All perfect praise is due to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad.

The evidences which Muslim outlaws rely on in justifying their atrocities reflect their ignorance in the religion(Islam), or that they are lying in its name. Their deviation starts when they resort to one of the irregular historical narrations to prove their obnoxious crimes, paying no attention to Sharia texts(Quran&Sunnah) and the principles of jurisprudence, which establish our tolerant Islamic Sharia.

We stress what follows: It has never been proven that any of the Prophet`s companions had burnt an enemy, for all of them adhered to the Hadith of the Prophet(PBUH):” No one may punish using fire other than the Lord of the Fire (Allaah)”{Abu Dawood/2673).

As regards what is circulated in some websites that Abu Baker (May Allah be pleased with him) had ordered burning some apostates such as (Foj`ah Assalami), the scholars of Hadith as well as the critics of history know that this is a false narration attributed to him:

At-tabari had narrated this in his book entitled” Tarikh Al-Ummam Wa Al-Molook/ the History of Nations and Kings” with a Sanad (chain of narrators) that included a narrator called (Saif Bin Umar Addabhi) whom Ibn Hibbaan described as a narrator of fabricated narrations. Also, Ibn Al-Hakim added that Addabhi was accused of hidden atheism (Zandakah), and that his narration is unreliable.{Refer to Tahzib At-tahzib}.

At-tabari also narrated it with another Sanad which included a narrator called (Elwaan Bin Dawood) whose narration was described by Al-Bukhari as denounced. This shows that transmitting from the books of history without having the proper knowledge and expertise leads to corruption, irregular(Shaz) opinion, and terrorism disguised in the clothes of religion. Actually, this is what At-tabari himself had warned, those who reported his narration about Abu Baker, against. In the preface of his aforementioned book, he acquitted himself from this denounced news and asked the fair scholar to make sure that a narration is sound and verified, and to avoid blind transmission. Another example of false narration is that Khalid Bin Al-Waleed cooked food by using the head of Malik Bin Nwairah as fuel. This narration neither had a Sanad nor was mentioned in history books as having one that could be studied and be built on; therefore, it is impermissible to deny the aforementioned sound Hadith which prohibits punishing by using fire, and to mistrust the honorable companions of the Prophet (PBUH) through false and unfounded accusations.

Ibn Sa`ad`s book: “ At-Tabakaat Al-Kobrah “ contains nothing on the narration attributed to Khalid Bin Al-Waleed. In fact, the Sanad stated in this book contains an obvious break-a missing narrator-between Orwah Bin Az-zobair, the reporter of this news, the time of the news and the event itself. Abu Hatim and Abu Zar`ah- eminent critics of Hadith- stated that Orwa`s Hadith narrated after Abo Bakir, Umar, and Ali (May Allah be pleased with them) is Morsal-incompletely transmitted Hadith. This was stated in in the book “ Jam`ie At-Tahseel “ by Al-Ala`i.

As regards those who narrate the piece of news about Ali burning people and don`t state the complete narration, they are actually deceiving people in a manner that contradicts the sound academic methodology. This is because when Ali burnt those who said that he was a God, the honorable companion Abdullah Ibn Abbas condemned his deed and reminded him(Ali) of the Prophet`s Hadith: “No one may punish using fire other than the Lord of the Fire (Allaah) .”Ibn Abbas is the honorable companion whom the Prophet(PBUH) supplicated Allah for: “O Allah! Make him (Ibn 'Abbas) a learned scholar in religion(Islam)”{Bukhari}. Ali accepted what Ibn Abbas said to him and regretted forgetting the Prophet`s Hadith which Ibn Abbas reminded him of.

This was stated in Ibn Hajar`s book: “ Fatih Al-Bari . “ Let`s suppose that some of the transmitted historical events were true, it is axiomatic as regards religious sciences that evidences from the sound Sunnah (Prophetic traditions) and the Noble Quran can`t be contradicted by historical tales told by someone since such tales are criticized according to criteria from the Sunnah and the Quran; therefore, we should trust the companions and think well of them by apologizing on their behalf for not having been delivered the Hadiths which forbid punishing with fire, or for having forgotten them.

Al-Imam Malik(May Allah bless him) said: “ All persons` opinions are subject to acceptance and rejection, save those of the one in this grave i.e. the Prophet(PBUH). “ However, the Ijtihad(independent reasoning) of a companion doesn`t constitute a Sharia evidence since he isn`t impeccable, so a mistake must be attributed to him alone. Muslim jurists have agreed that there is no room for Ijtihad when there is an evidence from Sharia. And Allah knows best.