The Prophet preached to the Jews and hoped and prayed for their salvation.
The Prophet (peace be upon him) preached to the Jews and hoped and prayed for their salvation. The incident at Banu Qurayzah is often cited as the brutal murder of innocent Jews, but what is often left out is its historical context. The conflict was not about the Jewish faith but about a war that the tribe of Banu Qurayzah had chosen to involve themselves in. When the Prophet (peace be upon him) came to Madinah, he made a constitutional pact with the Jews who were a minority. They were afforded rights and freedoms which they enjoyed and for a time being they lived in peace. Muslims did not harm them. To give an example, once a Jew and a Muslim quarreled; when the Jew praised Prophet Moses over the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon them), the Muslim insulted the Jew. The Jew complained to the Prophet (peace be upon him) who said: “Don’t confer on my superiority over Moses.” This was before this backdrop of religious coexistence that the incident of Banu Qurazyah occurred. The pact the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) made with the Jews along with the other tribes in Madinah was part of a written constitution that is considered to be one of history’s oldest. A whole section of the constitution pertained specifically to the Jews. The main clauses of the constitution that dealt with Muslim-Jewish relations stated that Muslims and Jews must reside peacefully with one another and that they must not transgress against each other. The two were to both protect the city of Madinah, and if there was to be any foreign aggression, everyone must defend the city together and share in the financial burden. This peace treaty included the major Jewish tribes of Madinah at that time: Banu Qurayzah, Banu An-Nadir, and Banu Qaynuqa`. While there were other Jewish tribes that lived with the Muslims in peace, these particular tribes did not abide by the treaty, and one after another, the three tribes breached the pact. First, the Banu An-Nadir attempted to assassinate the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), which led to a war between the Muslims and this tribe. Second, Banu Qaynuqa` breached the right of a Muslim woman by forcibly exposing her private parts while she was in the market. This led to another conflict between Muslims and Jews. Consequently, both Jewish tribes were expelled from Madinah, due to their violation of the treaty and constitution. As for Banu Qurayzah, not only did they breach the treaty, but they conspired with Makkans and other Arab tribes to launch an assault on Madinah to wipe out the Muslims once and for all. Nowadays such actions would be categorized as treason and insurgency. The Jews and their allies had an army of ten thousand as they marched towards Madinah. The Prophet had only three thousand soldiers. The ensuing battle was called the “Battle of the Ditch” because the Muslims dug a trench around Madinah as a defensive ploy. Never did the Prophet face such a critical and alarming situation in all of his military experience. He even had to send Muslim women and children to the outskirts of Madinah for their safety. The Muslims feared that the community would be exterminated. The Quran depicts the situation,
Remember what you felt when they came upon you from above you and from below you, and when your eyes became dim and your hearts came up to your throats, and when most conflicting thoughts about God passed through your minds: for there and then were the believers tried, and shaken with a shock severe. (Al-Ahzab 33:10)
Suddenly a storm wind blew violently, but strategically in favor of the Prophet and his army. Interminable strife and difficult climatic conditions eventually forced their enemies to leave. Admitting utter defeat, the Makkans and the other tribes left Madinah. The Prophet (peace be upon him) immediately marched to Banu Qurazyah. After a siege of almost one month, Banu Qurayzah surrendered. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) then had to deal with the seven hundred prisoners of war from Banu Qurayzah. He did not make any decision regarding them, but left it to an arbitrator, Sa`d ibn Mu`adh, who was an ally of Banu Qurazyah and the chief of a major Madinian tribe. Sa`d took a pledge from both sides—the Prophet and the leaders of Banu Qurayzah— that his verdict would be binding. Sa`d’s final verdict was that those who fought against the Muslims should be killed, and that the women and children should be taken as prisoners. This judgment was applied in accordance with the voluntarily agreement of the Jews to be bound by the final verdict. Banu Qurayzah unfortunately faced this harsh punishment due to their very serious act of treason, which entirely undermined the fragile stability of the community. In fact, the Jews did not object to this judgment, as Sa`d’s decision was based on Jewish law, as expounded in the Torah: [When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engaged you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves.] (Deuteronomy 20:10-16) A Hindu writer, Nadhuran, after a detailed study of the historical account and the judgment made upon Banu Qurayzah, concluded: “…though it seems harsh, Sa`d’s verdict was fair. First, this verdict accorded with [the Jews’] own laws. Second, the verdict was made by a mediator who was their own ally and they themselves had chosen him to arbitrate between them and Muhammad.” The prolific author and scholar of comparative religions, Karen Armstrong, states: “… It is, however, important to note that the Qurayzah were not killed on religious or racial grounds. None of the other Jewish tribes in the oasis either objected or attempted to intervene, clearly regarding it as a purely political and tribal matter… The men of Qurayzah were executed for treason. The seventeen other Jewish tribes of Madinah remained in the oasis, living on friendly terms with the Muslims for many years, and the Quran continued to insist that Muslims remember their spiritual kinship with the People of the Book…” Therefore, it is clear from the detailed context of this incident that the charge of ethnic cleansing or genocide of the Jews of Madinah is a baseless accusation. _____________________ Source: www.onilslam.net.
If a 15 years old man marries a 9 years old girl, it is definitely wrong today. In Cairo, New York or London, it is wrong because it is a violation of the law.
Theodora Komnene, the wife of King Baldwin III of Jerusalem, was born in 1145. She became the wife of King Baldwin III at the age of 13.
But, maybe today in some other part of the world it is not wrong because it is not violating the law or the customs and traditions of people. Maybe in those three cities Cairo, London or New York few centuries ago, it was not wrong because it was not violating anything too. So, to say that something is wrong or not, we have to say it is wrong because of what, because it is violating what?
Now, let’s go through the European palaces to see more of these cases. In the twelve century, 14, September, 1169, a Byzantine Emperor named Alexios II Komnenos married a beautiful girl named, Agnes, when her age was only 9 years old. It was an official or a natural marriage back at that time.
Also, when do people get married? Usually, people get married after they finish their studies because it is very difficult to study and be married at the same time. So, in the cities, you find girls getting married in the age of 22 or 23 after they finish college. In the villages where usually people do not go to college, you find girls getting married in the age of 18 or 19 after they finish school. What do you think was the case when there were no schools or colleges? What were girls doing? They were just getting married as soon as they reach puberty.
Mary (peace be upon her) gave birth to the Messiah or Jesus (peace be upon him) when she was only 13 years old.
Actually, today after 1500, you find in the USA girls getting married by the law at the age of 13. In New Hampshire, the age of marriage starts at 13 years old for girls by the consent of their parents, in Texas 14 years old, in Missouri and Mississippi 15 years old by the consent of their parents. Also, in Spain until 1995 it was 12 years old and now it is 13 years old. In Canada, 100 years ago, it was about 11 years old. So, it is unfair to judge people according to today’s laws and customs. You have to judge people, whether they are doing something wrong or not, according to their own laws and their own customs.
To prove that this was norm at that time, you will find much evidence actually. First of all, Prophet Muhammad was not the first man in the life of lady Aishah. Lady `A’ishah, in the age of 6, was actually engaged to another man called Jubayr ibn Mut`am ibn `Adiyy. You will find also that one of the Prophet’s wives was Lady Safiyyah bint Huyayy ibn Al-Akhtab, the daughter of one of the biggest names of the Jewish tribes in Arabia, Huyayy ibn Akhtab, he (i.e. the Prophet) married her according to some records in the age of 14 and he was her third husband. What was her age when she got married to her first husband? Maybe 10, 9 or eleven! So, even the Jews at that time were marrying their girls in that early age. Also, you will find that Prophet Muhammad married lady `A’ishah in the age of 6 but he did not consummate the marriage except in the age of 9. So, what was he waiting for, for 3 years? If he was a child molester, he could have consummated the marriage in the age of six. But, what he was waiting for, for three years? Puberty!
Some people here may say, “Who said that once a girl reaches puberty that she can get married?” Simply, the Encyclopedia Britannica. I open the Encyclopedia Britannica, the fifteenth edition, volume number 26, page number 850, and I found the following definition for puberty. It says: “In human physiology, puberty is the stage or period of life when a child transforms into an adult normally capable of procreation.”
In 1184, Margaret, the Empress of Hungary, got married to Isaac II, the Byzantine Emperor when she was only nine years old. This is why it is illogical to criticize the marriage of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to `A’ishah, the daughter of the Prophet’s closest Companion Abu Bakr.
One may ask himself, “Did Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) have any enemies?” You will find that the hypocrites in the Muslim community were enemies, the pagans were his enemies, and the Jews of Arabia were his enemies. You will find that they tried by all means to tarnish his image and they called him all the possible bad names that they can, but they did not say that he was a child molester. Why? Did they forget? That would have been an excellent way to damage this man and this new religion, but they never used it because simply it was the norm to get married to girls at that age at that time.
For those who say that she was a molested child, molested by Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), I ask them, “Do molested children love their molesters?” If you want to read the perfect love story,
Shakespeare, we all know this famous British outstanding playwright in his famous play “Romeo and Joliet” who said the age of Joliet, the hero in this play, was not more than 13 years old.
I recommend that you do not read Romeo and Joliet because actually Romeo committed suicide at the end of the story. Read Muhammad and `Aishah. In the very word of `Aishah herself explaining how beautiful this relationship was between her and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Lady `A’ishah explains that he used to race with her, and she says that when he used to drink from her glass, he used to make sure that she sees him putting his lips in the same place where she was putting her lips to drink from the glass. Lady `A’ishah says that when she used to say “O my God I have a headache,” he used to say, “It’s me, you can sense your headache in my head.” Lady `A’ishah was so proud that he died in her arms.
The writer tackles some of the allegations provoked against Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as regards the sources of his Islamic message.
By Dr. Muhammad Khalifah
One of the oft-repeated charges is that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) composed the Qur’an either with direct help from others, after reading their books (despite the constantly reiterated fact of his illiteracy) or after being taught by someone of Jewish or Christian background. Once more, it has to be pointed out that far from being original to this period these assertions were actually leveled by infidels in the lifetime of Muhammad as responded in the Qur’an itself in which they are challenged, (10:38; 11:13; 16:103)
The Prophet was assumed to have been instructed on Christianity and Judaism either during his travels or while staying in Makkah or Madinah. He did travel to Syria twice when aged thirteen and twenty five, but this was long before his mission and consequently constitutes no justification for those who describe him as “a man who spent most of his time on the road”; nor for “his vast travels” to have been described as a major source of his accumulated knowledge. It is clear that Muhammad’s first journeys to Syria was made at the age of thirteen, with his uncle Abu Talib. They had a brief meeting with a certain monk called Bahirah. Not only was this encounter too brief but it occurred too early to favor the surmise of the monk’s assistance with the revelations, which began about thirty years later.
A further postulate was that Muhammad had a close acquaintance with Christianity while in Makkah through what he might have heard from bishops and monks. These men, stationed as they were on the Syrian borders of the Arabian desert could have conducted missionary activities in the vicinity. While it is historically correct that Qiss ibn Sa`idah and another bishop called Asad ibn Ka`b did deliver many sermons to the Arabs during these fairs, the unfortunate fact regarding the theory of their influencing the Prophet is that both bishops died over a century before Muhammad’s birth.
In addition to the bishops and monks, two Christian sword-smiths were alleged to have taught Muhammad both by his disbelieving contemporaries and much more recently by Zwemer (an American missionary, traveler, and scholar) at the turn of the present century. Jaber and Vasser were Abyssinian slaves who had accepted Islam; their master, a member of the Banu Hadramy, used to beat them saying, “You are teaching Muhammad!” They would protest, “No, by Allah! He teaches us and guides us!” It seems that Zwemer favored their master’s opinion.
Others maintained that Salman, a Persian, had helped in writing the sacred Book. This Salman, who had been a Zoroastrian before accepting Christianity in Syria, later moved on to Madinah where he met the Prophet and embraced Islam. Salman’s life is documented in Islamic history, notably as the very first person to propose digging a trench for the defense of Madinah when the city was threatened with invasion by the Makkan disbelievers and their allies. His bright suggestion, coupled with violent wintry gales, successfully repelled the enemy. It is well known to Muslims that the greater part of the Qur’an, i.e., about two thirds of it, was revealed in Makkah before the Prophet migrated to Madinah, where Salman met him. Furthermore, the Book’s literary style is so sublime that even born Arab linguists who have tried over the years to imitate it have not been successful, to say nothing of Persian.
Less recently, it was argued that by the application of the principle of higher criticism it became clear that, “Muhammad had been gathering, recasting and revising in written form the material planned to issue as his book.” In making these claims it should be pointed out that the writers concerned have overlooked certain important facts. Ibn Taymiyyah, who wrote a book on the same subject in the Middle Ages, stated that among other things that the Prophet was illiterate. Secondly, he argued that the sublime style of the Qur’an remained the same throughout the entire period of its revelation. No mortal author could maintain such perfection of style, persistently, for so long. Not a chapter, not a verse, not even a word was revised, as is recorded in history.
Thirdly, the Arabs of those generations excelled in accurate memorizing of their history. The records of events used to be relayed by word of mouth verbatim from one historian to another down the generations. The science of Isnad relating to this subject was developed by the Arabs long before the art of printing appeared upon the scene. This science includes the grading of historians according to their knowledge, upbringing, way of life, the kind of friends they used to have and their accuracy in recording events. Isnad also discusses the way the same events are reported by various channels or chains of narrators and accounts for any discrepancies.
With the safeguard of the science of Isnad, as it flourished in Arabia, not one Arab historian was quoted to have mentioned that Muhammad ever sat down to learn from anyone; nor that he used regularly to counsel with friends except after he became a Prophet. Arab history records every detail of Muhammad’s life from his birth to the moment of his death.
Finally, Ibn Taymiyyah makes the point that Muhammad, before reaching the age of forty, never preached, nor could he utter a passage of the Qur’an which is clearly distinct even from his own speeches and sayings. Had Muhammad in fact learnt from a Christian monk, a bishop, a Jewish person, or even from Christian slaves, the following might have happened:
- Muhammad would never have denied it because he was famous all his life for both preaching and telling the truth.
- He could never have preached a faith so radically different from Christianity and Judaism, particularly with respect to their basic creeds.
- Under the circumstances, and considering the climate of antagonism existing between him and those who did not believe in his message, particularly the Jews and polytheists, his teacher’s name could scarcely have remained unknown throughout all the years of the Prophet’s mission.
- Whoever taught him would surely have written a book or at least a chapter similar to the Qur’anic revelations.
- The Jews, referred to in the Qur’an as “The People of the Book” had been persistently cross-examining him, defying him and hiding their books from others. How then could they have taught him at the same time? If they had taught him anything would they not have been the first to declare it in order to disprove his Prophethood? It is difficult to believe that they would not also have been careful to suppress the uncomplimentary references to them contained in the Qur’an.
- Had Muhammad not been sincere in his Prophethood and honest in delivering his revelations, his friends and followers would never have been so devoted to him, nor would they have clung to his teachings despite devastating hardship and persecution. It is a remarkable tribute to the character of Muhammad and to those of his friends and followers that not one of them ever betrayed him.
- The Qur’an confirms certain biblical records of previous Prophets. Since the historical events in the Bible were originally revealed by God to Moses and other prophets why could not this confirmation be a sign that the source is one, and divine?
- If divine authorship has never been claimed for the Bible by a Christian, why should Muhammad have risked additional persecution from his enemies by claiming the Qur’an to have been revealed by God if this were not so?
Source: Taken with modifications from the author’s “The Sublime Qur’an and Orientalism” published by International Islamic Publishers, Karachi, Pakistan, October 1989.
Martial artist and Hollywood star Jean-Claude Van Damme has said that he follows the example of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) when asked about healthy eating.
“The Prophet Muhammad was very smart, he knew what’s good for the future, about the body. So, look at that, don’t ask me and believe me, you have everything that you need.” Van Damme said while talking to a Saudi owned broadcasting network MBC.
Watch the video:
By Özcan Hıdır, PhD
When we examine the many works of the orientalists on the life of Prophet Muhammad we can see that they claim that neither Islam nor the Qur’an has any originality.
From the 12th century on, works by non-Muslims about the life of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) began to appear alongside the works of Muslim scholars and researchers. Since the 19th century, with the help of the orientalists, a wide literature in this field has appeared, and in line with the different methods and techniques in social sciences, a methodology has been developed as well as a point of view about Prophet Muhammad that is usually based on secular logic.
The views of the orientalists on Prophet Muhammad actually constitute the base point in general for their opinions and claims about Islam and particularly about the Glorious Qur’an and the Sunnah (practices of the Prophet). It is extremely important that we understand their views and opinions about Prophet Muhammad and their perception of Islam. In other words, it is important to understand how they understand Prophet Muhammad: was he a spiritual leader, a social improver and a reformist, an intelligent observer who watched and personalized the customs, practices and traditions of the places he visited that did not exist in his own society, or was he a person who acted reflexively with sociological and psychological motives that evolved within himself?
When the studies conducted by the orientalists on the Prophet are examined, we see, in addition to these attitudes, portrayals and opinions in which some vicious remarks are included. As a matter of fact, according to such opinions, the Glorious Qur’an is a book written by Prophet Muhammad and consequently Islam is a religion that was established by the Prophet. It is clear that such a point of view is an outright denial of the fact that Islam is a religion based on revelations and that the Prophet was a Prophet guided by revelations.
Events in the 20th century, particularly with the effects of political developments, have caused Islam to become an important phenomenon in the West. In line with this issue, Westerners began to search for the foundation, basis and establishment of this phenomenon called Islam with a literal method.
The publication of “Mohammed and the Rise of the Islam” by D. S. Margoliouth paved the way for works written by orientalists on Prophet Muhammad and his Prophethood, and the number of works on this issue have increased greatly since that time.
It can be observed that orientalists who researched Prophet Muhammad from different aspects generally evaluated him via two different approaches. The first group of orientalists studies the Prophet from a reductionist point of view and as a result they ignore the religious identity of Prophet Muhammad, rather showing him to be nothing more than a social reformist. It is obvious that this understanding is a denial of the Prophethood and the revelations, and thus leads to the conclusion that the Glorious Qur’an is a book written by a human being. The second approach represents a phenomenological point of view. According to this, the religious identity of Prophet Muhammad is recognized and examined from an Islamic point of view. Unfortunately, the researchers’ preconceived notions in both approaches affect their objectivity and this is reflected in their methods.
When we examine the many works of the orientalists on the life of Prophet Muhammad we can see that they claim that neither Islam nor the Qur’an has any originality and that the Qur’an is a book which was written by Prophet Muhammad. The typical example of this understanding shows itself in the claims of R. Bell, who studied the foundations of Islam in Christianity in his book “The Origins of Islam in Its Christian Environment”. As a matter of fact, orientalists usually try to find an answer as to how Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) created the Glorious Qur’an and accordingly Islam, and while doing so, they set forth their views and opinions on this issue. Accordingly, there are orientalists who assert that the Prophet’s own genius played a great role in the formation of the Glorious Qur’an and Islam. However, some orientalists state that this formation had political and psychological causes. This approach puts forward the assertion that Prophet Muhammad lived among the society not with a religious identity but as a social reformer and formed his religious identity through experiences he gained later on.
According to this approach, which is generally explained with the term cultural-reductionism, conclusions are drawn by considering the Prophet within the context of the socio-cultural environment of the Arabian Peninsula and Mecca at that period.
Other than the theories and claims related to the religious identity of the Prophet and the formation of the Qur’an and Islam, a different claim is introduced by the orientalist W. M. Watt. The basic characteristic of the theory developed by Watt is that he does not deny the religious identity of the Prophet and he accepts Prophet Muhammad’s religious sincerity. As a matter of fact, Watt considers the Prophet not as a figure that displays religious reactions after being affected by external religious-cultural factors, but as someone who actually showed a religious reaction to a social environment.
However, it is very difficult to say that the view of Watt on this issue is consistent. He tries to identify the sincerity of the Prophet and the basis of the information he acquired from the sources and lists three probabilities. According to this, the Prophet either combined the information he acquired from human sources with ones conveyed to him through revelations and eventually might have evaluated all of this information as revelations, or he acquired his information through various supernatural ways which constitute a telepathic aspect, or finally the term “nuhyi = we reveal” should be understood to mean “we inspire”. According to this last possibility, it is clearly stated that Prophet Muhammad received the divine messages not through revelation, but through inspiration, which brings us back to the external religious-cultural intervention theory. This is actually in line with Watt’s general view related to the Islamic revelation.
As can be understood, Watt is not open-minded on this issue and what separates him from the other orientalists is that he does not completely associate the religious function of the Prophet with other religions and cultures but rather considers his function on the revelation level. However, he never ignores the external religious-cultural effects on the personality, thought structure or religious messages of Prophet Muhammad.
Despite the general negative approaches towards the orientalists and their studies in the Islamic world, Watt’s studies, which manage to penetrate deeply into such issues while maintaining respect towards Islam and Prophet Muhammad, gained praise from the scholars and researchers concerned. In the introduction of Watt’s work Islam and Christianity Today, Ahmed Zeki Yemani placed Watt on a different level than the other authors writing about Islam in the English language: “Professor Watt did many things to save the Western mentality from the animosity and prejudices of the authors of the Middle Ages against Islam, which for a long time influenced the Western world. Despite the phenomenological difficulties resulting from his compromising attitude on issues that are hard to compromise, Watt prevented himself from acting with insular prejudices and succeeded in reaching the zenith of open mindedness.”
Actually, in the introduction of his book Muhammad at Mecca Watt addresses Muslim readers and states that he has said nothing that will require the denial of their faith nor is there a need for a wide gap to exist between the Islamic faith principles of Muslims and the Western studies, and finally, that to date the views of western researchers have been unacceptable to Islam. He further adds that these researchers have acted in such a way not because they actually believe in the research principles they have established, therefore the conclusions at which they have arrived need to be reconsidered. However, immediately after this, he writes that the doctrine of Islamic faith should be held subject to a re-formulation; it is this last that gives us a clue to Watt’s attitude towards Islam and Muslims, which although objective, is perhaps influenced by political statements.
Watt states that the Prophets of the Bible are mentioned in the Qur’an, however he adds that this is not an indication that the Qur’an or Prophet Muhammad were under the influence of Judaism-Christianity, and expresses that the introduction of these Prophets is completely different in the Qur’an. He also reports that in the Qur’an there are many references to other issues that are related in the Bible and the Jewish-Christian culture; however, he states that this could lead us to an incorrect conclusion if we were to claim that the Qur’an in fact introduced Judaism.
Watt expresses that the elements that are existent in the Qur’an that belong to the Jewish-Christian culture overlap with the information found in canonical or apocryphal books. As a result, for him Prophet Muhammad learned this information and these parables from his society and without having subjected them to criticism, adapting them to the Qur’an.
Note: This article is a summary of Ozcan Hidir, “Bati`da Hz. Muhammed`in Imaji”, Diyânet Ilmî Dergi Peygamberimiz Hz. Muhammed (özel sayi), 2000, s. 297-306.
Source: Taken with modifications from Lastprophet.info
By Editorial Staff
Today, we are going to spend these beautiful minutes in the company of our most and best beloved man, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). He is the most merciful and ever kind human being in the history, according to the testimony of our Creator, (Glory be to Him) who said,
There has certainly come to you a Messenger from among yourselves. Grievous to him is what you suffer; [he is] concerned over you and to the believers is kind and merciful. (At-Tawbah 9:128)
He is the greatest of all people, best of all persons and the leader of the leaders. He is Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). “He must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness.” George Bernard Shaw said about him.
Mahatma Gandhi, speaking on the character of Muhammad, says in (Young India):
“I wanted to know the best of one who holds today’s undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind….I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to this friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the Prophet’s biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life.”
On the life and message of the Prophet (peace be upon him), Sheikh Khalid Yasin gives this very interesting talk. He goes through the most touching situations of the Prophet’s life and sheds light on the shining teachings of the message of Islam. Do not miss watching this video to know more about the Prophet Muhammad’s inspiring life story as well as his universal message to people everywhere.
Source: Taken from One Islam Productions Youtube Channel