A Qualitative Content Analysis of Ibn Hishām’s Reports concerning the Prophet’s encountering with the Verbal Opposition in Medina

One of the essential requirements for appreciating the early Islamic history is the study of opposition faced by the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) during the Medinan period and his modes of response. This study specifically examines verbal opposition to the Prophet (PBUH) in Medina, as recorded in Sīrah Ibn Hishām, and presents its findings through the method of qualitative content analysis. It seeks to answer the question on how the Prophet Moḥammad (PBUH) dealt with the verbal opposition expressed by the Muslims, People of the Book, and even the polytheists being under his sovereignty. The findings reveal that the verbal opposition during the Medinan period falls into the five categories: first, defying the Prophet’s commands, such as the opposition of some Muslims towards the Prophet’s decision in signing the Treaty of Ḥudaybiyah; second, insult and mockery, such as Battle of the Trench when Muʿtab ibn Qoshayr sarcastically derided the Prophet’s promises while mocking the Muslims’ plight; third, attempts to nullify the Prophet’s orders, such as Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb’s resistance to adhering to the treaty of Ḥudaybiyah; fourth, complaints about officials, such as Refāʿ ibn Zaid’s complaint regarding Zaid ibn Ḥāritha’s killing of tribesmen and seizure of their families and property; and the fifth, supporting traitors, exemplified by Abū ʿAfak and ʿAṣmāʾ bent e-Marwān, who satirized the Prophet (PBUH) and overtly showing hostility after the killing of Hareth ibn Sovayd ibn Samet. Within the category of defiance, two core themes emerge: rejection of military orders—the most frequent type of opposition, as in Saʿd ibn Maʿādh’s objection to taking prisoners at Badr—and contesting the prophet’s decisions about the war booty, as Anṣār’s protest over the distribution of spoils at Ḥunayn battle. Similarly, insult and mockery includes two subthemes: insults directed at the Prophet (PBUH) and mockery of the Muslims. The Prophet’s (PBUH) responses reflected his adherence to the principles such as the social rights, unity and cohesion, freedom of choice and expression, justice, respect for the sanctity of Muslim lives and honor, and commitment to the political treaties. The most frequent response was the forbearance and leniency, such as his initial patience toward the taunts of the Bani Qaynqāʿ or toward Zaid ibn Luṣayt, who mocked the Prophet (PBUH) after he lost his camel on the return from Tabūk; in both cases, the Prophet refrained from harsh retaliation and thereby left room for repentance and reintegration. Other modes of response, in descending order of frequency, included persuasion of opponents (e.g., convincing skeptics of the Ḥudaybiyah treaty, acceptance of suggestions (e.g., agreeing with the Anṣār not to hand over Medinan dates to the Ghatafān during the Trench), redress and compensation (e.g., sending ʿAli (PBUH) to make amends for Zaid ibn Ḥāritha’s actions against the Jadhīma tribe), and finally punishment, verbal or physical (e.g., the execution orders against Abū ʿAfak and ʿAṣmāʾ for inflammatory poetry against the Muslims). Overall, the reports demonstrate that the Prophet (PBUH) sought to minimize unnecessary conflicts by employing rational, strategic, and flexible methods—balancing principles with pragmatism—in order to preserve social cohesion and advance the divine mission with minimal cost to the community. Moreover, he distinguished between opposition directed at himself as Moḥammad ibn Abdullah (PBUH), a member of society, and opposition to his position as Prophet and political leader of the Muslim community: while he tolerated personal slights with patience, he did not tolerate challenges to the position of prophethood and the governance of the Islamic polity.