Exposing Robert Spencer Part X

I recently added my refutations of Robert Spencer to the side of my blog for quick and easy reference for those interested in the continual blunders of a demonstrated anti-Muslim moron. When Spencer replied to my article on Juvenile Hadith Interpretations he demonstrated that he clearly could not counter a single point I raised against him. But more importantly for this thread he made more errors of scholarship in his rebuttal, errors that actually had me laughing out loud. Among them were:

1. He stated that when the Prophet, peace and prayers be upon him, said he was given the most concise words he was referring to the Qur'an. As I showed in my reply to Spencer, the Prophet Muhammad was speaking about his own speech contained in ahadith and not about the Qur'an, which are considered God's words.

2. Spencer said the Muslims attacked the "workers of Khaybar" at the Battle of Khaybar. That's either a blatant lie by Spencer or another mistake he made. His own citation proves him otherwise. For him to come to such a conclusion is a total disregard for the very source he uses where it said clearly that the workers turn and fled away.

In any case, I had read one of Spencer's Qur'an blog commentaries on Surah al-Kahf or The Cave, chapter 18 of the Qur'an. In that blog Spencer says the following:

"Another point emerges in Islamic tradition: don’t kill children, unless you know they’re going to grow up to be unbelievers. “The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used not to kill the children, so thou shouldst not kill them unless you could know what Khadir had known about the child he killed, or you could distinguish between a child who would grow up to he a believer (and a child who would grow up to be a non-believer), so that you killed the (prospective) non-believer and left the (prospective) believer aside.” The assumption thus enunciated may help explain the persistence of the phenomenon of honor-killing in Islamic countries and even among Muslims in the West."

He also says this about Khidr:

"Some consider Khidr to be immortal (Ibn Taymiyya thinks so)."

I'll start with his second statement, that Khidr was considered immortal by ibn Taymiyya. Ibn Taymiyya never considered Khidr to be immortal - free from death. That would be akin to saying Khidr and God would live for eternity - that's complete blasphemy. I found a more thorough rebuttal of Spencer's erroneous comment at a site called seekingilm.com. You can see the relevant text by ibn Taymiyya stating clearly that he believed Khidr was alive, but not immortal as Spencer stated.

Moving on to the first point raised about Spencer's Qur'an blog, namely the remarks about killing children. I don't even know what to say about where Spencer's mind goes or how he thinks because I find him to be more and more idiotic everyday and with every article he writes and with every comment he makes.

The first thing I'll point out is that the hadith Spencer mentions is taken from the USC hadith compendium. It's found in Sahih Muslim and there are FOUR variations of the hadith of which Spencer chose only this version:

Book 019, Number 4457:

This tradition has been narrated by the game authority (Yazid b. Hurmus) through a different chain of transmitters with the following difference in the elucidation of one of the points raised by Najda in his letter to Ibn Abas: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used not to kill the children, so thou shouldst not kill them unless you could know what Khadir had known about the child he killed, or you could distinguish between a child who would grow up to he a believer (and a child who would grow up to be a non-believer), so that you killed the (prospective) non-believer and left the (prospective) believer aside.

The other three versions mention that Yazid bin Hurmus related that "Najda b. 'Amir al-Haruri wrote to Ibn Abbas asking him about the slave and the woman as to whether they would get a share from the booty (it they participated in Jihad) ; about the killing of (enemy) children (in war) ; about the orphan as to when his orphanhood comes to an end; about kinsmen (of the Holy Prophet) as to who they are." The three other versions of this hadith all mention explicitly that Ibn Abbas was asked about the killing enemy children, not Muslim children. I think that needs to be clarified since Spencer, for whatever reasons, used the only version of the four that leaves out the fact that this question was about enemy children.

There are two points that need to be clarified in regards to what Spencer said. The first I just highlighted above, that the issue was about the children of the enemies of the Muslims, specifically the polytheist enemies, as mentioned in one of the versions of the hadith. The second point is what did Ibn Abbas mean when he said "thou shouldst not kill them unless you could know what Khadir had known about the child he killed." I do not have any hadith exegesis to support my interpretation, but I believe what he was saying was that unless you know the unseen (ghaib) like Khadir/Khidr knew the unseen (because God had given him such knowledge, while other mortals did not have that knowledge including Moses who was his companion on that journey) then you cannot kill the enemy child even if you suspected that the child was going to become an unbeliever when they grew up. This correlates nicely with basic principles of Islamic fiqh, namely that a judge can only judge what he or she sees as plain evidence and cannot make a judgment on subjective evidence.

So, what have we learned so far?

1. These ahadith were about the children of the enemy.

2. Ibn Abbas was rhetorically chiding the questioner with the logic of the fact that no one except Khidr had the knowledge of the unseen about such an issue, i.e. if a child would become a believer or unbeliever.

Finally, Spencer's last statement regarding this hadith will be analyzed: "The assumption thus enunciated may help explain the persistence of the phenomenon of honor-killing in Islamic countries and even among Muslims in the West."

Can Spencer provide one example of a Muslim killing their relative based on such an absurd interpretation of this hadith, that a Muslim can kill a child based on one's subjective notion that such a child may become an unbeliever? I would like just one example because I've never heard of such a thing in relation to honor killings. They are called honor killings for a reason because someone's or some group's honor had been tarnished.

The Prophet Muhammad, peace and prayers be upon him, told his Companions not to kill their daughters. There are no reports that state any Companion killed their child because they knew that they would grow up to become an unbeliever and that they had the knowledge to make such a judgment, such as the knowledge that Khidr had.

Spencer out does himself again by making ridiculous statements about things he apparently has very little knowledge of. It just goes to show you what happens when someone like Spencer roams into territory that he is obviously unfamiliar with. It demonstrates clearly that his scholarship is "utter twaddle."

Below is another version of the hadith that Spencer quotes. You might find this version a bit more clear about what children to kill and what ibn Abbas' judgment was on such an issue.

Book 019, Number 4460:

It has been narrated on the anthority of Yazid b. Hurmuz who said: Najda wrote to Ibn Abbas. I was sitting in the company of Ibn 'Abbas when he read his letter and wrote its reply. Ibn Abbas said: Were it not for preventing him from falling into wickedness. I would not have replied to his letter, may he never be joyful. He wrote in reply to him referring to the share of the close relatives (of the Holy Prophet) (from the booty) whom God has mentioned. (I have to tell you that) we thought we were the close relatives of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), but our people have refused to recognise us as such. You have asked about the orphan as to when his orphanhood comes to an end. (I have to say that) when he reaches the age of marriage, attains maturity of mind, and his property is returned to him, then he is no longer an orphan. You have inquired whether the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upo him) used to kill anyone from the children of the polytheists in the war. (You should know that) the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used not to kill any one of their children, and you (too) should not kill any one of them, except when you knew about them what Khadir had known about the boy whom he killed. And you have inquired whether there is a fixed share of the booty for women and slaves when they participate in a battle. (I have to tell you that) there is no fixed share for them except that they will be given some reward from the spoils of war.