Prof Alakram

I have explained this before on this space, but let me explain again so we can clear all doubts. Please note that, as far the death of the noble Prophet (peace be upon him) is concerned, there is nothing to hide. It is documented in our most authentic books, Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. These texts are entirely public and heavily studied. We have no secrets to hide. So, pay attention. First of all, the incident happened in 628 CE at Khaybar. The person who did this was Zaynab bint al-Harith, a prominent Jewish noblewoman of Khaybar. She had just lost her father, uncle, and husband in the battle, giving her a severe motive for revenge. To ensure her plot worked, she went around interrogating his companions beforehand, asking them which cut of meat he preferred. When they told her he liked the shoulder, she loaded that specific part with a lethal toxin. If you understand theological history, you will know this assassination attempt was not a random isolated event. The scriptural history of the Children of Israel is heavily marked by the persecution of messengers from God. Our Quran states this, and the Bible documents this continuous pattern. The religious elites of the past killed prophets such as Zakariyya and his son Yahya. Even in the case of Isa (Peace be upon him), who you know as Jesus, their explicit intention was to execute and humiliate him on a cross. If not for the Almighty who intervened and raised him to heaven, they would have crucified him. So when Zaynab tested Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) with poison, she was following a very old, established playbook used against previous prophets. This poison was undeniably fatal. Another companion sitting right next to him, Bishr ibn al-Bara, swallowed a piece and dropped dead on the spot. If Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was a false prophet, biology dictates he would have died right there in the dirt at Khaybar. Lethal medieval poisons do not wait. But he did not die. He spat it out because the Almighty revealed the plot to him. So, those who told you that the Prophet didn’t die of the poison was not out of place. Only that, they could have explained further. Instead of adopting cheap rhetoric, let us ask ourselves what happened after that incident. The supposedly poisoned man went on to achieve what healthy, unpoisoned emperors could not. He lived for four more years. In those four years, he marched into Mecca and conquered it. He unified the entire Arabian Peninsula. He also went after the global superpowers. In 630 CE, he led an army of 30,000 men in the Expedition of Tabuk, marching straight to the northern border to challenge the Byzantine Empire. The popular Scottish historian and Anglican priest W. Montgomery Watt could not help but document this in his book "Muhammad at Medina". He recorded how this massive expedition terrified the region. The Roman border forces and their allies completely withdrew. The Byzantine army refused to engage and abandoned the frontier. A supposedly dying man marched to the doorstep of Rome and broke their regional political grip without swinging a single sword, forcing northern Christian and Jewish tribes to sign treaties with him instead of Rome. If you look at the healthy, unpoisoned leaders of that era, we had the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius and the Sassanid Persian King Khosrow II. They were exhausting their empires, losing territory, and struggling to maintain their borders. Meanwhile, this poisoned man established a state and a military machine that humiliated them and swallowed both of their empires shortly after his death. The prominent secular historian Michael Hart ranked Muhammad as number one in his book "The 100" because his unparalleled secular and religious success peaked right in this specific window, between 628 and 632 CE. 1/2🧵