After reciting tashahhud, ta‘awwuz and Surah al-Fatihah, Hazrat Khalifatul-Masih V^(aba) said:

Today, I will continue mentioning details pertaining to incidents from the Conquest of Mecca. The following are details concerning the length of the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) stay in Mecca: After his arrival in Mecca and the Conquest of Mecca, the Holy Prophet^(sa) remained there for a few days; however, there are varying accounts about the actual length of his stay.

According to [Sahih al-] Bukhari, it is narrated by Hazrat Ibn Abbas^(ra) that the Holy Prophet^(sa) stayed in Mecca for 19 days. He would offer two units of prayer, meaning he would shorten his prayer [due to being in a state of travel]. Other narrations also mention 18 days, 17 days, and 15 days. Allama Ibn Hajr has given precedence to the narration which mentions 19 days, because most narrations mention 19 days. The other narrations can be reconciled in that the narration mentioning 19 days also includes the day of arrival and the day of departure. Those who have mentioned 17 days have not included the two days of arrival and departure. The narrators who have related 18 days have included only one of those days, whereas those narrators who have conveyed 15 days have taken the narration regarding 17 days as their basis and have then subtracted the days of arrival and departure, thus stating it as 15 days. (Subul al-Huda, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 261; Fath al-Bari, Vol. 2, Qadimi Kutub Khanah, Karachi, p. 715)

Certain orientalists have mentioned the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) conquest of Mecca in their books. William Muir was a renowned orientalist from Scotland. Whilst mentioning the Conquest of Mecca in his book “The Life of Mohammad”, he has written about the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) excellent example and says:

“It was indeed for his own interest to forgive the past (meaning to forgive all transgressions committed by the people), and cast into oblivion its slights and injuries. (After saying this, he cannot help but say and accept the following reality:) But this did not the less require a large and generous heart. And Mohammad had his reward, for the whole population of his native city at once gave in their adhesion, and espoused his cause with alacrity and apparent devotion. [...] Within a few weeks, we find two thousand of the citizens fighting faithfully by his side.” (The Life of Mahomet, London: Smith, Elder & Co., 15 Waterloo Place, 1878, pp. 425-426)

Similarly, William Montgomery is another Scottish orientalist who has also written and spoken very harshly against Islam and the Holy Prophet^(sa) in his books. However, in one of his books, Muhammad at Medina he has written (I will read out the translation; I also read out a translation for the previous quote):

“These leaders were not forced to become Muslims (he is accepting this fact); they and doubtless many others remained pagan. Above all, however, his consummate skill in handling the confederacy he (meaning the Holy Prophet^(sa)) now ruled, and making all but an insignificant minority feel they were being fairly treated, heightened the contrast between the feeling of harmony, satisfaction and zest in the Islamic community and the malaise elsewhere; this must have been obvious to many and have attracted them to Muhammad^[sa].

In all this, one cannot but be impressed by Muhammad’s^[sa] faith in his cause, his vision and his far-seeing wisdom. While his community was still small and devoting all its energies to avoiding being overwhelmed by its enemies, he had conceived a united Arabia directed outwards, in which the Meccans would play a new role, a role no less important than their old role of merchants. [...] And now practically all of them, even the greatest, had submitted to him. Against considerable odds, often with narrow margins, but nearly always with sureness of touch, he had moved towards his goal. If we were not convinced of the historicity of these things, few would credit that a despised Meccan prophet could re-enter his city as a triumphant conqueror.” (Muhammad at Medina, Ameena Saiyid, Oxford University Press, Karachi, 2006, pp. 67-68 and 70)

Then, there is another orientalist named Arthur Gilman from America who was also quite renowned. Whilst mentioning the Conquest of Mecca in his book The Saracens he has deemed the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) general amnesty, his excellent example and tolerance as being exemplary, and writes:

“When Mohammed^[sa], mounted on the same camel that had so faithfully carried him on other occasions, rode into the city, his heart rose in thankfulness, for he saw empty streets again, and knew that his reception was to be peaceful. It is greatly to his praise that on this occasion, when his resentment for ill-usage in the past might naturally have incited him to revenge, he restrained his army from all shedding of blood and showed every sign of humility and thanksgiving to Allah for his goodness. Kalid, it is true (he writes, as has also been previously mentioned with regard to the incident of Hazrat Khalid bin Walid^(ra)), did meet force with force at one point, but he was rebuked by Mohammed^[sa].

“The prophet’s^[sa] first labor was the destruction of the idol-images in the Kaaba, and after that had been done he ordered his original muezzin to sound the call to prayer from the top of the Kaaba, and sent a crier through the streets to command all persons to break in pieces every image that they might possess.”

He writes:

“Ten or twelve men who had on a former occasion shown a barbarous spirit, were proscribed, and of them four were put to death, but this must be considered exceedingly humane, in comparison with the acts of other conquerors; (he writes) in comparison for example, with the cruelty of the Crusaders, who, in 1099, put seventy-thousand Moslems, men, women, and helpless children, to death when Jerusalem fell into their hands; or with that of the English army, also fighting under the cross, which, in the year of grace, 1874, burned an African capital, in its war on the Gold Coast (the former name of Ghana). Mohammed’s^[sa] victory was in very truth one of religion and not of politics; he rejected every token of personal homage, and declined all regal authority; and when the haughty chiefs of the Koreishites appeared before him he asked:

“‘What can you expect at my hands?’

“‘Mercy, O generous brother.’

“‘Be it so; ye are free!’ he exclaimed.” (The Saracenes, 4^th Edition, T. Fisher Unwin, London, 1887, pp. 184-185)

Another orientalist is Ruth Cranston who was also from America. Whilst mentioning the Conquest of Mecca in her book World Faith (she is a female author) she writes:

“On a day early in the year 630, the man who had been stoned and hooted from the town ten short years before, accompanied by one terrified companion, now led his ten thousand seasoned troops into the city of Mecca. Mohammed^[sa] had given orders that there should be no killing – the inhabitants were to be treated kindly. But his men were attacked—in spite of all the Meccan promises and undertakings; and the Prophet^[sa] had difficulty in restraining Khalid (now as a commander of his forces) from stern reprisals.” She has exaggerated in saying this; there were no assurances, and the Meccans were the first to attack. In any case, such prejudice typically manifests in one way or another. She further writes:

“Two Moslems and twenty-eight Meccans were killed. Imagine the carnage at such a time and on such an occasion if another leader had been in command! (Here she is compelled to accept the reality.)

“As soon as the Moslem troops were in control of the city, Mohammed changed his uniform for the white pilgrim robes. He performed the regulation pilgrim rites – seven times round the Kaaba. Then he called for the surviving companions – those who had risked all, again and again, for his cause – to stand beside him during the great event of the day and of his life. One by one, the 360 stone images – including the detested Hubal – were brought out of the shrine and dashed to pieces. With each destruction, Mohammed cried aloud:

“‘Truth is come – and falsehood is vanished!’” (World Faith, Skeffington Stratford Place, London, 1953, pp. 216-217)

Karen Armstrong is another good orientalist who is generally very fair in her writings. She was born in 1944 and is a renowned scholar and author of England who is known for her works on comparative religions. With reference to the Conquest of Mecca, she writes in her book, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet:

“He^[sa] had no desire to begin bloody reprisals. Nobody was made to accept Islam, nor do they seem to have felt under pressure to do so. Muhammad^[sa] did not want to coerce the people but to effect a reconciliation.

“He^[sa] had come to Mecca not to persecute the Quraysh but to abolish the religion which had failed them. […] By conquering Mecca, Muhammad^[sa] had vindicated his prophetic claim. But this conquest had been achieved without bloodshed and Muhammad's [sa] peaceful policy paid off. Within a few years, paganism was quite dead in Mecca and some of Muhammad’s^[sa] most committed enemies like Ikrimah and Suhayl became devout and fervent Muslims.” (Muhammad – A Biography of the Prophet, Book Readers International, Quetta, pp. 243 and 245)

Nevertheless, despite their fierce opposition, some Orientalists have been compelled to acknowledge the truth about certain matters, having no choice but to do so. There are additional events related to the conquest of Mecca as well.

One incident is in relation to the repentance of Abdullah bin Sa‘d bin Abi Sarh. It is recorded that he initially accepted Islam and served as a scribe for revelations. Later, however, he apostatised and returned to Mecca. It is reported that he was sentenced to death. After the conquest of Mecca, he sought refuge with Hazrat Uthman bin Affan^(ra), who was his foster brother. Hazrat Uthman^(ra) brought him before the Holy Prophet^(sa) and requested that the Holy Prophet^(sa) accept Abdullah’s pledge of allegiance. The Holy Prophet^(sa) remained silent for some time, then accepted his Bai’at. When Abdullah bin Abi Sarh had left, the narrator mentioned that the Holy Prophet^(sa) remarked to his Companions, “I remained silent, expecting one of you to rise and swiftly execute him.” The Companions asked, “O Messenger^(sa) of Allah, why did you not give us a signal?" To this, the Holy Prophet^(sa) replied, “It is not fitting for a prophet to signal toward killing someone.” According to some narrations, the Holy Prophet^(sa) stated, “It is not permissible for a prophet to commit treachery with the eyes.” (Sirat Ibn Ishaq, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 529-530; Sirat Ibn Hisham, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 742; Al-Iktifa’, Vol. 2, Alam al-Kutub, Beirut, p. 225)

Such narrations, along with similar ones, are found in certain historical books; hence, they are mentioned here. However, these accounts are doubtful, and the exemplary patience and character of the Holy Prophet^(sa) prove that such narratives are likely fabricated.

A similar narration appears in Sunan an-Nasa’i, stating:

During the conquest of Mecca, Abdullah bin Sa‘d hid in the house of Hazrat Uthman^(ra). When the pledge of allegiance for the general public was announced, Hazrat Uthman^(ra) brought Abdullah and requested the Holy Prophet^(sa) to accept his pledge. The Holy Prophet^(sa) raised his blessed head, looked at him, and refused three times. After doing the same action three times, he finally accepted his pledge. Then, he addressed the Companions, “Was there no wise person among you who, upon noticing my refusal to accept his pledge, would have stood and executed him?” The Companions replied, “O Messenger^(sa) of Allah, how could we know what was in your heart? Why didn’t you signal with your eyes?” The Holy Prophet^(sa) said, “It is unbecoming of a prophet to deceive with his eyes.” (Sunan an-Nasa’i, Kitab Tahrim ad-Dam, Bab al-Hukm fi al-Murtab, Hadith 4067)

Nevertheless, even this narration from Sunan an-Nasa’i is not necessarily authentic. This tradition is also found in Sunan Abu Dawood, but another narration within Abu Dawood omits any mention of execution. (Sunan Abu Dawood, Kitab al-Hudud, Bab al-Hukm fi Man Istadda, Hadith 4359)

This narration is as follows:

Hazrat Ibn Abbas narrates that Abdullah bin Sa‘d bin Abi Sarh was a scribe for the Holy Prophet^(sa), but Satan misled him, causing him to side with the disbelievers. On the day of Mecca’s conquest, the Holy Prophet^(sa) ordered his execution. Hazrat Uthman bin Affan^(ra) interceded for his protection, upon which the Holy Prophet^(sa) granted it. (Sunan Abu Dawood, Kitab al-Hudud, Bab al-Hukm fi Man Irtadda, Hadith 4358)

Regarding Abdullah bin Sa‘d, it is essential to clarify – as previously stated – that narrations from certain hadith collections regarding him have been critically assessed, and their chains of narration are considered weak. Suggesting the Holy Prophet^(sa) remained silent, expecting the Companions to act, is improbable; he was a king, and thus could have explicitly stated his intentions.

Another critical consideration is that Islam does not prescribe a penalty for apostasy; thus, suggesting Abdullah bin Sa'd was sentenced to death merely for apostasy is incorrect. Furthermore, it is also worth noting that the described details contradict the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) noble character, as I have already mentioned. On that day [of the Conquest of Mecca,] the Holy Prophet^(sa) epitomised Allah’s attributes of forgiveness, concealment of faults, mercy, and compassion. There was no one who sought forgiveness and was denied, even if a death sentence had previously been pronounced.

This narration is absent from Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. Additionally, it contradicts rational analysis. As a victorious leader, if execution were necessary, why would the Holy Prophet^(sa) hesitate or resort to subtle signals? When Hazrat Uthman^(ra) brought Abdullah forward, the Holy Prophet^(sa) could have openly declared his crimes unforgivable. Around the same time, the case of a woman from Banu Makhzum accused of theft was presented before the Holy Prophet^(sa), accompanied by significant intercession, including from Hazrat Umm Salama^(ra) and Hazrat Usama bin Zaid^(ra). Yet, the Holy Prophet^(sa) decisively rejected all pleas and upheld the punishment of severing her hand. Therefore, had Abdullah bin Sa'd’s crime been so severe, the Holy Prophet^(sa) would have openly stated that forgiveness was not possible.

Attributing to the Holy Prophet^(sa) such actions that contradict basic ethical principles and traditions is unacceptable. It is fallacious to claim that when he came to pledge allegiance, the Holy Prophet^(sa) remained silent, hoping someone would kill him. Furthermore, when this did not happen, the Holy Prophet^(sa) questioned the Companions, who replied that he needed only to signal them with his eye; however, he refrained from doing so because a prophet does not deceive with his eyes. Through this narration, people wish to assert, God forbid, that the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) true desire was for someone to kill him; however, he did not openly express it. This narrative inherently undermines its authenticity.

The exalted character of the Holy Prophet^(sa) is far above such attributions. He was firm and resolute in implementing Allah’s laws and cared nothing for others' opinions or reactions when justice was concerned. Yet, he was softer than silk when it came to forgiveness and mercy, harbouring no resentment or bitterness.

Therefore, narratives surrounding Abdullah bin Sa‘d’s allegiance are questionable, and some historians and biographers have rightly rejected these accounts.

In his commentary on verse 15 of Surah al-Mu’minun, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud^(ra) mentions the following incident in the following manner:

“A historical event is associated with this verse, which seems necessary to mention here. (He writes:) The Holy Prophet^(sa) had a scribe of revelation whose name was Abdullah bin Abi Sarh. When a revelation was sent down to the Holy Prophet^(sa), he would call him and have it written. One day, the Holy Prophet^(sa) was having these very verses written down. When he reached the verse ثُمَّ اَنۡشَاۡنٰہُ خَلۡقًا اٰخَرَ ‘Then We developed it into another creation.’ [23:15], the words فَتَبٰرَکَ اللّٰہُ اَحۡسَنُ الۡخٰلِقِیۡنَ “‘So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators’ [23:15] spontaneously came out of the scribe’s mouth. The Holy Prophet^(sa) said, ‘This indeed is the revelation – write it down.’

“But that unfortunate man did not realise that, as a natural conclusion to the previous verses, these words flowed appropriately. Instead, he thought that just as these words came out of his mouth and the Holy Prophet^(sa) declared them to be revelation, likewise – God forbid – the Holy Prophet^(sa) must be composing the Quran himself. As a result, he became an apostate and went to Mecca.

“On the occasion of the Victory of Mecca, among those whom the Holy Prophet^(sa) had ordered to be killed was Abdullah bin Abi Sarh. However, Hazrat Uthman^(ra) gave him protection, and he remained hidden in his house for three days. One day, while the Holy Prophet^(sa) was taking the oath of allegiance from the people of Mecca, Hazrat Uthman^(ra) brought Abdullah bin Abi Sarh before him and requested that his oath of allegiance be accepted. The Holy Prophet^(sa) hesitated for a moment, but then accepted his oath of allegiance – and in this way, he re-entered Islam.” (Tafsir-e-Kabir, 2004, Vol. 6, p. 139)

Regarding Abdullah bin Abi Sarh, it is reported that he later came to be counted among the Companions who rendered distinguished services to Islam. He also served as the governor of Egypt and was the one who led the conquest of a region in Africa. After the martyrdom of Hazrat Uthman^(ra), he distanced himself from the civil strife, even though he was Hazrat Uthman’s^(ra) foster brother. It is said that he had prayed that his final deed be prayer – and so it happened that one day he stood for the morning prayer, and while concluding the prayer, after saying salam to the right, he was just about to say salam to the left when he passed away. He died in the year 36 or 37 Hijri. (Usd al-Ghabah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 260-261)

Then there is the account of Ikrimah bin Abi Jahl accepting Islam. Ikrimah bin Abi Jahl was among those whose killing the Holy Prophet^(sa) had ordered on the occasion of the Conquest of Mecca. Ikrimah and his father used to harm the Holy Prophet^(sa) and were extremely harsh towards the Muslims. When he found out that the Holy Prophet^(sa) had ordered his execution, he fled towards Yemen. Despite the fact that in his enmity towards Islam he had even surpassed his father, Abu Jahl – and it is possible that this is what led to the command for his killing – it is also quite likely that those chiefs and leaders of Mecca who had always been at the forefront of opposing Islam – and who constantly plotted against Islam and the Holy Prophet^(sa) – after the conquest of Mecca, assumed that their deeds were such that there was no way they could be forgiven, and they would surely be killed. So assuming this, they fled on their own.

In reality, they had no expectation of the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) extraordinary mercy, pardon, and forgiveness, nor any real understanding of it. That is why they thought it best to save their lives and escape. But as they came to know more about the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) unparalleled forgiveness and grace, they began to feel drawn back towards Mecca and returned to the Holy Prophet^(sa) and presented themselves before him.

In any case, Ikrimah was among those prominent opponents who fiercely resisted the Muslim army even at the time of the Conquest of Mecca. He gathered a group with him that included the brave young men of Mecca, among whom were Suhail bin Amr and Safwan bin Umayyah, and they drew their swords, declaring that they would not allow the Muslims to enter Mecca. They firmly confronted the battalion of Hazrat Khalid bin Walid^(ra), but after more than twenty of their young men were killed, all of them fled from there, and Suhail, Safwan, and Ikrimah – all three – fled from Mecca.

In historical accounts, it is mentioned that Ikrimah had decided to travel to Yemen by sea. His wife, Umm Hakim bint Harith bin Hisham, who was the daughter of a chief of the Quraish, pledged allegiance on the occasion of the Conquest of Mecca along with Hind bint Utbah and other influential women. When she learnt that her husband, Ikrimah, had fled towards Yemen out of fear for his life, she came to the Holy Prophet^(sa) and submitted, “Ikrimah fears that you will have him killed. I implore you to grant him protection.” The Holy Prophet^(sa) responded, “He is under my protection.”

She then departed with her servant and made her way towards Jeddah, where she found Ikrimah on the seashore, just as he was preparing to board a ship. According to one narration, she reached him after he had already boarded the vessel. She called out to him, saying, “O son of my uncle! I have come to you from a man who is the most devoted in upholding ties, the most righteous among all people, and the most sincere well-wisher of all the people. Do not cast yourself into ruin, for I have already secured protection for you.”

Moved by her words, Ikrimah returned with his wife and accepted Islam, and his acceptance of the faith proved to be most blessed and beautiful.

It is narrated that when Ikrimah presented himself before the Holy Prophet^(sa), he said, “O Muhammad^(sa), my wife has informed me that you have granted me protection – meaning, you have permitted me to remain in Mecca even while I remain in a state of disbelief, and not on the condition that I accept Islam.” The Holy Prophet^(sa) replied, “You have spoken the truth. Indeed, you are under protection.”

At this, Ikrimah declared, “I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah. He is One and has no partner, and you are His servant and His Messenger.” Then, he lowered his head in embarrassment.

The Holy Prophet^(sa), then, said, “O Ikrimah, today whatever you ask of me, if it is within my power, I shall surely grant it to you.” Ikrimah submitted, “Then pray for the forgiveness of all the enmity I harboured against you.”

Upon this, the Holy Prophet^(sa) offered the following prayer: “O Allah! Forgive every instance of hostility that Ikrimah displayed towards me, and every ill word or deed he committed.” The Holy Prophet^(sa) was so pleased that he then placed his own cloak upon Ikrimah and declared with affection and honour, “Welcome! To the one who has come to us as a believer and a migrant in the cause of God.” (Al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 132; Subul al-Huda, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 227-228; Fath al-Bari, Vol. 8, Qadimi Kutub Khanah, Karachi, p. 13; Usd al-Ghabah, Vol. 4, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 67; Muhammad Bashmil, Fath Makkah, Nafis Academy, Karachi, pp. 307 and 327-328)

There is also mention of the fulfilment of a prophecy attached to the acceptance of Islam by Ikrimah, which has been mentioned by Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud^(ra). He writes:

“With the acceptance of Islam by Ikrimah, a prophecy was fulfilled, one that the Holy Prophet Muhammad^(sa) had conveyed to his Companions many years earlier. The Holy Prophet^(sa) said:

“‘I saw in a dream that I was in Paradise. There I saw a cluster of grapes and asked the people around me, “For whom is this fruit?” Someone replied, “It is for Abu Jahl.” This seemed strange to me, and I thought, “How can this be? No one enters Paradise except the believers. How then is Abu Jahl to receive grapes in Paradise?”’

“When Ikrimah accepted Islam, the Holy Prophet^(sa) explained, ‘That cluster was meant for Ikrimah. In the dream, God mentioned the name of the father in place of the son, something which is commonly found in dreams.’” (Dibacha Tafsirul Quran, Anwar-ul-Ulum, Vol. 20, p. 350)

In relation to Habbar bin Aswad’s fleeing and then later accepting Islam, it is written that Habbar bin Aswad was known in the Days of Ignorance for his eloquence, and he would often incite the people against the Holy Prophet^(sa). Moreover, he was a person of extremely foul morals.

When the daughter of the Holy Prophet^(sa), Hazrat Zainab^(ra), undertook her migration to Medina, she was expecting at the time. Habbar bin Aswad caused her camel to be startled, resulting in her falling from the mount and caused the miscarriage of her unborn child. Due to this injury, she remained in a state of illness until the end of her life.

Owing to this, the Holy Prophet^(sa) had given a directive for him to be slain wherever he might be found. At the time of the conquest of Mecca, in fear of retribution, Habbar fled from Mecca and went into hiding among the wilderness and deserts.

After the conquest of Mecca and the subsequent return of the Holy Prophet^(sa) to Medina, Habbar, ventured to present himself before the Holy Prophet^(sa). When he approached, the Companions^(ra) recognised him and immediately informed the Holy Prophet^(sa) that Habbar was coming.

The Holy Prophet^(sa) replied, “Yes, I have seen him. Do not take any action against him.”

Habbar then drew near and submitted:

“O Messenger of Allah, peace be upon you. I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah, and I bear witness that you are His Messenger. I have fled from you, wandering through various places and even sought refuge among non-Arabs. But then I recalled your grace, your forbearance, and the kindness you extend even to those who transgress against you. O Messenger^(sa) of Allah, we were once idolaters, and it is through you that Allah has guided us and delivered us from ruin. I implore you to forgive my transgressions and the pain I have caused you. I confess my misdeeds and sins.”

The narrator relates that at that moment, he observed the countenance of the Holy Prophet^(sa). The Holy Prophet^(sa), overwhelmed by modesty and compassion, lowered his gaze in silence. After a pause, he said:

“I have forgiven you. Verily, Islam wipes away all previous sins.” (Waqidi, Kitab al-Maghazi, Vol. 2, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 282; Muhammad Bashmil, Fath Makkah, Nafis Academy, Karachi, pp. 331-333)

Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud^(ra) has also recorded this incident, stating:

“Among those individuals for whom the Holy Prophet^(sa) had issued orders of the death penalty, was a man who had become the cause of the demise of the Holy Prophet’s^(sa) noble daughter, Hazrat Zainab^(ra).

“This man’s name was Habbar. During the migration of Hazrat Zainab^(ra), he had severed the girth strap of her camel’s saddle – a strap that secures the saddle firmly. As a result, Hazrat Zainab^(ra) fell from the camel, leading to the miscarriage of her unborn child. Not long thereafter, she passed away. This grievous act, in addition to other crimes he had committed, rendered him deserving of death.

“However, this very individual later came into the blessed presence of the Holy Prophet^(sa) and submitted:

“‘O Prophet of Allah, I had fled from you and journeyed towards Persia. But then I reflected and thought to myself: it is through this Prophet that Allah the Almighty has removed from us the darkness of shirk (idolatry) and saved us from spiritual destruction. Why should I seek shelter among strangers, when instead I could go to him, confess my transgressions, and implore his forgiveness?’

“The Holy Prophet^(sa) stated:

“‘O Habbar, when Allah has instilled the love of Islam within your heart, then why should I not forgive your sins? Go – for I have forgiven you. Indeed, Islam erases all that has gone before.’” (Dibacha Tafsirul Quran, Anwar-ul-Ulum, Vol. 20, pp. 350-351; Ferozul Lughat Urdu, Feroz Sons, p. 385)

How is it that the Holy Prophet^(sa) forgave him, yet it is claimed that he did not forgive Abdullah and was asked whether a signal or gesture could have been made and upon this the Holy Prophet^(sa) stated that there was no need.

Another individual was Kaʿb bin Zuhayr bin Abi Aslami. In the 7^th year of Hijrah, Kaʿb and his brother Bujayr arrived at a place called Abrak, a well belonging to the Banu Asad, located along the route from Basrah to Medina. From there, Bujayr journeyed on to Medina and accepted Islam. This news greatly angered Kaʿb, who then composed satirical verses [against the Holy Prophet^(sa)].

Although many narrations suggest that it was due to these satirical poems that the Holy Prophet^(sa) ordered Kaʿb’s execution, certain circumstantial details indicate a deeper matter: that Kaʿb and Bujayr may have conspired to harm or assassinate the Holy Prophet^(sa). It is surmised that Kaʿb deliberately remained at a distance from Medina, while sending his brother ahead, [with ill intent]. However, Bujayr embraced Islam.

Upon hearing of his brother’s conversion, Kaʿb became extremely angry. However, later – when the Holy Prophet^(sa) returned from the expedition of Ta’if – Bujayr wrote to his brother, exhorting him to repent and submit himself to the Holy Prophet^(sa), for the Holy Prophet^(sa) was known to forgive everyone who would come to him in a state of repentance.

Having no alternative other than presenting himself before the Holy Prophet^(sa), Kaʿb composed a qasidah [poem in praise of the Holy Prophet^(sa)]. The opening verse was:

بَانَتْ سُعَادُ فَقَلْبِي الْيَوْمَ مَتْبُولُ

“Suʿad has departed, and my heart today is torn with grief.”

Kaʿb then travelled to Medina and stayed with an acquaintance. The next morning, that acquaintance brought him to the Holy Prophet^(sa). After the Holy Prophet^(sa) had completed the morning prayer, the companion pointed out the Holy Prophet^(sa) to Kaʿb and said, “This is the Messenger^(sa) of Allah. Stand and seek his protection.”

Kaʿb rose, sat before the Holy Prophet^(sa), and placing his hand in the blessed hand of the Holy Prophet^(sa). None among the Companions present recognised him.

He then addressed the Holy Prophet^(sa), saying:

“O Messenger^(sa) of Allah, Kaʿb bin Zuhayr seeks protection and forgiveness, having repented and wants to come to you. If I were to bring him before you, would you accept his repentance?”

The Holy Prophet^(sa) replied, “Yes.”

At this, Kaʿb declared, “I am Kaʿb bin Zuhayr.” Hearing this, an Ansari Companion rose and said:

“O Messenger^(sa) of Allah, hand over this enemy of God to me so that I may strike his neck.”

But the Holy Prophet^(sa) responded with compassion:

“Let him be. He has come in repentance and regret.”

Kaʿb then recited his poem, and when he reached the couplet:

إِنَّ الرَّسُولَ لَنُورٌ يُسْتَضَاءُ بِهِ

مُهَنَّدٌ مِنْ سُيُوفِ اللَّهِ مَسْلُولُ

“Verily, the Messenger^(sa) of Allah is a radiant light by which guidance is sought,

A sharp, unsheathed Indian sword from among the swords of Allah.”

The Holy Prophet^(sa), removed his blessed mantle which he had over him and draped it over Hazrat Ka’b. It was due to this gesture that the poem came to be known as the Qasidah al-Burdah i.e. “The Poem of the Mantle.” Because “Burdah” means mantle. It is also referred to as Qasidah Banat Suʿad.

Later, Hazrat Amir Muʿawiyah expressed a desire to purchase this blessed mantle for a large sum from Hazrat Ka’b, but he declined, saying:

“I shall never part with this blessed garment bestowed upon me by the Messenger^(sa) of Allah.”

After Hazrat Kaʿb’s demise, Hazrat Amir Muʿawiyah acquired the mantle from his heirs, and thereafter it passed down through the rulers of the Banu Umayyah, until it was lost following the fall of their dynasty. (Ka’b bin Zuhair aur Qasidah Banat Sa’ad, Maktabah Ishaqiah, Karachi, pp. 6-7; Al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 301-302; Al-Lu’lu’ al’Maknun Sirat Encyclopaedia, Vol. 9, Dar al-Salam, p. 393; Muntaha al-Su’al, ala Wasa’il al-Wusul ila Shama’il al-Rasul^(sa), Vol. 3, Dar al-Minhaj, p. 166; Farhang-e-Sirat, Zawar Academy, Karachi, p. 24)

It is worth noting that among the people today, another poem is more widely recognised by the same name – Qasidah al-Burdah – composed by Imam Sharaf-ud-Din al-Busiri. It is said that when he wrote this poem in praise of the Holy Prophet^(sa), the Holy Prophet^(sa) appeared to him in a dream and wrapped him in his blessed mantle. When he awoke, the mantle was reportedly still on his shoulders, and he – having been paralysed – was miraculously healed. This, however, is a story that is narrated and passed down; such accounts do appear from time to time. (Diwan Imam Busiri, Dar al-Salam Printing Press, Lahore, pp. 32-33)

In any case, there are numerous examples of staunch opponents who ultimately accepted Islam and were forgiven. Insha-Allah, these accounts shall be mentioned in future.

From next Friday, insha-Allah, the Jalsa Salana of Jamaat-e-Ahmadiyya UK will also begin. Pray for that as well. May Allah the Almighty bless the Jalsa with His grace and continue to bestow His blessings on each and every programme. May Allah protect against every mischief-maker, every harmful person, and anyone with the intent to cause harm.

May Allah the Almighty bring safely all those guests who are coming from within the country or from abroad, and may He keep them in His protection in every way while they are here. May Allah the Almighty grant every host the ability to fulfil the duty of hospitality – whether the guests are coming personally to stay with individuals, or are being hosted under the Jamaat’s formal hospitality arrangements.

The workers who enthusiastically and passionately offer themselves for Jalsa duties – may Allah the Almighty enable all of them to serve selflessly in their respective departments, and may they serve the guests with utmost respect, kindness and cheerfulness.

Sometimes, due to the burden of work and lack of sleep, the cheerful spirit of some workers may waver. However, every worker, regardless of their role or department, should spend these days with the thought that Allah the Almighty has granted us the opportunity to serve the guests of the Promised Messiah^(as) and therefore we shall uphold our passion to offer every kind of sacrifice and not show any kind of wrong attitude and always maintain smiles on our faces.

Whether young girls or women, young boys or elderly men, officers or assistants, those who prepare food and manage the kitchen arrangements, those who serve the food, those on security duty, those working in the parking area, those working in hygiene and cleaning, those maintain the discipline inside and outside of the Jalsa Gah, the workers assigned at the entrance gates, the girls serving in the children’s marque, or the girls, boys, men, and women serving in the main Jalsa Gah – all must carry out their duties with a smile on their face at all times. May Allah the Almighty grant them this ability.

At the same time, a vigilant eye should be maintained on everyone so that no one can even have the courage to spread any mischief or harm. May Allah the Almighty enable all workers to serve in the best possible manner and become recipients of His blessings.