top of page
Search

Khalid b. al-Walid: An immoral war criminal

  • Writer: Anonymous
    Anonymous
  • Apr 20, 2024
  • 17 min read

Updated: Apr 4

Other Parts:

Refuting The Virtues of Khalid b. al-Walid

Historically speaking, the biggest war crimes committed during battles were perpetuated by senior commanders. Whilst these crimes were often covered up by the State, historical documentation cannot be completely manipulated to hide their misdeeds. Tragedies involving harm towards innocents, such as the torture of the prisoners of Abu Ghraib, demonstrate the offences that are overseen by senior army officials. As Muslims, we are outraged by such actions and even more when we hear excuses used to justify these crimes.

Unfortunately, Islāmīc history isn’t innocent of such corrupt commanders, but the tragedy here is that these actions aren't condemned, rather forgiven and ignored for their cruelty. It is tragic that our opponents have elevated the status of such criminals and honored them with revered titles.

Khālid b. al-Walīd posed a serious threat to Islām as a kāfir during the Battle of Uḥud, wherein the Prophet (saw) was injured. After allegedly affirming Islām, instead of mending his ways, he pursued the same attitude of adhering to stubbornness and cruelty.

Table of Contents:

Khalid permitted his officer to rape women

Imam Bayhaqi records the following incident involving Khālid b. al-Walīd and Dhārār b. al-Azwar in Sunan al-Bayhaqi, Vol. 9, pg. 177, H # 18222:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو الْحُسَيْنِ بْنُ الْفَضْلِ الْقَطَّانُ، أنبأ عَبْدُ اللهِ بْنُ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ دَرَسْتَوَيْهِ، ثنا يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ سُفْيَانَ، ثنا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ الرَّبِيعِ، ح وَأَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو نَصْرِ بْنُ قَتَادَةَ، أنبأ أَبُو الْفَضْلِ بْنُ خَمِيرَوَيْهِ، أنبأ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ نَجْدَةَ، ثنا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ الرَّبِيعِ، ثنا عَبْدُ اللهِ بْنُ الْمُبَارَكِ، عَنْ كَهْمَسٍ، عَنْ هَارُونَ بْنِ الْأَصَمِّ، قَالَ: بَعَثَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ رضي الله عنه ‌خَالِدَ بْنَ الْوَلِيدِ فِي جَيْشٍ، فَبَعَثَ ‌خَالِدٌ ‌ضِرَارَ بْنَ الْأَزْوَرِ فِي سَرِيَّةٍ فِي خَيْلٍ، فَأَغَارُوا عَلَى حَيٍّ مِنْ بَنِي أَسَدٍ، فَأَصَابُوا امْرَأَةً عَرُوسًا جَمِيلَةً، فَأَعْجَبَتْ ضِرَارًا، فَسَأَلَهَا أَصْحَابَهُ فَأَعْطَوْهَا إِيَّاهُ، فَوَقَعَ عَلَيْهَا، فَلَمَّا قَفَلَ نَدِمَ وَسُقِطَ بِهِ فِي يَدِهِ، فَلَمَّا رُفِعَ إِلَى ‌خَالِدٍ أَخْبَرَهُ بِالَّذِي فَعَلَ، فَقَالَ ‌خَالِدٌ: فَإِنِّي قَدْ أَجَزْتُهَا لَكَ وَطَيَّبْتُهَا لَكَ. قَالَ: لَا حَتَّى تَكْتُبَ بِذَلِكَ إِلَى عُمَرَ، فَكَتَبَ عُمَرُ أَنْ أَرْضِخْهُ بِالْحِجَارَةِ، فَجَاءَ كِتَابُ عُمَرَ رضي الله عنه وَقَدْ تُوُفِّيَ، فَقَالَ: مَا كَانَ اللهُ لِيُخْزِيَ ‌ضِرَارَ بْنَ الْأَزْوَرِ

ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb (may Allah be pleased with him) dispatched Khālid b. al-Walīd with an army. Khālid then sent Ḍirār b. al-Azwar with a cavalry detachment. They raided a clan from Banū Asad and captured a beautiful newlywed woman. Ḍirār was attracted to her, and when he asked his companions for her, they gave her to him. He then had relations with her. Upon returning, he regretted his action and felt deep remorse. When the matter was brought to Khālid, he informed him of what had happened. Khālid said, "I have approved it for you and made it permissible for you." However, Ḍirār insisted, saying, "Not until you write to ʿUmar about this." So Khālid wrote to ʿUmar, who replied with the order, "Stone him to death." By the time ʿUmar's letter arrived, Ḍirār had already passed away. ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with him) then said, "Allah would not disgrace Ḍirār b. al-Azwar."

The same incident has also been recorded by another chain: Abu Nasr b. Qutada from Abu al-Fadhl b. Khamirewh from Ahmad b. Najdah from al-Hassan b. Rabee from Abdullah b. al-Mubarak from Kahmas from Harun b. Al-Asam.

From this incident, we see that a beautiful woman, who had recently been married, was captured by Khālid's companion, Ḍirār b. al-Azwar. After she came into his possession, he slept with her, and later felt guilty, as he should, because he committed zina. A woman does not become lawful for marriage until she completes the iddah (waiting period).

Shaykh Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Jassās al-Rāzī (d. 370 AH) records in Ahkam al-Quran, Vol. 5, pg. 330:

واتفق الفقهاء على جواز وطء المسبية بعد الاستبراء

The scholars agreed on the permissibility of having sexual intercourse with the captured woman after performing Istebra.

If it is said that the women captured were murtadd (apostates) and disbelievers, that too would not lessen the heinous crime committed by Ḍirār, which was legitimized by Khālid. In fact, the punishment would be even more severe. Imam al-Nawawī records in his authoritative work Sharh Sahih Muslim, Vol. 10, pg. 35 - 36:

أن المسبية من عبدة الأوثان وغيرهم من الكفار الذين لا كتاب لهم لا يحل وطؤها بملك اليمين حتى تسلم فما دامت على دينها فهي محرمة

The captured woman from the pagans and other kinds of disbelievers who don’t have a book, it is not permissible to have sexual intercourse with her as ‘right hand possess’ until she converts to Islam, as long she is on her religion (paganism) she is unlawful.

Despite this, his lust made him unable to distinguish between halāl and ḥarām (even for an upright companion). He immediately took advantage of the woman. Khālid then justified his actions and saw no issue with them, as it is well-known that he was involved in acts of murder and fornication. He failed to implement the Sharīʿah properly, as the Qur'an says in Surah Mai'dah 5:45: 

وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَآ أَنَّ ٱلنَّفْسَ بِٱلنَّفْسِ وَٱلْعَيْنَ بِٱلْعَيْنِ وَٱلْأَنفَ بِٱلْأَنفِ وَٱلْأُذُنَ بِٱلْأُذُنِ وَٱلسِّنَّ بِٱلسِّنِّ وَٱلْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌۭ ۚ فَمَن تَصَدَّقَ بِهِۦ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌۭ لَّهُۥ ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّـٰلِمُونَ

And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.

By now, our readers will realize the motives behind war for Khalid and his fellow hot blooded males was to acquire riches and ravage beautiful women. The above incident and that of Malik b. Nuwayrah attests to this fact. The nature of ‘victories’ achieved by Khalid & Co that Nawasib have pride in, have been unveiled. Despite this, these Sahabah worshippers still blindly praise such thugs as they were ‘Sahabah’, issues such as killing Muslims, raping their women and personally taking the position of the Prophet by deeming an act as halal, have no negative bearing on these individuals, they remain just, truthful men that deserve respect! Shame on these people, we just don’t understand what audacity they have to invite us to embrace a school of thought that praises, defends and loves murderers and rapists!

Khalid unjustly fought Tulaiha b. Khuwaild

We would like our readers to recall the incident of Malik b. Nuwayrah (for those unaware can go to The killing of Malik b. Nuwarayh). We cited from Ibn Shadhan in the previous chapter because the causes linked to the murder of Tulaiha are similar to those of Malik b. Nuwayrah’s. Prior to the campaign that culminated in the murder of Malik, Abu Bakr had launched a similar campaign against a person called Tulaiha, who (like Malik) rejected the illegitimate caliphate of Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr deemed it paramount that this opponent be silenced, he connoted a claim that Tulaiha had claimed Prophethood for himself, and should hence be killed. This task was also given to his loyal pet Khalid b. al-Walid. The present day Sunnis would no doubt try to support the allegation of Abu Bakr against Tulaiha with the help of some weak narrations.

Ibn Atham (d. 314 H), who in his book Al-Futuh, pg. 14 records:  

وجعلت بنو أسد وغطفان وفزارة يقاتلون بين يدي طليحة بن خويلد أشد القتال وهم ينادون لا نبايع أبا الفصيل يعنون أبا بكر الصديق رضي الله عنه

Bani Asad, Ghatfan and Faraza (tribe) fought sternly in Tulaiha b. Khuwaylid’s army and they stated: ‘We won't give bay'ah to Abu al-Fasil', that referred to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq.

Ibn Hibban has also testified to this in his work al-Thiqat Vol. 1 pg. 171:

وكانت بنو فزارة وأسد يقولون والله لا نبايع أبا الفصيل يعنون أبا بكر

Bani Fazara and Asad used to say: ‘By Allah, we don’t give baya to Aba al-Fasil', by it they meant Abu Bakr.

Abal Fasil means a person who does not possess any merit.

Khalid's killing of innocent women

قَالَ ابْنُ إِسْحَاقَ: وَحَدَّثَنِي بَعْضُ أَصْحَابِنَا، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مر يَوْمَئِذٍ بِامْرَأَةٍ قَتَلَهَا خَالِدُ ‌بْنُ ‌الْوَلِيدِ ‌وَالنَّاسُ مُتَقَصِّفُونَ عَلَيْهَا، فَقَالَ لِبَعْضِ أَصْحَابِهِ " أَدْرِكْ خَالِدًا فَقُلْ لَهُ: إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَنْهَاكَ أَنْ تَقْتُلَ وَلِيدًا أَوِ امْرَأَةً أَوْ عَسِيفًا

Ibn Ishaq said: ‘Some of our companions narrated that Allah’s Messenger (s) passed by a woman who had been killed by Khalid b. al-Walid, the people were gathered around her, then He (s) said to some of his companions: ‘Go after Khalid and say to him: ‘Allah’s Messenger orders you not to kill a child, woman, or slave.’ 

حَدَّثَنَا وَكِيعٌ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ، عَنْ الْمُرَقَّعِ بْنِ صَيْفِيِّ، عَنْ حَنْظَلَةَ الْكَاتِبِ، قَالَ: غَزَوْنَا مَعَ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم، فَمَرَرْنَا عَلَى امْرَأَةٍ مَقْتُولَةٍ، وَقَدِ اجْتَمَعَ عَلَيْهَا النَّاسُ، قَالَ: فَأَفْرَجُوا لَهُ، فَقَالَ: " مَا كَانَتْ هَذِهِ تُقَاتَلُ " ثُمَّ قَالَ لِرَجُلٍ: " انْطَلِقْ إِلَى ‌خَالِدِ ‌بْنِ ‌الْوَلِيدِ فَقُلْ لَهُ: إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ يَأْمُرُكَ أَنْ لَا تَقْتُلَ ذُرِّيَّةً وَلَا ‌عَسِيفًا

Rabah b. al-Rabi' said: Handhala al-Katib marched with Allah’s messenger to a battle and Khalid b. al-Walid was at the front, then Rabah and the companions of Allah’s Messenger passed by and killed a woman, who had been killed by the front troops. They stopped and stared at her and wondering of her looks, until Allah’s Messenger (s) arrived, they then moved away (to let the Prophet pass) then Allah’s Messenger (s) stood next to her and said: ‘She wasn’t a warrior’. Then He (s) said to someone: ‘Go to Khalid and tell him to not to kill children or slaves’.

Hadith has been declared as ‘Sahih li Ghayrihi’ (authentic due to corroboration) by Shu'ayb al-Arnaut in the margin of Musnad Ahmad and another margin writer of Musnad Ahmad namely Shaykh Hamza Ahmed Zain has declared it ‘Sahih’. Al-Hakim recorded it in Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihain, Vol. 2, pg. 133, Hadith # 2565 and declared it ‘Sahih according to standards of Bukhari and Muslim’ and al-Dhahabi echoed the same. Al-Albani declared it ‘Hasan Sahih’ in Sunan Abu Dawud Hadith 2669. 

Subhan'Allah, the 'upright companions' butchered a civillian woman and stared at her dead body. Where is their shame? Where is the justice? Is Khalid's butchering of innocent women just ignored by the nawasib?

The massacre of Banu Jadhima

The following incident will also give a sketch to our readers about Khalid's inhumane characteristics. We read in Sahih al-Bukhari 4339:

The Prophet sent Khalid b. Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, “Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam),” but they started saying “Saba’na! Saba’na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another).” Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive, I said, “By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive.” When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet raised both his hands and said twice, “O Allah! I am free from what Khalid has done.”

It should be noted that Khalid was sent by the Prophet (s) to invite people to Islam not to kill them. Despite this, Khalid personally killed those he was unable to convince to embrace the faith, and asked his colleagues to likewise kill those that they had captured, and on what grounds? Where did the shari'ah permit him to do such? Fortunately, his colleagues utilized their humanity and rejected these orders and the Holy Prophet (s) automatically distanced himself from the brutality committed by Khalid. 

While Sunnis try to argue that this was just a mere 'error' of Khalid, the reality is this was more than just an error of judgement, it was a calculated cold blooded murder of Muslims, merely to settle some old scores. The proof for this lies in the Sahaba's own testimony, such as the one from Abdul-Rahman b. 'Awf who exposed the reason behidn his slaughter.

The version that Bukhari narrates regarding the Bani Jadhima massacre is a heavily edited and watered down version of what actually occured. Other traditions give us more detail of what took place.

أخْبَرَنا أبو بكر محمد بن عبد الباقي، أنا الحسن بن علي، أنا محمد بن العباس، أنا عبد الوهاب بن أبي حية، أنا محمد بن شجاع، نا محمد بن عمر حَدَّثَنِي عَبْد الله بن يزيد عن إياس بن سلمة، عن أبيه، قال : لما قدم خالد بن الوليد على النبي ﷺ - يعني بعدما صنع ببني جذيمة ما صنع - عاب عبد الرحمن بن عوف على خالد ما صنع قال: يا خالد أخذت بأمر الجاهلية قتلتهم بعمك الفاكه، قاتلك الله ، قال : وأعانه عمر بن الخطاب على خالد، فقال خالد : أخذتهم بقتل أبيك، فقال عبد الرحمن بن عوف كذبت والله، لقد قتلت قاتل أبي بيدي، وأشهدت على قتله عثمان بن عفان، ثم التفت إلى عثمان فقال : أنشدك الله هل علمت أني قتلت قاتل أبي ؟ فقال عثمان : اللهم نعم، ثم قال عبد الرَّحْمن : ويحك يا خالد، ولو لم أقتل قاتل أبي كنت تقتل قوماً مسلمين بأبي في الجاهلية؟ قال خالد ومن أخبرك أنهم أسلموا. فقال أهل السرية كلهم يخبروننا أنك وجدتهم قد بنوا المساجد، وأقروا بالإسلام، ثم حملتهم على السيف، قال: جاءني رسول الله ﷺ أن أغير عليهم، فأغرت بأمر النبي ﷺ فقال عبد الرحمن: كذبت على رسول الله ﷺ وغالظ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمن وأعرض رسول الله ﷺ عن خالد وغضب عليه، وبلغه ما صنع بعبد الرحمن، فقال : يا خالد ذروا لي أصحابي متى يُنك أنف المرء ينكى المرء، ولو كان أحد ذهباً تنفقه قيراطاً قيراطاً في سبيل الله لم تُدرك غدوة أو روحة من غدوات أو روحات عبد الرَّحْمن

When Khalid b. al-Walid came to the Prophet (s) after what he had done to the tribe of Jadhima, Abdul-Rahman b. 'Awf discredited Khalid on his deed and said: ‘Oh Khalid, you adopted the manner of Jahiliyah and killed them to avenge your uncle al-Fakeh, may Allah destroy you.’ Then Umar b. al-Khattab supported him against Khalid. Khalid said: ‘I avenged your father.’ Abdul-Rahman ibn 'Awf said: ‘By Allah, you have lied, I killed the killer of my father with my own hands and Uthman b. Affan is witness to that’. Then he (Abdul-Rahman) looked at Uthman and said to him: ‘I appeal to you by Allah, do you witness that I killed my father’s killer?’ Uthman said: ‘Yes.’ Then Abdul-Rahman said: ‘Oh Khalid, shame on you, even if I didn’t kill the killer of my father, would you kill Muslims to take avenge my father?’ Khalid said: ‘Who told you that they were Muslims!’ (Abdul-Rahman said): ‘All the soldiers testify that you saw them building mosques and testifying that they were Muslims, and then you struck them with the sword.’ (Khalid) said: ‘I had received a message from Allah’s messenger to invade them, therefore I attacked them on the orders of the Prophet (s)’. Abdul-Rahman said: ‘You have attributed a lie to Allah’s messenger.’ Then (Khalid) became rude with Abdul-Rahman and Allah’s Messenger became angry and turned his face away from Khalid because of what he did to Abdul-Rahman…

Certainly this narration disturbs any reader of any background, be it Shi'a or Sunni. For starters, the concept 'Adalat al-Sahaba', that all companions and truthful when they narrate from the Prophet (saw). Clearly, Abdul-Rahman didn't believe in this made up concept of the Sunnis, for he has attributed him of lying on the Prophet (saw)! 

Secondly, it also shows the real reason behind why Khalid killed Bani Jadhim, it was to avenge his father (who was a kafir mushrik). We clearly see that Khalid has no care for Islam or the theology behind it, he is killing a group of muslims for the sake of mushriks! Subhan'Allah. Even Umar b. al-Khattab, as usual, sought issue against Khalid which is expected as Umar hated Khalid ever since they were kids.

Thirdly, we see that Khalid was clearly aware of his mission and that the people he killed were muslims, yet he striked them with his sword regardless. Where is the so-called iman of Khalid, wherein he slaughters an innocent group of muslimeen to whom all he must account to on the day of Judgement. 

While Sunnis try to justifies Khalid slaughtering these tribesmen on account of a misunderstanding in Arabic grammar in the account of Sahih al-Bukhari, here Abdul-Rahman b. Awf exposes a more chilling reality. That is because we have the testimony of all the Sahaba participants that accompanied Khalid that the tribe were believers, and this before they were slaughtered. We have the witness testimony of scores of Sahaba that prove that there was no honest mistake on the part of Khalid, it was cold blooded unjustified slaughter, done merely to avenge an old tribal killing. Khalid tries to lie and say:

‘I had received a message from Allah’s messenger to invade them, therefore I attacked them on the orders of the Prophet’.

We know that this is not the case, Khalid had been asked by the Prophet (s) to invite the people to Islam, not to slaughter them. It is indeed atrocious that he sought to justify his sin, by claiming he was merely enforcing the directive of the Prophet (s). This lie was immediately refuted by Abdul-Rahman b. Awf. The implications for attributing a lie to the Prophet (s) are clearly set out in the Sunnah. We read this Hadith in Ibn Majah that has been authenticated by Shaikh Al-Baani in Sunan Ibn Majah 30:

Allah’s Messenger (SAW) said: “He, who deliberately attributes a lie to me, let him take his seat in the Hell-Fire.”

Khalid's disturbing treatment of Malik's dead body

We have already discussed Khalid's unjust killing of Malik b. Nuwarayh (refer to The killing of Malik b. Nuwarayh), let us now reveal toe post-murder activity done by Khalid to the severed head of this martyr.

وأمر برأسه فجعل مع حجرين وطبخ على الثلاثة قدرا فأكل منها خالد تلك الليلة ليرهب بذلك الأعراب من المرتدة وغيرهم

He (Khalid) ordered that the head (of Malik) be placed with two stones and inserted into a cooking pot, he (Khalid) then ate from it that night in order to scare the Arabs and others from being apostates. 

This disturbing act has been prohbited extensively by the Prophet (s), for mutilating dead bodies is a known haram act. In Musnad Ahmad, Vol. 33, pg. 141, Hadith # 19909:

حَدَّثَنَا وَكِيعٌ، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللهِ الشُّعَيْثِيُّ، عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ، عَنْ ‌سَمُرَةَ بْنِ جُنْدُبٍ وَعِمْرَانَ بْنِ حُصَيْنٍ قَالَا: مَا خَطَبَنَا رَسُولُ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم خُطْبَةً إِلَّا أَمَرَنَا بِالصَّدَقَةِ، وَنَهَانَا عَنِ ‌الْمُثْلَةِ

‘Whenever the prophet addressed us, he ordered us for charity and forbade us from mutilation’.

We await for the Sunnis to continue ranting about this being a mere 'honest mistake' of Khalid. Perhaps this was done while Khalid was drunk, for it's known he used to regularly drink as affirmed in Tarikh Ibn Asakir, Vol 16 pg. 252:

أخبرنا أبو بكر محمد بن عبد ‌الباقي أنا الحسن بن علي أنا محمد بن العباس أنا أحمد بن معروف نا الحسين بن الفهم نا محمد بن سعد - قال وحدثني إبراهيم بن عبد الله بن حاتم الهروي نا هشيم نا العوام بن حوشب حدثني قومي عن رجل منهم يقال له صعصعة قال فشت الخمر في عسكر خالد بن الوليد فجعل يطوف عليهم وكان رجل منا بعث به أصحابه فاشترى زقا من خمر وجعله بين يديه فاستقبله كفة بكفة فقال ما هذا قال خل قال جعله الله خلا فانطلق إلى أصحابه ففتحه فإذا خل كأجود ما يكون من الخل

My people informed me about a man among them called Sa'sa'a. He said: Alchohol (khamr) was common in the army of Khalid b. al-Walid, and he began to circulate among them. A man from our group was sent with it by his companions, so he bought a container of wine and placed it in front of him. Khalid faced him, palm to palm, and said, 'What is this?' He replied, 'It's alchohol.' Khalid said, 'May Allah make it vinegar.' He then went back to his companions, opened it, and found it to be the finest vinegar."

Indeed fitting it is for a man like Khalid to openly have khamr (alchohol) and make it common amongst his troops.

Khalid verbally abusing a companion

عَنْ أَبِي، سَعِيدٍ قَالَ كَانَ بَيْنَ خَالِدِ بْنِ الْوَلِيدِ وَبَيْنَ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ عَوْفٍ شَىْءٌ فَسَبَّهُ خَالِدٌ 

“Abu Sa’id reported there was some altercation between Khalid b. Walid and Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Awf and Khalid reviled him... ”

This is despite the Prophet (saw) having said per the Sunni narrations in Sahih Muslim 2540:

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: Do not revile my Companions, do not revile my Companions. By Him in Whose Hand is my life, if one amongst you would have spent as much gold as Uhud it would not amount to as much as one much on behalf of one of them or half of it.

This command is for the companions themselves, as he was talking to them, so no exception is made for the companions to be allowed to revile one another.

Khalid b. al-Walid's hatred of Ali (as)

It should come as no surprise to learn that Khalid b. al-Walid was a nasibi, since one possessing habits to commit haram acts commonly has a Nasibi affliction. In Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal, Vol 38 pg. 133 -134 Hadith # 23078 we read:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا وكيع ثنا الأعمش عن سعد بن عبيدة عن بن بريدة عن أبيه انه مر على مجلس وهم يتناولون من على فوقف عليهم فقال انه قد كان في نفسي على علي شيء وكان خالد بن الوليد كذلك

Buraida narrated from his father that he passed by a group of people abusing Ali, he stopped there and said: ‘There is something in myself against Ali as is the stance of Khalid b. al-Walid.’

Shaykh Shu’aib al-Arnaout in the margin of this tradition wrote: ‘Sahih according to the conditions of two Sheikhs’, and so did al-Albani in his Silsila al-Sahiha, Vol. 4 pg. 249.

We have already presented the testimony of the Sahabi Buraidah that Khalid b. al-Walid had something against Ali b. Abi Talib (as) that made him a Nasibi that automatically renders him a hypocrite. Being a nasibi is an indication someone is of illegitimate birth. 

Imam of Ahlus Sunnah, Fakhruddin al-Razi said correctly in Tafsir al-Kabir, Vol. 30, pg. 85:

ولأن الغالب أن النطفة إذا خبثت خبث الولد ولهذا قال عليه الصلاة والسلام لا يدخل الجنة ولد الزنا ولا ولده ولا ولد ولده

If the seed is evil then the progeny will also be evil, therefore the Prophet (s) said: ‘The son of adultery and his son and his grand son shall not enter heaven.’

With this fact in mind allow us to reveal the ‘virtuous’ lineage of Khalid b. al-Walid b. al-Mughira, as attested to in the Quran Surat al-Qalam 68:10-13:

وَلَا تُطِعْ كُلَّ حَلَّافٍۢ مَّهِينٍ, هَمَّازٍۢ مَّشَّآءٍۭ بِنَمِيمٍۢ, مَّنَّاعٍۢ لِّلْخَيْرِ مُعْتَدٍ أَثِيمٍ, عُتُلٍّۭ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ زَنِيمٍ

And do not obey every worthless habitual swearer (10) [And] scorner, going about with malicious gossip (11) A preventer of good transgressing and sinful (12) Cruel, moreover, and an illegitimate pretender (13).

Following are the esteemed Sunni sources confirming that base-born (Zanim) means of illegitimate birth:

And the scholars who wrote the following authority Sunni works are in agreement that this verse descended with regards to Khalid’s father, al-Walid b. al-Mughira:

For the sake of brevity we shall just cite Tafsir al-Nasfi, Vol 3, pg. 520:

{عتل} غليظ جاف {بعد ذلك} بعد ما عد له من المثالب {‌زَنِيمٍ} دعي وكان الوليد دعياً في قريش ليس من سنخهم ادعاه أبوه بعد ثمان عشر سنة من مولده وقيل بغت أمه ولم يعرف حتى نزلت هذه الآية والنطفة إذا خبثت خبث الناشئ منها رُوي أنه دخل على أمه وقال إن محمداً وصفني بعشر صفات وجدت تسعاً فيّ فأما الزنيم فلا علم لي به فإن أخبرتني بحقيقته وإلا ضربت عنقك فقالت إن أباك عنين وخفت أن يموت فيصل ماله إلى غير ولده فدعوت راعياً إلى نفسي فأنت من ذلك الراعي

“It is narrated that he (Walid) approached his mother and said, ‘Muhammad described me by ten characteristics. I am fully aware of them with the exception of the son of adultery. Now if you do not tell me the truth, then I shall strike off your neck. she (Waleed’s mother) replied ‘Your father was impotent, I was worried that if he died his wealth would go to others, so I called a shepherd and slept with him and you are that shepherd ‘s son’ “

We would ask our readers to ponder over the words of Razi “If the seed is evil then the progeny will also be evil” – this has exactly been proven in this article.

Other Parts:

Refuting The Virtues of Khalid b. al-Walid

Комментарии

bottom of page