Re: Banu Qurayza
Supernova girl !
I have a question for you. Please answer it explicitly. I will elaborately respond to this thread after your reply. Thanks
Q: Hypotheticallty, If you were in place of Hazrat Saad at that time then what would be your judgment of that crime by tribe of Banu Quraiza ?
This has already been explained to you, and at this point you're just being obtuse and obstinate. The Banu Qurayza had entered into a peace treaty with the Prophet, which they willfully broke when they betrayed the Muslim community. The Taleban are not limiting themselves to killing people who are breaking peace treaties with them.
If you're referring to the Caravan Raids, those were instituted after the beleaguered, persecuted Muslim minority had fled Mecca and had all of their property seized by the Quraysh. Under those circumstances, the Prophet gave them permission to raid the caravans of the Qureshi leaders who had been active in the persecution of the Muslim community.
In any case, the Battle of the Trench was a Meccan attack on Medina, not vice versa.
Apparently you don't know what "genocide" is. Genocide is the deliberate massacre of an entire ethnic, religious, racial, or national group. The Banu Qurayza were Arab Jews - the Prophet made no attempt to kill off all Arabs or all Jews. Calling this incident genocide is ridiculous.
I can smell the blood, I can hear their cries, I can feel the hot bloody ground, I can hear the swords as they cut through the flesh, I can sense the fear in the eyes of the victims, I can feel the sinking hearts of women as they lost their fathers, brothers, sons, I can see the smirking evil faces as they bought and sold the women and children.
Spare me the theatrics.
You dismiss the forced exile of over 1 million Palestinians as "Muslims being put in their place [by Israel]" but you can still "smell the blood" of the Banu Qurayza?
an incidental point that emerges from this discussion is the respect afforded to Jewish law, even when it (presumably) conflicts with Islamic law. would everyone agree
a) In an Islamic state, minorities can choose which laws they want be judged under. b) The respect afforded to a minority religion should also be afforded to a minority fiqh?
Great points raised , somehow got lost in the thread
Re: Banu Qurayza
Also lets not forget the muslims suffered from such indiscriminate acts of violence like the massacre of Bir Mauna of ansari sahaba.There was no reason to let this incident go unpunished.
The OP started this with an ulterior motive, not to investigate objectively but simply to smear the reputation of the Prophet
Re: Banu Qurayza
Possibly the only ulterior motive I see is to ask people to attempt to see if the incident is based in fact or fiction... the prophet has come and GONE ... no attempts to 'smear' his reputation will affect him.
Re: Banu Qurayza
Now you comdemn what just happened to the Ahmadies in Lahore, but you condone the massacre of Banu Qurayza. I can guarantee anything that if you were alive at the time of the massacre, you would have protested against it unless you were a Jahil arab which most muslim converts were anyway.
You ALL fail to see my main point. Islam was supposed to introduce peace and it missed the opportunity.
NEVERMIND! It will take centuries before your clouded sense of judgment starts to clear up.
Supernova girl !
I have a question for you. Please answer it explicitly. I will elaborately respond to this thread after your reply. Thanks
Q: Hypotheticallty, If you were in place of Hazrat Saad at that time then what would be your judgment of that crime by tribe of Banu Quraiza ?
I would say "Hey Muhammad, let's move out of their land and go back to Mecca. If people can't accept us here maybe we shouldn't interfere with their matters anymore. They welcomed us here, let's not be so harsh. Let's burn the stupid treaty as it makes no sense and stop with the self-revealed death threats to have a reason to attack them first and then ask them to help us fight the Quraish for our selfish reasons. They didn't fight, even they suspected the Quraish so let's just let this one go. We can do without the war booty because we are so peace loving and Allah will guide us and I am sure it won't be to raid other caravans. Let's be reasonable, eh? What you say Muhammad, you in?"
Sa'd bin Mua'dh would have been beheaded then. Nevermind...
Yes, you can ban me now.
Now you comdemn what just happened to the Ahmadies in Lahore, but you condone the massacre of Banu Qurayza. I can guarantee anything that if you were alive at the time of the massacre, you would have protested against it unless you were a Jahil arab which most muslim converts were anyway.
And you can "smell the blood" and "hear the screams" of the Banu Qurayza 1400 years later, but dismiss the dispossession and exile of 1 million Palestinians as "Muslims being put in their place." What does that make you?
This has already been explained to you, and at this point you're just being obtuse and obstinate. The Banu Qurayza had entered into a peace treaty with the Prophet, which they willfully broke when they betrayed the Muslim community. The Taleban are not limiting themselves to killing people who are breaking peace treaties with them.
If you're referring to the Caravan Raids, those were instituted after the beleaguered, persecuted Muslim minority had fled Mecca and had all of their property seized by the Quraysh. Under those circumstances, the Prophet gave them permission to raid the caravans of the Qureshi leaders who had been active in the persecution of the Muslim community.
In any case, the Battle of the Trench was a Meccan attack on Medina, not vice versa.
Apparently you don't know what "genocide" is. Genocide is the deliberate massacre of an entire ethnic, religious, racial, or national group. The Banu Qurayza were Arab Jews - the Prophet made no attempt to kill off all Arabs or all Jews. Calling this incident genocide is ridiculous.
Spare me the theatrics.
You dismiss the forced exile of over 1 million Palestinians as "Muslims being put in their place [by Israel]" but you can still "smell the blood" of the Banu Qurayza?
I comdemn all acts of violence regardless of who is involved and where they happen. I condemn with all my heart the atrocities committed by the state of Israel. However, I don't dismiss one side completely because somehow being a muslim I should only feel sorry for the "muslim victims". I don't find that mentality very healthy in the first place. I have looked at it from both points of view. Jews were also victims at a point, just like Palestinians muslims are now. Again, I don't condone any acts of violence done under any government, religion, organization, etc....
I don't let my sense of judgment become clouded because of the beliefs I hold (I hold none). Throw away the muslim mask for a minute and look at it both ways. Violence should not be tolerated and the answer is never killing a bunch of innocent bystanders.
My issue with the Banu qurayza massacre is that Muhammad SAW preached that Islam meant peace yet it exhibited no such thing.
Re: Banu Qurayza
Where did the Jews learn how to put Muslims in their place...Jews are bound to hate Muslims for what they did to the Yathrib tribes. They were driven out of their homes and now they are taking it back....
Sounds to me like you're just rationalizing the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian territories here.
Re: Banu Qurayza
^ Stop taking it out of context, I said this in a different thread for an entirely different discussion. The OP asked why Jews having been through so much are now inflicting the same pain on Palestinian Muslims (or something along the line). I attempted to answer how it came to be. By the way, next time you want to mention a different post of mine please paste the entire response. They are protecting their home, so are Palestinians. I am on neither side. They are both victims in my opinion and their hatred over the centuries is LEARNED. Both need to rise above their religious differences and accept each other as one community.
Re: Banu Qurayza
^
Terminology like "putting Muslims in their place" hardly indicates neutrality.
I would say "Hey Muhammad, let's move out of their land and go back to Mecca.
"....And get masacared there by the hands of Meccan. Its not right for us to kill 600 jew traiters , Better we should sacrifice our all 10,000 noble peace loving followers and get killed and die peace fully and turn our women and children into slavery. Let bury this stupid religion once and for all "
Thanks supernova girl for answering the question. I just found the missing text in you answer (which was lost due to technical error) and posted it here . You have opened my eyes. That was indeed a wrong judgement By Saad. You should be there.
See tears in my eyes. :( Why these dumb nobel peace commettii are sitting idle. They should recognize you and give you this nobel peace prize. You are more entitled to get the award .... Even more than idiot George W Bush
Re: Banu Qurayza
^ Muhammad SAW had a lot of power which he could use wisely. He chose to follow the 7th century law & order when he could let the Banu Qurayza go and gain their support instead and be a hero even for people like ME who find it extremely difficult to swallow what happened. It gives these bast*rd terrorists a reason to kill every infidel. For a prophet who's known for being the most peaceful man, I don't understand how he failed to see through this one. With all due respect, if he indeed was a true prophet then why did he fear getting attacked and killed? If this was indeed a true religion, it would have spread anyway. To me, this was not religious but political that's why I hold Muhammad SAW responsible because he had the power to stop it and gain their support. The Jews of Medina feared Muhammad, if they didn't the Qurayza wouldn't have waited for the Quraysh to make their move.
Anyways..................just let it be I guess.. I would never understand this "Muslim" mentality.
Mods: Please close this thread before it turns really ugly!
It is hard for you to swallow becasue your mind is not free to pay attention of dynamic of that event pretext.
For Your infromation that was not some bloody war for booty. It was a battle for SURVIVAL. Muslims had lost the previous battle and many precious live of noble men. Muslims prepared Trench to defend themselves against the full throtal army of Mecca who came to exterminate muslims and eradicate thier religion once and for all.
He used his powers most wisely and decision contained a message Which was broadcasted for all potential enemies hiding in ghettos hundreds of miles away from madina.
Now open your eyes wide and read this message :
" O Enemies of Islam ! Listen carefully. If you want wipe us out then come in front of us and fight. I you want to stab us in the back then we will break your arm and slit your throt before you could blink your eyes "
These bastrds dont know anything of history. His decision was to teeach a lesson enemies. You can not live peaceful life unless you nip the bud in the begining.
Here is the prime time story of following your philosophy. He was a noble and peaceful man. Muslim made him thier third Caliph. We know him by the name of Hazrat Usman (ra). He was very kind ruler and people were happy in his reign. There were some mischief element in the society, they were creating lot of controvercies. The advisers of this noble caliph told him about these characters asked his highness to take some action. The noble caliph told them that it is a minor hoopla and people will ignore them and forget it.
Some time passed and these elements in society build up strong comunity and cult following against caliph to De-throne him. The adviser again came to Caliph and strongly advised him to take some strict action against the leader of that cult otherwise they would create lots of bloodshed. The noble and peace loving Caliph declined and told them that it is against his belief harm them as they are his brothers.
Some time later he and his wife were living in their house and some terrorists came and slit his throt when he was reading holy quran. Inna lillah wa inna Alehe Rajeon
After his Shahdat These terrorist killed thousands of muslim in that region.
Mods : I request you DO NOT close this thread . And please do not BAN Supernova Girl. She is a peace loving Dove. She can teach the world the real meaning of peace. Place her in a cage full of Snakes including our own king Cobra. Provide her basic nessesities of life. and show her activities live on TV channel for all the world viewers. She will live happily with snakes and they wont harm her. She will feed them with bread and milk.
This way people will understand the meaning of love and peace :k:
Re: Banu Qurayza
The OPs take on history is confused, and it's unclear if she is pro-kaffir (to the extent that she wished the early Muslims would have been slaughtered), or simply disturbed over the alleged (emphasis on alleged) conclusion to the betrayal of the Muslims by the BQ.
First, the muslim arrival in Medina was precisely so they could intermediate (i.e. "interfere") in the affairs of the locals. The Prophet (pbuh) was brought in to bring peace to the already warring tribes, and did so through the pact of medina. All present were signatories to the pact, and none disagreed to any of the terms at that point in time. After the pact was created, all were beholden to it, and the Muslims ceased to be migrants but citizens of Medina proper. So, migrating again in the face of treachery was uncalled for. Turning the other cheek would have meant the neck of the Muslims. This wasn't some stupid treaty...such a suggestion is moronic. It was the key for peace, and it was others within Medina that sided with the war mongering Quraysh in clear violation of the treaty that had anything but peace on their minds.
Second, the policy of exile was a failure. The Banu Nadir began agitation against the Muslims, in clear violation of the pact, with those who wanted the Muslims dead and gone. The chief of the tribe was executed, so his tribe could be spared. Nonetheless, it seems the policy of supporting the Quraysh at the expense of the Muslims was a tribal matter, and not the whims of the former chief. The exposed plot to assassinate the prophet (which the OP flippantly refers to as a self-revealed prophecy...the attempt was neither denied and alternative sources suggest it was a tip off and not revelation), was the last straw...the Banu Nadir were exiled for their continuous violation of the pact. THey returned with 10,000 men surrounding 3000 Muslims in what would end with the battle of the Trench.
The BQ, rather than at the very least stay neutral (the pact seems to imply they were obligated to come to the defence of Muslims), entered into talks with the Meccans. That these talks broke down was not a sign of their good will or their honourable intentions. They were simply looking out for their own interests, and were biding time until the Muslims were defeated and dead.
The Banu Nadir couldn't keep to the terms of the pact of Medina, nor the terms of their exile...it was clear that these facts weighed on the mind of Sa'ad.
The OP suggests that the battle was for booty. 10,000 men against 3000...and booty was a certainty? Such lunacy can't be taken seriously.
The OP suggests that by letting the BQ go, they would then support him. This is unreasonable, and given the battle that was just concluded, unlikely.
The OP asks why the Propeht (pbuh) feared being attacked or killed...asinine assertion given that he was present at every battle. Second, any action done to him would no doubt repeated on the entire Ummah...his mission was to establish an Ummah, not to be some hippie hanging out in the dessert.
The OP suggests that if it were a "true" religion it would have spread anyway...the fact it is, these battles did little to spread Islam, and it takes the cake to suggest that this was the intent of any of them. They were fought to protect and secure those who were Muslims and threatened with elimination because of it. The idea that Muslims really didn't need to do anything, and God would have protected Muslims anyway is a bit much. One of the underlying themes of Islamic history is that the establishment of the Ummah was so the faith could survive after the last prophet...in the end that meant hard choices, difficult politics, and fighting. There would be no more prophets delivering faithful men from evil people. With this, it becomes obvious why it made sense for the Muslims to take arms and not sit around waiting for a miracle...or slaughter.
The OP suggests it was not religious but political. Yes. It was. But did the prophet (pbuh) have the "power" to stop it? For what purpose?
The OP suggests that these events somehow motivate the Taliban. The question is: how? No parallels exist.
Re: Banu Qurayza
I offer bundle of thanks to Ms Supernova girls for opening discussion on this very important and difficult part of muslim history 
No matter how critical it may sound to readers but it was part of history. Her questioning is natural. It may sound blunt but we need to pay attention to subject.We need to deeply look into affairs of political and religious affinity with open and clear eyes and mind.
I thank all participant for highlighting important dimensions of this topic of discussion :k:
Again, I request moderators and Admins : DO NOT ban Supernova girl. If you have done, then remove these restictions. I find the topic and discusion very educational attempt to unviel one of the most important part of islamic history burried in books.
This forum is open venue for all discussions and criticism in order to understand religions.
I will lodge a formal protest in feedback forum if imposed restrictions are not removed
Code Red dude!
You have absolutely no sincerity here.
You are playing in the hand of your ego and egocentric satisfacion and have no real sympathy to this so called supernova girl.
Let it go and move on.
I duly respect opinions of an individual, no matter they are in stark contrast with mine. If I have no sincerity then why i am disturbed by this blockade on freedom on opinion expression. I have no sympathy for that user.
But I respect debators who do not hide their face behind links and respond with solid footings. As I said I respect all participants of this thread. :k:
:Sigh:
If you say so.