Action Against Bani Quraydah

Expedition Of B. Al-mustaliq And The Affair Of Ifak

After some time the Apostle led an expedition against Bani Lihyan and went up to the hills of Dhu Qarad in pursuit of some raiders, but there was no fighting. In Sha’ban, 6 A.H., the Apostle was informed that Bani al-Mustaliq were thronging for an attack on him. The Apostle went out with a group to face the enemy. A large party of the hypocrites, still skeptical and reticent, accompanied the Apostle with their leader ‘Abdallah B. Ubayy B. Salul. The Hypocrites had never before gone out with the Apostle in such large numbers in any earlier expedition.1

The failure of the Quraish in the battle of the Trenches despite having mustered all the warriors of their confederate clans for the destruction of Islam, had made the hypocrites bitter and sour, indeed burning with hostility in their souls. The Muslims were gaining victory after victory, the star of their fortune was on the rise, and this had sent the Quraish, the Jews and their hooks in distress. They knew that the Muslims could not be humbled in an open combat by their enemies and hence the only way to defeat them was by sowing dissension in their ranks and pitting them against one another. They also knew that the means by which they could be put to requisition for undermining the confidence of the Muslims in Islam and its Apostle as well as creating a rift between them were disparagement of the holy prophet and arousing pre-Islamic sentiments of tribal pride. With this view in mind, the hypocrites started a clandestine campaign of casting reflections upon the honor of the Prophet. An entirely new type of society had, however, been brought into existence at Medina, whose members loved and respected every other man bound by the common ideal. These pretenders had, therefore, arrived at the conclusion that nothing could sap the foundations of this ideological fraternity more effective than a slanderous campaign aimed at creating misgivings about the leader of that order and his family. Undoubtedly, this was a well-devised conspiracy of the hypocrites, which was vigorously pursued during the expedition of Bani al-Mustaliq, when, for the first time, as stated earlier, a large number of them accompanied the Apostle.

The Apostle met the enemy at a watering place of Bani al-Mustaliq, in the direction of Qudayd towards the shore, known as al-Muraysri,2 where the battle brought Bani al-Mustaliq to defeat and exodus.

While the Prophet was still at this place, a hired servant of Bani Ghifar, belonging to the Muhajirin got into a row with another man coming from the tribe of Juhinah, which was an ally of al-Khazraj. The Juhini called out, “O ye Ansar!” and the hired servant shouted, “O ye Muhajirin.” ‘Abdallah B. Ubayy B. Salul at once flared up and said to his friends who happened to be present with him, “didn’t they dare it? They set themselves against us in our own country and tried to outnumber us. By God, it is just the same as the ancient saying: Feed the dog and it will bite you. I swear by God that when we return to Medina those who are worthy and noble will drive out the unworthy wretches.” Then, admonishing his men. ‘Abdallah continued, “you have yourselves wrought it. You allowed them to settle in your country and shared your property with them. By God, had you held back and not been so generous, they would have certainly gone elsewhere.”

The Apostle came to know about the incident and he at once gave orders to break the camp and then set off, although he was not accustomed to travelling at an abominable hour. He wanted the people to get rid of the vain disputations and promptings of the devil. The Apostle continued to move all daylong, and brought the night till dawn and during the following day till the sun became annoying. He made a halt when the people had become so tired that they readily fell asleep as soon as they laid their posteriors against the ground.

‘Abdallah was the worthy son of the unworthy ‘Abdallah B. Ubayy. He rushed to Medina ahead of the troops and waited for his father’s arrival. When ‘Abdallah B. Ubayy came, his son brought his camel to its knees, thereby obstructing the passage of his father whom he ordered not to enter Medina until he had acknowledged that he was indeed an unworthy wretch while the Apostle was commendable and noble. In the meanwhile, the Apostle also came up. He said to ‘Abdallah, “nay, let us deal kindly with him while he is with us.”3

The Apostle used to cast lots, whenever he intended to go on an expedition, to decide which among his wives should accompany him. In the expedition of Bani al-Mustaliq the lot had fallen on ‘Aisha and she had accordingly accompanied the Prophet. At one of the stopovers in their journey back to Medina, the Apostle spent a part of the night before he ordered to break the camp. ‘Aisha had gone to answer the call of nature, and when she came back she discovered that she had dropped her necklace. She went back to recover it, but by the time she returned the army had moved off. Then the camel drivers who had the charge of ‘Aisha’s transport saddled her litter thinking that she would be in it as usual. However, ‘Aisha was small and very light, so none could notice if she was in the litter or not. When ‘Aisha came back she found no trace of the army. She wrapped herself in her smock and laid down in the hope that as soon as they would discover the truth or the real situation, someone would come to fetch her.

Safwan B. al-Mu’attal al-Salam had earlier fallen behind the army for a purpose. He happened to pass by ‘Aisha. He saw her. “Inna Lillah”, he called out, “The Apostle’s wife!” then he brought his camel near her and turned back a few paces. After ‘Aisha had rode the dromedary, Safwan took hold of the camel’s halter and went ahead quickly in search of the army. Safwan overtook the army when it had again rested. Nobody took any notice of the incident, for such mishaps were not unusual in the caravans trekking the vast emptiness of the Arabian wilderness. To wayfaring Arabs, it was just a familiar misfortune and their code of honor, even in the days of pagan past, never tolerated the disgrace of their daughters. The Arabs, both pagans as well as after embracing Islam, were chivalrous enough to lay down their lives defending the honor of their women rather than to support any disgrace.

A poet of pre-Islamic days expresses the Arab sentiment of chastity and virtuousness in a couplet which depicts a lovely picture of Arab womanhood.4

“If my glance meets the looks of a neighbouring maiden, I cast my eyes low until her abode takes her in”.5

The companions held the Apostle in the same esteem and reverence as one has for one’s father while the wives of the Apostle all served as ‘mother of the faithful’ to every Muslim. In fact, never had any people loved anyone more dearly than how the companions treated the prophet. Safwan B. al-Mu’attal was, as they say, a man of sterling qualities---noble, true-souled and God-fearing who had the reputation of being least interested in women.

In short, nobody paid any attention to the incident and the matter would have been forgotten had not ‘Abdallah B. Ubbay walked into the picture. On coming back to Medina, ‘Abdallah B.Ubayy thought it proper for their plans to succeed to capitalize on the adversity. He had found out, as he would though, something that he could bank upon to slander the Apostle and his household and thus weaken muslims’ sentiments of love and admiration for him and his family. His treacherous disposition was shrewd enough to realize that his shameless attack on the Apostle’s honor would create sufficient misgivings to destroy the mutual trust among the Muslims as well. And true enough, a few injudicious Muslims who were accustomed to jumping into conclusions without verification, were thus convinced by the crafty conspirator.

“Aisha had no idea of the vilification against her. As it normally happens in such cases, she came to know of it very late, and when she did know, she was bewildered. Plunged into sorrow, her anguish brought her to tears and she kept on sobbing with overflowing eyes.

The scandal was even more distressing to the Apostle of God. When he found out who was at the bottom of this intrigue, he proceeded to the mosque and ascending the pulpit he said, “O ye believers, who would allow me to say something about the man, who I have come to know, has caused trouble to my family. What I know of my family is naught but good and what they say concerning a man, I have known only good about him. Whenever he enters my house, he enters with me.”

The people of Aus were filled with indignation at the grief of the Prophet. They said, “we are prepared to behead the man, whether he belongs to Aus or Khazraj, who has given tongue to this calumny.” ‘Abdallah B. Ubayy belonged to Khazraj, and hence his tribesmen took the remark as an affront to tribal honor. Feelings ran high, and the two tribes were about to grapple with one another, but the presence of the Apostle calmed them down and the matter ended there.

‘Aisha was convinced of her innocence. She was distressed, but was also confident and composed just like the one who knows that the truth ultimately prevails in the end. She knew in the abyss of her heart that God would ultimately protect her honor and bring shame to the lying slanderers but it had never crossed her mind that God would send down a revelation concerning her which would be read in the mosques during prayers ‘till the end of time. She had not waited for long when the verses attesting her innocence were sent down by God, hence:

“Lo! They who spread the slander are a gang among you. Deem is not a bad thing for you: nay, it is good for you. Unto every man of them (will be paid) that which he hath earned of the sin; and for him among them who had the greater share therein, his will be an awful doom.

“Why did not the believers, men and women, when ye heard it, think good their own folk, and say: it is a manifested untruth?” (Qur’an 24:11-12)

And thus ended the frightful menace which was forgotten completely by the Muslims of Medina who devoted themselves once again to a great task from which rested not only their own success, but that of the salvation of the entire humanity as well.6

Footnotes:

1. Ibn S’ad Kitab ul-Tabaqat al-Kabirat, Vol. II, Part I, p. 45
2. The expedition is therefore also called as the expedition of Murays’i. See tabaqat Ibn S’ad.
3. Tabaqat Ibn S’ad, Vol. II, p. 46
4. An illustration of the Arabs’ conduct towards women is provided by the incident relating to the migration of Umm Salma. When she was not allowed to migrate to Medina with her husband, she used to go every morning and sit in the valley weeping till the night fall. So it continued until a year or so had passed when her clan took pity on her and allowed her to join her husband. She saddled her camel and set forth Medina. ‘Uthman b. Talha met her in way and on coming to know her plight decided to escort her. He took hold of her camel’s halter and went with her to Medina. Umm Salma says that she never met an Arab nobler than ‘Uthman. When she had to halt, ‘Uthman used to kneel her camel and then withdrew. After she had alighted, he unload the camel and tied it to a tree. This, ‘Uthman did all the way to Medina. (Ibn Kathir, Vol. II, pp. 215-17) This was the conduct of ‘Uthman when he had accepted Islam. Safwan b. al-Mu’attal al-Salami was a had the benefit of the Prophet’s guidance.
5. Diwan al-Hamasa
6. Ibn Hisham, Vol. II, pp. 289-302 and Bukhari

Benevolence And Large-heartedness

The Apostle sent some on an expedition to Nadjid who captured Thumama B. Uthal, the chieftain of Banu Hanifa. When the cavaliers returned to Madina, they tied him to a stump in the Prophet’s Mosque. God’s Messenger came out of him and asked, “What do you expect, Thumama?” He replied, “if you kill me, Muhammad (peace be upon him)?” , you will kill one whose blood will be avenged; if you show me a favor, you will show it to one who is grateful; and if you want property, you will be given as much as you wish.” The Apostle left him and when he passed by him the next time, he asked him the same question. Thumama repeated his earlier reply and the Apostle left him again. When the prophet passed by him for the third time, he ordered Thumama to be set free.

Thumama went away to a grove of palm-dates and returned to the Prophet after taking a bath. He accepted Islam and said to the Apostle, “I swear to God, Muhammad (peace be upon him) that there was no face on earth more detested by me than yours, but now your face is the dearest of all to me. And, I swear to God that there was no religion more hateful to me than yours in the entire world, but now the dearest of all to me. What happened to me is that your cavalry seized me when I was going to perform ‘Umra.” The Apostle congratulated him and bade him for the ‘Umra.

When Thumama came to Mecca, someone asked him if he had turned a disbeliever. He replied, “No, by God, I swore that not a grain of corn will reach you from Al-Yamamah until God’s Messenger accords permission to it.”

Al-Yamamah was the chief market of food grains in Arabia from where the Meccans used to import their requirements. When Thumama went back to Al-Yamamah, he prevented the caravans from bringing wheat to Mecca. So the people of Mecca wrote to the Apostle requesting him to get the ban lifted. The kind-hearted Apostle asked Thumama to repeal the ban and allow the rationing and supply of food grains back to Mecca.1

Footnotes:

1. Zad-al-Ma’ad, Vol. I, p. 377, Sahih Muslim, Kitab-ul-Jihad was Siyar

Decision Consistent With The Law Of Moses

The decision disclosed by Sa’d B. Mu’ad was nothing more than what is laid by the Israelites’ law of war. The fifth Book of Moses, called Deuteronomy, containing the sacred law of the Jews on the subject in question runs like this:

“When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace, and open unto, then shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, but will, make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it; and when the Lord thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword; but the women, and the little ones, and the cattle and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee.” (Deut, 20:10-14)

This was the practice followed by the Jews since the olden times. We read in the Book of Numbers that:

“And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded Moses; and they slew all the males. And they slew the kings of Midi-an, besides the rest of them that were slain, namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midi-an; Balaam also son of Boer they slew with the sword. And the children of Israel took all the women of Midi-an captives, and their flocks, and all their good. And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castle, with fire.”1 This law had not only enjoyed the approval of Moses but was also enforced by him.

“And Moses, and Ele-azar the priest, and all the princes of congregation, went forth to meet them without the camp. And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle. And Moses said unto them; Have ye saved all the women alive?”2

The judgement declared by S’ad B. Mu’adh, executed ere long, made sure that Medina henceforth play safe with the crafty and scheming Jews. The Muslims could now be confident that none would act as traitors.

Sallam B. Abul Huqayq was one of the Jews who had played a leading role in inciting the desert clans to make a united bid to subvert Islam. The Khazraj killed him at his house in Khaybar. Aus had already done away with Ka’b B. As’Ashraf who had done his utmost to provoke the Quraish against the Muslims and to slander the Apostle of God. Extermination of these two implacable enemies of Islam removed the source of danger ever willing to foment a new trouble for the burgeoning community in Medina.3

The settlement entered into by the Apostle with Bani Qurayda and other Jews of Medina was a defensive alliance along with an arrangement providing the basis for the establishment of a confederal administration of the city with a very large measure of autonomy by the units, which was consistent with the needs and wishes of the Jewish tribes of Arabia. But Bani Qurayda had broken their word without any justification whatsoever. Therefore, they needed an exemplary punishment if only to warn the other double-dealing or deceitful people against running with the hare and hunting with the hounds.

Commenting upon the imperative need of a deterrent punishment to the traitors on this occasion, R.V.C. Bodley writes in “The Messenger – The life of Muhammad”, thus:

“Muhammad stood alone in Arabia, a country equivalent in area to one-third of the United States, populated by about five million people. His own dominion was not much larger than Central Park; his means of enforcing his wishes, three thousand badly armed soldiers. Had he been weak, had he allowed treachery to go unpunished, Islam would never have survived. This massacre of the Hebrews was drastic but not original in religious history. From a Moslem point of view, it was justified, from now on, the Arab tribes, as well as the Jewish, though twice about defying this man who evidently intended to have his own way.”4

Another advantage gained by the destruction of this last but influential foxhole of treachery was that the bastion of hypocrisy built by ‘Abdallah B. Ubayy automatically became weak and impotent. The lukewarm among the Muslims, were shocked and dejected and were ultimately driven to despair. With the Jewish stalking-horse destroyed before their very eyes, they gave up the habit of building dungeons in the air for Muslims. A Jewish scholar, Dr. Wellphenson has also reached this very conclusion that the punishment dealt out to Bani Qurayza helped to frighten and discourage the hypocrites, and had said:

“In so far as the hypocrites were concerned, their clamors declined after the expedition against Bani Qurayza; thereafter they said or did nothing against the decision of the Apostle and his companions, as it was expected earlier.”5

Footnotes:

1. Num. 31:7-10
2. Num. 31:13-15
3. Ibn Hisham, Vol. II, p. 273
4. Ibid., p. 217
5. Al-Yahud fi Balad al-‘Arab, p. 155

Truth In Action

Bani Qurayda submitted to the Apostle’s judgement but the people of Aus who had long been friendly with the Jews had a soft spot in their hearts for them. They said to the Apostle, “O Messenger of Allah, they are our allies against Khazraj and you very well know what they have done agreeing to place the decision in the hands of an arbitrator from amongst you.” They agreed and the role was entrusted to their chief, S’ad B. Mu’adh.

When S’ad arrived, his clansmen begged him to be lenient to Bani Qurayda; for they insisted, the Apostle had made him an arbiter so that they get their demand. S’ad B. Mu’ad replied, “fate has brought this opportunity to S’ad; let him not be ashamed of ought in fulfilling the commandment of God.” Then, S’ad gave his decision: “I decided that the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives.” The Prophet, on hearing the verdict of S’ad, remarked: “You have awarded them God’s decision.”1

Footnote:

1. Ibn Hisham, Vol. II, pp. 239-40. The words of the Prophet quoted in the Muslim are: “You have awarded them the God’s decision” or the Prophet said, “The King’s decision.” (Muslim, Kitab-ul-Jihad was-siyar).

Repentance Of Abu Lubaba

In the meantime, the Jews requested the Apostle to send them Abu Lubaba of Bani ‘Amr ‘Auf (who were allies of the Aus) that they might consult him. The apostle accepted their request. When Abu Lubaba went to the Jews, all of them got up to receive him. Abu Lubaba was moved by the plight of the women and children who started bewailing and dissolving into tears in his presence. The Jews asked Abu Lubaba whether they should surrender to the judgement of the Apostle. “Yes,” replied Abu Lubaba, but he also pointed with his hand to his throat.

Abu Lubaba says that before he had left the place it occurred to him that he had not been faithful to the Apostle of God. He hastened back instead of presenting himself to the Prophet then tied himself to one of the pillars in the Prophet’s mosque. He declared his intention not to leave the place until God had forgiven him. He also resolved neither to go back to Bani Qurayda nor to set his eyes again on the place where he had betrayed Allah and His Apostle.

The repentance of Abu Lubaba eroded his guilt, as evidenced by the following revelation that descended from God:

“And (there are) others who have acknowledged their faults. They mixed a righteous action with another that was bad. It may be that Allah relented towards them. Lo! Allah is Relenting, Merciful.” (Qur’an 9:102)

Several persons rushed forward to set Abu Lubaba free but he refused, saying, “No! Not by God until the Apostle of Allah release me with his own hands.” The Apostle removed the rope with which Abu Lubaba had tied himself when he came out to perform the morning prayer. Abu Lubaba remained bound to the pillar of date-palm trunk in the Prophet’s mosque for about twenty days. At the time for prayers his wife used to set him free and he again bound himself after the prayer was over.1

footnotes:

1. Ibn Hisham, Vol. II, pp. 236-38

Bani Qurayda Assailed

The Prophet as well as the Muslims set their arms aside after their return from the battle of the Trenches. An account of what happened thereafter, as related by the traditions, is that Gabriel came to the Prophet and asked, “O Apostle of God, have you put aside your arms?” When the Apostle replied that he had, Gabriel said, “but the angels have not put away their arms.” “Allah commands you”, continued Gabriel, “to march on Banu Qurayda, where I will also go there to flutter them.” Thereupon the Prophet got an announcement made that everyone listened and compelled them to perform with him their ‘Asr prayer at Bani Qurayda.1

The Prophet and his people besieged the district inhabited by the Jewish clan of Bani Qurayda, whereupon the beleaguered Jews defied the siege for twenty-five days after which they gave in and offered to surrender. Allah cast terror into their hearts.2

Footnotes:

1. Ibn Hisham, Vol. II, pp. 233-34. For detailed version see Bukhari, Kitab-ul-Jihad was-Siyar.
2. Ibn Hisham, Vol. II, p. 235

Bani Qurayda’s Breach of Faith

Not long after his arrival in Medina, the Prophet got a covenant made between the Ansar and Muhajirin to which the Jews were also made a party and were guaranteed protection of life and property as well as freedom of professing their faith. The covenant, which was reduced to writing, accepted certain rights of the Jews and also put them under certain obligations. Some of the important considerations of this covenant were as follows:

“Those among the Jews who sided with us shall be liable to equality and help. Neither shall they be wronged nor shall their enemies be given help. No polytheist of Medina shall afford protection to the property or life of any Quraishite, nor shall he intervene against a believer on their behalf. The Jews shall bear the expenses so long as the war lasts, like the believers. The Jews1 shall be considered as one community along with the believers – they shall have the freedom of their religion and the believers shall be free to profess their faith. They shall have full freedom to deal with their allies and slaves and to settle their affairs.’

The compact also made both the parties liable to help one another in the event of war, subject to the limits of divine injunctions, responsible to promote mutual co-operation, goodwill and cordial relations between the confederates. One of its terms provided that if an enemy attacked Yathrib, both the Jews and the Muslims shall join hands in its defense.2

But, in spite of these clear undertakings, Bani Qurayda were convinced by Huyayy B. Akhatab al-Nadir to go back on their words in order to help the Quraish. As a matter of fact, when Huyayy B. Akhtab had come to Bani Qurayda for rallying them over to the allies against the Muslims, their chief Ka’b B. Asad had replied, “I have always found Muhammad (peace be upon him) truthful and trustworthy.” However, Ka’b B. Asad broke his word and acquitted himself of every responsibility devolving upon him by the covenant.

When the Apostle heard of Bani Qurayda’s betrayal, he delegated a few persons headed by Sa’d B. Mu’adh and Sa’d B. ‘Ubada, the two chiefs of Aus and Khazraj, to see if the report was correct. What they found out was that the situation was even worse than what had circulated around. Banu Qurayda spoke disparagingly of the Apostle and said: “Who is the Apostle of God? We have no pact or pledge with Muhammad (peace be upon him).”3

Bani Qurayda then started making preparations for an armed conflict with the Muslims; they threatened to stab in the back and actually placed the Apostle and his followers between the hammer and the anvil.4 The situation would not have been so hazardous had the Jews declared their intention, from the very beginning, to fall out with the Muslims. The Qur’an had depicted the plight of the Muslims picturesquely:

“When they came upon you from above you and from below you?” (Qur’an 33:10)

It was but natural that the Muslims got offended by the infidelity of the Jews, and how hard it had afflicted them can be judged from the prayer sent up fervently by S’ad B. Mu’ad. The chief of Aus, he had been in partnership with these Jews for many years and was, thus, their ally and sympathizer. When he was shot by an arrow which severed the vein of his arm, and he lost the hope of surviving for long, he supplicated to God, saying, ‘O Allah, do not let me die until I have set my eyes on the destruction of Bani Qurayda.”

Footnotes:

1. The covenant gives the names of various Jewish tribes of Medina like Bani ‘Auf, Abni Sa’ida, Bani Jusham, Bani Th’alaba who were made party to the covenant.
2. Ibn Hisham, Vol. pp. 503-4
3. Ibn Hisham, Vol. pp. 220-23
4. Writing about the action of the Jews on this occasion, W. Montgomery Watt write in the Cambridge History of Islam: “The remaining large Jewish group in Medina, the clan of Qurayza, had been overtly correct in its behaviour during siege, but had almost certainly been in contact with the enemy, and would have attacked Muhammad in the rear had there been an opportunity.” (Vol. I p. 49).