Did Prophet Muhammad kill 700 Jews?

A good place for the non-Muslims to start learning about the Holy Prophet Muhammad is a movie named, the Message: Mohammed: Messenger of God,  (1976) Rated PG, starring Anthony Quinn. This is a three hour movie the first hour is available above.

Source of the refutation article: Muhammad Fact Check

This is perhaps one of the most common contemporary allegations levied against Prophet Muhammad [1]. It is also one of the most spurious.

This event occurred after the largest battle ever held on Arabian soil in Medina during Prophet Muhammad’s life. The Confederate Army comprised of no less than 12,000 soldiers while the Muslims barricaded themselves in Medina, along with their sworn allies—per the Charter of Medina—numbering roughly a tenth the size. While the Muslims were victorious, they came within moments of annihilation due to the Banu Quraizah tribe’s treason.

Critics baselessly claim that Prophet Muhammad blindly executed the entire tribe. This too is baseless. Prophet Muhammad and the Jews were allies, as enshrined in the Charter of Medina Article 49, which states, “The parties to this Pact are bound to help each other in the event of an attack on Yathrib.” The Banu Quraizah Tribe was an equal and willing party to this pact. Yet, in the heat of battle, the Banu Quraizah sided with the enemy against the state of Medina despite their prior signed agreement. Fortunately, the remaining allied Medina army was able to withstand this treasonous act and win the battle against incredible odds. The question remained, however, how to address the Banu Quraizah’s treason. Adding to the dilemma was the fact that the Banu Quraizah had committed this act once before, upon which Prophet Muhammad merely exiled them. When they later asked his forgiveness, he granted it, which is why they had since re-entered Medina. The 19th century historian Stanley Lane-Poole accurately describes the events that followed the Battle of the Ditch:

Of the sentences on the three clans, that of exile, passed upon two of them, was clement enough. They were a turbulent set, always setting the people of Medina by the ears; and finally, a brawl followed by an insurrection resulted in the expulsion of one tribe; and insubordination, alliance with enemies and a suspicion of conspiracy against the Prophet’s life, ended similarly for the second. Both tribes had violated the original treaty, and had endeavored in every way to bring Muhammad and his religion to ridicule and destruction. The only question is whether their punishment was not too light. Of the third clan a fearful example was made, not by Muhammad, but by an arbiter appointed by themselves. When Quraish and their allies were besieging Medina and had well-nigh stormed the defences, this Jewish tribe [the Banu Quraizah] entered into negotiations with the enemy, which were only circumvented by the diplomacy of the Prophet. When the besiegers had retired, Muhammad naturally demanded an explanation of the Jews. They resisted in their dogged way and were themselves besieged and compelled to surrender at discretion. Muhammad, however, consented to the appointing of a chief of a tribe allied to the Jews as the judge who should pronounce sentence upon them. This chief gave sentence that the men, in numbers some 600, should be killed, and the women and children enslaved; and the sentence was carried out. It was a harsh, bloody sentence; but it must be remembered that the crime of these men was high treason against the State, during a time of siege; and one need not be surprised at the summary execution of a traitorous clan.

Thus, Prophet Muhammad did not order any execution, nor did he participate in the execution. On the contrary, Prophet Muhammad graciously agreed to let the Banu Quraizah’s own ally, Sa‘d bin Mu‘adh of Aus, deliver the verdict. Why blame Prophet Muhammad for a decision he did not make and for a crime he did not commit?

Read further

Additional Reading

Muhammad: the Light for the Dark Ages of Europe!

Mosque of Medina: First built in first year after Hijra

Categories: Ahmadiyyat: True Islam, Muhammad

Tagged as:

8 replies

  1. if 600 Jews were indeed executed there should be evidence of their graves. Their corpses would not have been left just like that.Does history provide any evidence of such a graveyard. Jewish grave orientation is different from Muslims. Does history provide any clue about the actual executioners ?Explore the possibility of the whole event being a hoax or a story.

  2. Referring to the last sentence of the blog:”Why blame Prophet Muhammad for a decision he did not make and for a crime he did not commit?”
    I’d request to reconsider the word “crime” as the evidence of the 19th century historian Stanley Lane-Poole clearly speaks that it was a legitimate decision of a legitimate orbiter: Sa‘d bin Mu‘adh. Please refer to the words, “but it must be remembered that the crime of these men was high treason against the State, during a time of siege; and one need not be surprised at the summary execution of a traitorous clan.”
    Comments from Aneela are very wise.

  3. You very cunningly left off the exception to the pact. The pact was only valid if the enemy was a “common enemy “. In this case, the enemy wasn’t a common enemy but did business with the Quresh tribe, therefore the pact didn’t apply in this case. Mohammed went back on his pact and mercilessly murdered hundreds of men and boys. Get your facts straight.

  4. a’audhu bi llahi min al-shaytaan al-rajeem.
    bi ism allah al-rahmaan al-raheem

    Denying the fact that this happened is denying the Ahadith which have went through several scrubbings to ensure authenticity and thus given the grade ‘Saheeh’
    you cannot deny these because if you do, you deny islaam.
    You deny the wudu’, the salah, zakah, hajj and everything that the ahadith informs us of.
    So don’t even go that route!

    سُوۡرَةُ الحُجرَات
    يَـٰٓأَيُّہَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓاْ إِن جَآءَكُمۡ فَاسِقُۢ بِنَبَإٍ۬ فَتَبَيَّنُوٓاْ أَن تُصِيبُواْ قَوۡمَۢا بِجَهَـٰلَةٍ۬ فَتُصۡبِحُواْ عَلَىٰ مَا فَعَلۡتُمۡ نَـٰدِمِينَ (٦)

    Surah Al-Hujraat 49
    O ye who believe! If an evil-liver bring you tidings, verify it, lest ye smite some folk in ignorance and afterward repent of what ye did. (6)

  5. I am amused that we are being asked to look to the Quran for this answer. Absolutely the most arrogant and disgusting assumption here that only Arabs and Muslims had a written history or language. The Jews make Islam look like a week old baby in diapers. Everyone else had a language and can attest to the murders and brutal religious wars -even if Muslims have a very short memory – and want to white wash this part of everyone’s history. NOT a peaceful religion. Never was. Even if some sects today espouse tolerance and respect. However – I do hope the faith evolves and embraces the best parts of the Quran.

  6. if this incident did occur and the book The History of Damascus confirms the incident did occur then that would mean Muhammad violated the Koran. therefore, he fails as a prophet. Muslims accept this incident as true and try to justify it. the killing of prisoners of war is in complete contradiction to Koranic injunctions.

Leave a Reply