Breaking The Idols In Makkah & Thereafter.

[ghulam muhammed]

An interesting post found on "The (Moderates) Digest" :-

A lot of Muslims believe that soon after Makkah was reclaimed the idols inside the Kaaba were broken by the victorious Muslims on the instructions of the Prophet. In fact, there is a hadees in Bukhari which claims that the Prophet himself
knocked down some of the idols with his bow while reciting verse 17:81.

To me all these reports sound inauthentic because they militate against the exemplary character of the Prophet as described in the Quran. Let us not forget that the Prophet was conferred the title of "Rahmatul lil aalameen" (Mercy unto mankind). Moreover, the Quran warns the Muslims through the Prophet saying: "wa laa tasubbul lazeena yad'oona min doonillaah..".

"But do not revile those [gods] whom they invoke besides Allah, lest they revile Allah out of spite, and in ignorance: for, goodly indeed have We made their own doings appear unto every community In time unto their Sustainer they must return: and then He will make them understand all that they were doing." (6:108)

Therefore, how could the Prophet have broken the idols when as per the Book he preached he was not allowed to even orally abuse them? Most of the iconoclastic reports emanated from Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and Tabari whose accounts are not known for their authenticity. Also, any hadees (even if it is from Bukhari or Muslim) cannot be accepted as authentic if it goes against letter or spirit of the Quran.

My personal view is that the Prophet, given his compassionate nature, allowed the idol-worshiping Makkans to take away their idols from within the Kaaba. He certainly would not have humiliated them by breaking their idols against the express injunctions of the Quran. In this context, let me recall a theory about the Somnath temple that the idol it houses is Manath,
one of the goddesses worshiped by the Makkans. Hence, the name SoManath or Su-Manath (the place of Manath). I do not know how credible this story is but those interested in learning more may read Romila Thapar's book on Somnath where she discusses this in detail. But the fact remains that such stories could only be based on the plausible idea that Makkan idols were not broken but allowed to be taken away.

As for those who did not "convert" to Islam, no authentic historical report suggests that such "kafirs" or "mushriks" were expelled from Makkah. "Conversion" to Islam meant a pledge to uphold the principles essential for maintaining peace and harmony in society namely; equity, justice, fairness, compassion, moderation, honesty and benevolence; and to peacefully struggle (that is, do "jihad") against injustice, extremism, dishonesty and any disruptive activity that threatens societal peace. Let me reproduce the famous question posed by the Prophet to the Makkans from the doorway of the Kaaba soon after its takeover.

"Ya ma'sharal Quraish! Maa tarauna anni faayilan bikum ?"

"O people of Quraish! What treatment do you think I am about to accord to you?"

(Please note here that the Prophet is addressing the entire city of Makkah most of which was idol-worshiping.)

When the Quraish replied, "O noble brother, and son of a noble brother! We expect nothing but goodness from you", the Prophet quotes verse 12:92 of the Quran and says; "I speak to you in the words spoken by Prophet Joseph to his brothers; 'No reproach on you this day (laa tasriba alaikumul yaum). Go your way, for you are freed ones'. "

These are not the words of a man who was going to avenge his own expulsion from Makkah. And how could the Prophet have forced the Quraish to adopt Islam's theology after having freed them saying "Go your way (izhabu)"? In my opinion "izhabu" here denotes freedom of religion and thought which has its basis in the Quranic concept "lakum deenukum waliya deen" (to you your way of life to me mine).

What actually happened was many Makkans voluntarily joined the Islamic movement of the Prophet having been impressed by the general amnesty granted to them by a man who had the power at that time to annihilate them completely. There is no record of anyone being forced to affirm the monotheism of Islam. In fact, staunchest enemies of the Prophet such as Abu Sufyan, his wife Hinda, Ikrimah the son of Abu Jahl and many others were pardoned and Muslims were warned against causing any harm to them.

Just look at this conversation between the Prophet and Hinda which took place when she came to take the pledge of Islam soon after the Makka was taken over. I have extracted this from Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah's book *The Battlefields of the Prophet Muhammad*. Notice the arrogance of Hinda and the Prophet's magnanimity despite her insolence.

Prophet: Do you promise not to kill your infants?
Hinda: We had reared them as children. It was you who killed them in the Battle of Badr.
Prophet: Do you promise not to commit fornication or adultery?
Hinda: Can a free-born woman do that?
Prophet: Do you promise not to steal?
Hinda: O Messenger of Allah! Stealing is really bad; but just think my husband is miserly, and for the necessary expenses of maintaining the home I have stolen, from time to time, some money from my husband.
Prophet smiles and says: All right, that much is not forbidden.

This amazing dialogue has been authenticated by several biographers of the Prophet. It also gives us an idea of the kind of pledge that was taken from those who had voluntarily chosen to follow Islam.

Those who believe that the Prophet banned all polytheists from entering Makkah quote (or misquote) the following verse.

"O you who believe [in peaceful message of Islam]! Truly the Mushriks [of Makkah] are unclean (najas); so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if you fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-wise." (9:28).

As can be seen here, the verse does not mention all Makkans. It talks about only those "Mushriks" or Pagans of Makkah who were violently opposed to the Islamic reform movement. The word Mushrik here is not used in a generic sense. In my opinion it is a label given to those polytheistic members of the Quraishi oligarchy whose feudalistic mindset prevented them from supporting the transformation of Makkah into a free, democratic society. It is because of this attitude they were described as mentally "unclean" or "najas". According to Lane's Arabic Lexicon the word "najas" "is of two kinds: one that can be seen by sight (basaarat), the other that can be perceived by intelligence (basiirat)." What is being referred to in 9:28 is the corrupt mindset of the "Mushriks", and only such Makkans were barred from entering the Sacred Mosque. In any case, those given to idol worship had nothing to gain from visiting the Mosque in the absence of their idols
inside the Kaaba.

A. Faizur Rahman

The author is the Secretary General of the Chennai-based Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought in Islam. He may be reached at faizz@rocketmail.com

[anajmi]

A lot of Muslims believe that soon after Makkah was reclaimed the idols inside the Kaaba were broken by the victorious Muslims on the instructions of the Prophet. In fact, there is a hadees in Bukhari which claims that the Prophet himself
knocked down some of the idols with his bow while reciting verse 17:81.

To me all these reports sound inauthentic because they militate against the exemplary character of the Prophet as described in the Quran. Let us not forget that the Prophet was conferred the title of "Rahmatul lil aalameen" (Mercy unto mankind). Moreover, the Quran warns the Muslims through the Prophet saying: "wa laa tasubbul lazeena yad'oona min doonillaah..".

Let us also not forget that the Quran talks about Ibrahim (as) himself destroying idols. Does this author think that Ibrahim (as) had deficiency in his character? Or that the Quran too is inauthentic?

21:58 And then he broke those to pieces, save the biggest of them, so that they might [be able to] turn to it.
21:59 When they saw what had happened, they said: “Who has done this to our gods? Verily, one of the worst wrongdoers is he!’’

[alwan]

Abraham's reason for breaking all idols (except the biggest one) in the house of worship was to prove to the Idol worshippers that the Idols can neither profit nor harm them hence they are not worthy of worship (refer 021:063-067)

What was Muhammad's reason for breaking Idols, if he ever did it ?

[anajmi]

The same reason as Ibrahim (as) is not good enough for you? How about Idols in the house of the God who prohibits idol worshipping? Is that a good reason?