`A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (ﷺ) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (ﷺ) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (ﷺ) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.`
— Sunan Abi Dawud 4361
This hadith recounts a chilling incident: a blind man brutally murders his slave—the mother of his children—by stabbing her in the belly for verbally abusing the Prophet Muhammad. The act is gruesome, killing both the woman and an unborn child. When the Prophet learns of this, he does not condemn the killing or demand punishment. Instead, he declares that “no retaliation is payable for her blood,” effectively excusing the murder.
The implications are stark. The Prophet’s ruling suggests that insulting him justifies extrajudicial killing, even of a pregnant slave, without consequence. This bypasses any notion of due process or proportional justice, raising serious ethical red flags. In modern terms, this would be a clear violation of basic human rights—murder over words is indefensible under any legal system that values life.
The slave’s status adds another layer of unease. As a slave and mother, she was already vulnerable, yet her life is deemed worthless because of her speech. This jars with Islamic claims of compassion and justice for the weak, exposing a troubling double standard. The Prophet’s decision to absolve the killer outright also opens the door to vigilante violence, a precedent that echoes in debates about blasphemy laws today.
This hadith forces a hard look at early Islamic justice. How does a ruling like this square with ideals of mercy or equality? For critics, it’s a glaring example of moral inconsistency that challenges the universality of certain Islamic principles.