Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
Questions and Discussions about Islam
 Whyislam.org Forums : WhyIslam : Questions and Discussions about Islam
Message Icon Topic: Justification for the murder of innocent(Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 4
Author Message
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 03 December 2017 at 4:30pm
Sorry, bud, but if you have learned anything about me, you should know that you can't bully me. And why do you keep trying to bring my views of religion into the discussion? We're talking about politics and history, not religion.

You make brash statements about what "all" Muslims understand, but what sources do you have? The only accusation against these people drawn from a supposedly contemporaneous source that I know of is "33:26 And He brought down those who supported them among the People of the Scripture from their fortresses". Your position is that every member of this tribe supported an enemy of Muhammad and they all deserved to die for this. If it's news to Muslims, then it's because Muslims don't know how to think critically. Obviously, I'm nowhere near the first person in 15 centuries to observe the injustice of the treatment of this tribe.

You've had several chances to make your case, but you dodge the issue and attack me instead. Nice try!

So now I'll move on to the next question that a critical thinker would ask: Why was this account of this incident preserved? When the Muslims gathered up fragments of Muhammad's speeches to form the Qur'an, they were free to retain those which they felt were worthy and to discard those which were best forgotten. Why would the early Muslims wish to preserve an account of Muhammad's atrocity?

I believe the answer is also in 33:26 "...and cast terror into their hearts..."

Whether or not Muhammad's opponents believe that the Muslim army was aided by armies of angels, those who had heard the fate of this tribe would certainly fear the consequences of being besieged and captured. It was important to the Muslims that this story be disseminated widely and that all those around them would fear them. You don't think that Muhammad was the leader of a terrorist organisation? Think again!
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Traveller  
Graduate
Graduate

Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 2270
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 04 December 2017 at 9:23am
Originally posted by Non Believer

So now I'll move on to the next question that a critical thinker would ask: Why was this account of this incident preserved? When the Muslims gathered up fragments of Muhammad's speeches to form the Qur'an, they were free to retain those which they felt were worthy and to discard those which were best forgotten. Why would the early Muslims wish to preserve an account of Muhammad's atrocity?

I believe the answer is also in 33:26 "...and cast terror into their hearts..."


NB, your imagination is really wild.

Fyi. The prophet صلي الله عليه وسلم is probably the only ancient historical figure whose life story is almost fully recorded and the records carefully preserved. This is especially true during his prophethood. There are no gaps in the narration and as such, no 'selective recording' of history as alleged by you.

We disagree with you calling it an atrocity and my brother Shenango have given arguments. He also asked you to come up with your arguments why you call it that but till now nothing. You only repeated the same, calling it an atrocity and asking us to argue on your concocted premise. That's not fair.



Originally posted by Non Believer

Your position is that every member of this tribe supported an enemy of Muhammad and they all deserved to die for this.


That's not his position. It was not 'every member of this tribe'. He made that clear.

Originally posted by Shenango

What genocide? Are you referring to the execution of the men of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe of Medina, and enslavement of their women and children?


Remember these two vital points.

1. Bani Qurayza requested to be tried according to the Jewish law.
2. The execution was in accordance with the Jewish law.










In life, be like a traveller. Take only what you need
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Doris  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Religion: Agnostic(Agnostic)
Posts: 185
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 04 December 2017 at 9:54am
What was that Jewish law? I'd like to examine it.
History Buff
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Traveller  
Graduate
Graduate

Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 2270
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 04 December 2017 at 12:42pm
Originally posted by Doris

What was that Jewish law? I'd like to examine it.


Look at this verse.

If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. And when the LORD your God has delivered it into your hands, you shall smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword. Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you. - Deut 20.

In life, be like a traveller. Take only what you need
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 04 December 2017 at 2:38pm
Traveller, I continue to be disappointed by the Muslims posting in this forum. The non-Muslims who are here are trying to understand what Islam is. For brother Shenango to dodge the question and put the burden on me to find my own answer defeats the purpose of this site. Surely, there are discussions of this incident which you agree with and that can form the basis of our conversation. How many times have I found an Islamic commentary only to be told that "it isn't mainstream" or "I'm not understanding it properly". This is disingenuous.

I can't believe that you truly think that Muhammad's life is well documented compared to others. What historical records are there that were produced in his time? You rely heavily on the biography by ibn Ishaq whose life did not overlap with Muhammad at all. He relied on oral traditions. When I ask for you to indicate your source, it's a serious question that cannot be dismissed with "we (Muslims) all understand", as brother Shenango has tried to do.

Oral traditions do not make for reliable, complete histories. People, including you and me, generally report nothing but good things about the people we admire and we report nothing but bad things about the people we dislike. That's the nature of oral history. I've never heard a bad thing said about my grandfather. Oral traditions are highly selective and when they are written down, there is further selection. Don't be so naive to think otherwise.

By contrast, for example, the trial of Joan of Arc in 1431 is fully documented and scholars today can read the court records and understand why she was executed. We have unbelievably detailed historical records for many aspects of our history. However, unless I'm mistaken, all that was recorded about the fate of this Jewish tribe is a few verses in the Qur'an. We hear nothing about the remnants of this tribe after this execution and we can assume that the tribe was annihilated. You aren't able to just come out and say what their crime was and why it was just to annihilate the tribe? I'm not concocting anything.

And then, there's the "Jewish Law" excuse. There are many reasons to reject this as a justification for annihilating this tribe. According to the Qur'an, Muhammad spoke that it was "Allah" who brought this destruction down on this tribe. Therefore, Islam fully owns this decision. Unless I'm mistaken, these verses make it so that this treatment of prisoners is lawful under Shariah.   

There are many time when Muslims claim that Muhammad was merciful, but he was not merciful in this case. Even if it were true that the execution was in accordance with Jewish law (only Muslims say that it was), there was nothing to prevent Muhammad from pardoning these people.

Brothers, it is time for you to stop making excuses and actually put some reasoning forward.

Edited by Non Believer - 04 December 2017 at 2:42pm
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3233
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 04 December 2017 at 8:51pm
Originally posted by Non Believer

Sorry, bud, but if you have learned anything about me, you should know that you can't bully me.


I'm not bullying anyone...but rather keeping you from backtracking and your feet to the fire, complaining about us from one end but then reluctant to make your case from the other end when given the opportunity. That's the hallmark of a troll, but no, you'd never be one of those.

Originally posted by Non Believer

The only accusation against these people drawn from a supposedly contemporaneous source


The incident is well-documented in the Sirah, which is accepted as valid on this incident. Sure, the Sirah wasn't a contemporaneous document because it was only set down a hundred years later, but the earliest Qur'anic manuscripts don't date from much earlier. So that's an inconsistency in your logic.

I don't get this entire line of argumentation. Where are you going with this Qur'an vs. Sirah thing and what benefit can possibly accrue to you? None that I can see. You're not going to get us to discount the Sirah's context of this incident, so what's the point of trying?

Originally posted by Non Believer

Your position is that every member of this tribe supported an enemy of Muhammad and they all deserved to die for this.


Mere alliance with an enemy force of the Prophet's was not what got this tribe executed. There is a specific reason this tribe was executed, but others were spared. Go back and do your homework. Go back and do your research. Come to the discussion prepared. I shouldn't have to be asking you to do this...and I'm not going to tell you the answer. You owe, us, your interlocutors, whose time and energies you are wasting with your ignorance and refusal to pick up a book, that much respect.

Originally posted by Non Believer

Why was this account of this incident preserved?


The passage in Qur'an 33 is not an "account" and was never intended to be. As with other incidents, it only alludes to the incident as it ties in to the theme of that specific Surah. The Qur'an wasn't composed to provide historical information, even though the few details of historical events it does provide by way of its verses are considered accurate by Muslims. No, the Sirah is what fulfills the fuctions of historical documentation, and as such is properly considered an "account".


Originally posted by Non Believer

When the Muslims gathered up fragments of Muhammad's speeches to form the Qur'an


You just characterized the Qur'an as "Muhammad's speeches". That is what Hadith is. The Qur'an is a poetic recital with verses and rhyme, not ordinary vernacular, and considered the literal words of God. Muslims must make ritual washing/purification before handling the text. The same is not true of Hadith books, which are just the Prophet's vernacular speeches and actions.

The difference may not matter to you, but if you're going to dialogue with me, then it is going to matter to you.

I feel like I'm writing an Islam 101 book just for you, NB...all the while without even a shred of gratitude and likely insults to meet me.

Originally posted by Non-Believer

they were free to retain those which they felt were worthy and to discard those which were best forgotten.


So you're saying in their place you'd feel free to discard parts of what you considered the literal word of God?

Originally posted by Non Believer

Why would the early Muslims wish to preserve an account of Muhammad's atrocity?


In the Sirah, yes...probably because they did not consider it an atrocity, but a justified act? Go figure!

Originally posted by Non Believer

You don't think that Muhammad was the leader of a terrorist organisation? Think again!


Great, thanks for coming onto a Muslim forum and insulting the man we revere the most of all and all of us. Now, is there anything else we can do for you?

Edited by Shenango - 04 December 2017 at 8:52pm
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 05 December 2017 at 2:56am
You are supposing that I can prove that something that never happened didn't happen? That's not how it works. It is for you to prove that something did happen, namely that every member of this tribe was guilty of crimes for which death or enslavement was an appropriate sentence. I don't understand your reluctance to state your case. You don't have to actually write anything but could simply point out a credible article.

You have lost all credibility with me. My understanding is that Muslims claim that the Qur'an was compiled in the years immediately after Muhammad's death by companions who had heard his speeches directly. Histories gathered by later generations of Muslims do not have this same authenticity. Since there is no outside corroboration, these histories have to be viewed with some amount of scepticism. And, yes, the compilers of the Qur'an would have to have made a determination about what was "the literal word of God" and what was not.

What a foolish site this has become where Muslims consider it beneath themselves to provide meaningful comment and repeatedly insult those who are trying to learn. Who would have thought that it would be Muslims who have become the trolls?

If you feel insulted because I do not show reverence for your man, then that's your problem, not mine. If your reverence prevents you from the objective study of his life, that too is your problem, not mine.

If you are incapable of being objective, then do us all a favour and stop posting here.
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Corinna  
Graduate
Graduate

Religion: Judaism(Orthodox)
Posts: 2184
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 05 December 2017 at 9:47am
Originally posted by Traveller

Originally posted by Doris

What was that Jewish law? I'd like to examine it.


Look at this verse.

If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. And when the LORD your God has delivered it into your hands, you shall smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword. Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you. - Deut 20.



Traveller, you seriously need to use Torah for quoting Jewish law and not this jibberish  which is without explanation and previous and subsequent laws taken into consideration.  Oy!  Talk about abuse of text and meaning, not to mention lack of understanding the time, place and what was actually taking place. 
 
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3233
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 05 December 2017 at 11:27am
Originally posted by Non Believer

It is for you to prove that something did happen, namely that every member of this tribe was guilty of crimes for which death or enslavement was an appropriate sentence. I don't understand your reluctance to state your case.


No, sir. I will not let you turn the tables. Logically speaking, no human, Muslim or non-Muslim, could live with the execution of innocent people. That automatically tells you that the Islamic position is that this tribe was not innocent. As you correctly implied, had it been felt that this tribe was innocent, then that incident would have been scrubbed out of the Sirah or not reported at all. Makes perfect sense. Show me where I've said anything different so far. I don't need to prove anything because all I've said so far is pure logic.

*YOU* put yourself out there by making the bold assertion, at least twice in this thread, that this tribe was "innocent", and that it bothered you how Muslims just ignored the deaths of "innocent" people. I can go back and quote your precise words in this very thread if you wish. It's those words that pissed me off and prompted me to jump into the thread.

I'm asking you for the umpteenth time now to defend the counter position YOU put out there of the tribe's innocence. All you've done so far is to cowardly try to turn the tables back on me to show their guilt. I think I've adequately explained my position.

If you care to admit that you've not done enough research, then just admit your fault and retract your assertion regarding their innocence and your consequent demeaning of Muslims. Don't worry, I'll consider your face saved despite our nasty exchange.

Edited by Shenango - 05 December 2017 at 11:32am
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 05 December 2017 at 11:57am
So you are saying that you "know" they are guilty of "something" but you don't know what, but this is logical since no Muslim would murder innocent people. Incredible, really.

The implications of your "logic" are terrifying, just as the implications of this genocide would have been terrifying to anyone who encountered these ruthless Arabs.

There is no "counter position" for me to defend until you take a position on what these people were guilty of and what evidence you have of their guilt, and then that the consequences of their guilt were just.

The ball is still in your court, as it always was.

PS. I'm happy to see that you admit that the Sirah has had any and all inconvenient truths scrubbed out. This has always been my position on the reliability of the Sirah as evidence of Muhammad's character. You've acknowledged that it is incomplete and would omit anything that is harmful to his reputation.

Edited by Non Believer - 05 December 2017 at 12:47pm
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4219
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 05 December 2017 at 2:47pm
Originally posted by Traveller



2. The execution was in accordance with the Jewish law.




Originally posted by doris

What was that Jewish law? I'd like to examine it.


Originally posted by Traveller

Look at this:

If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. And when the LORD your God has delivered it into your hands, you shall smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword. Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you. - Deut 20.


The Jews never recognised the above as law. The above is merely a commandment on a course of action for the Hebrews against a given enemy at a specified time and place in history. Nothing more. that's why you do not have a real answer to the question asked.

You guys really will spit out any nonsense at any given moment simply to to deflect from the rubbish you continually ensnare yourselves in. Is it any wonder no-one comes here for any longer ? Credibility was shot to pieces a long time ago .
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Corinna  
Graduate
Graduate

Religion: Judaism(Orthodox)
Posts: 2184
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 05 December 2017 at 2:57pm
That "law" was about transitioning from tribal behavior.  As a record of Jewish history, It occurred hundreds of years before Islam became a religion, long before Muhammad existed.  All of this is explained in Torah, Tanakh and especially in Talmud as mankind progressed toward more humane behavior and the laws changed with them - again, hundreds of years before the advent of Islam.  Oy!  Quit doing this to us, blaming all this crapulance on Jews.  
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3233
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 05 December 2017 at 11:05pm
You're a cowardly troll, Non-Believer, with no decency or integrity. Have a nice life.
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 06 December 2017 at 2:08am
I have posted several questions in this "Questions and Discussions about Islam" forum related to the execution of a Jewish tribe by the Muslims of Medina.

After 4 pages of meaningless posts, I am nowhere closer to understanding how modern Muslims view this incident.

Can anyone help me, Muslim or otherwise?
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 4
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.