Asma Bint Marwan: Did the Prophet order her killing?

It is alleged that Prophet Muhammad reportedly had a number of non-Muslims killed in Medina. Many non-Muslims use these alleged incidents to argue that the Prophet promoted violence against his critics while many Muslims view these incidents a justification to demand death for those who insult the Prophet and blaspheme Allah.

These alleged incidents are recorded in some of the earlier books compiled by people generally regarded as authentic scholars. Non-Muslims, usually, refer to six such incidents to prove their accusations; while Muslims use the same six incidents to justify and authenticate their position.

These incidents involve Asma bint Marwan, Abu Afak, Kab ibn Ashraf, Sofian ibn Khalid, Abu Rafi, and Oseir ibu Zarim.

It is important to put these incidents to critical examination as they refer to actions that stand directly opposed to the Quranic teachings when it says: “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things.” (2:256) or “to you be your way and to me mine.”(109:6) or“those who avoid the greater crimes and shameful deeds, and, when they are angry even then forgive.” (42:37)

Even a cursory look at these accusations, regardless of the reports found in some early Islamic literature, would suggest that the actions attributed to the Prophet were outrightly false. They were promoted by despotic rulers and clergy willing to serve the interests of the power elite to serve their political and cultural interests. The Prophet occupies the central figure in Islam. Any action attributed to him is part of faith.  The despots and their surrogate religious leaders found statements attributed to him as convenient instruments to purse their own transgressions from the rule of law.

This series of articles will look at all six incidents and expose their false assertions.

Asma bint Marwan’s incident figures very prominently in the literature of Muslims. Some Muslims accept it while others question its authenticity. What is the truth?

The incident is reported in two major books in early Islamic literature. One is the Life of Prophet Muhammad by Ibn Hisham and the other is the Book of the Major Classes (Kitab Tabqat al Kubra) by Ibn Sa’d.

Abu Muhammad 'Abd al-Malik bin Hisham died in 833, some 201 years after the death of the Prophet. From his memory, he edited the biography of the Prophet written by Ibn Ishaq that was lost and is now only known in the writing of Ibn Hisham and Tabari. Ibn Hisham did not meet Ibn Ishaq and was never his student as claimed by some. The year Ibn Hisham was born is 767 CE, the year, when Ibn Ishad died.  Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn Yasār ibn Khiyār was born in Medina in 704, some 63 years after the death of the Prophet. He did not have the opportunity of meeting those companions whom he is reported to have quoted extensively.

The second source that mentions the story of Asma bint Marwan is Ibn Sa'd’s Tabaqat. Ibn Sad was born in 784 CE, some 152 years after the death of the Prophet. His book is based on oral traditions that are often discounted. Kitab Tabaqat Al-Kubra is a compendium of biographical information that contains the lives of Prophet Mohammed, his Companions, and Helpers, Books 1 and 2 contain the Sirah (biography) of Prophet  Muhammad., books 3 and 4 contain biographical notices of the companions of Muhammad., books 5, 6 and 7 contain biographical notices of later Islamic scholars and book 8 contains biographical notices of Islamic women. Ibn Sa’ad also did not have the opportunity to meet any of the companions of the Prophet. 

The alleged incident as mentioned in early sources. OF Early SOURCES
From the Sirat Rasul Allah (A. Guillaume's translation "The Life of Muhammad") pages 675, 676.

`UMAYR B. `ADIYY'S JOURNEY TO KILL `ASMA' D. MARWAN

She was of B. Umayyya b. Zayd. When Abu `Afak had been killed, she displayed disaffection. `Abdullah b. al-Harith b. Al-Fudayl from his father said that she was married to a man of B. Khatma called Yazid b. Zayd. Blaming Islam and its followers she said:

I despise B. Malik and al-Nabit
and `Auf and B. al-Khazraj.
You obey a stranger who is none of yours,
One not of Murad or Madhhij.
Do you expect good from him after the killing of your chiefs
Like a hungry man waiting for a cook's broth?
Is there no man of pride who would attack him by surprise
And cut off the hopes of those who expect aught from him?

Hassan b. Thabit answered her:

Banu Wa'il and B. Waqif and Khatma
Are inferior to B. al-Khazrahj.
When she called for folly woe to her in her weeping,
For death is coming.
She stirred up a man of glorious origin,
Noble in his going out and in his coming in.
Before midnight he dyed her in her blood
And incurred no guilt thereby.

When the apostle heard what she had said, he said, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?" `Umayr b. `Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O `Umayr!" When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her", so `Umayr went back to his people.
Now there was a great commotion among B. Khatma that day about the affair of bint [daughter of] Marwan. She had five sons, and when `Umayr went to them from the apostle, he said, "I have killed bint Marwan, O sons of Khatma. Withstand me if you can; don't keep me waiting." That was the first day Islam became powerful among B. Khatma; before that those who were Muslims concealed the fact. The first of them to accept Islam was `Umayr b. `Adiy who was called the "Reader", and `Abdullah b. Aus and Khuzayma b. Thabit. The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam.”
From Ibn Sa`d's Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, translated by S. Moinul Haq, volume 2, pages 30-31.

SARIYYAH OF `UMAYR IBN `ADI

“Then (occurred) the sariyyah of `Umayr ibn `Adi Ibn Kharashah al-Khatmi against `Asma' Bint Marwan, of Banu Umayyah Ibn Zayd, when five nights had remained from the month of Ramadan, in the beginning of the nineteenth month from the hijrah of the apostle of Allah. `Asma' was the wife of Yazid Ibn Zayd Ibn Hisn al-Khatmi. She used to revile Islam, offend the prophet and instigate the (people) against him. She composed verses. Umayr Ibn Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind, and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her chest till it pierced up to her back. Then he offered the morning prayers with the prophet at al-Medina. The apostle of Allah said to him: "Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?" He said: "Yes. Is there something more for me to do?" He [Muhammad] said: "No. Two goats will butt together about her. This was the word that was first heard from the apostle of Allah. The apostle of Allah called him `Umayr, "basir" (the seeing).”

The simple fact is that this story is false and an utter lie. Do blind men really enter the houses of others at night and in the presence of many identify their target without being noticed and then kill at ease? This is nothing but a hallucination and mockery of human intelligence.

The reference of the story in these two books simply means that the authors did not verify the sources properly and wrote whatever they heard from a source without checking their integrity. Interestingly, the two sources contradict each other. In one, it is the prophet who allegedly ordered this murder and in another, Umayr, did it on his own.

It is false because the narrators of this story are not reliable as mentioned by Ibn al-Jauzi in his book al-illal (vol 1, pg 279) and by Ibn Adiyy, the author of the book Al- Kamel who accuses one of the narrators Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj of forging it. (Al-Kamel Vol 6, pg. 145)

There are other facts that prove the shallowness of this story.

It is reported by all who have reported this story that the killer was a blind man who murdered Asma at the dead end of the night. Imagine a blind man entering the house of a woman at the end of the night and identifying the woman sleeping in the room where her children were also asleep and then removed from her chest a suckling child and finally stabbing her with no one noticing.

Ibn Asakar in his book Seerat Shamee discloses the fact that Asma was a fruit seller. She had an altercation with one of the customers who was angry and violent with her and ultimately killed her.

Wakidi and Ibn Sad say the Prophet did not ask Umayr to murder Asma. It was Umayr who took it upon himself to kill her. Wakidi even says that Umayr was her former husband and had a long brooding and private malice towards her, a fact that Ibn Sa’d and Ibn Hisham contradict.

Ibn Asakar even says that the Prophet was not even aware of the poetry that was composed about him.

Anyone can make a false accusation against anyone. But the difference between a civilized and an illiterate mind is the criterion applied to verify facts, even if they were written hundreds of years after the reported incidents.

The Quran is the earliest document that gives details of the community the prophet built and the values he promoted. The Quran speaks of mercy and leniency to those critical of Islam and the Prophet. If the earlier scholars had focused on analyzing reports attributed to the Prophet in the context of the Quran and its message, we might have been saved from reading these baseless and malicious statements about the prophet. Why did not they do it? Maybe they did not apply the critical criterion to sift through facts or maybe they felt overwhelmed by the reports they had collected. Or they left the task of evaluating the information to the future generations.

It is obvious that those who are critical of Islam would use any false incident to denounce the prophet, but why should a Muslim give in to these false reports. The answer is very simple. Some people are not willing to accept the fact that historians like ibn Hisham or Wakidi or Ibn Sa’ad and other scholars without any exceptions could be wrong with recording, reporting, analyzing and writing about the Prophet. They have given these sources the same status that they usually give to the Quran, infallible, and absolute truth. The identity of the Prophet is built around the Quranic concept of “mercy to the worlds” and anything that challenges that identify is false, wrong and utter lie no matter who says and where it comes from. This simple principle will liberate us from scores of lies that are presented to us as part of the statements and actions attributed to our prophet.