Personal page on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/EyadQunaibi ===== Account on Twitter https://twitter.com/Dr_EyadQun
Peace be upon you, brothers and sisters. Regarding the widely circulated clip by one of the so-called family relationship advisors, in which he claims that our Prophet peace be upon him was disrespected in some way—while the Messenger of God neither spoke nor uttered a single word—yet when the offender informed him that he had divorced his daughter—the Prophet’s daughter—may God be pleased with her—the Prophet peace be upon him was enraged. I would like to advise my brothers who are sharing this clip: do not circulate content that includes crude and vulgar language against the Prophet peace be upon him, even if it is in the context of condemnation.
Repeating such language may weaken, in some hearts, the reverence due to the Prophet’s status. If such words were spoken against a king or a president, people would fear sharing them, knowing that it undermines the dignity of the ruler or president and could lead to accountability. So why does this caution disappear when it comes to the Messenger of God peace be upon him?
Look, for example, at the expression used by Al-Alusi in his commentary Ruh al-Ma'ani when he discussed this incident—despite the weakness of its narration. He said: “He—meaning Abu Jahl—said to Uqbah ibn Abi Mu'ayt: ‘I will not be satisfied with you until you go to him—that is, the Prophet peace be upon him—and do such-and-such,’ mentioning an act that is only fitting for the accursed speaker.” Uqbah then carried out the act, and the Messenger of God peace be upon him said: “I will not meet you outside of Mecca except that I will strike your head with the sword.”
Notice how Al-Alusi said: “and mentioned an act that is only fitting for the accursed speaker”—he used euphemism out of reverence for the Prophet’s status. The polytheists did indeed insult the Prophet peace be upon him through poetry and prose, yet the Muslims did not circulate these words, and they eventually faded into obscurity. Yes, in the context of legal judgment, it may be necessary to quote the exact offensive wording to establish the statement and its legal consequences. But spreading such words openly in public spaces is not appropriate when it comes to the Prophet’s status.
Second, the claim that the Prophet peace be upon him was disrespected, as mentioned by this wretched speaker, is attributed to Uqbah ibn Abi Mu'ayt and also to Utbah ibn Abi Lahab. Despite the weakness of the narrations containing these details, they do not state that the Prophet peace be upon him remained silent about the disrespect and then became angry upon hearing that his daughter was divorced.
Rather, in the story of Uqbah, the Prophet peace be upon him said: “I will not meet you outside of Mecca except that I will strike your head with the sword.” And in the story of Ibn Abi Lahab, the Prophet peace be upon him supplicated: “O God, empower against him one of Your dogs.” There is no mention that he peace be upon him remained silent and then reacted with anger upon being told that his daughter was divorced. This is a fabrication from the wretched speaker.
In conclusion, we ask God to protect us from the blindness of insight. For whoever begins his approach to family issues with a discourse that appeases women’s emotions—even at the expense of truth—may be led to transgress boundaries, even in speech about noble stations.
And whoever previously hosted a meeting to present atheism as a valid viewpoint should not be surprised if, in his case, the scales of reverence and sanctity become distorted. Wretched is the fame earned by someone known for disrespect where reverence is due. The problem here is not a single slip for which an apology was made, but the repetition of this conduct. And God is the One from whom we seek help.