Apostate prophet find true culprit; executing Christian apostates?

In answer to the video "The Fate of the Jews of Medina (TGP 1)"

The capital punishment solely for renouncing one's religion isnt Quranic, it is a Biblical ruling outlined in Deut13 or Deut17:1-7 and stipulates that all those who are caught enticing others into, or commiting idolatry, are to be put to death, in such a forceful manner that all the inhabitants of the city are to be indiscriminately executed, their livestock and possessions burned and their dwellings razed to the ground.

A demonstration of the law's application, on a large-scale and in a systematic way, directly commanded by God is when thousands of Israelites were executed by their own brethren for having reverted to idol worship during the exodus. This incident is reported in both the Torah and Quran.

Further the Biblical law of apostasy is general to all situations. When the Israelite prophets executed apostates and idolaters from among their own, it wasnt in war times where the apostate risked joining enemy ranks or spying on their or refusing to contribute economically as a full fledged member of a community with his rights and obligations. Later on in the course of their tumultuous history and as they were adapting the revealed law (of apostasy and other inconvenient and/or difficult laws) to their needs and whims, or their life circumstances, the passing of the death penalty required a much more stringent procedure. It was the case before, during and after the time of Jesus which is why it was rarely if ever applied then, whether by Jews or early followers of Jesus.

This by the way is one of the many points that undermine the crucifixion tale, as will be shown further below.

In Christianity a similar process of reinterpretation occurred as regards the capital punishment for apostasy. Up to the middle ages, whether it was church leaders, popes, thinkers and saints the likes of Thomas Aquinas, all justified and applied whenever they could, based on passages of both the HB/NT, the death penalty to apostates, as well as heretics and open sinners. It was not until Christianity and its church weakened through reforms and secularism that the capital punishment for religious transgressions was abandoned.

The Jews, in the times of Jesus didn't have any authority to try jesus for a death penalty, among other reasons, because of the procedures they had put into place so as to avoid the harsh mosaic punishments befalling their community for their frequent capital offenses:

-the NT says that the high priest headed up the trial. The high priest never headed the Sanhedrin, that role fell to Nasi and the Av Bet Din, neither of whom are mentioned in the NT.

-To pass a death penalty a Jewish Sanhedrin had to meet in the Chamber of Hewn Stones in the Temple, but in 28CE which is prior to Jesus' supposed execution, the Chamber was destroyed so the Sanhedrin moved to another room on the Temple Mount, and then into the city itself (Talmud, Shabbat 15a, Rosh haShanah 31a).

Deut17:8-13"go up to the place that G-d your L-rd shall choose"

means the chamber of carved/hewn stone. Just as the Tabernacle was the only place in which to bring animal offerings until the final place was identified as the Temple, so to was the place for the court identified as the chamber in the Temple. Also, the Romans had removed the right to pass the death penalty according to Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews 17:13). Around the year 6 CE, Herod Archelaus, was dethroned and banished to Vienna. He was replaced, not by a Jewish king, but by a Roman Procurator named Caponius. The legal power of the Sanhedrin was then immediately restricted.  When Archelaus was banished the Sanhedrin lost the ability to try death penalty cases in favor of the Roman procurator (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 20:19). So right there we have two impediments to the Jews passing a death sentence.

-The Sanhedrin never met at night Matt26:57,Mk14:53 or in secret, on Shabbat or any holy day -- or even on the day BEFORE. Misnah (Sanhedrin IV:1) and Maimonides (Hilkot Sanhedrin XI:2).

- A death penalty case required two eye witnesses to the crime even when the Jews had the authority. When a death sentence was passed a minimum of 24 hours was given before it was carried out, giving time for witnesses to come forth on behalf of the condemned 

-Jewish trials were never held in anyone's house, only in the Temple 

So, in addition to the many legal proceedings which would have had to be broken for such trial to have taken place as is depicted in the Gospels, something that never happened in Jewish history, the Jews, living under Roman dominion, didn't have any authority to try Jesus for a death penalty. Why would they even make such effort, organizing this secret meeting just prior to the Passover festival, a time of religious preparations, breaking a long list of mosaic comandements along the way, yet knowing that their endeavor would be fruitless and their judgement would bear no legal weight? And not only in the eyes of the authorities but in light of Jewish law itself since the halakha requirements for a legal trial were not fulfilled? When the Pharisees take him to the authorities, Pilate tells them to 

"Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law". 

This is because, supposing Jesus did break some religious law, which he never did, this charge would carry no weight in Roman courts except if it threatened the state. To try creating a valid criminal case they begin accusing him of rebellion against the state and claiming kingship. These charges have no bearing on Jewish law, so that this historically exceptional Sanhedrin had to be hastily set up. This is because the messianic king supposed to usher the era of Jewish dominance over the entire world will do just that. Bar Kochba, a messianic claimant who came just a few years after Jesus was supported by those very Pharisees, hoping he would fulfill those very "crimes" they supposedly accused Jesus of committing. 

That "pre-trial" was thus irrelevant on all counts. They could have just handed him to Pilate, on the charge of rebellion, this way saving time on passover eve, in preparation for their festival. They would have also avoided breaking a long list of requirements while setting up this hasty trial, making it invalid even by their own law.

The whole story is fiction, meant at demonizing the Jews so that the blame is not shouldered by the Roman executioners, when they reluctantly put Jesus to death. The gentile authorities, painted as borderline Christians, were this way appeased and could be targeted for missionary activity, as occured soon after. Consequently, we never see in history Christians blaming, oppressing and mass murdering Italians in retaliation for Jesus' death, but rather Jews, despite them being in fact the necessary tools in the cosmic scheme of salvation through God's suicide..

Apostate prophet seeks further examples; killing the political apostates?

In answer to the video "The Fate of the Jews of Medina (TGP 1)"

Another typical example is that of Abdullah Ibn Sad Ibn Abi Sarh who had converted then apostised, joined the enemy side and began undermining the authenticity of the Quran by spreading rumors that he had been forging verses. He in addition incited the opposite party to war. When the Muslim side finally overcame against all odds and his own inciting efforts, his inevitable, legitimate fate was now execution for high treason.

This is what governments generally do once a traitor is apprehended, especially when a conflict ends while the person is still among enemy ranks. At that point, ibn Abi Sarh sought Uthman's intercession and came to the prophet to pledge his allegiance. The prophet ignored Uthman's plea twice before finally accepting. The prophet knew that he deserved to be put to death but at the same time, because of the general amnesty he had declared upon Mecca's conquest, he hesitated in the case of Sarh' special case, leaning more towards the capital penalty. By his silence, he left it to the attendance of close followers to do as they liked and as he saw that they leaned the opposite way, he reluctantly validated their judgement and accepted Sarh's pledge. 

However and as already shown from the Quran, should one leave Islam peacefully without intending any harm to the community, not combining apostasy with public rejection of the state system, which includes refusal to acquit oneself from fiscal obligations, then the consequences of the sin are left for the Creator to decide in the Hereafter. A case in point is that of a bedouin that apostised though he had accepted Islam, pledging allegiance in front of the prophet the day before. The prophet did not punish him, the most that he did was to ignore him 3 times before stating

"Medina is like a furnace. It expels its impurities and collects what is pure".

The early caliphs followed the same line. Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz did not bother a group of apostates so long as they did not rebel against government laws. It is thus rejection of the religion in a way that threatens the stability of the Islamic system in place that warrants death penalty. These were the cases covered by the prophet's saying

"Whosoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him".

In fact there are explicit reports where the prophet let people leave the community in security following their spiritual apostasy.

Once more, there is no compulsion in religion 2:256,18:29 so no punitive measure can be directed at an apostate neither can he be compelled to go back to Islam or forced to repent solely on the basis of his choice of creed. Per the Quran and as made clear in 4:88-90 quoted earlier, action is to be undertaken against an apostate when he engages in hostile behavior towards Muslims and the Muslim state. Fighting, punishing or killing an apostate has therefore nothing to do with a person's choice of creed but with his behavior towards the Muslims.

Apostate prophet isnt the best prosecutor; executing apostates in Islam?

In answer to the video "The Fate of the Jews of Medina (TGP 1)"

To further corroborate the notion that spiritual apostasy isnt what triggers the death penalty, under Uthman's caliphate, a man named Abdullah Ibn Saba and his followers deeply resented Uthman, favoring Ali instead whom they saw as a semi divine figure more eligible to be caliph.

Their over exaltation of Ali took them outside the fold of Islam, making them apostates. Their true aim by feinting conversion was to spread political and social discord to destabilize the caliphate. They planned on capturing and killing Uthman should he refuse stepping down, and Uthman was eventually murdered.

Ali eventually arrested them, exiled some of them and executed others. The fact some were exiled shows that although they were all considered apostates, they did not all qualify for the death penalty. The executions were not motivated by choice of creed, which isnt an endorsed practice by the Quran, but rather for the capital offense of fasad fil ard, which per the Quran warrants the death penalty. Although the brief and most authentic reports do not clearly say how this was done, some say that they were first burned then thrown into a ditch while others say they were first beheaded then had their lifeless bodies burnt.

In both possible cases, Ali had done something which the prophet forbade;

- the first potential misdeed was execution by fire. It is reported

"When we intended to depart, Allah's Apostle said, "I have ordered you to burn so-and-so and so-and-so, and it is none but Allah Who punishes with fire, so, if you find them, kill them". In another report "We were with the Prophet and we passed by a colony of ants which had been burned, and the Prophet became angry and said, ‘It is not fitting for any man to punish with the punishment of Allah.” 

- the second potential misdeed was mutilation of lifeless bodies. It is reported

"The Prophet forbade robbery (taking away what belongs to others without their permission), and also forbade mutilation (or maiming) of bodies.”

The traditions explain that this instruction is rooted in a Quranic verse

16:126"And if you take your turn, then retaliate with the like of that with which you were afflicted; but if you are patient, it will certainly be best for those who are patient".

This verse is said to have been revealed after the prophet had seen the violent manner in which his uncle Hamza's dead body had been ripped open and then threatened

"Never yet have i felt more anger than now i feel; and when next time God gives me victory over Quraysh, i will mutilate thirty of their dead".

This emotional, on the spot declaration was never fulfilled, and the prophet in addition forbade mutilation as shown above, in obedience to the Quranic directive. Even in warfare, killing must be swift, without recourse to inefficient weapons that cause unnecessary suffering 

"The Prophet forbade the throwing of stones (with the thumb and the index or middle finger), and said "It neither hunts a game nor kills (or hurts) an enemy, but it gouges out an eye or breaks a tooth".

When ibn Abbas learned of what Ali had done (either burning or mutilating), he publicly rebuked him by appealing to the prophetic sunna mentioned above, which embarrassed Ali, hence his first reaction

"Wayh Ibn Abbas!".

Ali either knew about the prophet's commands but let his emotions overcome him in the execution of the right course, or had forgotten them. So he admitted his error and praised ibn Abbas for speaking the truth

"When ‘Ali was informed about it he said: How truly ibn Abbas said!"

Similarly the misquoted reports about Abu Bakr's ridda wars do not come in the context of apostasy. The people fought against were regarded as Muslims according to many other reports, although a minority had apostised. They were fought for their refusal to pay due government taxes and poor rate, and after they initially and unexpectedly attacked those that sided with Abu Bakr on the issue, and after causing bloodshed among government ranks and attempted to overthrow the first caliph. Prior to giving further details about this event, it is important noting that the Quran sanctions warfare against anyone, including Muslims, who refuse to desist from destructive practices such as riba 2:278-9. The events of the ridda war occured shortly after the prophet's death when many disheartened recent converts apostised and others attempted to reduce their community contributions.

Umar is reported to have pleaded with Abubakr to be more lenient with those that refused paying their dues, which he categorically refused. Clearly the issue was not about spiritual apostasy or else Abubakr would have acceded to Umar's request, accepting that they pay less in exchange of their adherence to the Muslim community. Abubakr sent them an official letter calling them back to Islam, those very people who were nominal Muslims, but that refused adhering to the laws of the Islamic state. He instructed his emissaries to fight the rebels after they have been informed of their obligations towards the state and have rejected

"(the duties) that are incumbent upon them and [the advantages] that accrue to them, and (the emissary) should take what is [imposed] on them and give them what they are due".

In his letter Abubakr additionally appealed to the prophet's practice in a similar situation. When he was confronted to Muslims who rebelled against the state and refused paying their dues, unjustly taking advantage of the system which others were sacrificing their own wealth and lives to maintain

"he struck whoever turned his back to Him (God) until he came to Islam, willingly or grudgingly".

Such a behavior is equal to turning one's back to God, as is represented by the state religion. This isnt speaking of simply renouncing the religion while remaining a full fledged citizen with his rights and obligations.

The rebels of the ridda war launched their assault by night while the majority of the Muslim soldiers were sent on an expedition outside Medina. Abu Bakr fought back with his people and killed those who were involved. It is with such historical and Quranic perspective that the killing of apostates as reported in the history and hadith books should be understood, spiritual apostasy was never the sole charge warranting the death penalty, but rather political apostasy ie socio-political destabilisation and conspiracies to commit bloodshed, especially in times of war or other sort of trials that caused the early Muslims to be on high alert against those who wished to overthrown the system.

In addition, some among the early Muslims' enemies pretended converting in attempts to infiltrate the community and harm it through inciting sedition and providing vital information in times of war 3:72,33:60. All governments would punish and sometimes execute foreign spies, double agents, or traitors to an enemy with whom one is at war. These are the people covered in the saying

"The one who leaves his religion AND SEPERATES from the community, kill him".

This clearly puts 2 condition for the execution of an individual in war times, leaving the religion combined with separation from the community to join the enemy. Leaving the religion while remaining a full fledged citizen with his rights and obligations does not warrant the death penalty. This openly declared threat would make the conspirators think twice before engaging in their insidious behavior. All scholars have understood that leaving Islam must be coupled with a will to harm it and its people, to warrant the death penalty. Ibn Taymiyah said

"Muhaarabah (waging war against Islam) is of two types: physical and verbal. Waging war verbally against Islam may be worse than waging war physically – as stated above – hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to kill those who waged war against Islam verbally, whilst letting off some of those who waged war against Islam physically. This ruling is to be applied more strictly after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Mischief may be caused by physical action or by words, but the damage caused by words is many times greater than that caused by physical action; and the goodness achieved by words in reforming may be many times greater than that achieved by physical action. It is proven that waging war against Allaah and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) verbally is worse and the efforts on earth to undermine religion by verbal means is more effective".

Apostate prophet counsels Muslims; remain in Islam or die!

In answer to the video "The Fate of the Jews of Medina (TGP 1)"

18:29,2:256"There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing" 

When 2:256 says there is no compulsion in religion, it also gives the reason for the prohibition of compulsion

"truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error".

The reason is that truth has been clearly explained, there is thus no need to enforce it. It is available for anyone to consider, while knowing the consequences of accepting or rejecting it. The clause on which the prohibition of force is based ie "truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error" was never reversed, whether before or after the "verses of the sword" meaning the effect must equally remain unchanged.

 
Islam requires that belief follows reason and understanding. There is no need for compulsion in a matter whose advantages and disadvantages are clearly defined and the reward and punishment for accepting or rejecting it well-explained

"the right way has become clearly distinct from error".

This is why the prophet is told that he is not a warder, keeper and guardian over those who turn away. Like all prophets that passed before him his task consists in warning and giving glad tiding to the people, he has no power to influence their freewill or force their belief 17:54,42:48,88:21-2. He should therefore let him disbelieve whoever wishes to 18:29 after making sure that the message has reached them 13:40 in the most kindly manner 6:108,16:125.

Also, anyone can leave Islam and come back time and time again without punishment or being killed 4:137 which bellies the idea of killing a person as a punishment for leaving Islam or wavering in his faith. However God will only accept his repentance if it is sincere 3:86-89 and not followed by constant periods of disbelief then belief 4:137. 

As reported by ibn Abbas 

"A man from among the Ansar accepted Islam, then he apostatized and went back to Shirk. Then he regretted that, and sent word to his people (saying): 'Ask the Messenger of Allah [SAW], is there any repentance for me?' His people came to the Messenger of Allah [SAW] and said: 'So and so regrets (what he did), and he has told us to ask you if there is any repentance for him?' Then the Verses: 'How shall Allah guide a people who disbelieved after their Belief up to His saying: Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful' was revealed. So he sent word to him, and he accepted Islam."

Nowhere does the Quran say a person must be punished or killed solely for the act of apostasy and all it mentions is that apostates shall face a terrible punishment in the Hereafter. This of course excludes those who apostize unwillingly, who are

3:86-91,16:106"compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith".

Such a person is compelled to renounce faith with his lips due to imminent danger on his life while he remains a firm believer in his heart. This is what is often referred to as taqiya. The Quran doesnt condone lying, rather commands to uphold one's pledges, to judge with equity, to speak justly, kindly, with integrity, without corruption, with the outward locution corresponding to the intent 

4:5-9,135,6:152,2:83,235,3:32,70"O you who believe! Reverence God and speak justly". 

It is further to be noted here, that although martyrdom in the cause of faith is highly meritorious, still the Quran absolves those who sincerely, not out of lack of faith, cannot go to such an extent because

2:233"no soul shall have imposed upon it a duty but to the extent of its capacity". 

Saving life takes precedence over following the law. That is why a Muslim may eat pork if facing starvation. Exactly what Jesus taught in the Gospels when he transgressed the sabbath by citing David's example.

Punishment in the hereafter for the sin of apostasy is therefore solely the lot of the one who willingly, without any compulsion renounces Faith and:

"opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement".

Severing of social ties must be made with apostates who were former hypocrites, especially in the context of war as in the verses that will be quoted, since these former Muslims used to hide their hatred and enmity from other Muslims, and now openly declare it, even striving to make them leave their religion

4:88-89"What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return (to unbelief) for what they have earned?..They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike".

They are therefore to be cut off from the community to avoid the spread of their mischief

4:89"take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes)/hajiru in Allah's way".

Ties with them can only be restaured when they decisively return to Islam (as indicated by the clause "fi sabilillah/for Allah's sake") and prove their faith to the rest of the community through difficult sacrifices such as leaving their homes and doing hijra in Allah's way, forsaking the domain of evil for an environement where they can practice their faith without restrictions, as the true believers were doing. If they do not do so then their expression of Islam is only for the purpose of spying and destruction, serving the purpose of those with whom Muslims are at war. In this case

4:89"if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper".

They must be executed because of their open and secret hostile activities. However if those apostates refuse to flee their homes in Allah's way but nevertheless end the threat from within the community, by migrating for

4:90"a people between whom and you there is an alliance"

or who decide to remain within the Muslim community but have decisively abandonned all hostilities

4:90"who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people..withdraw from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not given you a way against them".

This Quranic passage establishes the social ruling as regards apostasy. The Quran frames it exclusively in the context of war, which is also the historical context in which the early scholars of Islam discussed the law of apostasy. That is why neither the Quran nor the scholars impose a punishement solely for the act of apostasy, but when it is coupled with hostile activity, verbal or physical. 

Ridda is the word used in reference to those who engage in this multifaceted behavior. This historical perspective is often missed, disregarded or obscured whenever critics quote a saying from the prophet on apostasy, or the rulings of the fuqaha'. One can now understand the words of the prophet 

"The one who leaves his religion AND SEPERATES from the community, kill him". 

Here, the apostate is to be killed if he in addition severes all ties with the community. In those days, this amounted to joining enemy ranks. If the apostate remains in the community he is left unharmed. We thus see the prophetic practice in clear congruence with the aforementionned Quranic passage.

However even in times of peace, execution of an apostate is sometimes justified. In an Islamic state, Islam itself is what constitutes and legislates life on every level; administrative, economic, social etc. For a Muslim citizen to abandon Islam means to reject the law of the land. One cannot at the same time pledge to abide by those rules while rejecting the essence of the legislative authority, which is the Quran and the prophetic sunna. The entire system derives from these 2 pillars, and new laws are continuously formulated based on them. This constitutes a destabilising factor on all levels of society; how can a government endure if people reject a system unanimously adopted by the community? Except under a tyranny, such an attitude is unjustifiable and is an existential threat to the state. That is why the jurists have legislated for the threat to be cut off from its onset, before it becomes a movement. The apostate on the other hand is free to leave the land and reside outside Islamic jurisdiction, or remain in it without making his apostasy public. But if he makes the apostasy and rejection of the system public, remains in Muslim land, he becomes de facto an outlaw and a destabilising factor within society. Even if it is for the sake of converting to one of the non-Muslim groups of the Islamic land, the apostate still is guilty of rejecting the legislative authority. The non-Muslim groups on the other hand, pre-existed the Islamic state until it expanded to their lands. They never at any point rejected the legislative authority, but instead embraced it, along with the freedom of religion it grants them.

Islam critiqued fighting on the wrong side; Satan opposes the praying man?

In answer to the video "Bizarre Narrations- Muhammad's Doctrine of Satan"

There are numerous Quran and prophetic sayings stressing the importance in the sincere performance of the spiritual duties. Laziness in these matters was so loathed and reprimanded by the prophet that he is reported as using a derogatory Arabic expression, in reference to one who oversleeps past the morning prayer

"He is a man in whose ears (or ear) Satan had urinated".

Urination has been used as a metaphor for corruption in Arabic, as attested by the earliest hadith scholars in reference to the hadith, and attributing this action to the devil as being performed in one's ears is a symbolism for the devil's corruption of one's self to the point the faculty to hear is willfully disregarded, leading one to ignore the call to prayer being heard.

The insistence of the prophet to pray and encourage others to do so, was of course not only restricted to simple physical attendance but included a broad range of related issues that all reflected one's sincerity in practice and consciousness of the seriousness of the undertaking.

For example he reportedly used the vivid imagery of the devil being pleased when seeing someone yawning and entering the mouth of the one that doesnt put his hand in front of it.

Firstly, it is obvious the devil cannot but be pleased by any sign of human weakness, especially in a spiritual context. The hadith in question comes in the context of prayer, a moment where the devil is doing his utmost to deviate one's spiritual concentration. One could be tired or sleepy while praying, and yawning is the physical manifestation of that state. To try and prevent it or raise one's hand if it occurs is a sign of composure and self-awareness, let alone basic presentation etiquette -among others encouraged in both the Quran and hadith when about to solemnly address the Creator. The devil entering the mouth of the one who yawns improperly during prayer, illustrates that he has successfully exploited that specific weakness at a crucial moment, has defeated one's sense of self awareness and spiritual composure. Satanic entities from among the jinn have the property to enter the human body so that they might whisper their suggestions whenever one lowers his spiritual guard 

"He (the prophet) said: The devil flows in man as the blood flows in him. I feared that he might inject something in your hearts". 

Satanic entities lurk around in everyday affairs, awaiting any moment of inattention where they can enter people's minds and hearts, especially at prayer times.

In another report the prophet employed the image of one whose head is transformed into that of a donkey for preceding the imam during prayer. It is obviously not literal since he alludes to those that have already done so but were not transformed. Calling someone a donkey is equivalent to say he is stupid. To understand the image conveyed one has to picture the awkwardness of being the sole person in a room out of synchronization with all others.

This is another one among many misunderstood ahadith, often derided by critics of Islam, which need to be understood in terms of imagery. For example the ahadith saying the satan passes wind upon hearing the call to prayer while running off fast and far away is obviously meant at depicting his intense loathing of it, and fear.

To illustrate one can refer to the popular depictions (real or fake) of exorcisms and their physical effects on those undergoing it.

Also in that particular hadith, what is rendered "passing wind" is the Arabic "dart", which is amply used in Arabic literature in other ways, including to escape, to disapprove, all of which equally apply in the context of the hadith.

It is very common in Arabic parlance of the past and today, to figuratively speak of Satan as influencing and/or adding to one's afflictions, physical or spiritual. 

Other Semitic languages have this feature as well, as seen from Jesus' calling Peter "satan" in the NT Matt16:23, that when someone or something is associated with the devil, most of the time it is understood as a metaphor for its evil consequences. When some reports depict Satan as staying in one's nose at night, and that one should rinse it thrice (the number is just a recommendation not a strict obligation, and by the way a threefold repetition of the same action in religion is amply found within Christian rituals), it never states that such an action "flushes" Satan out. The prophet is here obviously giving a disease prevention advise and relief. It was addressed to desert people who surely experienced respiratory discomfort from sleeping in the dry desert climate. Rinsing the nose thrice helps decongesting it, humidifying it to ease breathing, but more importantly flushing out harmful dust and sand particles, things causing harm and hence the figurative association with Satan. The Prophet said,

 "When the darkness of night comes, or in the evening, collect your children, for the devil is abroad at that time, and when an hour of the night has passed let them free and shut the doors, making mention of God’s name, for the devil does not open a shut door. Tie up you buckets, mentioning God's name; cover up your vessels, mentioning God’s name, even though you should just put something on them, and extinguish your lamps". 

This again is plain common sense, while always relying on Allah for the outcome of things. Evil, whether coming from the men, jinn or anything else can and will affect all that was mentioned without precautions and relying on Allah. Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr said: In this hadeeth there is a command to close doors of houses at night. This is a Sunnah which is enjoined to protect people against the devils of mankind and the jinn. Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said: Ibn Daqeeq al-‘Eid said: in the command to close doors there are both religious and worldly benefits which protect lives and wealth from evildoers, and especially the devils.

It is interesting that among the critics of such ahadith are those who believe in Satan and demons entering people and animals' bodies, taking full control of their victims.

Islam critiqued plays the devil's advocate; Satan in the ahadith

In answer to the video "Bizarre Narrations- Muhammad's Doctrine of Satan"

So here this youtuber has gathered all he could from the vast corpus of ahadith to mock what neither he nor his public comprehend.

There are narrations speaking of the effects of revelation, not only on the prophet but on those around him; his camel would sit and sink into the sand, a close companion whose knee happenned to be under that of the prophet almost shattered. When he described it at times coming to him "like" the sound of a bell (meaning something similar but not the same) it was to convey to his addressees in terms they could relate to, what he was personally experiencing.

As a side note, the hadith saying the "bell is the musical instrument of the Satan" obviously is speaking of the real, physical thing unlike the similitude the prophet was using in reference to a certain type of revelation, further it isnt speaking of bells used at any occasion but for musical purposes that invite devilish, inappropriate behavior. It is well established in classical Arabic, let alone Semitic languages in general as seen from Jesus' calling Peter "satan" in the NT Matt16:23, that when someone or something is associated with the devil, most of the time it is understood as a metaphor for its evil consequences.

For example in Medina the Muslims are reported to have suggested using bells at first to signal the arrival of the time of prayer, although eventually someone was designated to vocally call the people to prayer.

The Quran never came to correct the prophet's worldviews in terms of knowledge of nature and general causality, neither of his contemporaries but rather guide him and the rest of humanity through him, to the most complete, advanced human spiritual knowledge

"The Messenger of Allah and I passed by some people who were at the top of their date palms. He said: “What are these people doing?” They said: “They are pollinating them, putting the male with the female so that it will be pollinated.” The Messenger of Allah said: “I do not think that it is of any use.” They were told about that, so they stopped doing it. The Messenger of Allah was told about that and he said: “If it benefits them, let them do it. I only expressed what I thought. Do not blame me for what I say based on my own thoughts, but if I narrate something to you from Allah, then follow it, for I will never tell lies about Allah, may He Glorified and Exalted is He.”

He continued in another version

"You know better about your worldly affairs".

The divine protection  therefore only pertained to the Quran which is the source of that perfect spiritual knowledge. The prophet was "uswa hasana" in his application of the Quran, not how he ate, slept or saw the nature around him. This phrase in no way implies that he was a perfect creation. Many verses urge him and those with him to seek God's forgiveness for shortcomings in the prophet used to implore God daily to be protected from sins.

Anyone is free to imitate his lifestyle and adopt his worldviews as found in extra Quranic writings, if one finds any personal benefits in doing so but that isn't a religious requirement nor relevant to it, and that is explicitly stated in the Quran itself. With that in mind, when the prophet made deductions as related in the ahadith, pertaining to his natural environement, general causality and basic observation of certain phenomenon, it is only expected from him that they would fit what the ancients of his time would find "plausible". These views however, right or wrong, no matter how extraordinary they might seem in light of our current knowledge, have no bearing on the Quran itself, which is again, pledged to be fully protected.

It would have been interesting to have had written records of how the previous prophets saw the world, as we have with Muhammad, and see who among them held the most "unscientific" personal views. There are many examples to be extracted from the ahadith, most of them inappropriately derided and misunderstood by modern people, although none of them are falsifiable and even if proven wrong, as said above, have no bearing on the Quran itself. Here are a few quotations alluded to by this youtuber.

CIRA international need a compass; original Qibla to Petra?

In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 04 - Modern Mecca, Ancient Qibla"

Due its cubical shape, the Kaaba faces several terrestrial and heavenly bodies. This led to the Arabs' use of astronomical phenomenon such as sunrise or sunset during equinoxes, solstices, Pole star, Canopus etc to direct the mosques towards the kaaba. It was in fact the favorite way adopted by religious authorities in medieval times to use astronomical alignments, particularly cardinal and solstitial directions and the rising point of the star Canopus to determine the correct qibla. These astronomical alignments were used by the early Muslims because they were so familiar with the Kaaba that they knew that when they stood in front of the edifice, they were facing a particular astronomical direction.

So in order to face the appropriate part of the Kaaba which was associated with their geographical location, they used the same astronomically-defined direction for the qibla as they would have been standing directly in front of that particular segment of Kaaba.

But to most other Muslims, those that werent natives to Mecca, they werent familiar with those cosmic allignements, but surgical precision isnt required when searching for the qibla anyway. The Quran in 2:144 doesnt simply say to face the Kaaba, as it would be impossible to anyone a few kilometers away from Mecca due to the earth's roundness, but to face SHATR the Kaaba. Shatr means half and when used to mean direction, it implies towards the half of the earth where something is located. The clear ordinance is therefore to "face the direction" where Kaaba is located. Regardless of what the earth's shape is, a particular point on the globe always has at least one direction in relation to another point.

That the Quranic statement isnt meant to be an exact science but rather an approximate orientation is reflected in the practice of early Muslims, as well as a statement from God's prophet that

"between East and West is a qibla".

So one is considered, even today as practiced by many Muslims, as facing the direction of the Kaaba if facing the northern or southern hemispheres with each shoulder directed east and west. This statement is rooted in the pervasive Quranic notion that the spirit of the law must always remain the primary focus of the religion. 

The Quran speaks of specific communities and incidents in relation to Mecca and the Kaaba with no evidence as happening anywhere but in Mecca at the time of revelation.

It in addition names places surrounding Mecca and the Kaaba, well known then and still identified today, like Arafat, Mash'ari haram, Juranah about 6hours walk from Mecca, where was located the farthest mosque in relation to the Kaaba, where the prophet used to stop and pray in the mosque that was by the spring and encouraged the Muslims to begin their minor pilgrimmage (umrah) from that place until they reached Mecca. There were of course wells and springs where the Meccans went for their water supply. Some of these wells were in the city, dug long into the pre-silamic times, others on the city's outskirts, and others further still. One of these relatively distant water sources for instance is the one in the valley of Khumm, between Mecca and Medina, given the same name by Kilab ibn Murrah who dug it long before the prophet according to the Islamic tradition. Water is still available at the place and is called Ghadir Khumm. It was a frequent passing point for the Muslims and the prophet, who according to the Shia tradition, named Ali as his successor at the spot. Water supply was certainly not plentiful and easily available, so much so that those in charge of the siqaya/providing water to pilgrims were highly regarded. Although scarce, rain fell nevertheless on Mecca, even sometimes to the point that the precincts of the Kaaba would be flooded, it happens still nowadays. This in fact is a known factor to have caused degradation to the edifice of the Kaaba throughout time. The Quraysh would gather this water in reservoirs to make sure their water supply wouldnt run dry for themselves and the yearly pilgrims.

The cave of Hira is another of those places found in the early historical records, described in a manner corresponding to a specific location in Mecca. It is about a 2hours walk on the nour mountain, outside of which one can oversee Mecca, as well as Safa and Marwa.

The word "jabal" describing Safa and Marwa in Arabic applies to any rocky elevation, small or big. The Quran for instance speaks of Ibrahim scattering chopped off pieces of a bird on surrounding jabal 2:260. Abraham wasnt going around climbing up mountains and leaving a piece of bird on each. It is also clear from the description of Hagar's ordeal, running between safa and marwa then standing successively on top of one jabal, then the other. She obviously wasnt going along climbing mountains in the desert heat.

No place in the world was refered to as Mecca, other than present day Mecca. That is not to mention the battles of Badr and Uhud, among many other specific locations where battles occured, where native tribes were met, their names and dialogues recorded, as well as the plethora of traditional records, authentic or else, isolated or known, all speaking of places and people that cannot by the furthest strech of the imagination be placed anywhere else than where they are currently located.

There isnt the slightest hint at a conspiracy the scale of which would have been required to put into place such a massive rewrite of history. Neither is there evidence for a large conspiracy to rename Mecca and all these places, nor is there archaeological support for these places being anywhere but in Mecca.

The Quran for example denounces the Arabs' idol worship and practices like animal sacrifice repeatedly, occuring in places it names in and around Mecca 2:256-7,5:3,90,16:36,22:30. All these practices were banned long before Islam by the Byzantines in the northern area of Arabia Petrae, meaning they couldnt have occured there at the time of the revelation of these condemning verses.

This type of claim runs along the same lines as others who argue that the original qibla faced Petra to the north of Arabia, instead of the Kaaba in Mecca. Early Muslims, and those of Mecca in particular had a fair idea about the orientation of several astronomical phenomenon (sunrise or sunset during equinoxes, solstices, Pole star, Canopus etc) in relation to the Kaaba and used them to orient their mosques towards their respective qibla. They knew that when they stood in front of the edifice, they were facing a particular astronomical direction and reproduced the same alignements in their new location as if they stood directly in front of a particular Kaaba segment. Iraqi mosques aligned towards the winter sunset, ie facing the northeast wall of Kaaba. In Fustat, Egypt it faced the winter sunrise, ie facing the northwest wall of Kaaba. None of those mosques faced Jerusalem or northern Arabia.

CIRA international find deeper meanings to Qibla change; a new nation under God?

In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 04 - Modern Mecca, Ancient Qibla"

The change of qibla indicated to the Israelites they had been definitely deposed from their spiritual leadership over mankind, a leadership that what was for them to honourably carry 2:63-64,3:187,28:5,32:24. This prophecied supplanting, as stated by Jesus in Matt21, meant they werent worthy of carrying the flame anymore, that the geographical center of monotheism has switched to another location, under a new established nation under God 

33:45-46"We have sent you as a witness, and as a bearer of good news and as a warner, And as one inviting to Allah by His permission, and as a light-giving torch". 

This meant that their hopes of seeing the Jerusalem Temple rebuilt for the 3rd time through Divine sanction by their messianic salvific figure was over. The era of prophethood itself has now ceased

33:40"Muhammad..is the Messenger of Allah and the khaatim of the prophets; and Allah is cognizant of all things".

The term khaatim from kh-t-m means to seal something shut so that nothing can get in or out of it. It is used often to mean that something is finished since one seals something when it is over and it is also conceptually used for a well demarcated feature of an entity or person. Jesus' return as a sign of the end of times as reported in some narrations, if taken as true, doesnt deny the finality of prophethood with Muhammad if one considers that he was born before him, did not die in the process of tawfiya/full reception by God. He has outlived the prophet who has ended the era of prophethood. In addition to closing the door to the institution of prophethood, the verse also denies any further revealed scriptures.

The Quran repeatedly associates prophethood to scriptures, contrary to messengership which is never explicitly said to have ended. Prior to prophethood when he was a 12 year old boy, it is reported that he was taken on a caravan trip with his uncle to Syria. There, a Christian monk supposedly recognizes several signs of prophethood in him, including what he described as the "seal of prophethood/khatm al nubuwwa" on Muhammad's back. It was a protrusion the size of a pigeon's egg between his shoulder blades. Although the prophet himself never identifies this birth feature as such, it seems that this comment by the monk led to a legend about it among his companions. During his prophethood when a physician noticed it and proposed to treat it, the prophet did not mention the legend, simply relied on Allah for a cure "Its physician is He Who has credit it".

This last change of qibla was also an announcement of the glad tidings of the near conquest of Mecca, a forecast of its cleaning and purification from the idols placed in it over time. It signified the near return of Islam as a fulfilment of Ibrahim's prayers and God's subsequent promise of placing in it, the righteous from among his descendants as the leaders of mankind 2:124-130.

The appointement of the Kaaba as the Muslims' qibla was in honor of Ibrahim and Ismail, a confirmation of the Quran's claim about the Muslims being closer to Ibrahim than any group claiming spiritual descendancy from him 2:135. It was a favor in a series of favors bestowed upon the believers by Allah 2:150, such as the sending of a messenger from among themselves who brought them wisdom and spiritual purification

2:151"We have sent among you a Messenger from among you who recites to you Our communications and purifies you and teaches you the Book and the wisdom and teaches you that which you did not know".

At all times, the believers are told to keep their remembrence of these favors

2:152"Therefore remember Me, I will remember you, and be thankful to Me, and do not be ungrateful to Me". 

However immidiately after annoucing this favor, God warns the Muslims that leadership is not a bed of roses but a bed of thorns. They will be confronted with all kind of difficulties, and trials and that if they went through their ordeals with fortitude and proceeded on in the way of Allah, they would be blessed with countless blessings and rewards by Him 2:153-7 just as their failure would cause their uprooting.

CIRA international find monotheistic discrepency; God is present in a direction?

In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 04 - Modern Mecca, Ancient Qibla"

As an anticipation to the people's reaction in Medina regarding this last change of qibla the Quran answers

2:142"The East and the West belong only to Allah; He guides whom He likes to the right path".

As similarly stated in 2:115,26:28,73:9 and more particularly in 2:177, Allah is the Omnipresent grasping the universe as a whole, present in all directions one may like to face and therefore Jerusalem, the Kaaba and all other places belong to Allah, Who intrinsically has no house and no place. The prophet Solomon in the Bible similarily conveyed that transcendental notion. After he had erected the Jerusalem Temple where God was to settle and "dwell in forever", the direction where all obedient servants were to face in prayer if they wanted to be hearkened by God in Heaven,

1kings8:27"But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold the heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You; much less this temple that I have erected".

This reality is also echoed in the book of Isaiah

Isa66:1"So says the Lord, "The heavens are My throne, and the earth is My footstool; which is the house that you will build for Me, and which is the place of My rest?".

Without God's commission, no place has spiritual excellence or preference in its own essence. The direction in itself is therefore not something to be disputed and argued about. If one wishes to remain in a specifc direction as if the place is intrisincly sacred then he may do so, however the core message would be missed; to obey a divine injunction above one's personal desires and preferences, and concentrate one's energy in outdoing one another in good deeds instead of disputing about what the Quran views as a moot point

2:143,148,177"and We did not make that which you would have to be the qiblah but that We might distinguish him who follows the Messenger from him who turns back upon his heels, and this was surely hard except for those whom Allah has guided aright...And every one has a direction to which he should turn, therefore hasten to (do) good works; wherever you are, Allah will bring you all together...It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards the East and the West, but righteousness is this that one should believe in Allah and the last day and the angels and the Book and the prophets, and give away wealth out of love for Him to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and the beggars and for (the emancipation of) the captives, and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate; and the performers of their promise when they make a promise, and the patient in distress and affliction and in time of conflicts-- these are they who are true (to themselves) and these are they who guard (against evil)".

CIRA international expose a great conspiracy; people hiding the true qibla?

In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 04 - Modern Mecca, Ancient Qibla"

Why would the entire Muslims community, a cluster of highly unruly and disunited tribes and clans, linked together only by their religion, living since times immemorial in this unnamed mysterious northern place, suddenly accept to be uprooted from its sacred location, where its prided history, cultural, economic attachments are all found, and accept relocating in a barren and isolated area. How could such a move pass unnoticed in the oral tradition. Even if every Muslim alive at the time of the alleged move vowed to keep it secret, how likely is it that the next generation of Muslims would not have leaked multiple versions of the story into the hadith?

The years following the prophet's death were times of great political and sectarian turmoil. Each group, spread geographically gave religious and legal authority to their figures, rejecting the legitimacy, beliefs, and practices of others.

From the partisans of Ali in Kufa, to the Umayyads in Damascus, to the proto-sunnis that claimed to follow the schools of Mecca, Medina and Iraq or the Omani Kharijites. This led to the development of independent and various traditions. And yet the single thing they all agreed upon was the Quran and the Meccan qibla, the prophet's birth in Mecca, his death in Medina and the vast majority of the essentials of the religion.

This unified tradition can only be rooted at a time where the community was united under their prophet and uncontested leader. Recent archaeology has revealed inscriptions dated to the first and 2nd centuries after hijra around Medina speaking of a Kaaba and masjid-al haram (al maghtawi). There are even earlier open mosques in the Negev area, none of them are oriented towards northern Arabia or Jerusalem and all of them are aligned to Canopus thus facing the northwest wall.

Some more recent polemicists, the likes of Gibson, stubbornly insisting on such flimsy claims have deceptively tried using satellite images of mosques to make them appear as if they face the Petra region. The flaw in that method is that, as anyone familiar with mosques knows, it is impossible to ascertain eachone's mihrab (a niche in the interior of the wall of a mosque denoting the direction of prayer for worshippers in the mosque) except if one sees it from inside the building. One could just as easily align them with Hawaii rather than Petra.

Even today, and within one and the same country, certain mosques face different cardinal points depending on whether they base their direction to Mecca on a flat map, or on the shortest distance around the globe.

Among other flimsier claims are those of Crone and Cook, misquoting Jacob of Edessa so as to make it appear as if the Muslims prayed towards Jerusalem in the early 8th century. The actual quote refutes their distortions and confirms Muslim historical accounts;

"The Jews who live in Egypt, as likewise Mahgraye (the Syriacized form of muhajirun, in reference to the invading Muslim Arab immigrants) there, as I saw with my own eyes and will now set out for you, prayed to the east, and still do, both people - the Jews towards Jerusalem, and the Mahgraye towards the Kʿabah (K‘bt'). And those Jews who are in the south of Jerusalem pray to the north; and those in Babylonia and nhrt' and bwst' pray to the west. And also the Mahgraye who are there pray to the west, towards the Ka‘ba; and those who are to the south of the Ka‘ba pray to the north, towards the place. So from all this it is clear that it is not to the south that the Jews and Mahgraye here in the regions of Syria pray, but towards Jerusalem or Kʿabah, the patriarchial places of their races".

Robert Hoyland further observes that

"Jacob had studied in Alexandria as a youth and so would have been in a position to observe the Muslims there at first hand, which makes his testimony particularly valuable. His information about Syria is also likely to be accurate, for there were Muslims resident in Edessa while he was bishop of that town. What he makes abundantly clear is that the intention of the Muslims was to direct themselves towards a specific site, which they called the Ka'ba. This is presumably to be identified with the "House of God," "the locality in the south where their sanctuary was," which is mentioned by Jacob's contemporary, John bar Penkaye, a resident of north Mesopotamia".

The list of empty claims, sensational conspiracies and revisionism of established history goes on and on. And yet, the language of the Quran itself, its consonantal text is in the old Hijazi. That Arabic dialect is attested in the Hijaz region from about the 1st to the 7th centuryCE.

Other humorists, have proposed similar massive conspiracies, citing Quran verses describing locations and landscapes apparently nowhere near Mecca's surroundings.

It is well known and established that Mecca was a seasonal city where people flocked in during the pilgrimage period only. 28:57 refers to this fact, that it is a safe sanctuary by God's grace, where people flock in and bring in it thamaraat/produce of all kinds. All year long outside this pilgrimage season where people brought in their goods, the caravans of the Arabs and the Quraysh had to travel outside the Peninsula to the north, to Syria and Jordan to do their trade. They passed through all types of landscapes along the way especially in the more lush areas of the north

23:17-20"..then with that rain We caused vineyards and palmgroves to spring up in which you have plentiful of fruit that you eat. As well as the tree that springs from mt Sinai producing oil and relish for the eaters".

They were also familiar with agriculture and rich farming lands, such as those of Ta'if, famous for its grapes, pomegranates, figs etc, and located less than a 100km from them. It is to be noted that since the earliest revelations, the Quran was a message, not only addressed to the Meccans but to

42:7"the mother city and those around it".

Umm al qura/mother city refers to Mecca being a center point of pilgrimage for the cities around it. There was no mother city in anyway shape or form in northern Arabia at the time, and Petra had gone into decline for long before Islam. These Meccan voyagers also passed through several locations where nations were known, prior to Islam, for having been destroyed. One of those locations was that of the people of Lut. The city of Lut is traditionally believed to be located somewhere along the Dead Sea, between Israel and Jordan, is said to be a frequent passing point of those people addressed by the Quran

37:133-8"And Lut was also of the messengers...you pass by their ruins by day and by night".

On their northern trips, the Meccans passed this location

"by night and by day".

Notice the clear Quranic words, not "daily and nightly". The verse 11:89 as a side note is quoting the prophet Shuayb, the Midianite 11:94,29:36-7 telling his people about the land of Lut not being far away. Midian is to the north of the Hijaz.