5:64-6"And the Jews say, "The hand of Allah is chained." Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His hands are extended; He spends however He wills. And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. And We have cast among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. Every time they kindled the fire of war [against you], Allah extinguished it. And they strive throughout the land [causing] corruption, and Allah does not like corrupters. And if only the People of the Scripture had believed and feared Allah, We would have removed from them their misdeeds and admitted them to Gardens of Pleasure. And if only they upheld [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to them from their Lord, they would have consumed [provision] from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them are a moderate community, but many of them - evil is that which they do".
Interestingly, there are in fact clear references to such blasphemous imagery in Jewish literature, one example being a 5-6th century piyyut/poem by Eleazar ha-kallir. The context is similar to the above passage, that of disobedience and consequent destruction. The Jews, at least in that poem, and possibly the prophet's contemporaries too who were being defeated by the Muslims, used a double language reflecting both their despair and prideful arrogance in the face of their enemies. So although their cries were clearly not heard while they were being slaughtered and destroyed, that silence and lack of action was not due to God cutting them off from His mercy rather to Him purposefully restraining, ie chaining Himself, from punishing their enemies. This kind of double, self serving language is common in Jewish thought. For example we find the idea among Talmudic scholars that the reason for the destruction of the 2nd Temple, and consequent scattering of the Jews was a divine scheme aimed at increasing the number of converts.
This blasphemous attitude towards Quranic concepts occurred on other occasions. For instance they would deride the idea of giving a "loan" to Allah. Although the Quran explains it isnt the human, worldly idea of a loan that is meant, they would still take it at the first degree in order to provoke the Muslims
"‘Ikrimah, al-Suddi and Muqatil ibn Ishaq related that, one day, Abu Bakr al-Siddiq entered a Jewish place of study and found a group of Jewish people gathered around one of them called Finhas ibn ‘Azura, who was one of their doctors. Abu Bakr said to Finhas: “Fear Allah and embrace Islam, for by Allah you know well that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah who has brought the truth to you from Allah. He is mentioned in your Torah; so believe and accept the truth and grant Allah a goodly offering and He will make you enter the Garden and multiply your reward”. Finhas responded: “O Abu Bakr, you claim that our Lord is asking us to lend Him our wealth. Yet, it is only the poor who borrow from the rich. And if what you say is true, it follows that Allah is poor and we are rich, for if He were rich He would not ask us to lend Him our wealth”. Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be well pleased with him, became very angry and struck the face of Finhas with a mighty blow. He then said to him: “By Him in whose Hand is my soul, if it were not for the treaty between us, O enemy of Allah, I would have killed you”. Finhas went to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, and said: “O Muhammad! Look at what your companion has done to me”. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, asked Abu Bakr: “What has driven you to do what you have done?” He said: “O Messenger of Allah, this enemy of Allah has said something very serious. He claimed that Allah is poor and they are rich. I therefore got angry for the sake of Allah and hit his face”.
Although the prophet here doesnt reprimand AbuBakr, as he did on another occasion when a Muslim struck a Jew because of a dispute on the superiority of their respective prophet, one can see that the Jews saw Muhammad as a man of integrity or else Finhas wouldnt have complained to him. In fact we read in both the Quran and hadith of Jews coming to him for adjudication, not only to solve issues between them and Muslims, but also internal Jewish matters.
The Quran tells them, as regards the notion of God's Hand being chained, that God is not restrained in anyway, much less as they implied. The obedient are favored while the sinful are destroyed, simple as that. More particularly destruction most often befalls those that are warned by a prophet in their midst. The punishment of the Jews, whether in the time of the Israelites or Ishmaelite prophets was thus because of divine disapproval consequently to their sins and disbelief. They are the reason for their condition, God has withdrawn His mercy from them. God has not restrained His anger from their enemies but has withdrawn His protection from those claiming to be His elect among the nations. This is the case since their rejection of the last Israelite prophet sent to them in Jesus, and is still the case today. Instead of God protecting them, they have been and still are subjected to the humiliating need of protection from all kinds of people and nations, including the Christians, the followers of the last prophet they rejected.
Furthermore God's mercy is open to anyone, Jew or else. So let them not think that they are being indirectly "favored" through slaughter. They have been cut off from divine approval and mercy, and still are.
Further reading answering Islam critiqued "Are God's Hands Chained?"
