Monday, April 20, 2020

Apostate prophet's recurrent nightmare; What happened to the Jews of Qurayza?

In answer to the video "The Banu Qurayza Massacre (TGP 2)"

The conflict with the Qurayza occured in the context of the momentous battle of the Trench, where Muslims were besieged by the greatest coalition of enemies they had faced until now. Qurayza were the only Jewish tribe still abiding by their covenant with the Muslims until they broke the treaty and joined the pagan ranks, the very people whom Moses and subsequent prophets fought.

This betrayal shook the Prophet greatly as well as the rest of the Muslims, so he sent his companion Sa'd ibn Mu'adh, leader of the Aws and close ally to Banu Qurayzah to confirm the bad news, which he did. With the last Jews joining the pagan ranks, cutting the food supply and threatening the Muslims from within the city, the pagan forces had their moral uplifted.

They prepared an invasion from 3 fronts and it was with reference to this deployment of enemy forces that the Quran said
33:10-13"When they came upon you from above you (the pagans) and from below you (the hypocrites and traitors), and when the eyes turned dull, and the hearts rose up to the throats, and you began to think diverse thoughts of Allah. There the believers were tried and they were shaken with severe shaking. And when the hypocrites and those in whose hearts was a disease began to say: Allah and His Messenger did not promise us (victory) but only to deceive. And when a party of them said: O people of Yathrib! there is no place to stand for you (here), therefore go back; and a party of them asked permission of the prophet, saying: 'Surely our houses are exposed; and they were not exposed.' they only desired to fly away".
The enemy managed to enter through a narrow breach in the trench, and engulfed their men inside but Ali managed to fend off the attack, forcing them to retreat.

The night came and the Prophet asked volunteers to go spy on the enemy and only one stood up, it was Hudhayfah. When he departed, the Prophet made a long cry and prayer to God to protect this man and bring victory over the unbelievers. Hudhayfah came back from the enemy camp unharmed and recounted what he had witnessed: a strong wind came out of nowhere, striking panic among them, blowing away their encampment. The pebbles carried by the wind, forced them to retreat for shelter
"and I heard the clatter of the pebbles against the shields. Abu Sufyan rushed up to his mount and cried out: 'Save yourselves, save yourselves!' Thus the Confederates went away".
This completely frustrated their plans, not only were they unable to pierce the Muslim defense, but in addition had to face a a bitterly-cold storm wind that raged for several days, making life unbearable even for hardened warriors
33:25"And Allah turned back the unbelievers in their rage"  
33:9"call to mind the favor of Allah to you when there came down upon you hosts, so We sent against them a strong wind and hosts, that you saw not, and Allah is Seeing what you do".
As happened before when the besieged and starved Israelites and their prophet Elisha, were rescued from the Syrians, by God who terrorized the hearts of their enemies, forcing them to retreat and break the siege, leaving their camps and all belongings intact and for the Israelites to plunder as spoils of war 2Kings6:24-33,7:1-20, the Muslims were freed by divine intervention. They went back next morning to Medina, baffled but joyful at what had happened.

The prophet did not have time to cheer, the angel Gabriel appeared to him telling him to pursue the retreating armies, including those among the People of the Book that supported them. Bani Qurayza were besieged for several war crimes, they did not abide by the Medina covenant saying they had to defend the city against foreign invasion, they in addition provided logistical support to the enemy, participating in the attack against the fortress where Muslim women and children were lodged for safety.

This time God did not side with them as He did in the times of Elisha, He did not break the siege of their enemies; the Muslim siege lasted 25 days without fighting until the Qurayza surrendered. They realized, just as they had deceived the Muslims, the pagans in turn deceived them by not coming to their rescue as promised. This means they didnt surrender out of any change of heart, but because they had no choice
3:111"They shall by no means harm you but with a slight evil; and if they fight with you they shall turn (their) backs to you, then shall they not be helped".
Thus the parable of the 2 sons of Adam was repeating itself 5:27-31. It was recited to the Children of Israel as a warning not to reject and kill their Ishmaelite brothers, out of jealousy that God has now chosen them instead. Just as happened to the one that murdered his brother, they would similarly be thrown into intense remorse and regret. The Israelites plotted against the Ishmaelite prophet for the same reason for which the erring son of Adam had slain his pious brother. They could not see the obvious fact that God withdrew His favor from them and bestowed it upon their more God-conscious brothers, just as Cain's offering was refused for lack of piety while that of the God-fearing Abel was accepted. Instead of considering the matter, and reforming their evil ways, they plotted to kill those whom God had blessed with His favors.

At that point, Ka'b, the leader of the Qurayza, sought the prophet for a lenient verdict. But the prophet refused giving him the benefit of the doubt as he had done with the Jews of the Banu Nadir who were freely left to relocate following their treacheries. The crime of the Qurayza was much more grievous.

He then turned to the tribe of Aws, the former allies of his tribe back in preislamic times. They intervened with the prophet before declaring his verdict, pleading for the lives of the combatants among the Qurayza..

The prophet of God, even though he knew that whatever punishment he would have requested be imposed upon the Qurayza, it would have been unquestionably executed, stepped down from his prerogative, telling the notables of Aws to have their leader issue his own verdict instead. Saad ibn Muaad, the leader of Aws, who was being treated for a severe battle injury, received the notables. They began telling him of their plea to the prophet, reminding him of the preislamic times when Aws and Qurayza were friends and allies, pressuring him for a lenient verdict.

Saad was on his deathbed and about to succumb to his wounds, which he had suffered during the battle against their alliance. He made at that point a decision that disregarded all political wisdom, one that could have otherwise secured his remembrance as a popular leader who heard his people's wishes before breathing his last. His judgement was directly related to the Jews' own ethics of war for national expansion.

That divinely sanctioned option stipulates, in their own scriptures, should a random nation be given the choice of a "peaceful" surrender to the Israelites army, and that this nation accepts, it would result in the enslavement and taxation of its population. Notice here it is speaking of purely arbitrary aggression, not a war in self-defense as was the case with the Muslims against whom the Qurayza had allied at the battle of the Trench earlier. Neither did the prophet arbitrarily choose to go and conquer them, neither did he propose any conditional peace offer. He was going after them to sanction them.

Anyway, Should the randomly chosen nation reject the appealing "peace offer" then it would result in military subjugation with the execution of all adult males, confiscation of all their belongings, as well as capture of their women, children, and livestock Deut20:10-14. Should it be necessary to completely subdue that nation
2Kings3:19"you shall fell every good tree, and you shall stop up all springs of water, and you shall clutter every good field with stones".
This was the case that applied most to the current situation, even though the Qurayza werent a randomly chosen nation, they were a people living in complete and unrestricted freedom according to the "peace offer" that was agreed upon between them and the Muslims. This "peace offer" was not conditional on the enslavement and taxation of their population, as their scriptures allows them doing.

They nevertheless rejected peace, and even though, according to their own war ethics, the only fact of rejecting a non-appealing offer results in complete destruction, in this case they not only rejected a truly appealing peace offer but also fought with the purpose of exterminating those that lived in peace with them.

Even if we just consider these factors, we see that, per their own standards, the punishment to be inflicted should be much higher. But it wasnt. And we're not even getting into the indiscriminate disposessions and massacres of the Canaanites. We're not talking of Joshua and subsequent leaders, down to David who after beating the Moabites, measured them off
"with a line, making them lie down on the ground; and he measured two cord-lengths to put to death, and one full cord-length to keep alive"(2Sam8:2)
and enslaved the remaining population. The prophet did not go to these lowly "divine" standards.
As Saad announced the verdict, the prophet, who knew the divine standard of justice in such cases did not object and said
"You have given the judgement of Allah above the seven heavens".
All adult males suspected of being fighters among the Qurayza were executed. This concerned only those above the age of puberty, meaning  fighting children, if there were, could not be subject to law of equal retribution. Others came to the prophet and sought amnesty, which was granted to them based on the fact they hadnt participated in the treachery, had left their stronghold prior to the siege and hadnt fought the encircled Muslims at the trench battle. In some cases the individual amnesty was extended to the close family relations despite them having actively taken part in the anti-Muslim preparations and attacks. These men later converted.

The number of men executed on the other hand varies greatly from one source to another, despite these sources being unreliable to begin with. What is sure is that, there was no "genocide", and certainly not one on the scale of what their own people have done throughout their history. No such "massacre" is spoken of anywhere despite the Quran itself and the Muslim traditions reporting some of the silliest contentions the prophet's enemies had. No such news ever reached the Jewish diaspora with whom the Medina Jews had regular contacts, including those of Syria or Iraq which was the seat of their religious authority at the time.

The cutting down of some of their trees occured prior to the battle. The prophet ordered some of their palm-trees adjacent to their stronghold be felled to incite them to come out and confront the Muslims, seeing some of their most precious trees being destroyed. The Quran describes those trees as "linat" denoting that they were the choicest 59:5. But the treacherous cowards remained behind their fortress until they could not bare the siege anymore.

Saad imposed his judgement just before the wound which he had suffered in his arm during the battle suddenly opened and the blood continued to gush out until he died. The women and children that had now no fathers and husbands were taken as captives, which in Islam implies in no way oppressive slavery. The land was distributed to the Muslims immigrating to Medina, and their wealth shared among all Muslims with one-fifth for public purposes.

Bani Israel were thus once again destroyed through divine punishment for their treachery and transgression, as it happened to them twice before, and on a divinely sanctionned scale far surpassing their punishment at the hands of the Muslims 17:4-8. The Quran prophecises that this threat of destruction will remain hanging above them until the Day of Resurrection 7:167. This severe decree does not contravene God's attribute of forgiveness, since both His punishment and mercy are contingent on the people's behavior
"And when your Lord proclaimed that He would surely send against them, until the day of Resurrection, those who would inflict on them a terrible punishment. Indeed your Lord is swift in retribution, and indeed He is all forgiving, ever merciful".
Abasement and humiliation, as well as insecurity and vulnerability, were stamped upon them wherever they went. This was due to their ungratefulness, transgressions which they persistently and sometimes even provocatively committed throughout their history, from the time they were led out of bondage 2:16,3:112. They were once again engulfed by the divine curse and wrath and whenever they kindled a fire for war after that, Allah put it out
33:26-7"And He drove down those of the followers of the Book who backed them from their fortresses and He cast awe into their hearts; some you killed and you took captive another part. And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property".
The prophet was at war for over 13 years with various tribes, including other Jews than Bani Qurayza. If he was a war lord that loved blood as the critics claim by raising this incident, then it would be easy to provide evidence for this lust for be-heading and decapitating to establish a precedent. History on the other hand says that Jews continued to live in that region. They should have all fled following the supposed massacres, but didnt. They were only to be expelled many years after the Prophet died, by Umar. They were shifted to other regions within the Peninsula, Tayma and Ariha, and given paid settlements. 

The Jews of Khaybar for example, after they had violently attacked a Muslim were exiled and compensated for their lands 
"When the people of Khaibar dislocated `Abdullah bin `Umar's hands and feet, `Umar got up delivering a sermon saying, "No doubt, Allah's Messenger made a contract with the Jews concerning their properties, and said to them, 'We allow you (to stand in your land) as long as Allah allows you.' Now `Abdullah bin `Umar went to his land and was attacked at night, and his hands and feet were dislocated, and as we have no enemies there except those Jews, they are our enemies and the only people whom we suspect, I have made up my mind to exile them." When `Umar decided to carry out his decision, a son of Abu Al-Haqiq's came and addressed `Umar, "O chief of the believers, will you exile us although Muhammad allowed us to stay at our places, and made a contract with us about our properties, and accepted the condition of our residence in our land?" `Umar said, "Do you think that I have forgotten the statement of Allah's Messenger, i.e.: What will your condition be when you are expelled from Khaibar and your camel will be carrying you night after night?" The Jew replied, "That was joke from Abul-Qasim." `Umar said, "O the enemy of Allah! You are telling a lie." `Umar then drove them out and paid them the price of their properties in the form of fruits, money, camel saddles and ropes, etc."
Umar was being lenient here, considering that their expulsion was due to them breaching a non-aggression treaty with the Muslims. The prophet therefore could not have ordered their expulsion from the entire peninsula when he said
"I will certainly expel the Jews and Christians from the peninsula until I leave none but Muslims".
That is why the medieval scholars argued that by Arabia, what was meant was the area of the Hijaz. It is well established that when the ancients referred to Arabia, it did not necessarily mean what is understood today as the Arabian Peninsula. The order was specific to the Hijaz, more specifically the southern portion, to secure the establishment of Islam from their proven, unabated hostilities even after the prophet's death. The prophet's foresight proved to be true when he said
"Two deens shall not co-exist in the Arabian Peninsula".
Clearly the prophet's conflict with his Israelites brethren was neither arbitrary or prejudiced. It is also to be noted it is Umar who, upon Jerusalem's conquest, cleaned the garbage dump which Christians purposefully left over the Jewish temple mount. It is Umar who invited 70 Jewish families of a nearby refugee village back into Jerusalem giving them the right to return after centuries of banishment by successive Christian leadership. Many attempts were made to reason and coexist with them.

This is nothing like the 2000 years of humiliating abasement, mass expulsions, rounding up, forced conversions, false accusations and calumnies, extortions and indiscriminate mass killings of Jewish "Christ-killers" by Christians. What is even more disturbing is that this type of behavior was viewed as theologically and eschatologically justified and positive, in the sense that Christians were being "loving" and "charitable" by inciting Jews to be healed from their cursed and harmful faith.

Here is a timeline of Jewish persecution https://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/historyjewishpersecution/.

Jewish "persecution" began since before any Temple was standing, such as in ancient Egypt. As already pointed 99% of such persecution as well as the killings from that time till now come from non-Muslims. But what is most important to note is the Jewish persecution and genocides of other people, through divinely ordained commands still applicable and compulsory to this day, as well as the persecution and killing of Jews by Jews throughout their biblical history. 

As to recent times, the Arab nations had no "Jewish problem". They've been living side by side with them for centuries, even helped them escape the Nazis, especially in North Africa. Its not German antisemitic propaganda that turned the tide, causing Nazis and Arabs to ally, rather the shared hatred of the colonizers (British, French or Italian) and opposition to fascism and communism. It is known that the Arab elites did not endorse Nazism either, just as Hitler despised the Arabs. The Mufti of Jerusalem on the other hand had a "Jewish problem" (the massive influx of Jews into Palestine in the late 30s), combined with hatred of the British who opposed their nationalism. When Jews were targeted by Arabs in Arab lands, it was to prevent their emigration to Palestine, by sympathizers of the Mufti. There were no genocidal attacks/pogroms except for the event of Baghdad in '41, again in the backdrop of the politics of the time, blaming the Jews for the British invasion (they were seen as allies in relation to Palestine). But the scale of victims and damage to property is widely disputed, and some Iraqis risked their lives to hide Jewish neighbours. Although the authorities did not immediately intervene, they eventually conducted an investigation, even executed army officers. Sure, life for a Jew in Arab lands was sometimes far from perfect, just like Muslim life is far from perfect in Israel (killings, destruction of land and property etc). But how many antisemitic incidents throughout ancient history until the 20th century came from Muslims, and were actually ordered by the authorities (as is done today in Israel)? Compare it to the scale of antimuslim attacks in Israel's short history.

No comments:

Post a Comment