The Massacre of the Banu Qurayzah: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

The Massacre of the Banu Qurayzah (view source)

Revision as of 23:40, 4 December 2025

27 bytes added , Yesterday at 23:40

no edit summary

[checked revision]

Lightyears

Editors, em-bypass-2, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators

3,454

edits

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Earliest accounts==
 ===Surah al-Ahzab (The Confederates)===
-The most well known version of these events is recorded in the [[Sirat_Rasul_Allah|Sira of Ibn ʾIsḥāq]] (d. 769 CE).<ref>Ibn Ishaq (rescension of his work by Ibn Hisham), Alfred Guillaume (translator), ''The life of Muhammad: a translation of Isḥāq's Sīrat rasūl Allāh Oxford University Press'', 2005, pp. 453, 458-9, 461-69, 479-81</ref> However, there is a brief description in the Quran itself according to the great majority of Islamic scholars, which is also the view of academic historians who believe there is at least some historicity to the story.
+The most well known version of these events is recorded in the [[Sirat_Rasul_Allah|Sira of Ibn ʾIsḥāq]] (d. 769 CE).<ref>Ibn Ishaq (rescension of his work by Ibn Hisham), Alfred Guillaume (translator), ''The life of Muhammad: a translation of Isḥāq's Sīrat rasūl Allāh Oxford University Press'', 2005, pp. 453, 458-9, 461-69, 479-81</ref> However, there is a brief description in the Quran itself according to the great majority of Islamic scholars, which is also the view of those academic historians who believe there is at least some historicity to the story.
 {{Quran-range|33|9|25}} recalls an attempted attack by the confederates on Medina (i.e. Yathrib, mentioned in verse 13). The next two verses (26-27) state that Jewish or Christian supporters of the failed offensive were brought down from their fortresses, then one group were killed and another taken captive:
@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 Ibn Ishaq records that the two sides pitched their camps either side of the trench. The leader of the Banu al-Nadir, Huyayy bin Akhtab An-Nadri, then went to the Banu Qurayza to ask them to abandon their agreement with Muhammad. According to Ibn Ishaq, initially the leader of the Banu Qurayzah, Ka'b bin Asad al-Qurayzi, refused to abandon his commitment to Muhammad, but after much wheedling from Huyayy agreed to do so.<ref>Ibn Ishaq, Alfred Guillaume (translator), The life of Muhammad, p. 453</ref> An additional detail in Mūsā ibn ʿUqba's account is that this had been a vow not to deceive Muhammad nor aid his enemies against him, and to assist him against anyone who attacked Yathrib (Medina). In this version they also promise to join the fight against him so long as hostages are provided by the confederates to guarantee they will both commit to the fight come what may. This is agreed by the Quraysh and so the Banu Qurayza declare war on Muhammad.<ref>Mūsā ibn ʿUqba, Kitāb al-Maghāzī translated by Imam Ghazali Publishing, pp. 105</ref>
-Ibn Ishaq reports that Muhammad sent some men to the Banu Qurayza to find out whether they had really abandoned their agreement, which they confirmed and insults were exchanged. A siege with little action besides the shooting of arrows then ensued for around 20 days.<ref>Ibn Ishaq, Alfred Guillaume (translator), The life of Muhammad, pp. 453-4</ref> In Mūsā ibn ʿUqba's version, it is after this siege period that Muhammad first sent his men to the Banu Qurayza, who explain their refusal to renew their alliance with him due to the way their kin, the Banu al-Nadir, had been treated.<ref>Mūsā ibn ʿUqba, Kitāb al-Maghāzī translated by Imam Ghazali Publishing, pp. 106-7</ref>
+Ibn Ishaq reports that Muhammad sent some men to the Banu Qurayza to find out whether they had really abandoned their agreement, which they confirmed and insults were exchanged. A siege by the confederates against Medina with little action besides the shooting of arrows then ensued for around 20 days.<ref>Ibn Ishaq, Alfred Guillaume (translator), The life of Muhammad, pp. 453-4</ref> In Mūsā ibn ʿUqba's version, it is after this siege period that Muhammad first sent his men to the Banu Qurayza, who explain their refusal to renew their alliance with him due to the way their kin, the Banu al-Nadir, had been treated.<ref>Mūsā ibn ʿUqba, Kitāb al-Maghāzī translated by Imam Ghazali Publishing, pp. 106-7</ref>
 Ibn Ishaq offers as evidence of the Banu Qurayza’s perfidy a story with isnad chain from Yaḥyā b. ʿAbbād b. ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Zubayr that a Muslim woman, Ṣafīyya bint ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib, saw a Jew walking around their fort. She feared that he was scouting for weaknesses as the Banu Qurayza had gone to war and cut the fort's communications with Muhammad. She told the fort's commander Hassan of this and asked him to kill the scout, and when he refused she took a club and went out and beat the man to death.<ref>Ibn Ishaq, Alfred Guillaume (translator), The life of Muhammad, p. 458</ref>
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 The sequence of events that Ibn Ishaq goes on to describe differs considerably from Musa's narrative. While Muhammad and his men continued to endure the siege, Nuʿaym ibn Masʿūd, a member of the Ghatafan who had secretly become Muslim, came to Muhammad, who sends him to sow distrust among the enemy, "for war is deceit". In Ibn Ishaq's version, it is now that the confederate hostages idea is first raised, as a suggestion by Nuʿaym to the Banu Qurayza, which they embrace as a prerequisite to joining the fight against Muhammad (this contradicts the scout story in which they are already active).<ref>Ibid. pp. 458-9</ref> In Mūsā ibn ʿUqba's account, as mentioned above, this had been the Banu Qurayza's own proposal before the siege got underway.
-Ibn Ishaq reports that Nuʿaym then (or as his sole act in the version reported by Musa, having reported to Muhammad what he had learned of Banu Qurayza's offer) tricked the Quraysh leader Abu Sufyan that the Banu Qurayza had switched sides again and would request hostages only in order to betray them. According to Ibn Ishaq this led Abu Sufyan to sent a message to the Banu Qurayza, who do indeed make the request as a condition of joining the fight. Thus Nuʿaym's trickery of them both plays out perfectly.
+Ibn Ishaq reports that Nuʿaym then (or as his sole act in the version reported by Musa, having reported to Muhammad what he had learned of Banu Qurayza's offer) tricked the Quraysh leader Abu Sufyan that the Banu Qurayza had switched sides again and would request hostages only in order to betray them. According to Ibn Ishaq this led Abu Sufyan to send a message to the Banu Qurayza, who do indeed make the request as a condition of joining the fight. Thus Nuʿaym's trickery of them both plays out perfectly.
 Mūsā ibn ʿUqba had placed Abu Sufyan's message and the reply in an earlier context, following the initial siege period, and with another, more important difference. He reports from al-Zuhri that the Banu Qurayza make this offer on their own initiative after the same message to them from Abu Sufyan, and that the offer is only that they would not hold him back so long as hostages are provided, i.e. they do not offer to actively join the fight.<ref>Mūsā ibn Uqba, Kitāb al-Maghāzī translated by Imam Ghazali Publishing, p. 108</ref>
@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 ===The decision on their fate===
-Ibn Ishaq reports that the tribe of 'Aws, allies of the Banu Qurayzah from the time of [[jahilliyah]], asked for mercy for them from the prophet. The prophet, not wanting to cause dissension in his ranks (oaths and alliances of loyalty were very important in tribal Arab society, as in the absence of courts and established governments the only guaranty of security and justice which could be obtained was the promise of protection from allies in the case of murder, family feuds or war), entrusted the fate of the Banu Qurayzah to a trusted elder shaykh of the 'Aws, Sa‘d bin Mu‘adh, who had been mortally wounded during the battle and would in fact die a shortly after the slaughter of the Banu Qurayza.  In Musa b. Uqbah's version, it is the Banu Qurayza themselves who choose Sa'd to determine their fate.<ref>Mūsā ibn Uqba, Kitāb al-Maghāzī translated by Imam Ghazali Publishing, p. 114</ref>. Once Sa'd bin Mu'adh had ascertained that both the Banu Qurayzah and the prophet would abide by his judgement, whatever it be, he gave it without hesitation: the men of the Banu Qurayzah were to be executed to the last, their property divided, while the women and children should be taken as captives.
+Ibn Ishaq reports that the tribe of 'Aws, allies of the Banu Qurayzah from the time of jahilliyah, asked for mercy for them from the prophet. The prophet, not wanting to cause dissension in his ranks (oaths and alliances of loyalty were very important in tribal Arab society, as in the absence of courts and established governments the only guaranty of security and justice which could be obtained was the promise of protection from allies in the case of murder, family feuds or war), entrusted the fate of the Banu Qurayzah to a trusted elder shaykh of the 'Aws, Sa‘d bin Mu‘adh, who had been mortally wounded during the battle and would in fact die shortly after the slaughter of the Banu Qurayza.  In Musa b. Uqbah's version, it is the Banu Qurayza themselves who choose Sa'd to determine their fate.<ref>Mūsā ibn Uqba, Kitāb al-Maghāzī translated by Imam Ghazali Publishing, p. 114</ref>. Once Sa'd bin Mu'adh had ascertained that both the Banu Qurayzah and the prophet would abide by his judgement, whatever it be, he gave it without hesitation: the men of the Banu Qurayzah were to be executed to the last, their property divided, while the women and children should be taken as captives.
 Some authors assert that Sa'd bin Mu‘adh justified this decision as being from the Torah of the Jews itself. Some of them point to Deuteronomy 20:12-14 which reads as follows:{{Quote|Deuteronomy 20:12-14|וְאִם  לֹ֤א  תַשְׁלִים֙ עִמָּ֔ךְ  וְעָשְׂתָ֥ה  עִמְּךָ֖ מִלְחָמָ֑ה  וְצַרְתָּ֖  עָלֶֽיהָ וּנְתָנָ֛הּ  יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ  בְּיָדֶ֑ךָ  וְהִכִּיתָ֥ אֶת  כָּל  זְכוּרָ֖הּ לְפִי  חָֽרֶב  רַ֣ק  הַ֠נָּשִׁים  וְהַטַּ֨ף וְהַבְּהֵמָ֜ה  וְכֹל֩  אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִהְיֶ֥ה  בָעִ֛יר  כָּל־  שְׁלָלָ֖הּ  תָּבֹ֣ז לָ֑ךְ  וְאָֽכַלְתָּ֙  אֶת  שְׁלַ֣ל  אֹיְבֶ֔יךָ אֲשֶׁ֥ר  נָתַ֛ן  יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ  לָֽךְ
@@ Line 85: / Line 85: @@
 ==Tafsir commentary==
-The famed [[tafsir|mufassir]] [[Ibn Kathir]] in his commentary on sura 33 Al-Ahzab الأحزاب  "The Confederates" draws on pertinent details from the narrative, particularly the anti-Jewish elements. Like other commentators, he reads into the Quran's denouncement of the [[people of the book]] the perfidious Jews of the tribe of Banu Qurayzah and their betrayal of the prophet:
+The famed [[tafsir|mufassir]] Ibn Kathir in his commentary on sura 33 Al-Ahzab الأحزاب  "The Confederates" draws on pertinent details from the narrative, particularly the anti-Jewish elements. Like other commentators, he reads into the Quran's denouncement of the people of the book the perfidious Jews of the tribe of Banu Qurayzah and their betrayal of the prophet:
 {{Quote|Tafsir of Ibn Kathir Qur'an Surah 33