Safiyah: Difference between revisions

Safiyah bint Huyayy (صفية بنت حيي‎, c. 610 - c. 670) (also spelled Saffiya, Safiyya, Safiya bint Huyai) was the bride of Kinana and the chief mistress of the Jewish tribes of Quraizah and An-Nadhir. According to the sira, Muhammad captured and married her after killing her husband. She is considered an أم المؤمنين or "mother of the believers". She and her husband were both captured after the victorious conclusion of Muhammad's conquest of Khaybar. The narrations agree that Muhammad chose her due to her exceeding beauty, as had been his custom in other engagements where the believers took slave women as booty, such as the conquest of the Banu Qurayzah. There was apparently some concern for his safety the night of their wedding on the part of his followers, as he had just that day murdered her husband after taking him as a prisoner of war, going so far as to torture him in order to ascertain the location of his treasure, and had earlier killed her father after the siege of the Banu Qurayzah. Modern Muslims have found the story embarrassing from the modern, liberal point of view, which supports the rights of people to not be slaves and to choose their own sexual and marriage partners. The story of Safiyah flies in the face of these norms, instead reflecting a world where powerful men like Muhammad take women as prizes in war and use them sexually to their own advantage with little regard to the women's emotional well being. Rather than admit this quite plain reading of source texts, many Muslim duaah and apologists rather seek to use isolated narratives to recast Safiyah as a woman deeply in love with the man who had just killed her brother, husband (including torturing him in order to find his gold), and had earlier killed her father, and profoundly possessed by the conviction that he was a prophet of Allah.

Story of Her Capture and Marriage to Muhammad

When the Muslims invaded and conquered Khaybar, the fighting men were killed and Safiyah was taken captive (along with the rest of the women and children) and allotted as booty to Dihya Al-Kalbi, a Muslim.^[1] Kinana, her husband, was tortured and executed by the Muslims in order to discover the hiding places of treasure,^[2][3][4] and one source relates that he and Safiyah had been married for only one day.^[5] She was so beautiful, that the Muslims began praising her in the presence of Muhammad,^[6] and so the prophet commanded that Dihya be brought before him along with Safiyah.

Upon seeing her, Muhammad said, "Take any slave girl other than her from the captives"^[7] and he selected her for himself (as was his custom, he had done similarly with Rayhana after The Massacre of the Banu Qurayza):^[8]

In the above passage, one might surmise that Kinana was killed in battle, but in the next passage ibn Ishaq himself confirms that he was murdered by the Muslims by torture in order to find his treasure.

The Muslims left Khaybar to return to Medina and on the way they stopped at a place called Sadd Al-Sahba; it was at this time Safiyah became clean from her menses.^[9]

The prophet decided to marry her, and he considered her manumission to be an adequate mahr (dowry).^[10] The "marriage banquet" consisted of Hays (a dish made of dates and butter) served on a small leather sheet and a gathering of those who were conveniently nearby.^[11] Another narrator describes the banquet in this way: "...there was neither meat nor bread in that banquet, but the Prophet ordered Bilal to spread the leather mats on which dates, dried yogurt and butter were put."^[12] Muhammad stayed three nights there and consummated his marriage with Safiyah.^[13] According to Tabari, there was apparently some fear amongst the believers that she would kill him in revenge for her husband and father:

Despite this banquet, and the nights he spent with her, the Muslims were still not sure whether she would be considered a wife or a right hand possession (i.e. a sex slave/concubine) until Muhammad set off and allowed her to wear a veil as she rode behind him on his camel (as slave women are not allowed to wear the hijab according to traditional shari'ah (Islamic law)).^[14]

Analysis

From the information provided in the Hadith, it can be reasonably concluded that Safiyah did not have a choice in this marriage; rather she was war booty for Muhammad, a not uncommon practice at the time. There do exist passages in ibn Sa'd's "Tabaqat" that indicate that Muhammad gave Safiyah the choice between marrying him and returning to her people:

This is however contradicted by numerous traditions that she was held captive up until the marriage, and when Muhammad decided that she would be a wife rather than a slave-girl, that is when he made known that her manumission was her Mahr (dowry).

Based on the sources, it seems that Muhammad took Safiyah based on her beauty. Her social status would not have mattered in this particular situation because Muhammad did not intend on maintaining amiable ties with the Jews of Khaybar, and in hand has subjected them by imposing the dhimma and jizyah upon them. In fact, he intended on forcing them into exile but was talked out of it by the Jews who agreed to cultivate the land and give half of its earnings to the Muslims.^[15]

In later, non-sahih accounts, there are reports that Safiyah desired to become a Muslim; however, there is no evidence of this in sahih accounts. She was the Jewish chief mistress of two tribes who had rebelled against Allah and his Apostle, so her religious piety would not have been a considering factor for Muhammad. Her wealth had been confiscated as war booty, so her wealth would not have been a considering factor either. Muhammad knew nothing about Safiyah until her capture and distribution as booty; his interest seems only to have been sparked when he heard about her beauty.

Additional Narratives

Many narratives outside of the sahih hadith tradition exist about Safiyah:

When the Muslims conquered al-Qamus (the fort of B. Abu'l-Huqayq), Bilal (one of Muhammad's companions) brought Safiyah and another woman to Muhammad. He led them past the slain Jews, and when the woman with Safiyah saw them she shrieked and slapped her face and poured dust on her head. Muhammad said, "Take this she-devil away from me." He then commanded that Safiyah be put behind him and he threw his mantle over her, indicating that he had chosen her for himself. It had been said that the apostle asked Bilal, "Had you no compassion, Bilal, when you brought two women past their dead husbands?"^[16]

The Sahih Hadith contradict this account, describing Safiyah being brought with Dihya, not another woman, for the sole purpose of satisfying Muhammad's curiosity about her beauty.

Safiyah had a mark on her face, and when Muhammad asked her about it, she told him that her husband had hit her so hard that he blacked her eye. She said she had a dream while she was married to Kinana, and in that dream the moon fell in her lap. When she described it to her husband, he said, "This simply means that you covet the king of the Hijaz, Muhammad", and then he hit her.^[17]

In another story, Safiyah was veiled after the wedding feast and Muhammad put her on his camel in order to conduct her to the bridal tent. In the morning, Muhammad heard the noise of someone rustling against the curtain of the tent. Abu Ayub was there, and he had kept watch all night with a drawn sword. When Muhammad asked his reason for being there, his friend explained that he did not trust Safiyah because Muhammad had just slain her husband the previous day. Muhammad thanked him for his vigilance and sent him away.^[18]

Issue of Saffiyah's 'Iddah (Waiting Period)

According to Islamic law, a woman whose husband dies must undergo her iddah or waiting period of four months and ten days:

As such, Muhammad theoretically should have waited the allotted waiting period to marry her. The hadith narrations, though, seem to indicate that he married her soon after taking her as a slave, waiting only a few days for her to pass her first menstrual period.

As such it would appear that Muhammad broke the rules of Islamic 'iddah in order to have sex with Safiyah so soon after he had tortured her husband to death. The issue is muddied, though, since in traditional Islamic law, capturing a married woman annules her marriage, and thus she wouldn't need to observe the 'Iddah. In order to ensure she is not pregnant, a single menstrual cycle suffices for a captured slave girl. After this single menstrual period her new owner can proceed to have sex with her. The Encyclopedia of Unanimous Islamic Rulings says: “Al-Balluti (d.355 AH) said: Scholars have unanimously agreed on the annulment of the marriage of a captured woman whose husband lives in a land of war (i.e. uncontrolled by Muslims), and that her owner can have sex with her after she menstruates for one time only.” ^[19]

Modern Perspectives

The story of Safiyah is retold by Muslims in numerous biographies and books. Some examples are given below:

This version is remarkable for the very selective reading of the sources and outright recasting of some of the material. Gone are the accounts of Safiyah being grieved at the death of her husband and the slaughter of her tribe. The idea that women should be the war booty of the men who conquer their tribe is never even questioned. The fact that she had no husband because he had been tortured to death with a fire on his chest is also conveniently omitted. This clearly shows the contemporary Muslim drive to reconcile elements of the prophet's biography which clash with contemporary liberal mores about war, slavery, and sexual consent.

The following quotes are from "Umm ul-Mukminin Safiyah: The Jewish Wife of Muhammad" by Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi, September 20, 2005:

The above author clearly views a plain retelling of the facts as related by the tradition to be an attack on the character. He attacks the mere thought of their presentation in a neutral matter as "ignorant missionary" rhetoric, attacking the motive behind even questioning whether Muhammad was morally right to take a woman as war booty and then marry her after having killing her father, husband, and brother. Rather than dealing with the meaning of "rape" in such a context of slavery and pre-modern society the author instead casts aspersions.

The following quote deals with the issue through the lens of lineage, which is actually an important angle in Islamic legal thought about marriage:

The issue of نسب nasab or "lineage" is an important issue in Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) vis-a-vis marriage; in short, lineage is one of the legally allowable categories when considering suitable marriage partners and Mahr (Marital Price). From an Islamic perspective, thus, it does make sense to take such an issue into consideration; yet this fact itself makes no appearance in the original sources, and the author makes no mention of the role played by Safiyah's beauty in the story.

Conquerors in pre-modern times generally married the daughters and wives of the kings whom they had conquered to give themselves legitimacy as the new rulers (in addition, of course, to slaking their lust with women who could not refuse their offers of marriage). Another angle often taken by pro-Islamic authors is often that of possible political motivations behind the marriage. Left out of this analysis, though, is that the feelings and dignity of the girls and women involved were the least of a conqueror's concern. In medieval England, for example, the Norman conquerors occasionally used intermarriage to claim land. The marriage to Safiyah is thus cast as having political significance as well, as it would supposedly help to reduce hostilities and cement alliances with the conquered people. John L. Esposito notes that

Esposito posits peacemaking as a goal of the marriage, yet the tribe that Safiyah hailed from was and continued to be at war with the Muslims; the people of Khaybar itself were reduced to dhimmitude and along with the rest of the Jews were eventually expelled from Arabia. In addition to this, before Muhammad heard of her beauty, he was going to allow Dihya to keep her as his slave.

Ling does not cite any source for this assertion. In contrast to Ling's assertion, we have Sahih Hadith that indicate that Safiyah was chosen for her beauty and kept captive up until her "wedding" night with Muhammad.

"...trying to wipe out pre-Islamic anti-Semitism amongst the Arabs" is an assertion that is not supported by the primary texts we have. In fact according the traditional sources Muhammad's companions eventually expelled all of the Jews from Arabia, save the Banu Qurayza whom Muhammad slaughtered and enslaved to the last.

The following Islamic message board post attempts to take the marriage as a sign of the prophet's compassion:

The above shows a clear apologetic bias at work; no modern person, especially given contemporary concerns about sexual consent prevalent in modern culture, would cast the marriage of a woman taken as a slave to the man who had just defeated her tribe in battle after an unprovoked surprise attack and murdered her husband, father, and brother as an example of fair and equal consent. The author above is clearly more concerned with modern perceptions of Muhammad and how they conform to contemporary mores around things like sexual consent than the plain facts of what is written in the texts.

Meraj Mohiuddin's book 2015 Revelation: The Story of Muhammad, provides only a single paragraph on the story of Safiyah's capture and betrothal to Muhammad, summarizing it as such:

No passages are cited by Revelation to support this story but the following hadith is probably in mind here.

It should be noted that the tradition seems to contradict the other traditions which show that Safiyah was in great anguish at the death of her family at the hands of Muhammad and his believers. It is also notable that at least one other version of the tradition exists in the same hadith collection where it is the sun, not the moon, that falls into her lap.

Revelation makes no mention of the numerous traditions mentioned above which indicate that Safiyah was filled with sadness at the murder of her family members by the Muslims (and the torture of her husband Kinana). Rather than dealing with the wide range of sources available on Safiyah, Revelation chooses to cherry pick a single tradition which casts her marriage to Muhammad as divinely pre-ordained and in accordance with her personal wishes, which is what modern liberal audiences would expect of a man claimed to be a good example (Uswa Hasana). Again, these modern Muslims seem embarrassed to admit the truth about the multiple different narrations that exist about Safiyah. And instead of presenting the tradition as it exists, they attempt to whitewash it in order to suit modern, liberal sensitivities around consent and slavery.

See Also

• Muhammad's Wives
• Forced Marriage

External Links

• "Safiyah, the Wife of Muhammad"-Rebuttal to Ali Sina - Bassam Zawadi, Answering Christianity
• Muhammad and the Law of 'Iddah - Sam Shamoun, Answering Islam
• Muhammad’s Marriage to Safiyah - Sam Shamoun, Answering Islam
• Muhammad’s Marriage to Safiyah Revisited - Sam Shamoun, Answering Islam
• Two Issues Around Prophet Muhammad’s Marriage With Safiyya - Waqar Akbar, ICRAA.org
• Safiya bint Huyai's father, husband & brother killed by Prophet Muhammad - Lehrasap, Atheism vs Islam

References