In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter 5 The Battle of Muta La nation, comme l’individu, est l’aboutissant d’un long passé d’efforts, de sacrifices et de dévouements. . . . On aime en proportion des sacrifices qu’on a consentis, des maux qu’on a soufferts. . . . Oui, la souffrance en commun unit plus que la joie. —Ernest Renan, Qu’est-ce que’une nation? 54 Introduction: From Tafsı̄r to Tarı̄kh In his commentary on the Qurān, Muqātil b. Sulaymān does not mention the date on which Zayd died or the circumstances of his demise. Later commentators likewise are silent about these matters. The silence should come as no surprise. In their treatment of Q. 33:36–40, the commentators are interested in Zayd only insofar as he is relevant to the story of Muhămmad’s marriage to Zaynab following her divorce from Zayd in the year 5 a.h., as related in v. 37. From the perspective of tafsı̄r, v. 37 has nothing to do with Zayd’s death and, conversely, Zayd’s death has nothing to do with v. 37. The same is not true of v. 40, which asserts that Muhămmad is not the father of any Muslim man and famously announces that he is the Messenger of God and Seal of Prophets. Although the meaning of the expression khātam al-nabiyyı̄n was initially contested, by the end of the first century a.h.—if not earlier—Muslims had come to understand this expression as signifying that Muhămmad was the Last Prophet. As the Last Prophet, Muhămmad could not have a son who reached puberty; otherwise, as Muqātil states, that son would have been a prophet. The logic of this argument applies not only to Muhămmad’s natural sons, none of whom reached puberty, but also to his adopted son Zayd, who did. By virtue of his status as Muhămmad’s adult son, Zayd b. Muhămmad was a member of the Abrahamic family to which the mantle of prophecy had been entrusted as an exclusive possession. Similarly, Muhămmad’s grandson, Usāma b. Zayd b. Muhămmad, was also a member of this family. In theory, the mantle of prophecy might have passed from Muhămmad to Zayd, and from Zayd to Usāma. In Chapter 4, I argued that the early Muslim community had no choice but to construct its founda- The Battle of Muta 73 tion narrative in such a way as to marginalize both Zayd and Usāma. However , Muhămmad’s repudiation of Zayd did not fully eliminate the threat to the theological doctrine of the finality of prophecy. This is because at the time of Zayd’s repudiation in 5 a.h., he was already a grown man. The fact that the Prophet had an adult son named Zayd b. Muhămmad conflicted with the assertion in v. 40 that “Muhămmad is not the father of any of your men.” For the sake of theological consistency, it was important to demonstrate that the man who had been Muhămmad’s son failed to outlive the Prophet. Like Muhămmad’s repudiation of Zayd, the death of the Beloved of the Messenger of God some time prior to the year 11/632 was a theological imperative. It is understandable that the early Muslim community would want to find a suitable historical context in which to situate Zayd’s death—to be analyzed in this chapter—and that it would want to confer theological meaning on his death—to be analyzed in the next chapter. It is also understandable that the early Muslim community would choose to insert Zayd’s death into a discursive space other than that carved out by Qurānic exegesis. It was not the commentators but the first Muslim historians who were responsible for the narrative account of Zayd’s demise. Historical narratives formulated in the first and second centuries a.h. subsequently found their way into the biography of the Prophet (sı̄ra), accounts of the Arab conquests (maghāzı̄), biographical dictionaries (tăbaqāt), and general works of history (tarı̄kh).1 As befitting a man who served as the commander (amı̄r) of as many as nine military expeditions, Zayd is said to have died while leading a Muslim military expedition into the province of Balqā in southern Jordan. He was killed in the village of Muta...

Share