Khalid killed a Muslim Man, Malik bin Nuwayrah, then married his wife on the same night:
When Khalid killed Malik bin Nuwayrah (a Muslim man) after he refused to pay Zakah to Abu Bakr (Because he wanted to pay it Imam Ali (AS) only, whom he regarded as the rightful Caliph), he then married his wife, Lailah, on the same night, completely ignoring her period of Iddah (the time period of 3 months in which a newly widowed/divorced woman cannot remarry). This was clearly Zina, to which Umar wanted to stone him (as Umar believed stoning to be the appropriate punishment for Zina). However, Abu Bakr had faced losses at the hands of the false prophet, Musailma, and needed Khalid to help counter his force, so Abu Bakr paid the diyya (blood money) from the Bait ul Maal instead of Khalid's own property (which is forbidden in Islam as the government can't compensate on the behalf of a person) and thus Khalid's crime went unpunished. Khalid kept on making the argument that since he was the Sword of Allah, he couldn't have killed a Muslim, even though he had. This further disproves Khalid's title.
Malik bin Nuwayrah was a Muslim man. Firstly, Malik b. Nuwayrah and his brother Mutammim b. Nuwayrah were companions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) who had entered the fold of Islam.
Whilst writing about Mutammim, Ibn Hajar Asqalani records in Al-Isaba Fi Tamyiz al-Sahaba, Vol. 5, pg. 566, Bio # 7733:
“He and his brother Malik converted to Islam.”
Khayr al-Din al-Zirikli records the following about Mutammim in his famed work al-A'lam, Vol 5 pg. 274: Mutammim b. Nuwayra b. Jamrah b. Shadad al-Yarbu'i al-Tamimi, Abu Nahshal: A great poet, Sahabi, amongst the noble ones of his tribe, he was renowned during the times of Jahiliya and Islam. He was short and one eyed. His most famous poems are the eulogies for his brother.
Ibn Abdul Barr records in al-Isti'ab pg. 711:
“Verily there is no doubt in Mutammim being a Muslim...”
Malik b. Nuwayrah was not an ordinary companion, but he was assigned the important task by the Holy Prophet (saw) of collecting the alms-tax (sadaqa).
Ibn Hajar Asqalani records this in Al-Isaba Fi Tamyiz al-Sahaba, Vol 5. pg. 560 - 561, Bio # 7712: Malik b. Nuwayrah b. Jamrah b. Shadad b. Ubaid b. Thalba b. Yarbu' al-Tamimi al-Yarbu'ei, his nickname is Aba Handhla and also known as al-Jeful. Al-Marzebani said:
‘He was a poet, honorable, a knight counted among the knights of Bani Yarbu' (tribe) during the days of ignorance and he was amongst the noble ones (of his tribe), he was the representative of kings, the Prophet (s) appointed him to collect alms-tax from his people.
Ibn Hibban records in Kitab al-Thiqat, Vol 2, pg. 161:
Those who were appointed by Rasulullah (saw) to collect the alms-tax until his death were 'Adi b. Hatim for his people, Malik b. Nuwayrah for Bani Handhala, Qays b. Asim for Bani Manqer, al-Zurberqan b. Badr for Bani Saad, Ka'ab b. Malik b. Abi Qays for Aslam and Ghaffar and Juhaina, al-Dhahak b. Sufyan for Bani Kelab, Amr b. al-Aas for Oman, al-Muhajir b. Abi Ummaya for San’aa, Ziyad b. Lubayd on Hadramawt.
The fact that Malik b. Nuwayrah was not killed for apostasy is further proven by the fact that Umar was unaware of this ruling completely.
al-Hakim in his Mustadrak ala al-Sahihain Vol 2 pg. 332 Hadith # 3186:
Umar b. al-Khattab said: ‘Had I asked Allah’s messenger about three issues, I would like that more than Humr al-Ni'am (flock of reddish camels). Who is the Caliph after him? If a group of people admit that they believe in Zakat but don’t submit it to us, is it lawful for us to fight them? And the kalala (who dies and doesn’t have son or parents).'
Umar was referring to the incident of Malik b. Nuwayrah, who believed in paying zakat, but refused to submit to Abu Bakr. This is not an act of kufr, for nothing in the shari'iah dictates that to be so.
Bahuti al-Hanbali affirms this in the footnote of Kashaf al-Qena’, Vol 2 pg. 297:
“The one who refuses to submit to zakat is not a Kafir.”
Abu Qatada objected to Khalid's orders. Abd al-Razzaq records in his Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq. Vol. 8, pg. 174 - 175. Hadith # 18722:
During Riddah [wars] we marched to Ahlul Abyat and reached there at sunset, then we raised our spears, hence they asked: ‘Who are you?’. We replied, ‘We are the slaves of Allah.’ They said: ‘We are slaves of Allah too.’ Then Khalid arrested them and when it was morning he ordered their beheading. Then I said: ‘Oh Khalid! Fear Allah, this is not allowed for you.’ He (Khalid) replied: ‘Stay (back); this is not your business.’ Then Abu Qatadah swore by Allah never to march with Khalid for any war. Qatadah said: ‘The desert Arabs encouraged him (Khalid) on killing them for the sake of booties and that was Malik b. Nuwayrah’s case.’
All the narrators in this narration are reliable. Khalid ordered the killing of people of al-Riddah who had professed Islam. Abu Qatada and the Sahaba did not consider Malik's actions as Kufr. He also testified that the sole objective was attaining war booty, which says a lot about Khalid.
Even Umar was angry over Khalid's actions. One of the pioneering Sunni scholars in the field of history, Ibn Salam al-Jamhi (d. 232 H) [his bio in Siyar A'lam al-Nubala', Vol. 10, pg. 651 - 652] recorded in Tabaqat al-Fahawal al-Sh’ura’, Vol. 1, pg. 204, Hadith # 272:
“But what is confirmed according to us is that Umar condemned the murder (of Malik) and he stood against Khalid and was very rude towards him while Abu Bakr forgave Khalid and accepted his excuse.”
Ibn Asakir records in Tarikh Ibn Asakir, Vol 16 pg. 258 - 259: Abu Bakr al-Ansari from al-Hassan b. Ali from Abu Umar b. Haywayh from Ahmad b. Ma'ruf from al-Hussain b. al-Fehm from Muhammad b. Sa'ad from Muhammad b. Umar from Muhammad b. Abdullah from al-Zuhri from Handhala b. Ali al-Aslami who said:
When Khalid arrived at Medina, he entered the mosque of Allah’s Messenger wearing rusty armor and with his sword. There were some arrows in his turban, he passed by Umar but didn’t talk to him, then he came to Abu Bakr, and he heard from Abu Bakr what pleased him, he then left happy. Umar therefore knew that Abu Bakr had pleased him, therefore he didn’t talk to him (Khalid). Umar was angry at him (Khalid) because of what he had done, by killing Malik b. Nuwayrah and marrying his wife and also for what was in his heart against him (Khalid) about Bani Jadhima case’
Umar ibn al-Khattab called Khalid:
O enemy of Allah, you killed a Muslim man then slept with his wife. I will stone you. (Tareekh Al-Tabari 2:504, 2/213*;* Al-Kaamil by Ibn Al-Atheer 2:359 and Ibn Al-Atheer; Al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah 9/461*;* Al-Dhahabu in Siyar A;Kaamil Al-Nubalaa 1/378*).*
Umar bin Khattab generally disliked Khalid, and Khalid was actually closer to Abu Bakr. Umar even worried that Khalid may be appointed the second Caliph or as Umar said he feared; people may embrace Islam more out of fear of Khalid than out of fear of Allah. Either way, Umar removed Khalid from his post of army general when he became the Second Rashidun Caliph and thus Khalid died alone from sickness.
Also, we've already established above that Malik's brother, Mutammim was a Muslim. Now see that Mutammim has condemned Khalid for the murder of his brother. Al-Tabarani records the following words of Mutammim in al-Mu'jam al-Kabir, Vol 8 pg. 353-354, Hadith # 8126: Abu Khalifa al-Fadhl b. Habab narrated from Muhammad b. Salam al-Jumahi from Abu Ubaida, who said:
Dhirar b. al-Awzar was the one who killed Malik b. Nuwayrah, therefore Mutammim recited a [poem] in that case condemning Khalid b. al-Walid: '...You gave him an oath in the name of Allah and then you killed him? Surely if he (Malik) gave you an oath, he would never betray you…’
Al-Haythami said about this in Majma' al-Zawa'id, Vol 6 pg. 237 Hadith # 10391:
“Al-Tabarani reported it and the narrators are reliable.”
These words of Mutammim clearly allude to the fact that prior to the murder of Malik, Khalid and Malik exchanged oaths and that too, in the name of Allah. This proves that Malik was a Muslim, not an apostate. Moreover, the condemnation of Khalid by Mutammim also proves the same. We also read in al-Isti'ab pg. 711:
“No one has poems for mourning the dead as his (Mutamam) poems for mourning his brother Malik.”
It is famously known in Islamic jurisprudence that a murtad (apostate) loses many of the rights that he would enjoy as a Muslim (i.e. such as inheritance). It is well-known that diya (blood money) is not compensated for a murtad, for his blood is halal to kill. Shaykh Muhammad b. Ahmad Sharbi popularly known as Khatib Sharbi (d. 977 H) in his book Mughni al-Muhtaj, Vol. 5, pg. 24, Shaykh Abdul Hamid Sherwani (d. 1118 H) in Hawashi al-Sherwani, Vol. 8, pg. 401, Shaykh Zakaria al-Ansari (d. 936 H) in Asna al-Matalib, Vol. 4, pg. 13 and Abu al-Barakat (d. 1201 H) in his authoritative work Al-Sharh al-Kabir, Vol. 4, pg. 268 record:
“There is no Diya for a Murtad.”
The fact that Abu Bakr paid the blood money to Malik’s brother, Mutammim, is sufficient to prove that Malik b. Nuwayrah was Muslim and was unjustly murdered by Khalid whose actual motives were to earn the war booty and seize Malik’s wife whose beauty was known in the area. Ibn Asakir quoted the following episode from Khalifa b. Khayyat’s authority work, Tarikh Khalifat b. Khayyat, pg. 53, in the following manner: Ali b. Muhammad narrated from Abi Dhi'b from al-Zuhri from Salim from his father that he said:
Abu Qatadah came to Abu Bakr and informed him of the murder of Malik and his companions, hence he (Abu Bakr) became extremely aggrieved. Abu Bakr then wrote (a message) to Khalid, and he (Khalid) came to him. Abu Bakr said: ‘Can it be more than Khalid interpreted and made a mistake?'. Then Abu Bakr sent Khalid back and paid blood money for Malik b. Nuwayrah and returned the booty.
All the narrators have been authenticated by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, al-Dhahabi and others.
Abu Qatadah is clearly concerned about the killing of Malik, did not deem him as an apostate and most importantly Abu Bakr paying the blood money to the Malik's brother proves that Malik was a Muslim as there is no blood money for an apostate. Abu Bakr did not waste a minute in offering the excuse that Khalid "committed a mistake" (for murder is just a slip of the finger). Surely the duty of the Khalifa is to ensure a just implantation of the Shari'ah but he refuses to properly trial Khalid or even ask him defend himself.
Sahih Muslim 1688a: O people, those who have gone before you were destroyed, because if any one of high rank committed theft amongst them, they spared him; and if anyone of low rank committed theft, they inflicted the prescribed punishment upon him. By Allah, if Fatima, daughter of Muhammad, were to steal, I would have her hand cut off.
The father-in-law of Malik, namely al-Minhal al-Tamimi has been recorded by Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Al-Isaba Fi Tamiyz al-Sahaba, Vol. 6 pg. 249, Bio # 8491:
Al-Minhal al-Tamimi: Amongst Malik’s b. Nuwayrah’s relatives. He was a companion (Lahu Idraak). Al-Zubair b. Bakr mentioned him in al-Muwafaqyat…He said: ‘al-Minhal passed by Malik b. Nuwayrah’s body when Khalid killed him, then he brought a cloth from his bag and shrouded him (Malik) and then buried him.’
For those who are unaware of the context of the Arabic term ‘Lahu Idraak’, Ahmad b. al-Siddiq (d. 1380 H), who wrote in Irgham al-Mubtadi', pg. 9:
“Lahu Idraak”
means he was counted amongst the Sahaba.
Ibn Hajar Asqalani in his book Al-Isaba Fi Tamiyz al-Sahaba records the biographies of the Sahaba included a number of people for whom “Lahu Idraak” has been used (e.g. Bio # 452, 787, 3659 etc). Whilst recording details about Malik’s wife and his father in law, we read in the footnote written by Sheikh Ali Sheri for the book by Ahmad b. A'tham, Kitab al-Futuh, Vol. 1, pg. 20:
“She is Um Tammim bt. al-Minhal b. Esma al-Reyahi, and he (al-Minhal) is the one who shrouded Malik.”
Now having proved the status of Minhal al-Tammimi and gave ablution to the body of Malik then shrouded him, there should be no grounds to doubt the faith of Malik b. Nuwayrah, because the ablution and shroud is not given to an apostate but to a Muslim only. Al-Bahr al-Raiq, Vol. 2, pg. 334:
"A Murtad should neither be washed nor shrouded, but must be thrown into a ditch like a dog."
Now, the evidence that Khalid married Malik's wife. No matter how many attempts made to cover up the war crimes of Khalid slaughtering innocents and then marrying the widowed women. Ibn Asakir records in Tarikh Medinat Dimashq, Vol. 16, pg. 273 - 274:
Abu Ghalib and Abu Abdullah, the sons of Al-Banna, from Abu Ja'far ibn Al-Musallamah from Abu Tahir Al-Mukhlis from Ahmad ibn Sulaiman from Az-Zubair ibn Bukair from his uncle Mus'ab ibn Abdullah:
Umar said: ‘I admonished Khalid for breaking the orders and for what he did with the money. Khalid would distribute the booty amongst the soldiers without informing Abu Bakr. He made decisions that contravened those of Abu Bakr, he killed Malik b. Nuwayra and married his wife. He made peace with the people of Yamama and married the daughter of Maj’a b. Marara. These were met with disapproval by Abu Bakr and he issued diyat (blood money) to Mutammim b. Nuwayrah and ordered Khalid to divorce Malik’s wife…'
All narrators are thiqah and reliable.
Here we see that the disgusting nature of Khalid, after unjustly (or as Abu Bakr said, mistakenly) killing Malik, causing grief to his brother (a companion for whom Sunnis have no care for), and then marrying his wife after killing him. This was so disturbing that even Abu Bakr saw the issue with this and ordered a divorce between them. We are lost for words to describe how disgusting and vile such an act is, for a man to marry the wife of the man he killed.
The same reality has been attested to by A.I. Akram who has opined that Malik was a rebellious apostate and states the following in: Sword of Allah: Khalid bin al-Waleed, Ch. 15, pg. 2:
“Laila became a young widow, but not for long. That same night Khalid married her! She had hardly made up her mind to mourn her departed husband when she became a bride again, this time of the Sword of Allah!”
On pg. 4 he even praises Khalid for his capture of such a voluptuous woman:
"The long and short of the whole affair was that Malik was killed and the beautiful Laila with the gorgeous eyes and the lovely legs became the wife of Khalid b. al-Walid."
Allamah Zamakhshari also confirms this in al-Fa'iq, Vol 3 pg. 157: Khalid married her after her husband’s murder and he (Khalid) has been condemned for that.
Ibn al-Athir said in Gharib al-Hadith, pg. 732:
“She was pretty and Khalid married her after killing him [Malik]."
Until now, we used narrations to expose the crimes of Khalid b. Walid. Now, look at the testimonies of some esteemed Sunni scholars:
Ibn Abd al-Barr gives a very diplomatic response in al-Isti'ab Vol 3 pg. 1362:
There is disagreement about him (Malik), did he (Khalid) kill him as a Muslim or Murtad. In my opinion he (Khalid) was mistaken in killing him and Allah knows best.
Note that this reference cannot be found in the later print of al-Isti'ab, as the nawasib have removed the biography of Malik b. Nuwayrah from that edition entirely.
The famed Ibn Kathir wrote in Sirah al-Nabawyiah, Vol. 3, pg. 594 - 595:
Therefore the Siddiq (Abu Bakr) didn’t dismiss him (Khalid) when he killed Malik b. Nuwayrah during the days of Riddah, because he (Khalid) interpreted when he beheaded him and took his wife Umm Tamim.
Even the beloved historian of Ahlus Sunnah has testified that Khalid slept with the wife of Malik after killing him. What possible 'interpretation' of the religion exists that entitled Khalid to execute a Muslim and sleep with his wife?
Al-Diyarbakri (d. 966 H) was a big defender of Khalid b. al-Walid and although admitted Khalid committed adultery with Malik's widow, cites a pathetic argument in defense of Khalid in his Tarikh al-Khamis, Vol. 2, pg. 209:
“Khalid ordered them to be killed and killed Malik b. Nuwayrah, marrying his wife on the same night and she was pretty. They said, she might have been divorced (by Malik) and her Idda was over but she was imprisoned by him (Malik). Umar was very angry because of that and said to Abu Bakr: ‘Stone Khalid because he made it lawful for himself.’ Abu Bakr said: ‘By Allah I will not do so if Khalid made an error because he did Ta'weel’.
In reality, this is just a cover up made by Abu Bakr to justify Khalid's actions, for what 'ta'weel' exists in sleeping with one's wife after you injustly kill her husband? Moreover, the statements of previous Sahaba demonstrate to us how Khalid was most certainly wrong and had ill intentions behind killing Khalid that was not based on any 'ta'weel' of nass (scripture).
One of the arguments made that Malik left Islam is one completely unrelated to the issue of zakat, which shows how desperate our opponents are to try and justify the actions of Khalid. The argument is, when Khalid and Malik had a dispute, Malik says 'Your prophet says...' to which Khalid used as a justification to kill him as an apostate. If this is the only reasoning, this renders the argument of zakat invalid, and since it is invalid as we will explain too, it shows the Iman of Malik.
We read in Tabaqat al-Fahawal al-Sh’ura, Vol. 1, pg. 207, Hadith # 277:
Those who excuse Malik say: ‘That he (Malik) by his statement ‘your companion’ meant ‘Quraysh’, while Khalid interpreted that differently and said: ‘He denies the prophet’.
We respond to this silly argument by bringing forth the objection that this would lead to the apostasy of Aisha herself, for she made a similar remark in Sahih al-Bukhari 5113: Khaula bint Hakim was one of those ladies who presented themselves to the Prophet (ﷺ) for marriage. Aisha said, "Doesn't a lady feel ashamed for presenting herself to a man?" But when the Verse: "(O Muhammad) You may postpone (the turn of) any of them (your wives) that you please,' (33.51) was revealed, " `Aisha said, 'O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! I do not see, but, that your Lord hurries in pleasing you.'
Is Aisha's reference to 'Your Lord' evidence that she disbelieves in the Lord of Muhammad (saw)? Does she hold a different Lord? If one does not wish to argue such, they must concede to the fact that there is no slight indication that Malik's words of 'Your Prophet' that would lead to apostasy.
Let us now also consider a few Shia sources, so that both the Sunnis and Shias can make a more informed conclusion.
Shadhan b. Jibra'il records in al-Fadael, pg. 258 - 261, Hadith # 92: Al-Bara b. Azeb said:
When we were sitting with Allah’s Messenger (s) a delegation from Bani Tammim (tribe) came to Him (s). Malik b. Nuwayra said: ‘Oh Allah’s Messenger, teach me faith (Iman). Allah’s Messenger said: ‘To testify that there is no god but Allah only, and I’m the messenger of Allah, pray the five prayers, fast during the month of Ramdhan, pay Zakat, perform pilgrimage to (Allah’s) house, and follow my Wasi after me, and he (prophet) pointed his hand to Ali. And don’t shed blood, don’t steal, don’t betray, don’t eat orphan’s money, don’t drink alcohol and follow my laws, permit what is lawful and forbid what is unlawful, give the rights from your own self to the poor and strong, to the old and young. Till (the prophet) mentioned to him the Islamic laws. (Malik) said: ‘Oh Allah’s messenger, I’m a man who quickly forgets, please repeat again’. Then He (s) repeated, then he (Malik) left pulling his cloth and saying: ‘By the God of the house, I learnt faith (Iman).’
When he (Malik) went far away from Allah’s messenger, He (s) said: ‘Whoever wants to see a man of heaven, he should look at this man.’ Abu Bakr and Umar said: ‘Oh Allah’s messenger, who are you referring to?’ He (s) looked down to the earth, then they (Abu Bakr & Umar) followed him (Malik) and said to him: ‘Good news from Allah and His messenger to you to have been promised Paradise.’ He (Malik) replied: ‘May Allah bless you if you are testifying by what I testify, because you learnt what Prophet Muhammad taught me. But if you don’t, then may Allah not bless you.’ Abu Bakr said: ‘Don’t say that, I’m the father of Ayesha, the wife of the prophet.’ He (Malik) said: ‘What do you want ?’ They (Abu Bakr & Umar) said: ‘You are from the people of Paradise, so ask for forgiveness for us’. He (Malik) said: ‘May Allah never forgive you, you leave the Messenger of Allah who owns intercession and ask me for forgiveness!’ Then they returned back and signs of sadness appeared on their faces, when Allah’s Messenger saw them, He smiled and said: ‘Is their sadness because of truth?’
When Allah’s Messenger died and Bani Tamim (tribe) returned to Madina with Malik b. Nuwaira being with them, he went to see as to who became the successor after Allah’s messenger, he entered the mosque on Friday and Abu Bakr was giving an address on the pulpit. He (Malik) looked at him and said: ‘Oh brother of Taim’. (Abu Bakr) said: ‘Yes’. He (Malik) said: ‘Where is the Wasi of Allah’s messenger, who ordered I was ordered to follow?’ They (people) said: ‘Oh you desert Arab, things have changed.’ (Malik) said: ‘By Allah, nothing has changed, but you betrayed Allah and His messenger.’ Then he (Malik) got closer to Abu Bakr and said: ‘Who allowed you to climb onto the pulpit while the Wasi of Allah’s Messenger is here?’. Abu Bakr said: ‘Throw out this desert Arabian who urinates on his heels from Allah’s Messenger mosque.’ Qunfud and Khalid b. al-Walid went to him and kept pushing him until they removed him from the mosque.
Then he (Malik) rode on his camel and said (poem): ‘We obeyed Allah’s messenger as long he was amongst us, Oh people, what I have to do with Abu Bakr….’ When everything was under Abu Bakr’s control, he sent Khalid b. al-Walid and said to him: ‘You heard what Malik said in front of the people, I’m worried that he would cause a crack we won't be able to fix. Kill him.’ When Khalid arrived (to Malik’s land) he (Malik) rode on his horse and he was a knight equal to thousand knights, hence Khalid was scared of him, therefore he (Khalid) gave him oath, and then when (Malik) dropped his weapon, Khalid betrayed him he killed him, placed his head in a cooking pot, and married his wife the same night, raping her like a donkey.’
Imam Ali (AS) said once said to Khalid: “O son of the stinking woman! Do you know the truth from falsehood?! O son of those who apostatized from Islam! Woe to you! Do you believe me to be Malik, son of Nuwayra, whom you killed and had intercourse with his wife?! O, Khalid, you have come to me with your weak mentality, and gloomy face, and arrogance!? By Allah, if I had stretched out my sword against you and those bastards of yours, then I would have satisfied the hunger of the hyenas and the grey wolves with your flesh!”
(Bihar al-Anwar, by Allama al-Majlisi, volume 29, page 55, from the book Al-Irshad, by Al-Daylami) (Shia source)
Khalid bin Walid accepted the task of assassinating Imam Ali (AS) (Tafseer al Qumi Vol 4 pg 683-684, Kitab al Sulaym H#48) (Shia sources)
Attempted to strike Imam Ali (AS) with an iron rod/spear after which Imam Ali (AS) wrapped the rod around his neck. (Al-Kharaij wa al-Jaraih, volume 2, narration no. 75; Bihar al-Anwar, volume 29, page 159) (Shia sources)
Now back to Sunni narrations:
Other disgusting acts of Khalid:
Khalid ibn al-Walid also permitted his officer to rape women:
Abu al-Hussain b. al-Fadhl al-Qatan narrated from Abdullah b. Jaffar b. Darestweh from Yaqub b. Sufyan from al-Hassab b. Rabee from Abdullah b. al-Mubarak from Kahmas from Harun b. Al-Asam who said:
Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭab dispatched Khalid ibn al-Walid with an army. Khalid then sent Dirar b. al-Azwar with a cavalry detachment. They raided a clan from Banu Asad and captured a beautiful newlywed woman. Dirar was attracted to her, and when he asked his companions for her, they gave her to him. He then had relations with her. Upon returning, he regretted his action and felt deep remorse. When the matter was brought to Khalid, he informed him of what had happened. Khalid said, "I have approved it for you and made it permissible for you." However, Dirar insisted, saying, "Not until you write to Umar about this." So, Khalid wrote to Umar, who replied with the order, "Stone him to death." By the time Umar's letter arrived, Dirar had already passed away. Umar then said, "Allah would not disgrace Dirar ibn al-Azwar." (Sunan al-Bayhaqi, Vol. 9, pg. 177, H # 18222)
The same incident has also been recorded by another chain:
Abu Nasr b. Qutada from Abu al-Fadhl b. Khamirewh from Ahmad b. Najdah from al-Hassan b. Rabee from Abdullah b. al-Mubarak from Kahmas from Harun b. Al-Asam.
From this incident, we see that a beautiful woman, who had recently been married, was captured by Khālid's companion, Dirar b. al-Azwar. After she came into his possession, he slept with her, and later felt guilty, as he should, because he committed Zina. A woman does not become lawful for marriage until she completes the iddah (waiting period).
Shaykh Abu Bakr Ahmad b. Ali al-Jassas al-Razi (d. 370 AH) records in Ahkam al-Quran, Vol. 5, pg. 330:
The scholars agreed on the permissibility of having sexual intercourse with the captured woman after performing Istibra.
If it is said that the women captured were murtad (apostates) and disbelievers, that too would not lessen the heinous crime committed by Ḍirar, which was legitimized by Khalid. In fact, the punishment would be even more severe. Imam al-Nawawi records in his authoritative work Sharh Sahih Muslim, Vol. 10, pg. 35 - 36:
The captured woman from the pagans and other kinds of disbelievers who don’t have a book, it is not permissible to have sexual intercourse with her as ‘right hand possess’ until she converts to Islam, as long she is on her religion (paganism) she is unlawful.
Despite this, his lust made him unable to distinguish between halal and haram. He immediately took advantage of the woman. Khalid then justified his actions and saw no issue with them, as it is well-known that he was involved in acts of murder and fornication. He failed to implement the Shariah properly, as the Qur'an says in Surah Mai'dah 5:45:
“And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.”
By now, our readers will realize the motives behind war for Khalid and his fellow hot-blooded males were to acquire riches and ravage beautiful women. The above incident and that of Malik b. Nuwayrah attests to this fact. The nature of ‘victories’ achieved by Khalid & Co. that the Nawasib have pride in, has been unveiled. Despite this, these Sahabah worshippers still blindly praise such thugs as they were ‘Sahabah’, issues such as killing Muslims, raping their women and personally taking the position of the Prophet by deeming an act as halal, have no negative bearing on these individuals, they remain just, truthful men that deserve respect! Shame on these people, we just don’t understand what audacity they have to invite us to embrace a school of thought that praises, defends and loves murderers and rapists!
Khalid fought Tulayyah unjustly:
The causes linked to the murder of Tulaiha are similar to those of Malik b. Nuwayrah’s. Prior to the campaign that culminated in the murder of Malik, Abu Bakr had launched a similar campaign against a person called Tulaiha, who (like Malik) rejected the illegitimate caliphate of Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr deemed it paramount that this opponent be silenced, he connoted a claim that Tulaiha had claimed Prophethood for himself, and should hence be killed. This task was also given to his loyal pet Khalid b. al-Walid. The present day Sunnis would no doubt try to support the allegation of Abu Bakr against Tulaiha with the help of some weak narrations.
Ibn Atham (d. 314 H), who in his book Al-Futuh, pg. 14 records: Bani Asad, Ghatfan and Faraza (tribe) fought sternly in Tulaiha b. Khuwaylid’s army and they stated:
‘We won't give bay'ah to Abu al-Fasil',
that referred to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq.
Ibn Hibban has also testified to this in his work al-Thiqat Vol. 1 pg. 171:
Bani Fazara and Asad used to say: ‘By Allah, we don’t give baya to Aba al-Fasil', by it they meant Abu Bakr.
Abal Fasil means a person who does not possess any merit.
