Australian Islamist Monitor

Islam Under Scrutiny

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Jews of Medina Killing Muslims??

E-mail Print PDF

Muhammad Drove out the Jews of Medina for Attacking & Killing Muslims?

Slaughter of Banu QuraizaIn the course of exchanging comments on an article The Quran and Hadith: Which is More Authentic? in, Mr. Abu Shuja’ah, a prominent Islamic propagandist on the Internet, made a number of outrageous claims. On the question of why Muhammad attacked, slaughtered and exiled the Jews of Medina, he claimed:

The Jews were driven out of Medina for attacking and killing Muslims. Consider it a mirror of today’s Gaza.
While Shuja’ah makes a case for justification of Muhammad’s atrocities against the Jews of Medina, I, before going into this discussion, affirm that Muhammad had no justification at all.


Let us start with a review of Prophet Muhammad’s encounter with the Jews of Medina. He relocated to Medina in June 622 CE on the background that his mission at Mecca had failed, had become stagnant, while his faith was making rapid progress in Medina even in his absence acquiring some 76 converts over the previous three years. It should be noted that his mission in Mecca, his hometown, made only 150 converts at least over the previous 13 years of his prophetic mission.

The prophet was invited to Medina by his Medinan disciples (those 76 or so), who belonged to the two Pagan tribes, Aws and Khazraj; and he settled down without facing any opposition from any group, including the Jews, who were richer and more influential in Medina. It is anticipated that the Jews might’ve been welcoming of him, as he was converting them to a monotheism, which he presented to the Jews as a sister-religion to Judaism and Christianity.

Muhammad continued his preaching unimpeded and the polytheists converted to Islam at a high frequency. But the problem with the Jews started only after Muhammad became too ambitious to present himself also as a prophet, a savior, of the Jews (& Christians) too. So Muhammad initially started pampering the Jews & Christians. He gave Moses a status even higher than his own [Bukhari 4:610,612]. Quranic verses pampered them saying, Allah gave them ‘guidance and light’ in the form of Torah [Q 5:44] and the Jews are “righteous” people [Q 6:153-54], who ‘excelled the nations’ [Q 45:16].


And he adopted many Jewish rituals and customs—fasting, circumcision, praying toward Jerusalem etc.—to make Islam truly look like an Abrahamic creed for the first time. Allah’s and Muhammad’s reason behind all these goody-goody sayings and gestures toward the Jews was to come out later; it was Muhammad’s ambition to become a prophet of Jews as well. So Allah reveals (Q 3.5):

YUSUFALI: (I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

The same is repeated in Q 5:48:

And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed…

But, if they failed to follow Muhammad, Allah threatens them with punishments in the next verse (Q5:49):

…And if they turn away, then know that Allah's Will is to smite them for some sin of theirs. Lo! many of mankind are evil-livers.

Despite all these pleadings and threats, the Jews did not accept Muhammad as their prophet and ruler. Instead, the Jews became staunch critics of Muhammad’s revelations, because they had the inner knowledge of what is in the Torah, which Muhammad said he brought in its entirety through his Quran. They could easily point out the errors in Muhammad’s messages, which they did putting Muhammad in a defensive and embarrassing position.
Muhammad (or Allah) eventually became sure that the Jews (& Christians) would, in no way, embrace his message. So Allah came down with a verse (Q 2:120) to relieve Muhammad from further persuasion of them, allowing him do what was needed—the subject of this debate:

Q 2:120
Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: “The Guidance of Allah,-that is the (only) Guidance.” Wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor helper against Allah.

And not long after Allah revealed these verses, Muhammad, while pursuing with some 300-plus Muslim raiders to attack and plunder a Meccan caravan returning from Syria under Abu Sufian, engaged the Meccans in the battle of Badr and achieved stunning success against an opposition at least double in strength. Muhammad’s confidence was ‘sky high’. The Jews can be challenged now to mete out Allah’s promised punishment to them for rejecting Muhammad, such as in verse 5:49 cited above.

Now let us see how Muhammad initiate violence against the Jews, according to the prophet’s earliest and most original biographer Ibn Ishaq (c. 750 CE, preserved through Ibn Hisham)1:

Meanwhile there was the affair of the B. Qaynuqa. The apostle assembled them in their market and addressed them as follows: ‘O Jews, beware lest God bring upon you the vengeance that He brought upon Quraysh and become Muslims. You know that I am a prophet who has been sent—you will find that in your scriptures and God's covenant with you.’ They replied, ‘O Muhammad, you seem to think that we are your people. Do not deceive yourself because you encountered a people (i.e. the Quraysh) with no knowledge of war and got the better of them; for by God if we fight you, you will find that we are real men!’

So Muhammad obviously tried to threaten the Jews to submission to his religious and political authority, pointing to them what happened to the Quraysh at Badr—a fate that may visit them too, if they didn’t submit. But they Jews rejected his threatening invitation with defiance.
Now, the plot to punish the Jews will be well-coordinated by both Muhammad and Allah. So, Allah also comes with his own threats to the Jews as Ibn Ishaq (p. 363) notes:

A freedman of the family of Zayd b. Thabit from Sa'Id b. Jubayr or from Tkrima from Ibn 'Abbas told me that the latter said the following verses (Q 3:13) came down about them:
‘Say to those who disbelieve: you will be vanquished and gathered to Hell, an evil resting place. You have already had a sign in the two forces which met’, i.e. the apostle’s companions at Badr and the Quraysh. ‘One force fought in the way of God; the other, disbelievers, thought they saw double their own force with their very eyes. God strengthens with His help whom He will. Verily in that is an example for the discerning.’ [Quran 3:13]

As the threatening notice of submission served to Banu Qainuqa first by Muhammad, followed by Allah was flatly rejected, it was time for Muhammad to look for an excuse to execute the threat. If Allah is to be believed, Muhammad found no excuse to attack the Jews. So Allah had to create one, an outrageously silly one at that in verses 8:55–58. The Jews are the worst of beasts, of living creatures, because they would not believe in Muhammad’s messages:

Q 8:55: For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.

What punishment do they deserve for being the worst beast because of their rejection of Muhammad? It’s defined in previous verse (Q 8:54), which says they deserved the same punishment Pharaoh suffered for rejecting the ‘Signs of their Lord’ (brought by Moses):

…after the manner of the people of Pharaoh and those before them: They treated as false the Signs of their Lord: so We destroyed them for their crimes, and We drowned the people of Pharaoh: for they were all oppressors and wrong-doers.

To create an excuse for attacking the Jews, Allah falsely accused the Jews of breaking treaty in the next verse 8:56:

They are those with whom thou didst make a covenant, but they break their covenant every time, and they have not the fear (of Allah).

Here Allah says the Jews broke treaty repeatedly. In this verse, Allah lied on two counts. First, there was no treaty between Muhammad and the Jews that the latter ever signed, which I will address at the end of this discussion. Second, even if a treaty existed, the Jews never broke it, even not once, forget about their breaking it ‘every time’ as Allah accuses them of. It becomes evident from the next verse, in which Allah commands Muhammad to attack the Jews:

Q 8:58: If thou fearest treachery from any group, throw back (their covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms: for Allah loveth not the treacherous.

Revelation of this verse was a direct command to attack Banu Qainuqa, the first Jewish tribe to face Muhammad’s sword, as Al-Tabari cites the account of al-Zuhri that a verse being brought by Gabriel to Muhammad, which said, ‘And if thou fearest treachery from any folk, then throw back to them their treaty fairly’ [Q 8:58]. Whereupon, Muhammad said, ‘‘I fear Banu Qaynuqa’’ and ‘the Messenger of God advanced upon them.’2

So, if Allah is to be believed, this verse was obviously a command, a license, to attack Banu Qainuqa. Although Allah accused the Jews of breaking treaty repeatedly in the earlier verse, here Allah only mentions Muhammad’s fear that the treaty may be broken in the future; the Jews hadn’t broken any treaty yet, which didn’t exist anyway.

In fact, the real reason as to why the Jews should be attacked can be found in the next verse (Q 8:59):

And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape.

The Jews were trying to outstrip Allah’s purpose. Allah tried to persuade them in so many verses to accept Muhammad as their prophet, but they not only rejected the repeated pleadings of Allah, but they also ridiculed those messages; they found so many faults with his messages, causing ridicule and embarrassment to Muhammad (& Allah). How dare they! They deserve the gravest of punishment for crime of such mammoth proportion. Let them not escape.

In sum, Muhammad attacked the Jews for his fear that Banu Qainuqa might break some treaty sometime in the future—that is, they did not break it yet but they likely would; and he rushed to attack them.

While this is the reason given by Allah and Muhammad for attacking Banu Qainuqa, there is another story created by later about the Jews, who allegedly killed a companion of Muhammad. Mr. Shuja’ah also mentioned about it in our previous exchange in making his case as to why the Jews deserved what Muhammad did to them, saying:

The Jews hated Islam and still do. They poisoned Muhammad (saw) and killed one of his companions.

Prophet Muhammad was poisoned after his conquest of Khaybar in 628 CE by an enslaved Jewish woman in revenge. By this time, Muhammad had cleansed all the Jews of Medina. So this poisoning incident cannot be considered as a reason for Muhammad’s punishing the Jews of Medina.
Concerning the Jews’ killing one of Muhammad’s companions, a story is included in his later biography by Al-Waqidi (d. 822). According to the story, sometime after the threat to Banu Qainuqa by Muhammad and Allah, a Meccan girl, married to an ansar (Medinan convert), went to the shop of a goldsmith in the market-place of Banu Qainuqa (Qainuqa were goldsmiths & richest community), where waiting for some ornaments, she sat down. A silly Jewish prankster pinned the lower hem of her skirt behind to the upper dress. When she stood up, the awkward exposure excited laughter, and she screamed with shame. A Muslim, apprised of the affront, slew the prankster; and the brethren of the Jew fell upon the Muslim murderer and killed him in return.

It should be noted here that because of this silly incident, nobody deserved to die. The prankster deserved a rebuke at best. Muslims’ killing him was an act of barbarism, unacceptable to any kind of justice. And of course, after the two lives from the two parties, one from Banu Qainuqa and other from Muslims, had been lost, the justice/injustice was equal on both side; and it should been resolved by calling a meeting between leaders of the two parties.

But no, Muhammad was just waiting for something like this to occur. And on the pretext of this brawl, says al-Waqidi, Muhammad besieged the entire community of Banu Qaynuqa. After a fifteen-day siege, the Jews surrendered. In order to mete out the deserving punishment to the Jews, which was to be similar to the way Allah had destroyed the people of Pharaoh by drowning them all, Muhammad ordered the surrendered men to be tied for their summary execution. At this point, Abdullah ibn Obayi—the famed hypocrite of Islam, but a rather humane chief of the Khazraj clan, who had converted to Islam but had a dubious allegiance to Muhammad’s mission—firmly intervened. He even threatened Muhammad with consequences had he slaughtered the Jews. As a result, Muhammad prudently relented from slaughtering the prisoners. Instead, he exiled them to Syria.

 On the basis of this discussion, I conclude the Jews never ever aggressively attacked and killed Muslims, as Shuja’ah claims, which made Muhammad to attack and evict them. Muhammad, therefore, had no justification to attack the Jews. Instead, it is Muslims, who were responsible for shedding blood of a Jew of Banu Qainuqa first for no justifiable reason. And Muhammad’s attacking the whole community and attempting to slaughter them en masse, on account of an individual ignorable silly act, was an instance of taking unjustified barbarism to the extreme.

Did a treaty, the so-called Constitution of Medina, exist between Muslims and the Jews?

We have noted above that Allah accuses the Jews of repeatedly breaking a treaty. Ibn Ishaq likewise writes:

Asim b. ‘Umar b. Qatada said that the B. Qaynuqa were the first of the Jews to break their agreement with the apostle and to go to war, between Badr and Uhud, and the apostle besieged them until they surrendered unconditionally.

Muslims boast about this so-called treaty—known as the ‘Constitution of Medina’ and considered the ideal blueprint of the Islamic state—as an epitome of tolerance, human rights and justice to people of all faiths in Islamic state. I will go into detail of the terms of the treaty, which is readers can find in Ibn Ishasq (p. 231-232): it is nothing but a document, demanding unconditional subjugation of all Medinans to the political and religious commands of Muhammad, a recent refugee in Medina. I will, however, prove that the treaty was never signed by the Jews; they probably never saw it. This treaty, according to Ibn Ishaq, begins as thus:

In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful. This is a document from Muhammad the prophet between the believers and Muslims of Quraysh and Yathrib, and those who followed them and joined them and labored with them.4

It becomes clear that this document was an invitation from Muhammad and his Muslim community to other tribes of Medina (the Jews included) to assemble after Muhammad and follow his commands. This opening in no way suggests that it was signed by any non-Muslim party. And moreover, we have seen above that not only Muhammad but also Allah agreed that the Jew would not accept Islam and submit to Muhammad’s leadership. Under these circumstances, is there any ground to believe that the Jews would sign a document, which starts with the words: “This is a document from Muhammad the prophet…” Signing this document means not only submitting to Muhammad’s leadership, but also to his prophethood, a claim which the Jews ridiculed in the least.

Similarly the document ends with these words:

God approves of this document… Muhammad is the apostle of God.

We can again be sure that the Jews would never have signed this document, which says “Muhammad is the apostle of God”, which they flatly rejected, indeed ridiculed, all along. Quite agreeing with this assertion, Montgomery Watt (a Western Islamic scholar favorite to Muslims, whose books are published in Pakistan) records that there were nine contracting parties in this document: they were the Muslim refugee from Mecca and Medinan Arab tribes (non-Jewish), who had become essentially Islamic by converting to Islam in large numbers after Muhammad’s arrival in Medina. None of the Jewish tribes were a co-signatory in this document.5

This proves beyond doubt that the Jews would never have signed this document. Instead, it was most likely a document that records a secret understanding between Muhammad and the Medinan pagan-turn-Muslim tribes, who had long-standing alliances with the Jewish clans. As Muhammad was planning to deal with the Jews because of their obstinate refusal to embrace Islam, he needed this document or understanding with his Medinan converts to create an excuse to strike the Jews. There is no alternative “logical” explanation to it.


1. Ibn Ishaq, Life of Muhammad, trs. A Guillaume, Oxford Uiversity Press, Karachi, 2004 impint, p. 363
2. Al-Tabari, History of Al-Tabari, State University of New York Press, Vol. VII, p. 86   
3. Ibn Ishaq, p. 363-64
4. Ibn Ishaq, p. 231-232
5. Watt  M (1961) Islam and The Integration of Society, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, p. 19




MA Khan is the editor of and the author of Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery.
Last Updated on Friday, 17 July 2009 13:56  

AIM Listed by NLA


Australian Islamist Monitor's web publications were selected for preservation by the National Library of Australia. Access to our materials stored in the NLA Archive is facilitated in two ways: via the Library’s online catalogue; and via subject and title lists maintained on the PANDORA home page.
Click HERE for direct access to the archive

Islam Kills

History - Articles

Lest We Forget the Battle of Tours

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Violent Jihad

Australians celebrate and revere Anzac Day on April 25th each year in remembrance of our brave soldiers who fought in two great world wars to secure our freedom. Every Australian identifies with the slogan “lest we forget” and in services held around the country people reflect on the battles and men who died to secure our freedom. Yet across the world in France, there is one remarkable battle which helped form the Europe we know today and allowed the development of civilization based on Judeo Christian principles. This one famous battle has become known as the battle of Tours and effectively stopped the Muslim advance into Europe. After the death of Mohammed in 632AD, Muslim armies exploded out of the Arabian peninsula to conquer much of the Middle East, expanding across north Africa. From there they crossed into Spain in 711AD and eventually controlled much of al-Andalus by 715AD. It was the victory at Tours by Charles Martel that stemmed the tide and eventually the Muslim marauders were expelled from Spain in 1492 when the last outpost at Granada fell to King Ferdinand of Spain. 

Read more

Shivaji’s Coronation Laudatory Landmark

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Infidels' Resistance

Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was born, lived, fought and won battles against religious and social oppression in the 17th century Bharat or India. He was a shining star in the Indian firmament and is renowned as a champion of the downtrodden and depressed masses. He was and continues to be an icon for the classes and masses alike and is seen as a rallying point for peasants oppressed by foreign rulers, Pathans and Moghuls alike. Sexually exploited women found in Shivaji Raje a protector, a benefactor and flocked to his Hindavi Swaraj to find solace and feel liberated under his saffron flag. 

Read more

Ransomer of Captives from the Muslims

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Tolerance Myths

Perhaps some readers might be interested to know that January 28 is considered a feast day among Catholics – actually 2 feast days are celebrated on the same day – one is of ST Thomas Aquinas, the great medieval theologian and philosopher who adapted Aristotle to the western Judeo-Christian worldview. . It is also the feast day of a lesser known person – St Peter Nolasco, the great ransomer of captives from the Muslims.

Read more

Islamic Pirates

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Violent Jihad

Barbary Corsair
Somalian Islamic Pirates & Lessons from History
The dramatic rescue of the American cargo-ship captain Richard Phillips from the hands of Somalian Islamic pirates by the U.S. Navy—killing three pirates, holding him hostage at gun-point, through precision-targeting—warrants a review of the U.S. struggle with piracy and hostage-taking in North Africa, which ended two centuries ago.

Raiding trade-caravans and hostage-taking for extracting ransom in Islam was started by Prophet Muhammad. Having become powerful and secure after his relocation to Medina from Mecca in 622, Muhammad initiated Jihad or holy war in the form of raids of trade-caravans for earning livelihood for his community. In the first successful raid of a Meccan caravan at Nakhla in December 623, his brigands killed one of the attendants, took two of them captive, and acquired the caravan as “sacred” booty. The captives were ransomed to generate further revenue. Muhammad, later on, expanded this mode of Jihad to raiding non-Muslim communities around Arabia—for capturing their homes, properties and livestock, capturing their women and children as slaves often for ransoming and selling, and imposing extortional taxes—which sometimes involved mass-slaughter of the attacked victims.

Read more

The Battle of Broken Hill

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

Battle of Broken Hill Logo
The First Islamic Terrorist Attack on Australian Soil
On January 1, 1915 two Broken Hill men, both former camel drivers, armed themselves with rifles, an homemade flag bearing Islamic insignia and a large supply of ammunition and launched a surprise attack on the Picnic Train about 3 kilometres outside Broken Hill.

The train carried about 1200 Broken Hill residents to Silverton where a picnic to celebrate the new year was to take place.

The two Muslim men, Gool Mohamed originally a Pashtun tribesman from Afghanistan and Mullah Abdullah from what is known today as Pakistan, decided to wage jihad against Australian infidels after Australia and the Ottoman Empire officially joined the opposite sides in the WWI.

Read more

Jihad Galore

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Tolerance Myths

Jihad Galore and the Toledo Whore

Battle of Higueruela

Alhambra - GazelleHow often in conversation with a Muslim, do they quote Spain as the crowning achievement of Islam, where Muslims, Jews and Christians lived in harmony for about 800 years?

And when you mention the killings and massacres, you are told that the Spanish Inquisition was much worse.
This is a misconception, since the Inquisition in Spain was responsible for only between 4,000 and 5,000 lives. [1]

Yet in 1066AD, in a single day, muslims murdered over 4,000 Jews because Vizier Joseph ibn Naghrela had risen to a position greater than them, and of course, this upset the Muslim sensitivities. [2]

Read more

Arabs Hated The Quran

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Stolen Heritage

How the Arabs Hated The Quran
Old Quran

Wh y are you a Muslim?
Musli ms in general love to hear the above question because it has a simple and readymade answer in their minds besides it gives them the opp or t u nity to propagate their religion and talk proudly about Islam.


Read more

Lepanto Anniversary

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Imperialism

Decisive Victory for the West

At this time of year, it is timely to remember one of the greatest victories of the west against the Islamic world. On the 7th October in 1571, Don Juan and the Holy League, led by Admiral Doria, defeated the larger Ottoman fleet in the Battle of Lepanto, saving Europe from the Turks and militant Islam. The Holy League was a coalition of different armies - of the Republic of Venice, the Papacy (under Pope Pius V), Spain (including Naples, Sicily and Sardinia), the Republic of Genoa, the Duchy of Savoy, the Knights Hospitaller and some others.

Read more

Muslim Jerusalem

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Stolen Heritage

Jerusalem - Coat of ArmsWhy do Muslims insist that Jerusalem is their Holy City?
When Mohamed and his faithful followers moved from Mecca to Medina, they found themselves among three Jewish tribes/clans (BANU-L-NADIR, BANU KAINUKA and BANU KURAIZA)  which settled there some time after their expulsion from their homeland and also living there were  two Arab, pagan tribes.

Mohammed, who at this stage needed more followers, decided to win those tribes over and convert them to his newly invented religion.

Islam was yet not as fully developed as we know it today, and Mohammed was still having his sessions with Allah (the Medina period revelations).

Read more

Killing of Banu Quraiza

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Imperialism

Did Prophet Muhammad order Killing Surrendered Jews of Banu Quraiza and Khaybar?  A historical Analysis

In the post 9/11 era of this modern-world, Islamists around the globe are busy with ‘damage control utopia’ in order to correct the image of religion Islam. We all know that the nucleus of Islam are: Quran, Hadiths (Sunnah) supported by Islamic histories and biographies recorded by various famous Islamic scholars and historians.

What Mecca?

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Early History

A great tragedy of the Islamic control of our universities and political correctness plus the fear of extreme violence if anyone dares question the roots and claims of Islam is ...that nobody dares question the roots and claims of Islam!!!  I want to stimulate interest and offer this summary of information on Mecca from (LINK) which discusses some problems with Muslim claims in a comparison of evidence supporting Islam/Christianity. 

Read more

Yahweh or Hubal

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

FlagThere is a very strongly entrenched view among majority of Westerners today that the three main monotheistic religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam share one common God and therefore despite the obvious differences, the core foundation of these three religions is the same. 

Read more