User:FrummerThanThou/jew

Other areas of Wikipedia
The Siege of the Banu Qurayza occurred in, after the battle of the trench.

Events
Muslim sources state that the Banu Qurayza violated the Constitution of Medina by not aiding the Muslims during the Battle of the Trench and even contemplated assisting the Muslims enemies.

Non-Muslim scholars state although the tribe did not not appear to have committed any overt hostile act, the tribe was almost certainly involved in negotiations with the enemy and would have attacked Muhammad in the rear had there been an opportunity. Marco Scholler believes the Banu Qurayza were "openly, probably actively," supporting Meccans and their allies.

In the two or three years following the setback of Uhud, the Muslims were preoccupied with the task of repelling the forays of nomadic tribes that against their possessions. But in the meanwhile, the Qurayzah, another Jewish tribe that had entered into a pact relation with the commonwealth of the Medina, were induced by the dispossessed Banu al-Nadir and the "hypocrits" to join the Quraysh in a new assault on Medina. This group was being organized and led by Abu Sufyan, the chief oligarch of Mecca.

Prelude
Muslim sources state that after the battle of the trench, the angel Gabriel told Muhammad to not lay down arms, but rather to go and confront the Banu Qurayza

in his tafsir of verse 33:26 writes: The reference is to the Jewish tribe of the Banu Qurayza. As citizens of Madina they were bound by solemn agreement to help in the defence of the city. But on the occasion of the siege by the Quraysh and their allies they intrigued with the enemies and treacherously aided them. The Banu Qurayza were filled with terror and dismay when Madina was free from the Quraysh danger. They shut themselves in their fortress about three or four miles to the east of Madina.

Ahul Fida and Tabari in their histories and Hirwi in Habib al Siyar say that soon after his return from the battle of Khandaq, while laying aside his armour, the Holy Prophet was washing his hands and face in the house of his beloved daughter Fatimah whom he used to visit before going to his own quarter on return from an expedition or excursion the angel Jibrail brought a command from Allah to proceed immediately against the Qurayza Jews.

Siege
The Banu Qurayza retreated into their stronghold and contemplated their alternatives. As the Banu Qurayza morale waned (according to Ibn Ishaq), their chief made a speech to them, suggesting three alternative ways out of their predicament: embrace Islam; kill their own children and women, then rush out for a "kamikaze" charge to either win or die; or make a surprise attack on Saturday (the Sabbath, when by mutual understanding no fighting would take place). But it seems that none of these alternatives were accepted. After a siege that lasted several weeks, the Banu Qurayza surrendered unconditionally.

In Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet, a PBS documentary film: The Muslims now commenced a 25-day siege against the Banu Qurazya's fortress. Finally, both sides agreed to arbitration.

in his tafsir of verse 33:26 writes: The Holy Prophet instantly sent Ali with his standard, and himself following with his army laid siege to the fortress of the Jews. The Holy Prophet himself went near the gate of their fortress and asked them to surrender. They did not. Had they done as suggested by the Holy Prophet they would have enjoyed the fair and lenient terms given to the tribe of Banu Quinuqa It is said that at the command of the Holy Prophet the grove of the trees near the walls of the fortress moved over to a place away from it so as to give shelter to the Muslim army.

Surrender and judgment
According to Muslim accounts, Banu Aus pleaded to Muhammad for Banu Qurayza and asked Muhammad to appoint Sa'd ibn Mua'dh as an arbitrator to decide their fate. Their request was accepted. Sa'd ibn Mua'dh pronounced that all men should be executed. Muhammad approved the ruling, calling it similar to God's judgment. This ruling was taken to refer to all males over puberty, some 600-900 individuals according to Ibn Ishaq.

In Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet, a PBS documentary film: A former ally of the Banu Qurayza, an Arab chief named Sa'd ibn Muadh, now a Muslim, was chosen as judge. Sa'd, one of the few casualties of battle, would soon die of his wounds. If the earlier tribal relations had been in force, he would have certainly spared the Banu Qurayza. His fellow chiefs urged him to pardon these former allies, but he refused. In his view, the Banu Qurayza had attacked the new social order and failed to honor their agreement to protect the town. He ruled that all the men should be killed. Muhammad accepted his judgment....

in his tafsir of verse 33:26 writes: At last, after twenty five days they offered to surrender, if Sad bin Mu-az, the chief of their allies-the Bani Aws- might be appointed to decide their fate. The Holy Prophet agreed. Sad decreed that the male captives should be put to sword, women and children be sold as slaves and their goods be confiscated and divided among the besiegers.

The killing of the men
Ibn Ishaq describes the killing of the Banu Qurayza men as follows: Then they surrendered, and the apostle confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, 'Will you never understand? Don't you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!' This went on until the apostle made an end of them. Huyayy was brought out wearing a flowered robe in which he had made holes about the size of the finger-tips in every part so that it should not be taken from him as spoil, with his hands bound to his neck by a rope. When he saw the apostle he said, 'By God, I do not blame myself for opposing you, but he who forsakes God will be forsaken.' Then he went to the men and said, 'God's command is right. A book and a decree, and massacre have been written against the Sons of Israel.' Then he sat down and his head was struck off.

In Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet, a PBS documentary film: Muhammad accepted his judgment, and the next day, according to Muslim sources, 700 men of the Banu Qurayza were executed. Although Sa'd judged according to his own views, his ruling coincides with Deuteronomy 20:12-14.

in his tafsir of verse 33:26 writes: This decision was given by Sad in the light of the verses 13 and 14 of Deuteronomy 20:

"You shall put all its males to the sword, but you may take the women, the dependants, and the cattle for yourselves."

Please refer to Deuteronomy 20: 10 to 18.

writes: Angered by the betrayal of the Banu Qurayzah in the violation of their oath, Muhammad submitted them to trial by the chief of the Aws whom they had requested to pass judgement upon them. Sa'd ibn Mu'adh, the chief, decreed all fighting men of the Banu Qurayza be put to death. This was in keeping with the Jewish law (Deuteronomy 20:12), which decreees the killing of every male in such situations, He was convinced that they would have meted out similar judgement on the Muslims had they and their allies triumphed instead. None but four would forsake Judaism for Islam as a price of survival

The passage quoted above, Deuteronomy 20:12-14, reads: 10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace.

11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.

12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.

13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it.

14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies.

is among the Islamic scholars who believe that the judgement of Sa'd ibn Mua'dh was conducted according to laws in Torah, and points to the fact that Qur'an does not present this punishment for Jews.

The Quran, chapter, verse&#32;26:

The spoils of battle, including the enslaved women and children of the tribe, were divided up among Muhammad's followers, with Muhammad himself receiving a fifth of the value (as khums, to be used for the public good). Some of these were sold soon after to raise funds for jihad.

Muslim
says regarding this event: It is unfortunate that many historians, and particularly in contemporary times, both on the Jewish and the Muslim side, have transformed us. On the Jewish side, they have used that as a way of sayin "Well you see, Muslim hate the Jews and they kill them", and on the Muslim side they say "Well you see, the Jews are full of treachery and they can't be trusted". They are both wrong..

Non-Muslim
says regarding this event: All that can be said is that this can not be seen as antisemitism per say, Muhammad had nothing against the Jewish people per say, or the Jewish religion. The Qur'an continues to tell Muslims to honor the People of the Book, and to honor their religion as authentic. And the Jewish tribes that had not rebelled, who had not given help to the Meccans, continued to live in Medina, completely unmolested. Muhammad was not trying to exterminate Jews, he was trying to get rid of very dangerous internal enemies.

writes If Muslim traditions tend to mythify the Prophet, western traditions too often has denigrated and vilified his memory. Two issues in particular - Muhammad's treatment of the Jews and his (polygynous) marriages - have proven popular stumbling blocks, or perhaps more accurately whipping posts for western critics and polemics.

• • •

After the Battle of the Ditch in 627, the Jews of the Banu Quryza were denounced as traitors who had consorted with the Meccans. As was common in Arab (and, indeed, Semitic ) practice, the men were massacred; the woman and children were spared but enslaved. However, it is important to note that the motivation for such actions were political rather than racial or theological. Although the Banu Qurayza had remained neutral, they had also negotiated with the Quraysh. Moreover, the exiled Jewish clans had actively supported the Meccans. Muhammad moved decisively to crush the Jews who remained in Medina, viewing them as a continual political threat to the consolidation of Muslim dominance and rule of Arabia.

One final point should be made. Muhammad's use of warfare in general was alien to neither to Arab custom nor to that of the Hebrew prophets. Both belived that God had sanctioned battle with the enemies of the Lord. Biblical stories about the exploits of kings and prophets such as Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Samuel, Jehu, Saul and David recount the struggle of a community called by by God and the permissibility, indeed requirement, to take up arms when necessary against those who had defied God, and to fight "in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel" Similarly, in speaking of the Israelite conquests, Moses recalls: "And i commanded you commanded you at the time, saying, "The Lord your God has given this land to posses....You shall not fear them, for it is the Lord your God who fights with you" (Deuteronomy 3:18-22).

Ibn Ishaq
Sources regarding the Banu Qurayza are sparse: the only known mentions of this tribe are in Muslim sources, and date from no earlier than 150 years after the event. Some information - including the judgment pronounced and carried out on the tribe - is to be found in hadith accepted as sahih by most Sunni Muslims. (Shia traditions also report this, but Shia do not accept the same hadith collections.) Most details - such as the number killed, the siege, the speech given by Ka'b before surrender, Ka'b's decision to join Quraish, and Huyai's efforts to persuade him - derive ultimately from a single account, that of Ibn Ishaq. His work is among the earliest surviving sources on Islamic history, but he is considered quite unreliable by the main hadith scholars, especially Imam Malik. The attitude of Western historians towards both the hadith and Ibn Ishaq varies from general acceptance to near-total scepticism; see historiography of early Islam. This event has been documented in the History of Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, which is one of the main sources of information about the early history of Islam.

Hadith
Various hadith treat of this event: