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.
BUKHARI,
VOLUME 5, #369
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 Sûrah 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
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
