Prophetic Violence? 

Why Did Muhammad Order the Assassinations of His Critics?

April 15, 2025

Islam teaches that Muhammad was not just a messenger — but the ultimate moral example for all humanity:

“Indeed in the Messenger of Allah you have a beautiful example to follow…”
— Qur’an 33:21

This verse forms the cornerstone of Islamic ethics. Muslims are taught that Muhammad’s actions are not only righteous, but divinely guided. He is, as the Qur’an describes, a “mercy to the worlds” (21:107).

But there’s a darker side to the biography of Islam’s prophet — one that raises urgent questions about his moral authority.

According to Islam’s most authoritative historical sources, Muhammad personally ordered the assassinations of poets and critics who mocked him. Among them:

• Asma bint Marwan — a mother and poet killed in her sleep for her verses criticizing Muhammad.

• Ka‘b bin al-Ashraf — a Jewish poet and tribal leader, lured and murdered on Muhammad’s command for composing verses mocking Muslim losses at Badr.

These are not obscure or disputed stories. They are reported in core Islamic sources like:

• Ibn Ishaq’s “Sirat Rasul Allah”

• Sunan Abu Dawud (Book 38, Hadith 4348)

• Ibn Sa’d’s “Tabaqat al-Kubra”

So we are compelled to ask:

If Muhammad was the most morally upright man to ever live, why did he have people killed for insulting or satirizing him?

This is not a peripheral issue. It strikes at the very foundation of Islam’s moral and theological claims.

Let’s examine it step by step.

---

1. The Assassination of Asma bint Marwan

Asma was a woman from the Banu Aws tribe in Medina. After the Battle of Badr, she composed a poem criticizing Muhammad for instigating violence and dividing her community.

According to Ibn Ishaq, the Prophet reportedly said:

“Who will rid me of the daughter of Marwan?”

One of his followers, Umayr bin Adi, took the hint. He crept into Asma’s home at night, stabbed her in her sleep, and left her five children — including a nursing infant — without a mother.

When Umayr reported back to Muhammad, the Prophet allegedly praised him:

“You have helped Allah and His Messenger.”
— Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah

There is no record of any trial, evidence, or defense. The crime was her words — her poetry. Her executioner was celebrated.

This is the man the Qur’an calls the best of examples?

---

2. The Murder of Ka‘b bin al-Ashraf

Ka‘b was a Jewish poet from the Banu Nadir tribe. After the Muslims’ victory at Badr, Ka‘b composed elegies mourning the Quraysh dead and mocked Muhammad.

In response, Muhammad reportedly said:

“Who will deal with this rascal for me?”

A companion named Muhammad bin Maslama volunteered. Using deception, he gained Ka‘b’s trust, lured him outside his home at night — and murdered him.

This incident is recorded in:

• Sahih Bukhari (4037)

• Sunan Abu Dawud (4349)

• Ibn Ishaq (Sirat Rasul Allah)

Again, the reason for Ka‘b’s murder was satire and political criticism — not treason, violence, or military action.

Muhammad didn’t call for dialogue. He didn’t tolerate dissent. He ordered death for mockery.

---

3. Muslim Defenses — and Their Fatal Flaws

Faced with these uncomfortable accounts, modern Muslims often offer justifications. Let’s examine them:

❖ “They were enemies or incited violence.”

There is no historical evidence that Asma or Ka‘b incited violence. Their crimes were words, not warfare.

To label poetic satire as “incitement” is to erase the line between speech and violence — a dangerous precedent.

Even if they were critical or offensive, that does not justify murder — especially not by someone claiming divine guidance and moral perfection.

❖ “It was war — different rules apply.”

But this wasn’t war. These were civilians, living in Muhammad’s own city. There was no battlefield. These were assassinations — in some cases by night, while the targets slept.

If war justifies killing those who mock or disagree, then every tyrant becomes a prophet.

And if Allah’s final messenger kills poets for satire, what stops his followers from doing the same?

This is not hypothetical. Islamist terrorists today cite these very examples to justify violence against cartoonists, writers, and critics.

The problem is not misinterpretation. The problem is precedent.

❖ “These stories are weak or fabricated.”

Unfortunately, this doesn’t hold up. These incidents are recorded in the earliest and most respected Islamic sources — by authors Muslims rely on for the entire story of Muhammad’s life:

• Ibn Ishaq — the first major biographer of Muhammad

• Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim — considered sahih (authentic)

• Sunan Abu Dawud and Ibn Sa’d — widely respected hadith compilations

To reject these reports, a Muslim would also need to reject much of the Prophet’s biography and Islamic law, which are based on the same sources.

Cherry-picking won't work.

---

4. What Kind of Prophet Silences Critics With a Sword?

There’s a deeper moral question beneath the historical facts:

Why does a man claiming to be divinely guided need to kill those who mock or disagree with him?

Jesus of Nazareth, for example, forgave those who spat on him, cursed him, and nailed him to a cross. Socrates died rather than suppress free speech. Buddha taught peace even toward those who opposed him.

But Muhammad — the "seal of the prophets" — had poets and satirists murdered?

If this is mercy, what does cruelty look like?

If this is justice, what is tyranny?

---

5. Conclusion: A Prophet Who Couldn’t Tolerate Dissent

Muhammad’s orders to assassinate critics like Asma bint Marwan and Ka‘b bin al-Ashraf reveal a hard truth:

His leadership was not marked by mercy, tolerance, or principled restraint — but by violent suppression of dissent.

This is not a smear. It is history — recorded by Muslims, in Islamic texts.

It contradicts:

• The Qur’an’s claim that Muhammad is the ideal moral example

• The idea that Islam respects freedom of speech or conscience

• The image of Muhammad as a peaceful reformer

What we see instead is a pattern of violence toward critics, justified by divine sanction.

And this raises the most uncomfortable — but necessary — question of all:

Can a man who orders assassinations for mockery be considered a prophet of God?

For many, the answer is becoming increasingly clear.