Banu Quraiza

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Massacre of the Banū Quraiza

The Banū Quraiza ( Arabic بنو قريظة, DMG Banū Quraiẓa , also Banu Qurayza ) were, together with the Banū Qainuqāʿ and the Banū n-Nadīr, one of the three most influential Jewish tribes of Yathrib , the pre-Islamic Medina.

Like the Banū Nadīr, the Banū Quraiza owned the most agriculturally productive parts of the oasis and secured their income by lending money. The men of the Quraiza were killed in 627 by order of Saʿd ibn Munādh and with the consent and supervision of Mohammed , and their wives and children were sold into slavery .

These events are narrated in Ibn Ishāq's biography of the prophet , in Maghāzī literature, in exegesis of the Koran and in collections of traditions . They are therefore presented exclusively from an Islamic point of view.

Origin of the Banū Quraiza

The Banū Quraiza and Banū Nadīr called themselves al-Kāhinān (The Two Priests) and were also known as Banū Hārūn (Sons of Aaron ). Their origins are not clearly established: It is unknown whether they moved to Yathrib after the Jewish rebellion against Rome in 70 or whether they were Arab proselytes .

Situation before and in the first time after the arrival of Muhammad

In the fifth century, the Arab tribes (the Khazradsch and Aus , who together formed the Banū Qaila ) settled in Yathrib after emigrating from Yemen , where they were initially subject to the Jews who were already living there. Later they gradually gained their independence from the Jewish tribes and became rulers of the oasis.

When Muhammad arrived in Yathrib in 622, a generation-long feud between the two Arab tribes there, the Aus and the Khazradsch, raged in the oasis, which had led to general exhaustion. The Banū Quraiza - together with the Banū Nadīr - allied with the Aus, the Banū Qainuqāʿ with the Chazradsch.

The Banū Quraiza were relatively wealthy. Like the Banū Nadīr, they owned the most agriculturally productive parts of the oasis (especially date palms). This is confirmed by Abū l-Faraj al-Isfahānī , who in his Kitāb al-Aġānī " states that the Banū Quraiza and Nadīr remain on fresh water and valuable palm trees ( manāzil Banī Quraiẓa wa-n-Naḍīr ʿalā ʿaḏb al-māʾ wa-karīm an-naḫl ). Nuʿaim ibn Masʿūd is quoted by al-Wāqidī as saying: "The Banū Quraiza were a rich people of noble descent and we [only] an Arab people without palm trees and without vineyards, but [only] with sheep and Camels. "

Conduct in the trench battle

Duel between ʿAlī ibn Abī Tālib (left) and ʿAmr ibn ʿAbd Wudd (right) during the trench battle

In 627, the Quraysh attacked Medina with the support of other tribes . To defend the city, Mohammed dug a trench around those areas of Medina that were not protected by natural circumstances. After a two-week siege of the oasis, the attackers withdrew without having successfully overcome the trench.

The common opinion in research is that the Quraiza behaved formally correctly during the siege. They helped the Muslims to work on the trench by lending them shovels to dig the trench. However, they did provide the attackers with provisions during the siege and negotiated with them in secret. At one point they were on the verge of stabbing the Muslims in the back.

The attack on the Banū Quraiza

After the battle of the trenches, Mohammed the archangel Gabriel is said to have appeared and ordered him to attack the Banū Quraiza:

“At noon [Gabriel] came to the Messenger of God [...] He was wrapped in a brocaded turban and sat on a mule with a leather saddle, on which lay a velvet blanket embroidered with silk brocade. He said, 'Have you laid down your arms yet, Messenger of God?' ,Yes.' he answered. Then [Gabriel] said: 'But the angels have not laid down their weapons yet! You have only returned home at the request of the people, God, the Mighty and Exalted, but commands you, [Mohammed], to go against the Banū [Quraiza]. I myself will turn against them and shake them. '"

- Ferdinand Wüstenfeld (ed.): The life of Muhammad. After Muhammed Ibn Ishāk, edited by Abd el-Malik Ibn Hishām. Volume 1. Dieterichsche Universitäts-Buchhandlung, Göttingen 1859, p. 684 ( online ).

Mohammed then asked his followers to assemble with him before dusk in front of the fortresses of the Banū Quraiza, from where they began to besiege the Jewish tribe. The Quraiza, who seem to have consulted one another during this siege, did not struggle to defend themselves. As a result, they asked Mohammed to be allowed to flee Medina with all their movable goods under the same conditions as before the Banū Qainuqāʿ and Banū n-Nadīr. When this request was refused, they offered Mohammed to flee Medina without their belongings, but this offer was also turned down: They were asked to surrender unconditionally. Now they wanted to ask Abū Lubāba , a Muslim friend of theirs, for advice. When they asked if they should surrender, he replied "Yes", but pointed to his throat to indicate that they would be killed. Despite this warning, the Quraiza surrendered unconditionally after a siege that lasted 25 days.

The Aus, allied with the Banū Quraiza since pre-Islamic times, asked the Prophet to be lenient in his decision about the tribe, which is why he offered them to transfer the decision to one of their tribal members. When all parties had agreed to this proposal, Mohammed chose Saʿd ibn Muʿādh as judge. The latter decided - with the subsequent consent of the Prophet - that the men (i.e. every male member of the tribe whose pubic hair had started to grow) of the Quraiza should be killed, their possessions distributed among the Muslims and their wives and children sold into slavery.

The sentence was carried out the following day. The Arab historian Ibn Ishāq describes the end of the Banū Quraiza in his biography of the prophets as follows:

“Eventually the [Quraiza] had to surrender, and the Prophet had them imprisoned in the homestead of the Bint [Hārith], a woman of the [Najjār] tribe. Then he went to the market of Medina, where the market is still today, and ordered some trenches to be dug. When this was done, the [Quraiza] were brought in and beheaded group by group in the trenches. Among them were the enemy of God [Huyaiy ibn Akhtab] and the head of the tribe, Kaadb ibn Asad . "

- Ferdinand Wüstenfeld (ed.): The life of Muhammad. After Muhammed Ibn Ishāk, edited by Abd el-Malik Ibn Hishām. Volume 1. Dieterichsche Universitäts-Buchhandlung, Göttingen 1859, pp. 689f. ( online ).

Around 400 to 900 members of the Banu Quraiza tribe were killed as a result of the execution. The sources mention three tribesmen who escaped execution by converting to Islam.

Among the women captured was Raihāna , who fell to Mohammed as booty. Her relationship with the Prophet after her capture has been narrated in different ways: According to one version, she converted to Islam, was released by the Prophet and then married. According to another version, she refused to accept Islam and became a concubine of Muhammad. Accordingly, even after her later conversion to Islam, she refused to be released and was a concubine of the Prophet until her death.

With the annihilation of the Banū Quraiza, the members of the Arab-born Banū Kilāb ibn ʿĀmir, the allies of the Banū Quraiza, were also executed. One of her wives, an-Naschat (variant: asch-Schat) bint Rifāʿa, married Mohammed, but rejected it after a short time. While the women and children of the Banū Quraiza were permitted to be enslaved, there are no reports that an-Naschat bint Rifāʿa was also a slave. Michael Lecker deduces from this that the Arab women who were captured in the fortresses of the Quraiza may not have been enslaved; alternatively, however, it is also possible - so Lecker - that their tribesmen would have ransomed them.

After the execution of the Banu Quraiza, Muhammad's position in Medina was strengthened. Now there was no longer an important Jewish tribe in the oasis, but there were several smaller groups who from now on avoided any hostile action towards Mohammed and his followers.

Reception in the Islamic Exegesis of the Koran

The events around the end of the Banū Quraiza have also found their expression in the Islamic exegesis of the Koran, which contains several verses - above all Sura 33: 26f. as well as sura 8: 55-58 - in the context of the alleged breach of contract by the Quraiza in the battle of the trenches and their subsequent destruction. The peculiarity of several of these representations is - according to Marco Schoeller's view - the treatment of this episode of the Prophet's life and the expulsion of the Nadīr as a single occurrence, roughly at the same time. In the traditional presentation of the Sīra, Maghāzī and Hadīth literature, there is about a year and a half between the two events.

Sura 33: 26f.

Tomb at-Tabarīs in Baghdad

In particular, Sura 33: 26f. brings exegesis in connection with the fate of the Banū Quraiza:

“And he let those of the people of the Book who had supported them (ie the unbelievers) come down from their castles and terrified them, so that you could partly kill them and partly capture them . And he gave you their land, their dwellings and their property as an inheritance, and (in addition) land that you had not (until then) set foot on. God has the power to do everything. "

- Translation: Rudi Paret

As-Suyūtī places the two verses in the context of the siege and destruction of the Quraiza. In doing so, he lectures on the usual historiography of the betrayal of the Banū Quraiza in the battle of the trenches, Gabriel's request to the Prophet to attack the Quraiza and the subsequent execution of their men, enslavement of their wives and children and the capture of their possessions. In at-Tabarī's comment, too , the well-known motive of Gabriel is taken up, who asks Mohammed to take up arms against the Quraiza.

Regarding the passage "And he gave you [...] land that you (up to then) had not set foot in" ("Wa-auraṯakum [...] arḍan lam taṭaʾūhā"), at-Tabarī mentions several interpretations, according to which they are still open here conquering territories of the Byzantines, Sassanids and other parts of the world (see Islamic expansion as well as jihad ) or Mecca or Chaibar is mentioned.

Both at-Tabarī and as-Suyūtī mention a report traced back to the prophet comrade Saʿīd ibn Zaid (d. 670 / -71), according to which the land, the dwellings and the property given to the Muslims as an inheritance in verse 27 refer to the Quraiza as well as refer to the Nadīr.

Sura 8: 55-58

The common notion in Islamic literature that the Quraiza were guilty of betraying the Prophet was also projected onto the wording of Sura 8: 55–58 in exegesis:

“The worst animals are those who disbelieve and (also) will not believe (?) (Or: and (for all the world) do not want to believe?), - (especially) those of them with whom you are one have entered into a binding agreement, and then each time (when it comes down to it) they break their agreement in a godless manner (i.e. without being godly). If you get hold of them in the war, then use them to scare away those who get behind them! Perhaps they will (then) be admonished (that is, deal with them in such a way that those who come after them take it as a warning and do not take the same wrong path)! And if you fear betrayal from (certain) people, then simply (?) Throw them (the contract) down! God does not love those who commit treason. "

- Translation: Rudi Paret

According to this, for example in Tafsīr Muqātil ibn Sulaimāns - the Banū Quraiza would have broken a contract with the Prophet if they had entered into another contract with him and violated him during the battle of the trenches and betrayed the Prophet. According to the wording in verse 56: "those [...] who then each time [...] break their agreement [...]" ("allaḏīna [...] yanquḍūna ʿahdahum fī kulli marratin").

With regard to Muqātil's interpretation, al-Baghawī cites a similar narration, according to which Kaʿb ibn al-Ashraf (who according to the traditional portrayal had already been killed at this point and is not mentioned in Muqātil's commentary) rode to Mecca during the battle of the trenches to accompany him to deny the Quraish. A clearer reference to the tribe of Kaʿbs (the Banū Nadīr) can be found in the commentary of al-Qurtubīs :

“The B [anū] Qur [aiza] and the B [anū] N [adīr] broke the agreement by supplying the pagans of Mecca with weapons. But then they regretted it and said, 'We had just forgotten (the agreement)'. Thereupon (Muḥammad) concluded a second agreement with them, which (the Jews) broke on the day of the 'Trench Battle'. "

- al-Qurtubī: al-Ǧāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qurʾān . Volume 22. Muʾassasat ar-Risāla, Beirut 2006, pp. 529-531 (Commentary on Sura 8: 55f .; online ).

Al-Baghawīs and al-Qurtubīs representations serve as clues for Schöller's thesis of a simultaneous action against the Quraiza and Nadīr.

Reception in Islamic international law

The action against the Banū Quraiza did not become a model in conventional dealings with the owners of scripts under Islamic rule. In the face of existing interreligious polemics , the following principle has been established, among other things in the form of this prophetic saying:

« قال رسول الله […] من ظلم معاهدًا او كلّفه فوق طاقته فانا حجيجه الى يوم القيامة »

«Qāla rasūlu Llāh […] man ẓalama muʿāhadan au kallafahū fauqa ṭāqatihī fa-anā ḥaǧīǧuhū ilā yaumi l-qiyāma. »

"The Messenger of God [...] said: 'On the day of the Last Judgment I will appear as an accuser against someone who oppresses or overburdens a person under protection.'"

Correspondingly, the second caliph KalUmar is said to have instructed his successor on his deathbed to adhere to the protective alliance concluded with the owners of scriptures residing in Islamic territory , to fight those who fight them and not to tax them outside of their ability to pay. A violation of the Dhimma agreement was considered serious perfidy .

Nevertheless, contrary to what Arafat claims, the attack on the Quraiza and their execution has been used as the basis for various legal discussions in Islamic (international) law.

Ash-Shaibani

Ash-Shaibānī (d. 805) mentions the annihilation of the Banū Quraiza as evidence of the lawfulness of the execution of people after their capture and also after "the war has ceased to burden [Mohammed and his followers] with its burdens."

Treatment of the prisoners to be killed

Ash-Shaibani advises against killing the prisoners while they are tied up, provided that it can be ruled out that the prisoners will flee or kill Muslims who are present. During the execution, the people to be killed should not be tormented by thirst or hunger: the Muslim commander should kill them “in a gracious manner.” Ash-Shaibānī traces the prohibition of such abuse back to the example of the prophet who gave the order supposed to have to provide the Quraiza prisoners with dates, to allow them to rest at noon and to postpone the time of their execution so that it does not take place at the hottest time of the day.

Minimum age of the prisoners to be killed

Furthermore, he explains the course of decision-making and execution in the chapter “The legal provision for harbīs who submit to the judgment of a Muslim man” ( al-Ḥukm fī Ahl al-Ḥarb iḏā nazalū ʿalā Ḥukm Raǧul min al-Muslimīna ). In this context, he again refers to Muhammad's instruction to postpone the execution to a cooler time of the day and deals with the question of the minimum age of the male prisoners to be killed. Saʿd ibn Muʿādh had determined in his decision that those who shave ( ǧarā l-mūsā ) and thus have reached puberty should be killed. According to al-Shaibani, the conclusion is drawn from this that the age of majority occurs with the onset of pubic hair growth - a view that he does not share. The beginning of pubic hair growth differs - so the commentary as-Sarachsīs - between the different peoples. Puberty, for example, would begin later for the Turks than, for example, for the inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent , which is why it would not be possible to make a clear judgment on this. Saʿd, on the other hand, would have made his decision on the basis of a notification from the Prophet, who had been informed by a revelation that the onset of puberty would determine the age of majority for the Quraiza. The judgment was made in this way because ...

« … من جرت عليه الموسى منهم كان مقاتلا. وإِنما حكم بقتل مقاتلهم. »

«… Man ǧarat ʿalaihī l-mūsā minhum kāna muqātilan. Wa-innamā ḥakama bi-qatli muqātilihim. »

"... those who shaved [man ǧarat ʿalaihī l-mūsā] were fighters and he had decided to kill their fighters [ie those of the Quraiza]."

Ash-Shafidi

Ash-Shafidis Mausoleum in Cairo

Under the lemma “breach of contract” ( Naqḍ al-ʿAhd ), the famous legal scholar asch-Shāfiʿī (d. 820), to whom the madhhab of the Shāfiites is attributed, exemplifies the actions of Mohammed against the Banū Quraiza.

Terms of a dhimma agreement and legal obligations of Muslims therein

He explains that a peace treaty or dhimma agreement concluded with the respective people has no legal validity “until we know that those of you who have stayed confirm this [treaty] and agree to it. “In such a case, no Muslim is allowed to appropriate their property or harm them physically. Such behavior on the part of a Muslim is to be punished accordingly, provided that those with whom such a contract has been concluded do not break it.

Possible forms of breach of contract on the part of the dhimmīs and its punishment

However, if ...

  • ... those with whom such a contract has been concluded break it;
  • ... one group among them breaks the contract and the remaining members do not oppose the breach of contract by words or deeds before the respective Muslim commander ( imam ) arrives, or do not leave their area to inform the imam that they themselves do Still view the contract as valid;
  • ... the breach of contract support enemy fighters by fighting Muslims or dhimmīs;
  • ... or help those who fight Muslims or dhimmīs ...

... it is up to the Muslim commander to take action against them. If the persons who are not involved in the act in question do not part with those who have broken the contract in one of the ways described above and come out to the Muslim commander, he must kill their able-bodied men (muqātilatahum), to take their relatives captive (sabā) and to steal their goods - "be it in the middle of Dār al-Islam or in the countries of the enemy ." To underpin these statements, he refers to the prophetic model in the destruction of the Quraiza:

« وهكذا فعل رسول الله [...] ببنى قريظة, عقد عليهم صاحبهم الصلح بالمهادنة فنقض ولم يفارقوه, فسار إليهم رسول الله [...] في عقر دارهم وهى معه بطرف المدينة فقتل مقاتلتهم, وسبى ذراريهم, وغنم أموالهم, وليس كلهم ​​اشترك فى المعونة على النبى [ …] وأصحابه ولكن كلهم ​​لزم حصنه ، فلم يفارق الغادرين منهم إلا نفر فحقن ذلك دماءهم وأحرز عليهم أموالهم. »

«Wa-hākaḏā faʿala rasūlu Llāhi […] bi-Banī Quraiẓati, ʿaqada ʿalaihim ṣāḥibihimi ṣ-ṣulḥa bi-l-muhādanati fa-naqaḍa wa-lam yufāriqūhū, fa-sāʿim wa-faihim rashluq [...] bi-ṭarafi l-madīnati fa-qatala muqātilatahum, wa-sabā ḏarārīyahum, wa-ġanima amwālahum, wa-laisa kullahumi štaraka fī l-maʿūnati ʿalā n-maabūnati alā n-nabīullā lākin kam yufāriqi l-ġādirīna minhum illā nafarun fa-ḥaqana ḏālika dimāʾihim wa-aḥraza ʿalaihim amwālahum. »

“And so did the Messenger of God [...] with the Banū Quraiza: He concluded a peace treaty [aṣ-ṣulḥ bi-l-muhādana] with their leader, [whom] he [d. H. the leader] broke. You [d. H. the remaining members of the Quraiza] did not separate from him. Thereupon the Messenger of God [...] marched into their area, which was at the [other] end of the city. He killed their fighters, took their loved ones [d. H. their wives and children] and captured their goods. They did not support all [the attackers of the oasis] against the Prophet [...] and his companions. However, they stayed in their fortress and did not part with the traitors [al-ġādirīna minhum] among them, except for a few men who thereby prevented their killing [dimāʾihim] and kept their possessions. "

Abū ʿUbaid al-Qāsim ibn Sallām

In his Kitāb al-Amwāl, Abū ʿUbaid al-Qāsim ibn Sallām (d. 838) - a disciple among others of ash -Shāfiʿīs - counts in the chapter on the “legal provision for captured slaves of the conquered peoples” ( Ḥukm fī Riqāb Ahl al-ʿAnwa min al-Usārī wa-s-Sabī ) lists the traditions available to him on the annihilation of the Quraiza, cites further traditions on the incident in the context of the question of the circumstances under which contracting parties of the non-Muslim peoples are to be killed towards the Islamic community, provides exegetical explanations The connection between the execution and sura 33: 26f. and explains:

« وإنما اسْتَحَلَّ رسولُ الله […] دماءَ بَني قُرَيْظَةَ لِمُظَاهَرَتِهمُ الأَحْزابَ عليه ، وكانوا في عَهْدٍ منه. فرأى ذلك نَكْثاً لِعَهدهم ، وإن كانوا لم يقتلوا من أصحابه أحداً. »

«Wa-innamā istaḥall rasūl Allāh […] dimāʾ Banī Quraiẓa li-muẓāharatihim al-aḥzāb ʿalaihi, wa-kānū fī ʿahd minhu. Fa-raʾā ḏālika nakṯan li-ʿahdihim, wa-in kānū lam yaqtulū min aṣḥābihī aḥadan. »

“The Messenger of God […] has declared the killing of the Banū Quraiza, who had signed a treaty with him, to be permitted because of their support for the Ahzāb against him. This [d. H. he saw their support for the Ahzab ] as a breach of their contract, although they had not killed any of his companions. "

Al-Māwardī

A different explanation is given by al-Māwardī (d. 1058), who justifies the action against the Quraiza religiously. In his Aālām an-Nubūwa (mark of prophethood) he lists the character qualities of Muhammad, including his meekness ( Ḥilm ), his dignity ( waqār ) and his good-naturedness in controversy. In the context of the question of how it could come about despite these character traits that he beheaded 700 Banū Quraiza ṣabran in a single day , i.e. H. without that they had a possibility of resistance, he refers to the concrete divine instruction for the execution of the Quraiza. Here he mentions the statement of Muhammad passed down in several sources that Saʿd ibn Muʿādh's decision corresponds to the determination of God "from above the seven heavens" ( min fauqi sabʿati arqiʿatin ). The annihilation of the quraiza was thus Muhammad's divinely imposed obligation as his messenger and would not have represented an act of personal vengeance or any other malice. According to Kister , this view is the common opinion within Sunni scholarship.

Ibn Qaiyim al-Jawzīya

Comparable to al-Māwardī's religious justification for the incident, Ibn Qaiyim al-Jschauzīya (d. 1350) explains the prophet's harsher approach compared to the two other great Medinan tribes this time as follows:

« وأما قريظة فكانت أشد اليهود عداوة لرسول الله […] وأغلظهم كفرا ولذلك جرى عليهم ما لم يجر على إخوانهم »

«Wa-ammā Quraiẓatu fa-kānat ašadda l-yahūdi ʿadāwatan li-rasūli Llāh […] wa-aġlaẓahum kufran wa-li-ḏālika ǧarā ʿalaihim ma lam yaǧri ʿalā iḫwānihim»

"As for the Quraiza, they were the Jews most hostile to the Messenger of God [...] and the most persistent in their Kufr [aġlaẓahum kufran], which is why they were treated differently than their brothers [by the Qainuqāʿ and Nadīr]."

On the part of Ibn Qaiyim only the stricter treatment of the Quraiza religiously compared to the Qainuqāʿ and the Nadīr, i.e. H. due to their particularly hostile attitude towards the Prophet. A breach of contract by the Banū Quraiza is said to be the immediate cause of their siege and destruction.

Reception in modern life-Mohammed research

criticism

William Muir

The execution of the Quraiza was the starting point for various ethical and moral reproaches against the prophet within oriental studies. William Muir (1885)
emphasizes that “the massacre of the Banū Quraiza” was a “ barbaric act” that “cannot be justified by reasons of political necessity.” The attack on them would be a severe punishment for those of their leaders who had made pacts with the attackers of the oasis, as well as the expulsion of the tribe, which was dangerous for the Muslims, were entirely legitimate. “ But the indiscriminate slaughter of the entire tribe can only be viewed as an act of enormous cruelty that cast a hideous stain on the name of the Prophet. “According to Muir, the Quraiza who were killed are to be regarded as martyrs because of their adherence to the Jewish faith and the resulting killing . Correspondingly, the Danish orientalist Frants Buhl (1903) notes, referring to the incident, that this time Mohammed was “too bitter” “to allow forbearance; but there was something highly refined about the way in which he got his will and again shows his character in a very repulsive light. ” Martin Hartmann (1909) speaks of the“ nefariousness with which Muḥammad dealt with the Quraiẓa tribe ”as a “Eternal disgrace”. According to Tor Andrae (1930), on this occasion Mohammed showed “again the lack of honesty and moral courage”, “which formed a less sympathetic trait of his character.” Like Muir before, Salo Wittmayer Baron (1937) also sees the death of the men the Quraiza as a martyrdom, describes the few tribe members who escaped the death penalty through conversion to Islam as "cowards", regards the judgment of Saʿd ibn Muʿādh as a "sham trial" and speaks of the "cruel vengeance of Muhammad and his companions ". In addition, the "guilty conscience of Muhammad and his immediate followers" would have contributed to the "inconsistencies in the later Arabic traditions regarding this misjudgment". According to Maurice Gaudefroy-Demombynes (1957) , the event was an “ugly chapter in the life of Muhammad”, which, however, would have turned out to be “very beneficial for the glory of Allah and his Prophet”.

Apologetics

Arent Jan Wensinck

In contrast to this, especially in later research, there has been a tendency to judge the event against the standards of the circumstances at the time and to present the decision to execute it as the result of military (instead of personal or ideological) considerations.
Even arent January Wensinck (1908) had found that on the one hand the Islamic literature "the most cruel acts of Mohammed ascribes a heavenly arrangement: The Siege of Qainuqā', the murder of Ka'b [ibn al-Ashraf] and the attack on the Qurayza. This has silenced any reproach. Allah's conscience seems to be more yielding than that of his creatures. ”On the other hand, the act was provoked by the behavior of the Banū Quraiza and was indispensable for the protection of his followers:

“The highest qualification that de Europeesche biographers van deze daad geven is: wreed. En wreed was zij. Ons Menschelijk gevoel laat geen other beoordeeling toe. But het zou onbillijk zijn Mohammed's character naar deze daad te beoordeelen. Bij other occasions heeft hij zich een man met een vergevensgezind hard toned […] Wat hem in dit geval tot zijn wreede daad moved heeft is zoo te greeted: hij was geprikkeld door de Qoraiẓa, the hem door hunne whirling houding wke long in spanning vrees hadden gehouden, en die, hadden zij de verbonden legers crashed, misschien had brought a large ramp over Medina. Hij wilde dus voor goed aan het Jodengevaar een an maken. Daartoe what other means then rivet. Had hij hen banish then were zij met het sterke Chaibar verbonden een blijvend gevaar voor Medina geweest. "

“The most gracious judgment of European biographers [Muhammad] of this act is ' cruel .' That was also the case. Our human feeling does not allow any other judgment. However, it would be unfair to judge Muhammad's character [solely] by this act. On other occasions he has shown himself to be a man with a forgiving heart […]. What prompted him to do this cruel act in this case can be understood as follows: He was provoked by the Quraiza, who kept him in fear and tension for weeks through their vacillating posture, and who might have brought great harm to Medina if they had them to the allied armies [d. H. the Quraish and their allies] would have effectively helped. He therefore wanted to put an end to the Jewish threat. There was no other means of doing this than annihilation. Had he banned them, they would have allied themselves with the strong Chaibar and would have represented a constant threat to Medina. "

Muhammad Hamidullah (1941) emphasizes the possibility that the Prophet or Saʿd ibn Muʿādhcould have orientedhis decision to execute on the Jewish law based on the Torah ( Deuteronomy 20 : 10–14  LUT ).

William Montgomery Watts

William Montgomery Watt (1956/1961) emphasizes that in the Arab world of that time there were no moral or other obligations to warring tribes and also simply all those with whom the respective party had not entered into contractual agreements - “not even what we would call good custom. The enemy and the complete stranger had no rights. ”Furthermore, the whereabouts of at least some Jews in Medina even after the execution of the Banū Quraiza proves that Mohammed did not pursue the goal of expelling or exterminating all Jews from the oasis. The Banū Quraiza were therefore executed because of their behavior in the trench battle and the betrayal of the Islamic community carried out in the process: Mohammed, whose position had now been strengthened after the failed attack by the Quraish, was not prepared to tolerate such behavior. As a result, the decision was made to remove this “weak point in the oasis” in order to teach a lesson to both its real and potential enemies. Also Rudi Paret (1957) which stated "quite questionable neutrality" of the Qurayza during the grave battle that - like the Qainuqā' and nadir - "Ooft [s] there were serious clashes with the Meccans," as a "legally dubious allies “Would have proven. It is not easy to make as objective a judgment as possible about this event, which has been handed down from a purely Muslim point of view, and for which one is inclined from the outset to primarily place the blame on Mohammed and his followers. The fear of treason (instead of an actual offense) as a possible reason for the execution, according to Paret, from Sura 8:58, would constitute “a very questionable justification for a military attack”.

“But there are also weighty reasons in favor of the prophet. Above all, it should be noted that the Medinan Jews were not warred or expelled from the country or killed for their beliefs, but because they formed self-contained groups within the community of Medina, which for Mohammed and his partisans at all times, above all but could be dangerous when threatened by foreign opponents. It is no accident that the operations […] against the Quraiẓa took place immediately after the trench warfare. [...] Mohammed [had] gotten into an extremely critical position with his family. The prophet had to reckon with the possibility that the Jews would make common cause with his opponents if the balance of power were to shift a little further to his disadvantage. After the acute danger had been overcome, safe conditions should be created for the future by eliminating Jewish population groups. Incidentally, the undertakings of Muhammad only ever extended to individual Jewish tribes, never to Medinian Judaism as a whole. Accordingly, these tribes behaved themselves. Otherwise they would have had to unite in a defensive fight against the Muslim party.
Finally, as far as the massacre of the Banū Quraia is concerned, it must be remembered that the customs of the war were in some respects more brutal than we are used to in the era of the Geneva Convention . But Mohammed must be measured by the standard of his own time. After the Qurai'a had surrendered to him at mercy and disgrace, it was generally accepted that he was perfectly justified not to show mercy. As strange and inhuman as it sounds, in public opinion he is guilty of having given orders to cut down several of the Banū Naḍīr's palms, but not because he has more than half a thousand in a single day Jews jumped over the blade. "

Marshall Hodgson (1974) described the incident in his posthumously published Venture of Islam also against the backdrop of historical and cultural circumstances: Among the Arab contemporaries of Muhammad was an execution or hostage-taking male prisoners of war and the enslavement of their women and children custom was, especially since their enslavement was considered too risky. According to Hodgson, the Banū Quraiza preserved their neutrality during the siege and at the same time entered into negotiations with the Quraish. As a result of the battle in the trenches, Mohammed had demanded the unconditional surrender of the Quraiza and had ruled out their expulsion in view of the active support that the Banū Nadīr, who had been expelled two years earlier, had given the attackers from their exile.

In contrast to “an anachronistic anti-Semitic explanation” of the event, according to Mark Cohen's (1976) remarks, the view that the destruction of the Quraiza was due to pragmatic considerations and was necessary is questioned by hardly any “reasonable scientist”, “especially the later history Medieval Islam shows relatively few signs of direct physical violence specifically directed against Jews as a [religious] group ”. With reference to William Montgomery Watts and Haim Zeev Hirschberg's remarks, Cohen attributes the attack of Muhammad to the "understandable need to assert his position and power in the face of an established Jewish group [in Yathrib] that resisted integration into the new religion." . Correspondingly, Norman Arthur Stillman (1979) claims that the treatment of the Banū Quraiza cannot be measured according to today's normative standards: Their “bitter fate” was “not uncommon according to the harsh rules of warfare of the time”. Stillman quotes the famous pre-Islamic poet Zuhair ibn Abī Sulmā (d. 609), who is said to have summed up the "rough ethos of the time" in the following words :

وَمَنْ لا يَذُدْ عَنْ حَوْضِهِ بِسِلاحِهِ
يُهَدَّمْ وَمَنْ لا يَظْلِمِ النَّاسَ يُظْلَمِ

wa-man lā yaḏud ʿan ḥauḍihī bi-silāḥihī
yuhaddam wa-man lā yaẓlimi n-nāsa yuẓlami

And whoever does not defend his territory with his weapon
will be destroyed; and whoever does not bully people will be bullyed.

In addition, he refers as an example of such ancient attitudes and procedures to the fate of the inhabitants of the island of Milos in the fifth century BC as well as to the Old Testament ( Deuteronomy 20 : 13-14  LUT ). The Quraiza supported the Muslims on the one hand by providing spades, pickaxes and baskets in their excavation work and were in a "state of armed neutrality" during the siege. On the other hand, their loyalty to Mohammed and his followers was questionable in view of their negotiations with Huyaiy ibn Akhtab , a head of the exiled Nadir, during the siege, which is quite common in contemporary Arab warfare . Even Gordon Newby (1988) refers to that fact and believes that the Qurayza probably the attackers were connected when "they would have been able to assume that they were not left in an attack Muhammad down. “Mohammed's destination of Saʿd was calculated to the extent that he could have expected a severe judgment from him. “It is obvious, however, that the underlying approach was not entirely anti-Jewish , since Jews remained in Medina and the areas under Muhammad's control until after his death.” Hartmut Bobzin (2000) emphasizes that Muhammad's actions against the Jews of Medina - "as incomprehensible as it seems to us today in some traits" - would not have led to a fundamentally anti-Semitic attitude within Islam, and refers to the historically far more hostile attitude of Christianity towards Jews. The Prophet “in the interests of consolidating his community certainly acted consistently and within the framework of the ethical norms customary in Arabia at the time. If his actions had been "reprehensible", ie contrary to the applicable norm, his biographers, who were interested in a fundamentally positive presentation, would have kept much more secret. "

Criticism of apologetics

Francesco Gabrieli

Contrary to such considerations are, among others, Francesco Gabrieli's (1967) remarks, who describes the Banū Quraiza as “a potential fifth column in the back of the prophet” during the siege of Yathrib, who were outwardly neutral, but secretly in contact with the enemy Mohammeds stood, but does not regard Mohammed's actions as excusable:

“This dark episode, which Muslim tradition, it must be said, takes quite calmly, has provoked lively discussion among western biographers of Muhammad, with caustic accusations on the one hand and legalistic excuses on the other. In reply to the horror of Christian and modern sentiment at the unnecessary slaughter […] it has been argued that these things took place in an Arabia whose ethic was neither Christian nor modern, and where the only restraint against the extermination of an enemy would be the thought of the revenge or blood-money which it would entail. [...] For our part, we do not care to submit the bloody course of history to legalistic disputes as to guilt or innocence; we merely note that haqn ad-dima , the avoidance of bloodshed, was a virtue not unknown even in pagan Arabia, and one which the Prophet himself showed on other occasions, if perhaps from political motives rather than from innate gentleness. In this case he was ruthless, with the approval of his conscience and of his God, for the two were one; we can only record the fact, while reaffirming our consciousness as Christians and civilized men, that this God or at least this aspect of Him, is not ours. "

“This dark chapter, which the Muslim tradition - this must be mentioned - takes rather calmly, has led to lively discussions among Western Mohammed biographers with sharp accusations on the one hand and legalistic justifications on the other. In response to the horror of a Christian and modern mindset at the unnecessary slaughter […], the argument has been made that these things took place in an Arabia whose ethos was neither Christian nor modern, and where the thought of a blood revenge or - guilt was the only obstacle to annihilating the enemy. [...] We ourselves have no interest in submitting the bloody course of history to legalistic disputes about guilt or innocence; we only note that the haqn ad-dimā - the avoidance of bloodshed - was a virtue not unknown even in pagan Arabia, which the Prophet of Islam displayed on other occasions (albeit possibly for political reasons rather than an innate mildness) put. In this case he was unscrupulous in agreement with his conscience and his God, since both are one and the same; We can only record the fact that this God is not our God, at least in this respect, by affirming our reflection as Christians and civilized people. "

Frontispiece of a manuscript of the Kitāb al-Aghānī

According to Maxime Rodinson's (1961) remarks, it is difficult to judge the massacre of the Quraiza: “One must consider the customs of that time, which were very crude.” However, the attempt to exculpate Muhammad on the part of Islamic historiography caused a sensation, that excited the act. In Islamic literature there are details about the event - namely Abū Lubāba's premonition of the fate of the tribe and the appointment of Saʿd ibn Muʿādh, who is looking for revenge, as arbiter - which "hardly allow one to believe in the innocence of the Prophet." From a politico-military point of view, the massacre was a wise measure: the constant danger of the Quraiza, that they would strengthen the "nest [s] of the [anti-Muslim] intrigues in Khaibar" in the event of an expulsion as well as the deterrence of the enemies of Muhammad and his followers made the decision to execute the purely politically by far best solution. Michael Lecker (1995) regards the execution of the Banū Quraiza as a novelty on the Arabian Peninsula : Before the emergence of Islam , the destruction of the enemy was never a war goal among the Arabs. Lecker refers here to the massacre of the Aus of the Chazradsch as a result of the battle of Buʿāth in 617, during which someone is said to have warned the Aus, gently with the defeated Chazradsch, in the Kitab al-Aghani Abu l -Faraj al-Isfahani to deal with and not destroy them:

« يا معشر الاوس اسحبوا ولا تهلكوا اخوتكم فجوارهم خير من جوار الثعالب »

«Yā maʿšara l-Ausi! Isḥabū wa-lā tuhlikū iḫwatakum fa-ǧiwāruhum ḫairun min ǧiwāri ṯ-ṯaʿālibi! »

“Oh, Aus group! Withdraw and do not destroy your brothers [the Khazradsch], since it is better to have them as neighbors than the foxes. "

According to Lecker, this statement reflects the current contemporary Arab attitude in this regard. Irving Zeitlin (2007) follows the same thesis with reference to Lecker's remarks. According to this, the dispute with the Banū Quraiza and their execution was not only due to religious and ideological reasons, but in particular to economic and political causes. Meanwhile, Tilman Nagel (2010) describes the procedure as one of the “most repulsive misdeeds” of Muhammad as well as “murders” and “atrocities”.

Revisionist tendencies

Walid Najib Arafat and Barakat Ahmad have attempted to prove that the men of the Banu Quraiza were not all killed and questioned the credibility of the information in Islamic historiography . Arafat's statements have been refuted by Meir Jacob Kister .

In his work on the history of the origins of Islam, Fred Donner , based on the fact that the Quraiza are not mentioned by name in the municipal code of Medina , inferred the possibility that the execution of male tribal members was a deliberate exaggeration or even an invention on the part of the Islamic historiography could act. Other possible explanations according to him would be that the text actually goes back to a phase in the life of the Prophet in which the three great Jewish tribes of the oasis had already been expelled or destroyed or that corresponding clauses of the document or other documents either have been lost or deleted because they are superfluous as a result of the destruction of the Quraiza: " These and many other questions must be investigated by research in the future. "

Modern Islamic Apologetics

In addition to the already mentioned Muhammad Hamidullah in his Muslim Conduct of State and Arafat and Ahmad's attempt at a revisionist criticism of the available source material, other Muslim intellectuals outside of oriental studies have also faced the accusations of (European) oriental studies and an attempt to invalidate the criticism, especially the earlier ones Research undertaken on an apologetic basis. According to this, Saʿd ibn Muʿādh's decision served the survival of the Islamic community . The guilt lies with Huyaiy ibn Akhtab, who seduced the Banū Quraiza to betray the Prophet.

See also

literature

Arabic sources

In addition to the exegetical and legal works listed in the article, the following Arabic-Islamic sources deal with the execution of the Banū Quraiza:

  • John Marsden Beaumont Jones (Ed.): The Kitāb al-Ma gh āzī of al-Wāqidī . Volume 2. Oxford University Press, London 1966, pp. 496-531 ( online ).
    • German partial translation by Julius Wellhausen: Muhammed in Medina. This is Vakidi's Kitab alMaghazi in a shortened German version . Reimer, Berlin 1882, pp. 210-224 ( online ).
    • English translation by Rizwi Faizer: The Life of Muhammad. Al-Wāqidī's Kitāb al-Maghāzī . Routledge, London / New York 2011, pp. 244–261.
  • Ferdinand Wüstenfeld (ed.): The life of Muhammad. After Muhammed Ibn Ishāk, edited by Abd el-Malik Ibn Hishām. Volume 1. Dieterichsche Universitäts-Buchhandlung, Göttingen 1859, pp. 684-700 ( online ).
    • German translation by Gustav Weil: The life of Mohammed after Mohammed Ibn Ishâk, edited by Abd el-Malik Ibn Hischâm. Translated from the Arabic by Dr. G. Because . Volume 2. J. B. Metzler, Stuttgart 1864, pp. 104-116 ( online ).
    • English translation by Alfred Guillaume: The Life of Muhammad. A Translation of ibn Isḥāq's Sīrat Rasūl Allāh . Oxford University Press, Oxford 2004, pp. 461-469 ( online ).
  • Eduard Sachau (ed.): Ibn Saad . Biographies of Muhammad, his companions and the later bearers of Islam up to the year 230 of his flight . Volume 2, part 1: The campaigns of Muhammad (ed. Josef Horovitz). Brill, Leiden 1909, pp. XXIII ( online ) & pp. 53-56 ( online ).
    • English translation by Syed Moinul Haq: Ibn Sa'd's Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir . Volume 2. Kitab Bhavan, New Delhi 1985, pp. 91-96.
  • al-Buchārī: Al-Ǧāmiʿ aṣ-Ṣaḥīḥ . Dār ar-Risāla al-ʿĀlamīya, Damascus 2011, Volume 3, pp. 325f. (Book 62, No. 4122; digitized from another edition ).
    • English translation by Muhammad Muhsin Khan: Translation of the Meanings of Sahîh Al-Bukhâri: Arabic-English . Dar-us-Salam, Riad 1997, Volume 5, pp. 271f. ( online ).
  • Michael Jan de Goeje (Ed.): Annales auctore Abu Djafar Mohammed Ibn Djarir at-Tabari ( Annalen at-Tabarīs ). Volume 1 (3). Brill, Leiden 1885, pp. 1485-1500 ( online ).
    • English translation by Michael Fishbein (translator): The History of al-Tabari . Volume 8: The Victory of Islam . State University of New York Press, Albany 1997, pp. 27-41.
Secondary literature
  • Marco Schöller: Qurayẓa (Banū al-) . In: Jane Dammen McAuliffe (Ed.): Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān . Volume 4. Brill, Leiden / Boston 2004, pp. 333-335.
  • Matthias Vogt: 'The angels have not put down their weapons yet' . About the literary representation of the execution of the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa in the Islamic Sīra tradition . In: Hallesche's contributions to oriental studies . Volume 41, 2006, pp. 203-225.
  • Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, pp. 61-96 ( online ).
  • Michael Lecker: Qurayẓa, Banū . In: Encyclopaedia Judaica . Second edition . Volume 16. Macmillan Reference USA, Detroit et al. a. 2007, p. 776.
  • William Montgomery Watt: Ḳurayẓa, Banū . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition . Volume 5. Brill, Leiden 1986, p. 436.
  • William Montgomery Watt: The Condemnation of the Jews of Banū Qurayẓah. In: The Muslim World . Volume 42, 1952, pp. 160-171.

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Cf. Virginia de Bosis Vacca: Naḍīr, Banu 'l- . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition . Volume 7. Brill, Leiden 1993, p. 852.
  2. ↑ See John Marsdon Beaumont Jones: The Chronology of the "Ma gh āzī" - A Textual Survey . In: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies . Volume 19, 1957, p. 251 and p. 274.
  3. ^ William Montgomery Watt: Muhammad at Medina . Oxford University Press, London 1962, p. 214 ( online ).
  4. ↑ Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, p. 62 ( online ).
  5. ^ Moshe Gil: The Origin of the Jews of Yathrib . In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 4, 1984, pp. 207f. See Norman Arthur Stillman: The Jews of Arab Lands . A History and Source Book . The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1979, p. 9 ( online ).
  6. ↑ William Montgomery Watt: Ḳurayẓa, Banū . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition . Volume 5. Brill, Leiden 1986, p. 436. See Moshe Gil: The Origin of the Jews of Yathrib . In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 4, 1984, p. 209 & passim .
  7. ^ Francis Edward Peters: Muhammad and the Origins of Islam . State University of New York Press, Albany 1994, p. 193.
  8. ^ William Montgomery Watt: al- Kh azra dj . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition . Volume 4. Brill, Leiden 1997, p. 1187.
  9. ↑ See Francis Edward Peters: Muhammad and the Origins of Islam . State University of New York Press, Albany 1994, pp. 193f.
  10. ↑ Michael Lecker: Muslims, Jews and Pagans. Studies on Early Islamic Medina . Brill, Leiden / New York / Cologne 1995, p. 26.
  11. ^ Arent Jan Wensinck; Rudi Paret: Ḳaynuḳāʿ, Banū . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition . Volume 5. Brill, Leiden 1986, p. 824.
  12. ↑ Al-Isfahānī: Kitāb al-Aġānī . Volume 15. Dār aṭ-Ṭibāʿa al-ʿĀmira, Cairo 1285  AH (1868 / -69), p. 161 ( online ). See also Michael Lecker: Muslims, Jews and Pagans. Studies on Early Islamic Medina . Brill, Leiden / New York / Cologne 1995, p. 26.
  13. ↑ Kānat Banū Quraiẓa ahl šaraf wa-amwāl, wa-kunnā qaum ʿArab, lā naḫl lanā wa-lā karm, wa-innamā naḥnu ahl šāt wa-baʿīr , see al-Wāqidī: Kitāb al-Maġāzī . Ed. JMB Jones. Oxford University Press, London, 1966. Vol. II, p. 480. ( online ). See also Moshe Gil : The Origin of the Jews of Yathrib . In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 4, 1984, p. 204.
  14. ↑ See for example William Montgomery Watt: Ḳurayẓa, Banū . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition . Volume 5. Brill, Leiden 1986, p. 436.
  15. ↑ Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, p. 86 ( online ).
  16. ↑ Michael Lecker: Qurayẓa, Banū . In: Encyclopaedia Judaica . Second edition . Volume 16. Macmillan Reference USA, Detroit et al. a. 2007, p. 776.
  17. ^ William Montgomery Watt; Alford Welch: Islam: Mohammed and the early days, Islamic law, religious life . In: Christel Matthias Schröder (ed.): The religions of humanity . Volume 25/1. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1980, p. 114. Cf. Matthias Vogt: 'The angels have not taken off their weapons yet' . About the literary representation of the execution of the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa in the Islamic Sīra tradition . In: Hallesche's contributions to oriental studies . Volume 41, 2006, pp. 209f.
  18. ^ William Montgomery Watt: Muhammad . Prophet and Statesman. Oxford University Press, London 1961, p. 171.
  19. ↑ Quoted from Matthias Vogt: 'The angels have not yet laid down their weapons' . About the literary representation of the execution of the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa in the Islamic Sīra tradition . In: Hallesche's contributions to oriental studies . Volume 41, 2006, p. 211. There with further references.
  20. ^ William Montgomery Watt: Muhammad . Prophet and Statesman. Oxford University Press, London 1961, p. 172.
  21. ↑ See, for example, John Marsden Beaumont Jones (ed.): The Kitāb al-Ma gh āzī of al-Wāqidī . Volume 2. Oxford University Press, London 1966, p. 512 ( online ). A German translation of Muhammad's statement can be found in Matthias Vogt: 'The angels have not taken off their weapons yet' . About the literary representation of the execution of the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa in the Islamic Sīra tradition . In: Hallesche's contributions to oriental studies . Volume 41, 2006, p. 213.
  22. ↑ Matthias Vogt: 'The angels have not yet laid down their weapons' . About the literary representation of the execution of the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa in the Islamic Sīra tradition . In: Hallesche's contributions to oriental studies . Volume 41, 2006, p. 213.
  23. ↑ Quoted from Ibn Ishaq: The life of the prophet . From the Arabic by Gernot Rotter . Spohr, Kandern 2004, p. 180.
  24. ↑ On the different reported numbers of those killed see Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, p. 89 ( online ) and sources listed there. For example, Abū ʿUbaid names 400 tribe members killed, while an-Nasafī, on the other hand, reports 600 to 900 deaths. See respectively Abū ʿUbaid: Kitāb al-Amwāl . Dār aš-Šurūq, Beirut 1989, p. 216 (No. 348; online ) and an-Nasafī: Madārik at-Tanzīl wa-Ḥaqāʾiq at-Taʾwīl . Volume 3. Dār al-Kalam aṭ-Ṭaiyib, Beirut 1998, p. 27 (Commentary on Sura 33:26; online ).
  25. ↑ See, for example, John Marsden Beaumont Jones (ed.): The Kitāb al-Ma gh āzī of al-Wāqidī . Volume 2. Oxford University Press, London 1966, p. 503 ( online ). These were members of the much smaller Jewish clan of the Hadl, who were allied with the Quraiza and, together with the Quraiza, were besieged by the Muslims. See Michael Lecker: Were There Female Relatives of the Prophet Muḥammad among the Besieged Qurayẓa? In: Journal of the American Oriental Society . Volume 136, No. 2, 2016, pp. 397-401. Lecker argues that these men were spared not because of a conversion to Islam but because of an existing marriage with relatives of the Prophet (pp. 400-403).
  26. ↑ See the different traditions in Eduard Sachau (ed.): Ibn Saad. Biographies of Muhammad, his companions and the later bearers of Islam up to the year 230 of his flight . Volume 8: Biographies of Women (ed. Carl Brockelmann). Brill, Leiden 1904, pp. 92-94 ( online ) and in John Marsden Beaumont Jones (ed.): The Kitāb al-Ma gh āzī of al-Wāqidī . Volume 2. Oxford University Press, London 1966, pp. 520f. ( online ). See Yohanan Friedmann: Tolerance and Coercion in Islam . Interfaith Relations in the Muslim Tradition . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge u. a. 2003, p. 184.
  27. ^ Michael Lecker: On Arabs of the Banū Kilāb executed together with the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa . In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 19, 1995, p. 70 ( online ).
  28. ^ William Montgomery Watt: Muhammad . Prophet and Statesman. Oxford University Press, London 1961, pp. 174f.
  29. ↑ For a list of other verses, some of which are associated with the Banū Quraiza, see Marco Schöller: Exegetical Thinking and Prophet's Biography . A source-critical analysis of the Sīra tradition on Muḥammad's conflict with the Jews . Harrasowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 1998, p. 306f. including sources named there.
  30. ↑ a b See Marco Schöller: Exegetical thinking and biography of the prophets . A source-critical analysis of the Sīra tradition on Muḥammad's conflict with the Jews . Harrasowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 1998, pp. 287-289 and a detailed presentation of his thesis on pp. 260-312.
  31. ↑ See for example Michael Jan de Goeje (ed.): Annales auctore Abu Djafar Mohammed Ibn Djarir at-Tabari (Annalen at-Tabarīs). Volume 1 (3). Brill, Leiden 1885, p. 1453 and p. 1499 ( online ). See John Marsdon Beaumont Jones: The Chronology of the "Ma gh āzī" - A Textual Survey . In: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies . Volume 19, 1957, p. 249 and p. 268 (Nadīr) and p. 251 and p. 274 (Quraiza).
  32. ↑ Marco Schöller: Qurayẓa (Banū al-) . In: Jane Dammen McAuliffe (Ed.): Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān . Volume 4. Brill, Leiden / Boston 2004, p. 334. Cf. Marco Schöller: Exegetical thinking and biography of the prophets . A source-critical analysis of the Sīra tradition on Muḥammad's conflict with the Jews . Harrasowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 1998, pp. 302-307 with an attempt to interpret a coherent Nadir and Quraiza episode.
  33. ↑ as-Suyūtī: Ad-Durr al-Manṯūr fī-t-Tafsīr bi-l-Maʾṯūr . Volume 14.Markaz Haǧr li-l-Buḥūṯ wa-d-Dirāsāt al-ʿArabīya wa-l-Islāmīya, Cairo 2003, pp. 15-19 (commentary on sura 33: 26f .; online ).
  34. ↑ See Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, p. 87 ( online ) with references there.
  35. ↑ at-Tabarī: Ǧāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Taʾwīl Āy al-Qurʾān. Volume 19. Dār al-Hiǧr, Cairo 2001, pp. 72f. (Commentary on Sura 33:26; online ).
  36. ↑ at-Tabarī: Ǧāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Taʾwīl Āy al-Qurʾān. Volume 19. Dār al-Hiǧr, Cairo 2001, pp. 82f. (Commentary on Sura 33:27; online ). As-Suyūtī also refers to representations according to which this statement relates to one of the three possibilities mentioned. See as-Suyūtī: Ad-Durr al-Manṯūr fī-t-Tafsīr bi-l-Maʾṯūr . Volume 14.Markaz Haǧr li-l-Buḥūṯ wa-d-Dirāsāt al-ʿArabīya wa-l-Islāmīya, Cairo 2003, pp. 16f. (Commentary on Sura 33:27; online ).
  37. ↑ See Arent Jan Wensinck; Gautier HA Juynboll: Saʿīd b. Zayd . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition . Volume 8. Brill, Leiden 1993, p. 857.
  38. ↑ See at-Tabarī: Ǧāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Taʾwīl Āy al-Qurʾān. Volume 19. Dār al-Hiǧr, Cairo 2001, p. 83 (commentary on sura 33:27; online ) and as-Suyūtī: Ad-Durr al-Manṯūr fī-t-Tafsīr bi-l-Maʾṯūr . Volume 14.Markaz Haǧr li-l-Buḥūṯ wa-d-Dirāsāt al-ʿArabīya wa-l-Islāmīya, Cairo 2003, p. 16 (Commentary on Sura 33:27; online ).
  39. ↑ See Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, pp. 81-83 ( online ) and sources listed there.
  40. ↑ Muqātil ibn Sulaimān: Tafsīr Muqātil ibn Sulaimān . Volume 2. Muʾassasat al-Tāʾrīḫ al-ʿArabī, Beirut 2002, p. 122 (Commentary on Sura 8: 55f .; online ).
  41. ↑ See John Marsdon Beaumont Jones: The Chronology of the "Ma gh āzī" - A Textual Survey . In: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies . Volume 19, 1957, p. 248 and p. 262f. A whole section is devoted to dating his death in the article on Kaʿb. See Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf # dating .
  42. ^ Al-Baghawī: Maʿālim at-Tanzīl . Volume 3. Dār Ṭaiyiba, Riyadh 1989, p. 369 (Commentary on Sura 8: 55-58, online ). Cf. Marco Schöller: Exegetical thinking and biography of the prophets . A source-critical analysis of the Sīra tradition on Muḥammad's conflict with the Jews . Harrasowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 1998, p. 287 with a German translation of the corresponding passage in al-Baghawī's work.
  43. ↑ Quoted from Marco Schöller: Exegetical thinking and biography of the prophets . A source-critical analysis of the Sīra tradition on Muḥammad's conflict with the Jews . Harrasowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden 1998, p. 287. A similar tradition can also be found in the traditional collections of Buchārīs and Muslims . See al-Buchārī: Al-Ǧāmiʿ aṣ-Ṣaḥīḥ . Dār ar-Risāla al-ʿĀlamīya, Damascus 2011, Volume 3, p. 287 (Book 62, No. 4028; digitized from another edition ) and Muslim ibn al-Hajjāj: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim . Bait al-Afkār ad-Duwalīya, Riad 1998, p. 733 (Book 32, No. 1766; online ).
  44. ^ Arent Jan Wensinck; Johannes Heindrik Kramers: Concise Dictionary of Islam . Brill, Leiden 1941, p. 18.
  45. ↑ See for example Georges Vajda: Ahl al-Kitāb . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam . New Edition . Volume 1. Brill, Leiden 1986, pp. 265f.
  46. ^ Theodoor Willem Johannes Juynboll (ed.): Le livre de l'impôt foncier de Yahyā Ibn Ādam (Das Kitāb al-Ḫarāǧ Yahyā ibn Ādams). Brill, Leiden 1896, p. 54 ( online ).
  47. ↑ See al-Buchārī: Al-Ǧāmiʿ aṣ-Ṣaḥīḥ . Volume 1. Dār ar-Risāla al-ʿĀlamīya, Damascus 2011, pp. 545f. (Book 23, No. 1392). English translation by Muhammad Muhsin Khan: Translation of the Meanings of Sahîh Al-Bukhâri: Arabic-English . Volume 2. Dar-us-Salam, Riad 1997, p. 274 ( online ).
  48. ^ Arent Jan Wensinck; Johannes Heindrik Kramers: Concise Dictionary of Islam . Brill, Leiden 1941, p. 18. See Mahmoud Ayoub: Dhimmah in Qur'an and Hadith . In: Arab Studies Quarterly . Volume 5, No. 2, 1983, pp. 178f. and Majid Khadduri: War and Peace in the Law of Islam . John Hopkins, Baltimore 1956, p. 196 and sources cited there.
  49. ↑ Walid Najib Arafat: New Light on the Story of Banū Qurayẓa and the Jews of Medina . In: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society . Volume 108, No. 2, 1976, p. 104.
  50. ↑ See Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, pp. 66-73 ( online ).
  51. ↑ “… baʿda mā waḍaʿati l-ḥarbu auzārahā.” The expression is taken from the wording of sura 47: 4: “(skin with the sword) until the war frees (you) from its burdens (w. Until the war its burdens (and is replaced by peace)! ”(translation according to Paret) See as-Sarachsī : Šarḥ Kitāb as-Siyar al-Kabīr li-Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan aš-Shaibānī . Volume 3. Šarikat al-Iʿlānāt aš-Šarqīya, Cairo 1971, p. 1025 (No. 1890).
  52. ↑ as-Sarachsī: Sharḥ Kitāb as-Siyar al-Kabīr li-Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan aš-Shaibānī . Volume 3. Šarikat al-Iʿlānāt aš-Šarqīya, Cairo 1971, p. 1026 (No. 1891).
  53. ↑ “… yaqtulūhum qatlan karīman.” See as-Sarachsī: Sharḥ Kitāb as-Siyar al-Kabīr li-Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan aš-Shaibānī . Volume 3. Šarikat al-Iʿlānāt aš-Šarqīya, Cairo 1971, p. 1029 (No. 1900).
  54. ↑ as-Sarachsī: Sharḥ Kitaab as-Siyar al-Kabeer li-Muhammad ibn al-Ḥasan aš-Šaibānī . Volume 3. Šarikat al-Iʿlānāt aš-Šarqīya, Cairo 1971, p. 1029 (No. 1900).
  55. ↑ See al-Sarachsī: Sharḥ Kitāb as-Siyar al-Kabīr li-Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan aš-Shaibānī . Volume 2. Šarikat al-Iʿlānāt aš-Šarqīya, Cairo 1971, pp. 587-592 (No. 962).
  56. ↑ a b as-Sarachsī: Sharḥ Kitāb as-Siyar al Kabir li-Muhammad b Hasan AS-Šaibānī . Volume 2. Šarikat al-Iʿlānāt aš-Šarqīya, Cairo 1971, p. 591 (No. 962).
  57. ↑ as-Sarachsī: Sharḥ Kitāb as-Siyar al-Kabīr li-Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan aš-Shaibānī . Volume 2. Šarikat al-Iʿlānāt aš-Šarqīya, Cairo 1971, p. 590 (No. 962).
  58. ↑ "... ḥattā naʿlamu anna man baqiya minhum qad aqarra bi-ḏālika wa-raḍiyahū".
  59. ↑ "... kānū fī wasṭi dāri l-islām au fī bilādi l-ʿadūwi." See al-Shāfiʿī: Kitāb al-Umm . Volume 5. Dār al-Wafāʾ, al-Mansūra  2001, p. 443 ( online ).
  60. ^ Al- Shafidī: Kitāb al-Umm . Volume 5. Dār al-Wafāʾ, al-Mansūra 2001, pp. 443f. ( online ).
  61. ↑ On Abū ʿUbaid see: Carl Brockelmann: History of the Arabian Literature . Volume 1. Emil Felber, Weimar 1898, pp. 106f. ( online ); Fuat Sezgin: History of Arabic Literature . Volume 8. Brill, Leiden 1982, pp. 81-87 and Volume 9. Brill, Leiden 1984, pp. 70-72; Reinhard Weipert: Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim b. Sallam . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam . THREE . Brill Online, 2017.
  62. ↑ Abū ʿUbaid: Kitāb al-Amwāl . Dār aš-Šurūq, Beirut 1989, pp. 215f. (No. 346-350; online ).
  63. ↑ Abū ʿUbaid: Kitāb al-Amwāl . Dār aš-Šurūq, Beirut 1989, pp. 259f. (No. 460-462; online ).
  64. ↑ Abū ʿUbaid: Kitāb al-Amwāl . Dār aš-Šurūq, Beirut 1989, pp. 260f. (No. 463; online ).
  65. ↑ The coalition led by the Quraish against the Muslims in the battle of the trenches .
  66. ↑ Abū ʿUbaid: Kitāb al-Amwāl . Dār aš-Šurūq, Beirut 1989, p. 260 (No. 462; online ).
  67. ↑ al-Māwardī: Aʿlām an-Nubūwa . al-Maṭbaʿa al-Bahīya, Cairo 1319 AH (1901), p. 146.
  68. ↑ See Edward William Lane: An Arabic-English Lexicon . Volume 4. Libraire de Liban, Beirut 1968, p. 1644a, svصبر(ṣ - b - r) ( online )
  69. ↑ al-Māwardī: Aʿlām an-Nubūwa . al-Maṭbaʿa al-Bahīya, Cairo 1319 AH (1901), p. 147.
  70. ↑ Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, p. 70 ( online ).
  71. ↑ a b Ibn Qaiyim al- Jawzīya : Zād al-Maʿād fī Hady Ḫair al-ʿIbād . Volume 2. Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīya, Beirut 1985, p. 105. Cf. the English translation in Ismail Abdus Salaam ( transl. ): Zād al-Maʿād. Provisions of the afterlife which lie within the prophetic guidance . Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut 2010, p. 298 ( online ).
  72. ^ "The massacre of the Beni Coreitza was a barbarous deed which cannot be justified by any reason of political necessity."
  73. ↑ "But the indiscriminate slaughter of the whole tribe cannot but be recognized otherwise than as an act of enormous cruelty, which casts an odious blot upon the prophet's name."
  74. ^ William Muir: Mahomet & Islam . A Sketch of the Prophet's Life from Original Sources, and a Brief Outline of his Religion . The Religious Tract Society, London 1885, p. 151 ( online ).
  75. ^ Frants Buhl: The life of Muhammad . Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1961, p. 275. The Danish first edition appeared in 1903 under the title Muhammeds Liv .
  76. ↑ Martin Hartmann: Islam. History - Faith - Law . Verlag von Rudolf Haupt, Leipzig 1909, p. 16 ( online ).
  77. ↑ Tor Andrae: Mohammed . His life and his faith . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1932, p. 126. The first Swedish edition appeared in 1930 under the title Muhammed. Hans liv och hans tro .
  78. ↑ "weak-kneed".
  79. ↑ "mock trial".
  80. ↑ Salo Wittmayer Baron: A Social and Religious History of the Jews . Volume 3. Columbia University Press, New York 1957, p. 79: “the cruel vindictiveness of the Messenger and his associates.” The first English edition appeared in 1937.
  81. ↑ Salo Wittmayer Baron: A Social and Religious History of the Jews . Volume 3. Columbia University Press, New York 1957, p. 264, note 7: "The bad conscience of Mohammed and his immediate associates also contributed to the inconsistencies in the subsequent Arab traditions concerning this miscarriage of justice."
  82. ^ Maurice Gaudefroy-Demombynes: Mahomet . Albin Michel, Paris 1957, p. 146 ( online ): “L'incident des B. Qoraïza est une vilaine page de l'histoire de Mohammed, mais c'est un acte qui fut très profitable à la gloire d'Allah et de son prophète ”.
  83. ^ Arent Jan Wensinck: Mohammed en te Joden te Medina . Brill, Leiden 1908, p. 155 ( online ): “Het is merkwaardig, that Mohammed's wreedste daden door de traditie aan een hemelsch bevel been toegeschreven: de documenting the Qainōqa ', de moord op Ka'b en de aanval op de Qoraiza. Daardoor wordt aan alle afkeuring het zwijgen oplegerd. Allah's weten schijnt ruimer te zijn dan dat zijner schepselen. ”English translation in Arent Jan Wensinck: Muhammad and the Jews of Medina . W. H. Behn, Berlin 1982, p. 113.
  84. ^ Arent Jan Wensinck: Mohammed en te Joden te Medina . Brill, Leiden 1908, p. 174 ( online ). English translation in Arent Jan Wensinck: Muhammad and the Jews of Medina . W. H. Behn, Berlin 1982, p. 127.
  85. ↑ Muhammad Hamidullah: Muslim Conduct of State . Ashraf Printing Press, Lahore 1987, pp. 216f. (§ 445; digitized older edition ) and p. 239f. (§ 498-499; digitized older edition ). The first English edition appeared in 1941. Cf. Norman Arthur Stillman: The Jews of Arab Lands . A History and Source Book . The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1979, p. 16, note 32 ( online ).
  86. ^ William Montgomery Watt: Muhammad . Prophet and Statesman . Oxford University Press, London 1961, p. 173: “Some European writers have criticized this sentence for what they call its savage and inhuman character. It has to be remembered, however, that in the Arabia of that day when tribes were at war with one another or simply had no agreement, they had no obligations towards one another, not even of what we would call common decency. The enemy and the complete stranger had no rights whatsoever. "
  87. ^ William Montgomery Watt: Muhammad at Medina. Oxford University Press, London 1962, pp. 216f. ( online ).
  88. ^ William Montgomery Watt: Muhammad . Prophet and Statesman . Oxford University Press, London 1961, pp. 171f .: "The reason, of course, was that, while the outward acts of the clan had been correct, they had been intriguing with Muḥammad's enemies and at one point had been on the verge of attacking Muḥammad in his rear. They had thus been guilty of treasonable activities against the Medinan community. Muḥammad, realizing that after the failure of the Meccans his position was very much stronger, was not prepared to tolerate such conduct, and determined to remove this source of weakness from Medina and to teach a lesson to enemies and potential enemies. "
  89. ↑ Rudi Paret: Mohammed and the Koran . History and proclamation of the Arab prophet . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart / Berlin / Cologne 2001, p. 122 ( online ). The first edition of the work appeared in 1957.
  90. ↑ Rudi Paret: Mohammed and the Koran . History and proclamation of the Arab prophet . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart / Berlin / Cologne 2001, p. 125.
  91. ↑ Rudi Paret: Mohammed and the Koran . History and proclamation of the Arab prophet . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart / Berlin / Cologne 2001, p. 122f.
  92. ↑ Rudi Paret: Mohammed and the Koran . History and proclamation of the Arab prophet . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart / Berlin / Cologne 2001, p. 123f. See his comments on p. 140 ( online ). See Rudi Paret: Tolerance and Intolerance in Islam . In: Saeculum . Volume 21, 1970, pp. 350f.
  93. ^ Marshall Goodwin Simms Hodgson: The Venture of Islam . Conscience and History in a World Civilization . Volume 1. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago / London 1977, p. 191. The first edition of the work was published in 1974.
  94. ↑ See Haim Zeev Hirschberg: Yisrāʾēl ba-ʿArāv . Mossad Bialik, Tel Aviv 1946, p. 146. Quoted from Norman Arthur Stillman: The Jews of Arab Lands . A History and Source Book . The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1979, p. 16, note 30 ( online ). Cohen refers to the entire eighth chapter of the work.
  95. ^ Mark Cohen: The Jews under Islam . From the Rise of Islam to Sabbatai Zevi . In: Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi (Ed.): Bibliographical Essays in Medieval Jewish Studies . Volume 2. Ktav Publishing House, New York 1976, p. 179: “Muhammad's assault is seen as arising out of the understandable need to assert his own position and power in the face of an entrenched Jewish group which resisted absorption by the new faith. Such an interpretation, rather than an anachronistic anti-Semitic explanation, is rarely challenged by reasonable scholars, especially since the subsequent history of medieval Islam reveals comparatively little evidence of physical violence directed specifically against Jews as a group. "
  96. ↑ Norman Arthur Stillman: The Jews of Arab Lands . A History and Source Book . The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1979, p. 16 ( online ): "Their fate was a bitter one, but not unusual according to the harsh rules of war during that period."
  97. ^ "[T] he harsh ethos of the age".
  98. ↑ Albert Arazi, Salman Masalha (ed.): Six Early Arab Poets . New Edition and Concordance . Graphit Press, Jerusalem 1999, p. 58. English translation by Charles Francis Horne (Ed.): The Sacred Books and Early Literature of the East . Volume 5. Parke, Austin & Lipscomb, New York / London 1917, p. 39 ( online ). See Norman Arthur Stillman: The Jews of Arab Lands . A History and Source Book . The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1979, p. 16, note 32 ( online ).
  99. ↑ The able-bodied men of Melos, who had opposed Athens at the time of the Peloponnesian War , were executed after their submission and their wives and children enslaved.
  100. ↑ Norman Arthur Stillman: The Jews of Arab Lands . A History and Source Book . The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1979, p. 16, note 32 ( online ). See Muhammad Hamidullah: Muslim Conduct of State . Ashraf Printing Press, Lahore 1987, pp. 216f. (§ 445; digitized older edition ) and p. 239f. (§ 498-499; digitized older edition ).
  101. ^ "State of armed neutrality".
  102. ↑ Norman Arthur Stillman: The Jews of Arab Lands . A History and Source Book . The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1979, p. 15 ( online ).
  103. ^ Gordon Newby: A History of The Jews of Arabia . From Ancient Times to Their Eclipse Under Islam . University of South Carolina Press, Columbia 1988, p. 91: "[T] hey also negotiated with the besieging Meccans and would have probably joined them if they had been able to trust that they would not be left isolated when Muḥammad attacked them."
  104. ^ Gordon Newby: A History of The Jews of Arabia . From Ancient Times to Their Eclipse Under Islam . University of South Carolina Press, Columbia 1988, p. 92.
  105. ^ Gordon Newby: A History of The Jews of Arabia . From Ancient Times to Their Eclipse Under Islam . University of South Carolina Press, Columbia 1988, p. 93: “It is clear, however, that the underlying policy was not totally anti-Jewish, because Jews remained in the city of Medina and in the teritories [sic] under Muḥammad's control until after his death. "
  106. ↑ Hartmut Bobzin: Mohammed . Beck, Munich 2000, p. 107.
  107. ^ Francesco Gabrieli: Muhammad and the Conquest of Islam . Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London 1968, pp. 73-76. The Italian first edition appeared in 1967 under the title Maometto e le grandi conquiste arabe . Compare the wording of the German translation in Francesco Gabrieli: Mohammed und die arabische Welt, which sometimes differs significantly from the English translation . Kindler Verlag, Munich 1968, p. 59.
  108. ^ "Il est difficile de juger le massacre des Qorayza. Il faut penser aux mœurs de l'époque qui étaient fort rudes. ”But see Maxime Rodinson: A Critical Survey of Modern Studies on Muhammad . In: Merlin Swartz (Ed.): Studies on Islam, Oxford University Press, New York / Oxford 1981, p. 77, note 142.
  109. ↑ “Pourtant le soin qu'apportent les textes à en disculper Mohammad atteste qu'il dut soulever quelque émotion. Des détails apparaissent dans ces textes même qui rendent difficile de croire en l'innocence du prophète. "
  110. ^ Maxime Rodinson: Mahomet . Seuil, Paris 1994, pp. 265f. The French first edition appeared in 1961. German translation in Maxime Rodinson: Mohammed . Bucher, Lucerne / Frankfurt a. M. 1975, p. 206.
  111. ^ A b Michael Lecker: On Arabs of the Banū Kilāb Executed together with the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa . In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 19, 1995, p. 66 ( online ).
  112. ↑ See Michael Lecker: Buʿāth . In: Kate Fleet, Gudrun Krämer, Denis Matringe, John Nawas, Everett Rowson (Eds.): The Encyclopaedia of Islam . THREE . Brill Online, 2017 ( online ).
  113. ↑ al-Iṣfahānī: Kitāb al-Aġānī . Volume 15. Dār aṭ-Ṭibāʿa al-ʿĀmira, Cairo 1285  AH (1868 / -69), p. 164 ( online ). Compare Michael Lecker: On Arabs of the Banū Kilāb Executed together with the Jewish Banū Qurayẓa . In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 19, 1995, p. 66 ( online ). There with the translation: "O company of the Aws, be gentle and do not destroy your brothers, because having them as neighbors is better than having foxes as neighbors."
  114. ↑ Irving Zeitlin: The Historical Muhammad . Polity Press, Cambridge / Malden 2007, p. 133 ( online ).
  115. ↑ Irving Zeitlin: The Historical Muhammad . Polity Press, Cambridge / Malden 2007, p. 12f. ( online ): “To grasp adequately the underlying socioeconomic causes of the growing antagonism between Muhammad and the Jews, we have to invoke Ibn Khalduns Theory of the interplay between the desert and the sown, between bedouins and sedentary cultures […]. In the context of Yathrib-Medina and its environs, the Jews represented the sown and were correspondingly better off than the Emigrants and the Medinan supporters of Muhammad. It was, therefore, not only religious-ideological differences, but also and, primarily, material economic and political differences that resulted in the killing of between 600–900 men of the Jewish tribe, Banu-Qurayza, and the selling of the women and children into slavery. "
  116. ^ Tilman Nagel: Mohammed . Twenty chapters on the Prophet of the Muslims . R. Oldenbourg Verlag, Munich 2010, p. 12.
  117. ^ Tilman Nagel: Mohammed . Twenty chapters on the Prophet of the Muslims . R. Oldenbourg Verlag, Munich 2010, p. 144.
  118. ↑ Walid Najib Arafat: New Light on the Story of Banū Qurayẓa and the Jews of Medina . In: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society . Volume 108, No. 2, 1976, pp. 100-107.
  119. ↑ Barakat Ahmad: Muhammad and the Jews . A re-examination . Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi et al. 1979, pp. 73-94. See Harold Kasimow: Muhammad and the Jews: A Re-Examination by Barakat Ahmad (review). In: Journal of the American Academy of Religion . Volume 50, No. 1, 1982, pp. 157f.
  120. ↑ Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, pp. 61-96 ( online ).
  121. ↑ Fred McGraw Donner: Muhammad and the Believers . At the Origins of Islam . Harvard University Press, Cambridge / London 2010, p. 73. Original wording in English: " These and many other questions remain to be resolved by future scholarship. " Cf. the remarks on early Islamic-Jewish conditions with Berkey's treatment of these events as historical facts who en passant suggests a possibility of the historiographical invention of the expulsion or annihilation of the three great Medinan-Jewish tribes, without any doubt to explain in more detail: “(...) the expulsion and massacre of some of the Jewish tribes of Yathrib / Medina, even if true, did not mark the end of the complicated story of creative interaction between Judaism and Islam . ”See Jonathan Porter Berkey: The Formation of Islam . Religion and Society in the Near East, 600-1800 . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge et al. 2003. pp. 64f. ( online ).
  122. ↑ See Meir Jacob Kister: The massacre of the Banū Qurayẓa: a re-examination of a tradition. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam . Volume 8, 1986, p. 63 and literature cited there ( online ).