top of page
Search

The unjust killing of Malik Ibn Nuwayrah

  • Writer: Anonymous (S)
    Anonymous (S)
  • Apr 20, 2024
  • 19 min read

Updated: Jan 25

Other Parts:

Refuting The Virtues of Khalid b. al-Walid

If the reader is unaware, Khalid b. al-Walid is famous for his incident of killing Malik b. Nuwayrah, who was known for having a beautiful wife, in order to sleep with his wife. Of course our opponents will refuse to ever acknowledge this and will do their best to disregard narrations indicating this. They justify this killing under the idea that Malik was an apostate for refusing to pay tax. We will delve into this issue in several ways.

Table of Contents;

The esteemed companion of the Prophet (saw)

Firstly, Malik b. Nuwayrah and his brother Mutammim b. Nuwayrah were companions of the Holy Prophet (saw) who had entered the fold of Islam. Whilst writing about Mutammim, Ibn Hajar Asqalani records in Al-Isaba Fi Tamyiz al-Sahaba, Vol. 5, pg. 566, Bio # 7733:

أسلم هو و أخوه مالك

“He and his brother Malik converted to Islam.”

Khayr al-Din al-Zirikli records the following about Mutammim in his famed work al-A'lam, Vol 5 pg. 274:

متمم بن نويرة بن جمرة بن شداد اليربوعي التميمي، أبو نهشل: شاعر فحل، صحابي، من أشراف قومه، اشتهر في الجاهلية والاسلام. وكان قصيرا أعور، أشهر شعره رثاؤه لاخيه

Mutammim b. Nuwayra b. Jamrah b. Shadad al-Yarbu'i al-Tamimi, Abu Nahshal: A great poet, Sahabi, amongst the noble ones of his tribe, he was renowned during the times of Jahiliya and Islam. He was short and one eyed. His most famous poems are the eulogies for his brother.

Ibn Abdul Barr records in al-Isti'ab pg. 711:

... وأما متمم فلا شك في إسلامه

“Verily there is no doubt in Mutammim being a Muslim...”

Malik b. Nuwayrah was not an ordinary companion, but he was assigned the important task by the Holy Prophet (saw) of collecting the alms-tax (sadaqa). Ibn Hajar Asqalani records this in Al-Isaba Fi Tamyiz al-Sahaba, Vol 5. pg. 560 - 561, Bio # 7712:

مالك بن نويرة بن جمرة بن شداد بن عبيد بن ثعلبة بن يربوع التميمي اليربوعي يكنى أبا حنظلة ويلقب الجفول قال المرزباني كان شاعرا شريفا فارسا معدودا في فرسان بني يربوع في الجاهلية وأشرافهم وكان من أرداف الملوك وكان النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم استعمله على صدقات قومه

Malik b. Nuwayrah b. Jamrah b. Shadad b. Ubaid b. Thalba b. Yarbu' al-Tamimi al-Yarbu'ei, his nickname is Aba Handhla and also known as al-Jeful. Al-Marzebani said: ‘He was a poet, honorable, a knight counted among the knights of Bani Yarbu' (tribe) during the days of ignorance and he was amongst the noble ones (of his tribe), he was the representative of kings, the Prophet (s) appointed him to collect alms-tax from his people.

Ibn Hibban records in Kitab al-Thiqat, Vol 2, pg. 161:

وكان ولاة رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم على الصدقات حتى توفى عدى بن حاتم على قومه ومالك بن نويرة على بنى الحنظلة وقيس بن عاصم على بنى منقر والزبرقان بن بدر على بنى سعد وكعب بن مالك بن أبى القيس على أسلم وغفار وهينة والضحاك بن سفيان على بنى كلاب وعمرو بن العاص على عمان والمهاجر بن أبى أمية على صنعاء وزياد بن لبيد على حضرموت

Those who were appointed by Rasulullah (saw) to collect the alms-tax until his death were 'Adi b. Hatim for his people, Malik b. Nuwayrah for Bani Handhala, Qays b. Asim for Bani Manqer, al-Zurberqan b. Badr for Bani Saad, Ka'ab b. Malik b. Abi Qays for Aslam and Ghaffar and Juhaina, al-Dhahak b. Sufyan for Bani Kelab, Amr b. al-Aas for Oman, al-Muhajir b. Abi Ummaya for San’aa, Ziyad b. Lubayd on Hadramawt.

The Sahaba were unaware of the legal punishment for Malik

Malik's killing has been justified on the account as apostasy as mentioned earlier, but is refusing to hand the alms to the (supposed) caliph equivalent to apostatising? It seems so that the Sahaba, such as Umar, were unaware of the ruling for this entirely. This recorded by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak ala al-Sahihain Vol 2 pg. 332 Hadith # 3186:

‌عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، قَالَ: لَأَنْ أَكُونَ سَأَلْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْه وسلم عن ثلاث أحب إلي من حمر النعم من الخليفة بعده، وعن قوم قالوا أنقر بالزكاة في أموالنا النعم من الخليفة بعده، وعن قوم قالوا أنقر بالزكاة في أموالنا ولا نؤديها إليك، أيحل قتالهم؟ وعن الكلالة

Umar b. al-Khattab said: ‘Had I asked Allah’s messenger about three issues, I would like that more than Humr al-Ni'am (flock of reddish camels). Who is the Caliph after him? If a group of people admit that they believe in Zakat but don’t submit it to us, is it lawful for us to fight them? And the kalala (who dies and doesn’t have son or parents).'

Umar was referring to the incident of Malik b. Nuwayrah, who believed in paying zakat, but refused to submit to Abu Bakr. This is not an act of kufr, for nothing in the shari'iah dictates that to be so. Bahuti al-Hanbali affirms this in the footnote of Kashaf al-Qena’, Vol 2 pg. 297: 

ولا يكفر مانع الزكاة

“The one who refuses to submit to zakat is not a Kafir.”

Abu Qatadah objected to Khalid’s actions

 أخبرنا عبد الرزاق، عن معمر , عن الزهري , أن أبا قتادة , قال: " خرجنا في الردة حتى إذا انتهينا إلى أهل أبيات , حتى طلعت الشمس للغروب , فأرشفنا إليهم الرماح , فقالوا: من أنتم؟ قلنا: نحن عباد الله , فقالوا: ونحن عباد الله فأسرهم خالد بن الوليد حتى إذا أصبح أمر أن يضرب أعناقهم " , قال أبو قتادة: فقلت: «اتق الله يا خالد فإن هذا لا يحل لك» , قال: اجلس فإن هذا ليس منك في شيء , قال: «فكان أبو قتادة يحلف لا يغزو مع خالد أبدا , قال وكان الأعراب هم الذين شجعوه على قتلهم , من أجل الغنائم وكان ذلك في مالك بن نويرة»

Abd al-Razzaq from Ma'mar from al-Zuhri: from Abu Qatadah who said:

During Riddah [wars] we marched to Ahlul Abyat and reached there at sunset, then we raised our spears, hence they asked: ‘Who are you?’. We replied, ‘We are the slaves of Allah.’ They said: ‘We are slaves of Allah too.’ Then Khalid arrested them and when it was morning he ordered their beheading. Then I said: ‘Oh Khalid! Fear Allah, this is not allowed for you.’ He (Khalid) replied: ‘Stay (back); this is not your business.’ Then Abu Qatadah swore by Allah never to march with Khalid for any war. Qatadah said: ‘The desert Arabs encouraged him (Khalid) on killing them for the sake of booties and that was Malik b. Nuwayrah’s case.’

All narrators in the chain are reliable. From this hadith, we see that for one the people of al-Riddah were muslimeen and professed Islam, yet Khalid still arrested them for a matter they were innocent of. Secondly, Abu Qatadah objected to Khalid's actions, showing again the Sahaba did not view that the actions partaken by Malik were 'kufr' that led him to be a disbeliever. He also testified that the sole objective for killing them was to attain war booty, which shows a lot regarding Khalid's character.

Umar's disapproval of Khalid's action

Even a person like Umar was angry over Khalid's actions. One of the pioneering Sunni scholars in the field of history, Ibn Salam al-Jamhi (d. 232 H) [his bio in Siyar A'lam al-Nubala', Vol. 10, pg. 651 - 652] recorded in Tabaqat al-Fahawal al-Sh’ura’, Vol. 1, pg. 204, Hadith # 272:

غير أن الذي استقر عندنا أن عمر أنكر قتله، وقام على خالد فيه وأغلظ له، وأن أبا بكر صفح عن خالد وقبل تأوله

“But what is confirmed according to us is that Umar condemned the murder (of Malik) and he stood against Khalid and was very rude towards him while Abu Bakr forgave Khalid and accepted his excuse.”

أخبرنا أبو بكر الأنصاري أنا الحسن بن علي أنا أبو عمر بن حيوية أنا أحمد بن معروف نا الحسين بن الفهم نا محمد بن سعد أنا محمد بن عمر حدثني عقبة بن جبيرة عن عاصم بن عمر بن قتادة قال وحدثني محمد بن عبد الله عن الزهري قال وحدثني أسامة بن زيد الليثي عن الزهري عن حنظلة بن علي الأسلمي قال وحدثني مسلمة بن عبد الله بن عروة عن أبيه قال دخل حديث بعضهم في حديث بعض قالوا... وقدم خالد بن الوليد المدينة من اليمامة ومعه سبعة عشر رجلا من وفد بني حنيفة فيهم مجاعة بن مرارة وإخوته فلما دخل خالد بن الوليد المدينة دخل المسجد وعليه قباء عليه صدأ الحديد متقلدا السيف معتما في عمامته أسهم فمر بعمر فلم ف يكلمه ودخل على أبي بكر فرأى منه كلما يحب فخرج مسرورا فعرف عمر أن أبا بكر قد أرضاه فأمسك عن كلامه وإنما كان وجد عمر عليه فيما صنع بمالك بن نويرة من قتله إياه وتزوج امرأته وما كان في نفسه قبل ذلك من أمر بني جذيمة

When Khalid arrived at Medina, he entered the mosque of Allah’s Messenger wearing rusty armor and with his sword. There were some arrows in his turban, he passed by Umar but didn’t talk to him, then he came to Abu Bakr, and he heard from Abu Bakr what pleased him, he then left happy. Umar therefore knew that Abu Bakr had pleased him, therefore he didn’t talk to him (Khalid). Umar was angry at him (Khalid) because of what he had done, by killing Malik b. Nuwayrah and marrying his wife and also for what was in his heart against him (Khalid) about Bani Jadhima case’

The case of Malik was as so that even a man like Umar saw issues with it and heavily opposed it. The marriage to his wife is unspeakably immoral and his killing was unjustified, and despite Umar's grudge and problem with Khalid, Abu Bakr still deemed in his favour and excused Khalid.

Malik's brother condemning Khalid

Having proved that Abu Bakr paid Malik’s blood money to his brother Mutammim, we should also mention how Khalid has been condemned by Mutammim for the murder of his brother 

Al-Tabarani records the following words of Mutammim in al-Mu'jam al-Kabir, Vol 8 pg. 294, Hadith # 8126:

:حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو خَلِيفَةَ الْفَضْلُ بْنُ الْحُبَابِ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سَلَّامٍ الْجُمَحِيِّ، قَالَ: قَالَ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ " ضِرَارُ بْنُ الْأَزْوَرِ تَوَلَّى قَتْلَ مَالِكِ بْنِ نُوَيْرَةَ، وَفِي ذَلِكَ يَقُولُ: مُتَمِّمُ بْنُ نُوَيْرَةَ، وَيُعَرِّضُ بِخَالِدِ بْنِ الْوَلِيدِ نِعْمَ الْقَتِيلُ إِذَا مَا الرِّمَاحُ تَنَاوَحَتْ … جَبُنَ الْعُصَاةُ قَتِيلُكَ ابْنَ الْأَزْوَرِ وَلَنِعْمَ حَشْوُ الدِّرْعِ حِينَ لَقِيتَهُ … وَلَنِعْمَ مَأْوَى الطَّارِقِ الْمُتَنَوِّر سَمِحَ بِأَطْرَافِ الْقِدَاحِ إِذَا انْتَشَى … حُلْوٌ حَلَالُ الْمَالِ غَيْرَ عَذُورٍِ لَا يَلْبَسُ الْفَحْشَاءَ تَحْتَ ثِيَابَهِ … صَعْبٌ مَقَادَتُهُ عَفِيفُ الْمِئْزَرِ أَدَعَوْتَهُ بِاللهِ، ثُمَّ قَتَلْتَهُ … لَوْ هُو دَعَاكَ بِذِمَّةٍ لَمْ يَغْدِرِ نِعْمَ الْفَوَارِسُ يَوْمَ حَلْبَةٍ غَادَرَتْ … فُرْسَانُ فِهْرٍ فِي الْغُبَارِ الْأَكْدَرِ "وَيُرْوَى فِي الْكَدُورِ الْأَكْدَرِ

Abu Khalifa al-Fadhl b. Habab narrated from Muhammad b. Salam al-Jumahi from Abu Ubaida, who said: Dhirar b. al-Awzar was the one who killed Malik b. Nuwayrah, therefore Mutammim recited a [poem] in that case condemning Khalid b. al-Walid: '...You gave him an oath in the name of Allah and then you killed him? Surely if he (Malik) gave you an oath, he would never betray you…’

رَوَاهُ الطَّبَرَانِيُّ، وَرِجَالُهُ ثِقَاتٌ

“Al-Tabarani reported it and the narrators are reliable.”

These words of Mutammim clearly allude to the fact that prior to the murder of Malik, Khalid and Malik exchanged oaths and that too, in the name of Allah (swt). This proves that Malik was a Muslim, not an apostate. Moreover, the condemnation of Khalid by Mutammim also proves the same. We also read in al-Isti'ab pg. 711:

ليس لأحد في المراثي كأشعاره التي يرثي بها أخاه مالكا

“No one has poems for mourning the dead as his (Mutamam) poems for mourning his brother Malik.”

Abu Bakr paid blood money to the family of Malik

It is famously known in islamic jurisprudence that a murtad (apostate) loses many of the rights that he would enjoy as a muslim (i.e. such as inheritance). It is well-known that diya (blood money) is not compenstated for a murtad, for his blood is halal to kill.

Shaykh Muhammad b. Ahmad Sharbi popularly known as Khatib Sharbi (d. 977 H) in his book Mughni al-Muhtaj, Vol. 5, pg. 24, Shaykh Abdul Hamid Sherwani (d. 1118 H) in Hawashi al-Sherwani, Vol. 8, pg. 401, Shaykh Zakaria al-Ansari (d. 936 H) in Asna al-Matalib, Vol. 4, pg. 13 and Abu al-Barakat (d. 1201 H) in his authoritative work Al-Sharh al-Kabir, Vol. 4, pg. 268 record: 

ولا دية لمرتد

“There is no Diya for a Murtad.”

The fact that Abu Bakr paid the blood money to Malik’s brother, Mutammim, is sufficient to prove that Malik b. Nuwayrah was Muslim and was unjustly murdered by Khalid whose actual motives were to earn the war booty and seize Malik’s wife whose beauty was known in the area. 

Ibn Asakir quoted the following episode from Khalifa b. Khayyat’s authority work,Tarikh Khalifat b. Khayyat, pg. 53, in the following manner:

وَحَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي ذِئْبٍ عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ عَنْ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ قَالَ قَدِمَ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ عَلَى أَبِي بَكْرٍ فَأَخْبَرَهُ بِمَقْتَلِ مَالِكٍ وَأَصْحَابِهِ فَجَزِعَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ جَزَعًا شَدِيدًا فَكَتَبَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ إِلَى خَالِدٍ فَقَدِمَ عَلَيْهِ فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ هَلْ يَزِيدُ خَالِدٌ عَلَى أَنْ يَكُونَ تَأَوَّلَ فَأَخْطَأَ وَرَدَّ أَبُو بَكْر خَالِدًا وَوَدَى مَالِكَ بْنَ نُوَيْرَةَ وَرَدَّ السَّبْيَ وَالْمَالَ

Ali b. Muhammad narrated from Abi Dhi'b from al-Zuhri from Salim from his father that he said:

Abu Qatadah came to Abu Bakr and informed him of the murder of Malik and his companions, hence he (Abu Bakr) became extremely aggrieved. Abu Bakr then wrote (a message) to Khalid, and he (Khalid) came to him. Abu Bakr said: ‘Can it be more than Khalid interpreted and made a mistake?'. Then Abu Bakr sent Khalid back and paid blood money for Malik b. Nuwayrah and returned the booty.

All the narrators have been authenticated by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, al-Dhahabi and others. As we see again, Abu Qatadah is clearly concerned about the killing of Malik, did not deem him as an apostate and most importantly Abu Bakr paying the blood money to the Malik's brother proves that Malik was a muslim as there is no blood money for an apostate. Abu Bakr did not waste a minute in offering the excuse that Khalid "committed a mistake" (for murder is just a slip of the finger). Surely the duty of the khalifa is to ensure a just implantation of the shari'ah but he refuses to properly trial Khalid or even ask him defend himself. What kind of system does the ruler have the power to exempt murderers for being allies? Could a khalifa go and do so for a fornicator, rapist, thief and so on with the same excuse Sunnis give for Abu Bakr? 

Masha’Allah, the Sunnis narrate in Sahih Muslim 1688a that the Prophet (saw) said:

O people, those who have gone before you were destroyed, because if any one of high rank committed theft amongst them, they spared him; and if anyone of low rank committed theft, they inflicted the prescribed punishment upon him. By Allah, if Fatima, daughter of Muhammad, were to steal, I would have her hand cut off. 

The Prophet made it clear that such practice of excusing the elite and punishing only the lesser is unacceptable, so much so that even if his own daughter did a crime he would’ve enacted the shari’ah on her. Abu Qatadah complained to Abu Bakr about the crime of Khalid, and reported himself the material objective of Khalid, yet Abu Bakr still ignored it?

The burial of Malik 

The father in law of Malik, namely al-Minhal al-Tamimi has been recorded by Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Al-Isaba Fi Tamiyz al-Sahaba, Vol. 6 pg. 249, Bio # 8491:

المنهال التميمي: من رهط مالك بن نويرة. له إدراك ذكره الزبير بن بكار في الموفقيات عن حبيب بن زيد الطائي أو غيره. قال: مر المنهال على أشلاء مالك بن نويرة هو ورجل من قومه حين قتله خالد بن الوليد فأخرج من خريطة له ثوباً فكفنه فيه ودفنه

Al-Minhal al-Tamimi: Amongst Malik’s b. Nuwayrah’s relatives. He was a companion (Lahu Idraak). Al-Zubair b. Bakr mentioned him in al-Muwafaqyat…He said: ‘al-Minhal passed by Malik b. Nuwayrah’s body when Khalid killed him, then he brought a cloth from his bag and shrouded him (Malik) and then buried him.’

For those readers who are unaware of the context of the Arabic term ‘Lahu Idraak’ we cite the words of Ahmad b. al-Siddiq (d. 1380 H), who wrote in Irgham al-Mubtadi', pg. 9:

له إدراك أي أنه معدود من الصحابة

“Lahu Idraak” means he was counted amongst the Sahaba.

Ibn Hajar Asqalani in his book Al-Isaba Fi Tamiyz al-Sahaba records the biographies of the Sahaba included a number of people for whom “Lahu Idraak” has been used (e.g. Bio # 452, 787, 3659 etc). Whilst recording details about Malik’s wife and his father in law, we read in the footnote written by Sheikh Ali Sheri for the book by Ahmad b. A'tham, Kitab al-Futuh, Vol. 1, pg. 20:

هي أم تميم بنت المنهال بن عصمة الرياحي وهو الذي كفن مالكا

“She is Um Tammim bt. al-Minhal b. Esma al-Reyahi, and he (al-Minhal) is the one who shrouded Malik.”

Now having proved the status of Minhal al-Tammimi and gave ablution to the body of Malik then shrouded him, there should be no grounds to doubt the faith of Malik b. Nuwayrah, because the ablution and shroud is not given to an apostate but to a Muslim only.

To substantiate this, let us mention the text of an esteemed Sunni book on Fiqh namely Al-Bahr al-Raiq, Vol. 2, pg. 334:

أما المرتد فلا يغسل ، ولا يكفن ، وإنما يلقى في حفيرة كالكلب

A Murtad should neither be washed nor shrouded, but must be thrown into a ditch like a dog.

Khalid ‘marrying’ the widow of Malik

No matter how many attempts made to cover up the war crimes of Khalid slaughtering innocents and then marrying the widowed women. Ibn Asakir records in Tarikh Medinat Dimashq, Vol. 16, pg. 273 - 274:

 ...أخبرنا أبو غالب وأبو عبد الله ابنا البنا قالا أنا أبو جعفر بن المسلمة أنا أبو طاهر المخلص أنا أحمد بن سليمان نا الزبير بن بكار قال قال عمي مصعب بن عبد الله فقال عمر إني ما عتبت على خالد إلا في تقدمه وما كان يصنع في المال وكان خالد إذا صار إليه المال قسمه في أهل القتال ولم يرفع إلى أبي بكر حسابا وكان فيه تقدم على رأي أبي بكر يفعل الأشياء لا يراها أبو بكر تقدم على قتل مالك بن نويرة ونكح امرأته وصالح أهل اليمامة ونكح ابنة مجاعة بن مرارة فكره ذلك أبو بكر وعرض الدية على متمم بن نويرة وأمر خالدا بطلاق امرأة مالك

Umar said: ‘I admonished Khalid for breaking the orders and for what he did with the money. Khalid would distribute the booty amongst the soldiers without informing Abu Bakr. He made decisions that contravened those of Abu Bakr, he killed Malik b. Nuwayra and married his wife. He made peace with the people of Yamama and married the daughter of Maj’a b. Marara. These were met with disapproval by Abu Bakr and he issued diyat (blood money) to Mutammim b. Nuwayrah and ordered Khalid to divorce Malik’s wife…'

All narrators are thiqah and reliable. Here we see that the disgusting nature of Khalid, after injustly (or as Abu Bakr said, mistakenly) killing Malik, causing grief to his brother (a companion for whom Sunnis have no care for), and then marrying his wife after killing him. This was so disturbing that even Abu Bakr saw issue with this and ordered a divorce between them. We are lost for words to describe how disgusting and vile such an act is, for a man to marry the wife of the man he killed.

The same reality has been attested to by A.I. Akram who has opined that Malik was a rebellious apostate and states the following in: Sword of Allah: Khalid bin al-Waleed, Ch. 15, pg. 2: 

“Laila became a young widow, but not for long.  That same night Khalid married her!  She had hardly made up her mind to mourn her departed husband when she became a bride again, this time of the Sword of Allah!”

On pg. 4 he even praises Khalid for his capture of such a voluptuous woman:

"The long and short of the whole affair was that Malik was killed and the beautiful Laila with the gorgeous eyes and the lovely legs became the wife of Khalid b. al-Walid."

Allamah Zamakhshari also confirms this in al-Fa'iq, Vol 3 pg. 157:

وقد تزوجها خالد بعد قتل زوجها فأنكر ذلك عليه

Khalid married her after her husband’s murder and he (Khalid) has been condemned for that.

Ibn al-Athir said in Gharib al-Hadith, pg. 732:

وكانت جميلة وتزوجها خالد بعد قتله

“She was pretty and Khalid married her after killing him [Malik]."

The views of Sunni scholars

We have until now relied on traditions to expose the despicable war crimes of Khalid b. al-Walid. Let us now submit the testimonies of some esteemed Sunni scholars.

Ibn Abd al-Barr gives a very diplomatic response in al-Isti'ab Vol 3 pg. 1362:

واختلف فيه هل قتله مسلما أو مرتدا وأراه والله أعلم قتله خطأ

There is disagreement about him (Malik), did he (Khalid) kill him as a Muslim or Murtad. In my opinion he (Khalid) was mistaken in killing him and Allah knows best.

Note that this reference cannot be found in the later print of al-Isti'ab, as the nawasib have removed the biography of Malik b. Nuwayrah from that edition entirely.

The famed Ibn Kathir wrote in Sirah al-Nabawyiah, Vol. 3, pg. 594 - 595:

ولهذا لم يعزله الصديق حين قتل مالك بن نويرة أيام الردة ، وتأول عليه ما تأول حين ضرب عنقه واصطفى امرأته أم تميم

Therefore the Siddiq (Abu Bakr) didn’t dismiss him (Khalid) when he killed Malik b. Nuwayrah during the days of Riddah, because he (Khalid) interpreted when he beheaded him and took his wife Umm Tamim.

Even the beloved historian of Ahlus Sunnah has testified that Khalid slept with the wife of Malik after killing him. We are eager to know what possible 'interpretation' of the religion exists that entitled Khalid to execute a Muslim and sleep with his wife.

Al-Diyarbakri (d. 966 H) was a big defender of Khalid b. al-Walid and although admitted Khalid committed adultery with Malik's widow, cites a pathetic argument in defense of Khalid in his Tarikh al-Khamis, Vol. 2, pg. 209

فأمر بهم خالد فقتلوا وقتل مالك بن نويرة وتزوج بأمرأته أم تميم من ليلته وكانت جميلة ، قيل لعلها كانت مطلقة قد انقضت عدتها الا انها كانت محبوسة عنده فاشتد في ذلك عمر وقال لأبي بكر ارجم خالدا فانه قد استحل ذلك ، فقال ابوبكر والله لا أفعل ان كان خالد تأول أمرا فأخطأه

“Khalid ordered them to be killed and killed Malik b. Nuwayrah, marrying his wife on the same night and she was pretty. They said, she might have been divorced (by Malik) and her Idda was over but she was imprisoned by him (Malik). Umar was very angry because of that and said to Abu Bakr: ‘Stone Khalid because he made it lawful for himself.’ Abu Bakr said: ‘By Allah I will not do so if Khalid made an error because he did Ta'weel’.

In reality, this is just a cover up made by Abu Bakr to justify Khalid's actions, for what 'ta'weel' exists in sleeping with one's wife after you injustly kill her husband? Moreover, the statements of previous Sahaba demonstrate to us how Khalid was most certainly wrong and had ill intentions behind killing Khalid that was not based on any 'ta'weel' of nass (scripture).

Did Malik openly disbelieve in the Prophet (saw)?

One of the arguments made that Malik left Islam is one completely unrelated to the the issue of zakat, which shows how desparate our opponents are to try and justify the actions of Khalid. The argument is, when Khalid and Malik had a dispute, Malik says 'Your prophet says...' to which Khalid used as a justification to kill him as an apostate. If this is the only reasoning, this renders the argument of zakat invalid, and since it is invalid as we will explain too, it shows the iman of Malik. 

فيقول من عذر مالكاً: إنه أراد بقوله: ” صاحبك ” أنه أراد القرشية. وتأول خالد غير ذلك فقال: إنه إنكار منه للنبوة

Those who excuse Malik say: ‘That he (Malik) by his statement ‘your companion’ meant ‘Quraysh’, while Khalid interpreted that differently and said: ‘He denies the prophet’.

We respond to this silly argument by bringing forth the objection that this would lead to the apostasy of Aisha herself, for she made a similar remark in Sahih al-Bukhari 5113:

Khaula bint Hakim was one of those ladies who presented themselves to the Prophet (ﷺ) for marriage. `Aisha said, "Doesn't a lady feel ashamed for presenting herself to a man?" But when the Verse: "(O Muhammad) You may postpone (the turn of) any of them (your wives) that you please,' (33.51) was revealed, " `Aisha said, 'O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! I do not see, but, that your Lord hurries in pleasing you.' 

Is Aisha's reference to 'Your Lord' evidence that she disbelieves in the Lord of Muhammad (saw)? Does she hold a different Lord? If one does not wish to argue such, they must concede to the fact that there is no slight indication that Malik's words of 'Your Prophet' that would lead to apostasy. 

A short account of Malik b. Nuwayrah (ra) from a Shia source

It would be relevant to mention the Shi’a view of Malik b. Nuwayrah, so that all knowledge seekers (amongst both Sunni and Shi’a) can make a more informed conclusion. Shadhan b. Jibra'il records in al-Fadael, pg. 258 - 261, Hadith # 92:

Al-Bara b. Azeb said: When we were sitting with Allah’s Messenger (s) a delegation from Bani Tammim (tribe) came to Him (s). Malik b. Nuwayra said: ‘Oh Allah’s Messenger, teach me faith (Iman). Allah’s Messenger said: ‘To testify that there is no god but Allah only, and I’m the messenger of Allah, pray the five prayers, fast during the month of Ramdhan, pay Zakat, perform pilgrimage to (Allah’s) house, and follow my Wasi after me, and he (prophet) pointed his hand to Ali. And don’t shed blood, don’t steal, don’t betray, don’t eat orphan’s money, don’t drink alcohol and follow my laws, permit what is lawful and forbid what is unlawful, give the rights from your own self to the poor and strong, to the old and young. Till (the prophet) mentioned to him the Islamic laws. (Malik) said: ‘Oh Allah’s messenger, I’m a man who quickly forgets, please repeat again’. Then He (s) repeated, then he (Malik) left pulling his cloth and saying: ‘By the God of the house, I learnt faith (Iman).’

When he (Malik) went far away from Allah’s messenger, He (s) said: ‘Who ever wants to see a man of heaven, he should look at this man.’ Abu Bakr and Umar said: ‘Oh Allah’s messenger, who are you referring to?’ He (s) looked down to the earth, then they (Abu Bakr & Umar) followed him (Malik) and said to him: ‘Good news from Allah and His messenger to you to have been promised Paradise.’ He (Malik) replied: ‘May Allah bless you if you are testifying by what I testify, because you learnt what Prophet Muhammad taught me. But if you don’t, then may Allah not bless you.’ Abu Bakr said: ‘Don’t say that, I’m the father of Ayesha, the wife of the prophet.’ He (Malik) said: ‘What do you want ?’ They (Abu Bakr & Umar) said: ‘You are from the people of Paradise, so ask for forgiveness for us’. He (Malik) said: ‘May Allah never forgive you, you leave the Messenger of Allah who owns intercession and ask me for forgiveness!’ Then they returned back and signs of sadness appeared on their faces, when Allah’s Messenger saw them, He smiled and said: ‘Is their sadness because of truth?’

When Allah’s Messenger died and Bani Tamim (tribe) returned to Madina with Malik b. Nuwaira being with them, he went to see as to who became the successor after Allah’s messenger, he entered the mosque on Friday and Abu Bakr was giving an address on the pulpit. He (Malik) looked at him and said: ‘Oh brother of Taim’. (Abu Bakr) said: ‘Yes’. He (Malik) said: ‘Where is the Wasi of Allah’s messenger, who ordered I was ordered to follow?’ They (people) said: ‘Oh you desert Arab, things have changed.’ (Malik) said: ‘By Allah, nothing has changed, but you betrayed Allah and His messenger.’ Then he (Malik) got closer to Abu Bakr and said: ‘Who allowed you to climb onto the pulpit while the Wasi of Allah’s Messenger is here?’. Abu Bakr said: ‘Throw out this desert Arabian who urinates on his heels from Allah’s Messenger mosque.’ Qunfud and Khalid b. al-Walid went to him and kept pushing him until they removed him from the mosque.

Then he (Malik) rode on his camel and said (poem): ‘We obeyed Allah’s messenger as long he was amongst us, Oh people, what I have to do with Abu Bakr….’ When everything was under Abu Bakr’s control, he sent Khalid b. al-Walid and said to him: ‘You heard what Malik said in front of the people, I’m worried that he would cause a crack we won't be able to fix. Kill him.’ When Khalid arrived (to Malik’s land) he (Malik) rode on his horse and he was a knight equal to thousand knights, hence Khalid was scared of him, therefore he (Khalid) gave him oath, and then when (Malik) dropped his weapon, Khalid betrayed him he killed him, placed his head in a cooking pot, and married his wife the same night, raping her like a donkey.’

Other Parts:

Refuting The Virtues of Khalid b. al-Walid

Comments

bottom of page