Leaving Islam





Bani Nadir


Next it was the turn of the Bani Nadeer. This was another tribe of the Jews of Medina. Ka'b Ibn Ashraf, the chief of the Bani Nadeer became concerned of the safety of his tribe after witnessing the fate of the Banu Qaynuqa and how the Prophet eliminated them with no excuse at all. He realized that Muhammad would stop at nothing to eradicate the Jews. It became clear to him that the Prophet was a ruthless man with no mercy, no conscience and no principles. He would kill innocent people with no qualms. Ka'b knew that he had to do something to protect his people. That is why he started to communicate with the Meccans and seek protection from them in the case that Muslims decided to invade his people.   

Ka'b bin Ashraf, the chief of the Bani an-Nadeer, "a wealthy man known for his handsomeness, and a poet, went to Makkah” Says Maududi, “and incited the people to vengeance by writing and reciting provocative elegies for the Quraish chiefs killed at Badr. Then he returned to Madinah and composed lyrical verses of an insulting nature about the Muslim women. At last, enraged with his mischief, the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) sent Muhammad bin Maslamah Ansari in Rabi al-Awwal, A. H. 3, and had him slain.” (Ibn Sad, Ibn Hisham, Tabari).

What should a responsible chief do when he sees that a whole population of a tribe like his was ambushed with no provocation by an emerging tyrant, and banished from their homeland despite of their treaty? Although Muslims say that it was the Jews who broke the treaty, their own very historical texts, clearly demonstrates that Muhammad is the one to be blamed for such breach of the covenant. If the stories written by Muslims are true, Ka’b bin Ashraf had no other choice but to go to Mecca and seek assistance for his people’s protection. Muhammad, by virtue of what he did to Bani Qaynuqa, was not a man to be trusted. What bin Ashraf did was no crime. He was a chieftain concerned about the safety of his own people. His crime was writing poetry.  Nothing justifies Muhammad sending an assassin to kill him traitorously in the middle of the night. Not his contacts with the Meccans and not his “poems satirizing Muhammad” or “eulogizing Quraish”. There is no justification in assassinating those who do not agree with you. Muslim apologists are not ashamed of Muhammad’s assassinations and approve anything he did without thinking. They say that by cowardly assassinating his enemies, Muhammad was saving lives. This demonstrates how religion drains the intelligence of its victims who otherwise are normal people. How these diehard Muslim apologists justify Muhammad’s assassination of Abu Afak, a 120 year old man and Asma bint Marwan a poetess and a mother of five small children whose only crime was to compose lyrics offensive to his holiness prophet of Allah. In what ways he was superior to Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden or for that matter any gangster? Isn't the assassination of the Journalists, writers and the intellectuals by the Islamic Republic of Iran and other Islamic regimes inspired by what the holy Prophet did to his critics?  

The story of Ka'b's assassination is recorded in the following hadith. 


Narrated Jabir Abdullah:

Allah's messenger said "Who is willing to kill Ka`b bin al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His apostle?" Thereupon Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's messenger! Would you like that I kill him?" The prophet said, "Yes". Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Ka`b). The prophet said, "You may say it."

Maslama went to Ka`b and said, "That man (i.e. Muhammad) demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) [taxes] from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you." On that, Ka`b said, "By Allah, you will get tired of him!" Maslama said, "Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food." Ka`b said, "Yes, but you should mortgage something to me." Maslama and his companion said, "What do you want?" Ka`b replied, "Mortgage your women to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the Arabs?" Ka`b said, "Then mortgage your sons to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people's saying that so and so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you."

Maslama and his companion promised Ka`b that Maslama would return to him. He came to Ka`b at night along with Ka`b's foster brother, Abu Na'ila. Ka`b invited them to come into his fort and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, "Where are you going at this time?" Ka`b replied, None but Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na'ila have come." His wife said, "I hear a voice as if blood is dropping from him." Ka`b said, "They are none by my brother Maslama and my foster brother Abu Na'ila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed."

Maslama went with two men. So Maslama went in together with two men, and said to them, "When Ka`b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strike him. I will let you smell his head."

Ka`b bin al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Maslama said, "I have never smelt a better scent than this." Ka`b replied, "I have got the best Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume." Maslama requested Ka`b "Will you allow me to smell your head?" Ka`b said "yes." Maslama smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka`b again, "Will you let me (smell your head)?" Ka`b said "Yes". When Maslama got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions) "Get at him!" So they killed him and went to the prophet and informed him."


This story becomes more intriguing as it evolves. Maududi continues with his narrative and says “For some time after these punitive measures (i. e. the banishment of the Qainuqa and killing of Ka'b bin Ashraf) the Jews remained so terror stricken that they did not dare commit any further mischief. But later when in Shawwal, A. H. 3, the Quraish in order to avenge themselves for the defeat at Badr, marched against Madinah with great preparations, and the Jews saw that only a thousand men had marched out with the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) as against three thousand men of the Quraish, and even they were deserted by 300 hypocrites who returned to Madinah, they committed the first and open breach of the treaty by refusing to join the Holy Prophet in the defence of the city although they were bound to it.”

It is amazing that Muslims expected collaboration from Bani Nadeer after assassinating their charming leader and completely destroying their brethrens, the Bani Qaynuqa. Muhammad proved to be a ruthless tyrant that would stop at nothing. He would order the assassination of his enemies and next day appear in the mosque reciting prayers as if nothing had happened and praise the killer. He would have no mercy on a 120-year-old man or a nursing woman with five small children to take care of. He would look for an excuse to lash out on an entire population confiscate their belongings and banish them from their homes. If it weren’t for someone else’s intervention he would have had no qualms executing thousands of Bani Qaynuqa. As Maududi brags these poor Jews were terror stricken and must have asked themselves when would be their turn? And yet the Muslims call them traitors for not willing to fight alongside them after they had killed their chieftain. Wasn't killing Ka’b ibn Ashraf and exiling the Bani Qaynuqa the breach of the contract? Or perhaps Muhammad thought that the treaty is only one sided and while obliges the Jews to observe it, he was free to do as he pleased!

Maududi narrates the story of Muhammad's meeting with the Bani Nadeer thus: “Then, when in the Battle of Uhud the Muslims suffered reverses, they were further emboldened. So much so that the Bani an-Nadir made a secret plan to kill the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) though the plan failed before it could be executed. According to the details, after the incident of Bi'r Maunah (Safar, A. H. 4) Amr bin Umayyah Damri slew by mistake two men of the Bani Amir in retaliation, who actually belonged to a tribe, which was allied to the Muslims, but Amr had mistaken them for the men of the enemy. Because of this mistake their blood money became obligatory on the Muslims. Since the Bani an-Nadir were also a party in the alliance with the Bani Amir, the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) went to their clan along with some of his Companions to ask for their help in paying the blood money. Outwardly they agreed to contribute, as he wished, but secretly they plotted that a person should go up to the top of the house by whose wall the Holy Prophet was sitting and drop a rock on him to kill him. But before they could execute their plan, Allah informed him in time and he immediately got up and returned to Madinah.”

What an absurdity!  First of all Muhammad already broke any treaty when he assassinated Ka’b bin Ashraf. He already broke all treaties when he confiscated the belongings of the Banu Qaynuqa and banished them on foot in the desert. Now that his assassins, by mistake killed someone else, of which Banu Nadeer had no fault he wanted them to pay for his crimes. Treaties are not made to bail out the criminal activities of the other party. The treaty was to defend Yathrib from the invasion of the enemies. Muhammad’s crimes and his gangster activities was not the subject of the treaty. It is unconscionable that intelligent human beings become so dumb to read this story for 1400 years and none of them pause for a second and think. Could you even imagine if the same story was repeated today between two nations that have signed a joint treaty? Let us assume that the president of one of these countries was so low that like Muhammad he decided to eliminate his enemies through assassination, would it be conceivable if he came to his ally and demand to bail him out for his criminal mistakes?  

In this story, apparently Muhammad goes to the Bani Nadeer and makes his demand. These terrified Jews of course knew that the treaty did not mean that they should bail out for Muhammad’s crime acticities and blunders. But they were too weak and too frightened to oppose the emerging tyrant, so they agreed. But this was not what the Prophet of Allah had in mind. He was hoping that they reject him so that he gets an excuse to deal with them the way he dealt with the Banu Qaynuqa. Bani Nadeer had the best-cultivated land in Yathrib. Muhammad had his eyes on their plantations and farms.  Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 447 He was just getting his taste of power and he loved it. So he had to come up with an excuse. When Bani Nadeer disappointed him and agreed with his request. He needed a pretext to act upon his plan and confiscate the properties of these wealthy Jews. There again, the prophet of Allah had a new “inspiration”. It was a brilliant idea. He told his companions that the Jews had plotted to kill him. His followers believed him when he told them of his Miiraj in the company of Gabriele. They had no difficulty believing whatever to believe in any absurdity that he concocted. 

Al-Mubarakpouri writes; "Once the Prophet (Peace be upon him) with some of his Companions set out to see Banu Nadeer and seek their help in raising the blood-money he had to pay to Bani Kalb for the two men that ‘Amr bin Omaiyah Ad-Damari had killed by mistake. All of that was in accordance with the clauses of the treaty that both parties had already signed. On hearing his story they said they would share in paying the blood-money and asked him and his Companions Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Ali and others to sit under a wall of their houses and wait. The Jews held a short private meeting and conspired to kill the Prophet (Peace be upon him). The most wicked among them, ‘Amr bin Jahsh, volunteered to climb up the wall and drop a large millstone on his head. One of them, Salam bin Mashkam, cautioned them against perpetrating such a crime, predicting that Allâh would divulge their plot to him, and added that such an act would constitute a manifest violation of the pact concluded with the Muslims.

In fact, Gabriel did come down to reveal to the Prophet (Peace be upon him) their wicked criminal intention, so he, with his Companions, hurried off back to Madinah. On their way, he told his Companions of the Divine Revelation."

Of course Bani Nadeer was part of the treaty that the Prophet signed with the Medinans but the treaty was to fight against the Meccans if they attacked Medina and not to pay for assassination mishaps of the messenger of Allah. Yet interestingly, despite the absurdity of this demand and despite the fact that the Prophet had assassinated their leader, the Bani Nadeer agreed to pay the ransom. They knew Muhammad and did not want to give him an excuse to exterminate them like he did with the Bani Qaynuqa. They knew that any rejection would mean their death and had no choice but to accept this unjust levy. 

But the Prophet who apparently wished they decline this absurd demand and therefore use it as an excuse to declare war against them was disappointed at their complacency. The messenger of Allah, really had no other purpose than to find an excuse and exterminate the Bani Naeer.  

The Prophet who believed that God is khairul maakereen, "the best of the deceivers", was himself a cunning man. The story of Gabriel informing him of the plot of the Jews against his life is as credible as his visits of the hell and heaven in the night of Mi’raj or his other fantasy tales of his encounters with Jinns and Satan. It would make us doubt his sanity or his sincerity but his easy to fleece followers would actually believe him and would go killing innocent people for the lies he counted them.  

The truth is that it was not the Jews who breached the treaty but it was Muhammad who broke it and along with it he broke the very cords of human decency. He broke the norms of humanity, the human morality, the laws of compassion, the rules of Justice, the standards of ethics and violated the principles of goodness. The Prophet of Allah {peace be upon him) took away the peace from the people who crossed his way and for 1400 years plunged humanity into never ending wars. He instigated hatred in the world and among his followers that is consuming them and the rest of humanity.

The above story raises few more logical questions. If these Jews really wanted to kill Muhammad, couldn’t they easily capture and kill him along with his companions? Why drop a stone when he and his companions were already in their hands? And why a God who could inform his beloved prophet of a plot against him did not make ‘Amr bin Jahsh to fall to his death? This could have saved his prophet and the entire Jewish population. Didn’t God know that his messenger has no mercy and no compassion for the lives of thousands of innocent people and he would make all pay for the crime of a few? If God was so angry of these Jews that he did not care about them any more, why he himself did not kill them with a disease. Why he did not order the Earth to open its belly, as a story if Bible says (numbers; 16:30) and devour them all? It certainly would have been much easier on them and on the Muslims. Why a loving God would ask his devoted servants to act like common murderers and ruthless killers? Only people blinded by faith do not cringe by hearing these stories. To every reasonable person it is obvious that Muhammad made up the whole thing to continue with his plans of ethnic cleansing and plundering.

Maududi finished this story by saying, “Now there was no question of showing them any further concession. The Holy Prophet at once sent to them the ultimatum that the treachery they had meditated against him had come to his knowledge; therefore, they were to leave Madinah within ten days; if anyone of them was found staying behind in their quarters, he would be put to the sword. Meanwhile Abdullah bin Ubayy sent them the message that he would help them with two thousand men and that the Bani Quraizah and Bani Ghatafan also would come to their aid; therefore, they should stand firm and should not go. On this false assurance they responded to the Holy Prophet's ultimatum saying that they would not leave Madinah and he could do whatever was in his power. Consequently, in Rabi' al-Awwal, A. H. 4, the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) laid siege to them, and after a few days of the siege (which according to some traditions were 6 and according to others 15 days) they agreed to leave Madinah on the condition that they could retain all their property which they could carry on their camels, except the armor. Thus, Madinah was rid of this second mischievous tribe of Jews. Only two of the Bani an-Nadeer became Muslims and stayed behind. Others went to Syria and Khaiber.”

Muhammad did not massacre the Bani Nadeer as he did the Banu Qurayza, another Jewish tribe residing in Medina but the thought have surely came to him as we can see from the following extract from Sirat.

"Concerning B. al-Nadir the Sura of Exile came down in which is recorded how God wreaked His vengeance on them and gave His apostle power over them and how He dealt with them. God said: 'He it is who turned out those who disbelieved of the scripture people from their homes to the first exile. ... 'So consider this, you who have understanding. Had not God prescribed deportation against them,' which was vengeance from God, 'He would have punished them in this world,' (Q. 59: 3) i.e. with the sword, 'and in the next world there would be the punishment of hell' as well." [Sirat, p. 438]

There is a verse from Quran that speaks about this event confirming Muhammad’s actions in killing them and taking them as prisoners.

"He caused those of the People of the Book who helped them (i.e. the Quraysh) to come out of their forts. Some you killed, some you took prisoner.” Q. 33: 26

It is in this occasion that Muhammad orders the cutting and burning the trees, and even then Allah would reveal a verse to condone that despicable act. 

“What you (O Muslims) cut down of the palm-trees (of the enemy), or you left them standing on their stems, it was by leave of Allâh.”  Q. 59: 5 

Neither the Quraiza nor the Ghatfans came to help the Bani Nadeer and they were forced to surrender within days and were banished out of Medina. Some left to Syria and some headed to Khaibar. Huyai Ibd Akhtab the new chief of the Bani Nadeer was among those who went to Khaibar. He was murdered few years later when the Prophet invaded the Banu Quraiza an his daughter Safiyah became the booty of the Prophet when Khaibar fell into the hand of the Muslims. 

Al-Mubarkpouri writes, 

"The Messenger of Allâh (Peace be upon him) seized their weapons, land, houses, and wealth. Amongst the other booty he managed to capture, there were 50 armours, 50 helmets, and 340 swords.

This booty was exclusively the Prophet ’s because no fighting was involved in capturing it. He divided the booty at his own discretion among the early Emigrants and two poor Helpers, Abu Dujana and Suhail bin Haneef. Anyway the Messenger of Allâh (Peace be upon him) spent a portion of this wealth on his family to sustain their living the year around. The rest was expended to provide the Muslim army with equipment for further wars in the way of Allâh.

Almost all the verses of Sűrah Al-Hashr (Chapter 59 - The Gathering) describe the banishment of the Jews and reveal the disgraceful manners of the hypocrites. The verses manifest the rules relevant to the booty. In this Chapter, Allâh, the All-Mighty, praises the Emigrants and Helpers. This Chapter also shows the legitimacy of cutting down and burning the enemy’s land and trees for military purposes. Such acts cannot be regarded as phenomena of corruption so long that they are in the way of Allâh."

As it becomes obvious and even the Muslim historians are not abashed to admit, no crime is bad as long as it is done in the way of Allah. This was the example that the Prophet left for his followers and this has been the way that the devout Muslims have been acting throughout the history. This perhaps can explain to an uninitiated westerner the inspiration behind Islamic fundamentalism and Islamic terrorism. Islamic violence is not a deviation of the true Islam but they IS the true Islam. Murdering , plundering, raping and assassinating are Islamic practices. Nothing is out of limit when it comes to promoting the religion of Allah. 

Ironically, this very Surah concludes by exhorting the believers to be pious and and prepare themselves for the world to come. Which makes one wonder about the twisted mind of its author and the distorted values that he uphold.

We, with our modern sensibility wonder how the followers of Muhammad did not abandon him based on his cruelty and inhumanity. But apparently plundering and looting was the norm, in Arabia. Al-Mubarakpuri writes. “The desert Bedouins living in tents pitched in the vicinity of Madinah, … depended on plundering and looting as a means of living,” This was the way Arabs used to live. When Muhammad used the same techniques to amass his wealth and build his empire, no one raised an eyebrow. This was accepted and everybody did it. In fact when people went to war to bring the booty they prayed to their gods. If they were victorious, they glorified their gods and hailed them as being powerful. Muslims and Muhammad belonged to this primitive culture and had the same primitive mindset. They beseeched Allah, the only idol, for their victories and since Muhammad did not hesitate attacking merchant caravans or unarmed populations he enriched himself and his army very soon. These Arabs attributed his military prowess to the greatness of Allah, What those Arabs believed is not reproachable. They did not know better and this was the only way of life they had ever known. What is tragically deplorable is to see that in this age of science and reason educated people follow the religion of people with such a primitive mentality.

As we saw, if the Bani Nadeer really wanted to kill Muhammad and his few companions, they did not need to make such complicated plans of climbing the wall of throwing a millstone on over their head. He was in their town and they could have killed him easily. 

But let us suppose that Muhammad was right and they actually had such plan. Under what law it is allowed to punish thousands of people for a failed murder attempt by a few? Isn’t everyone responsible for his own action? What was the crime of those new born children, those pregnant women, those elderly Jews who had to leave everything behind and walk in the desert? How many of those perished? Why the weak ones had to pay for a failed attempt of a few members of their tribe? 

Another important thing to consider is that Muhammad actually assassinated K’ab bin Ashraf the leader of the Bani Nadir; very traitorously. These people, according to their own religion and custom, had all the rights to revenge. Why Muhammad believed that he could go killing all his opponents without any impunity but the simple thought of someone planning to kill him should be punished so severely? What would happen to the world if we all followed Muhammad’s example? 

I ask Muslims to show me one parallel story in the annals of history of mankind where an entire population of thousands of people was eliminated because of a failed plot of few of them against the life of someone.

A Hadith in Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 362 confirms this story. The narrator talks about the treatment of the Jews of Medina and how Muhammad “killed their men and distributed their women, children and property among the Muslims, but some of them came to the Prophet and he granted them safety, and they embraced Islam. He exiled all the Jews from Medina.”

Some Muslim apologists say that the morality of today should not be applied to Muhammad who lived 1400 years ago. They maintain that, “This whole narrative has been problematic for many people because of their notions of what is morally correct and what it morally wrong. The origin of this sickness rests squarely on the Christian mentality of 'turn the other cheek,' and the 'redemptive suffering of Christ,' both of which have been sicknesses in the minds of Europe for centuries on end, until they came to their senses and discarded it.”

I don’t believe that morality is sickness and it has nothing to do with Christianity either. Morality stems out of human consciousness and its compass is the Golden Rule. We know what is right or wrong when we consider the way we would like to be treated.

By Ali Sina

The Invasion of Banu Qainuqa

The Invasion of Banu Quraiza


2-  AR-Raheeq Al-Makhtum  by Saifur Rahman al-Mubarakpuri  http://islamweb.islam.gov.qa/english/sira/raheek/PAGE-26.HTM

3-     http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau59.html 

4- http://islamweb.islam.gov.qa/english/sira/raheek/PAGE-29.HTM






Articles Op-ed Authors Debates Leaving Islam FAQ
Comments Library Gallery Video Clips Books Sina's Challenge

  ©  copyright You may translate and publish the articles in this site only if you provide a link to the original page.