[PUG] Muhammad of Islam: Battle of the Trench

[NeverAmI]

So this forum probably isn't the best place to ask about this, since the Muslim community is so lightly represented here, but I am asking anyway.

I generally see Muslims as peaceful and moral people. Yet, I see one of the core events shortly after the founding of Islam that disturbs me in the way it is portrayed.

The battle of the Trench (Siege of the Banu Qurayza) involves the Muslims coming back to Yathrib (Medina) and defeating the Banu Qurayza tribe. So after the surrender of the tribe, it is said that Muhammad approved the slaughter of over 400 men (beheading) and enslavement of all the women and children, including having at least one of his own slaves.

Does anyone have credible information that proves or disproves this? I don't intend to cause a flame war, but I am unbiased in this and I simply want to know the truth.

 

[ENTroP]

So this forum probably isn't the best place to ask about this, since the Muslim community is so lightly represented here, but I am asking anyway.

I generally see Muslims as peaceful and moral people. Yet, I see one of the core events shortly after the founding of Islam that disturbs me in the way it is portrayed.

The battle of the Trench (Siege of the Banu Qurayza) involves the Muslims coming back to Yathrib (Medina) and defeating the Banu Qurayza tribe. So after the surrender of the tribe, it is said that Muhammad approved the slaughter of over 400 men (beheading) and enslavement of all the women and children, including having at least one of his own slaves.

Does anyone have credible information that proves or disproves this? I don't intend to cause a flame war, but I am unbiased in this and I simply want to know the truth.

Muslims that you see may be peaceful, but there is a very significant portion of Muslims that believe in unadulterated sharia law, and are not afraid to use any means to impose it on the rest of the world. These are violent, dangerous people that care nothing for the sanctity of human rights, and their ancient texts affirm their sociopathic beliefs.

Beheadings, hand choppings (for stealing), marital rape, child brides, all of these things are happening in the present, not a thousand years ago, but TODAY.

One can call them fringe, or extremist groups, but the kind of fundamental thinking that fosters these groups is the rule outside of developed countries, not the exception. Not fringe at all, but mainstream.

Surprisingly common in America, too, although more restrained, to be sure.

Although I am not sure about the historical veracity of the battle of the trench and the ensuing barbarity, it is accepted as gospel by each and every Muslim. So...

 

[Norton]

Muslims that you see may be peaceful, but there is a very significant portion of Muslims that believe in unadulterated sharia law, and are not afraid to use any means to impose it on the rest of the world. These are violent, dangerous people that care nothing for the sanctity of human rights, and their ancient texts affirm their sociopathic beliefs.

Beheadings, hand choppings (for stealing), marital rape, child brides, all of these things are happening in the present, not a thousand years ago, but TODAY.

One can call them fringe, or extremist groups, but the kind of fundamental thinking that fosters these groups is the rule outside of developed countries, not the exception. Not fringe at all, but mainstream.

Surprisingly common in America, too, although more restrained, to be sure.

Although I am not sure about the historical veracity of the battle of the trench and the ensuing barbarity, it is accepted as gospel by each and every Muslim. So...

Aren't you being culturally insensitive? (Said sarcastically)

 

[bamf]

but there is a very significant portion of Muslims that believe in unadulterated sharia law

Do you have any sort of data to back that sort of statement up? What do you consider 'significant'?

But anyways, I don't think the point of this thread was to dwell into a religion, rather history. It might be a violent history, but that does not mean modern day followers preform such actions. Granted some do, but it's hardly just an Islamic thing. They're found in all different cultures around the world.

If anyone has actual history about the question NAI asked, I'm really curious too!

 

[enfp can be shy]

The Crusades weren't like candy store visit either.

 

[sassafras]

The Crusades weren't like candy store visit either.

+1

 

[Solongo]

According to wikipedia, Muhammed did approve of the killings. The number is between 400 and 900 men.

 

[ENTroP]

Do you have any sort of data to back that sort of statement up? What do you consider 'significant'?

But anyways, I don't think the point of this thread was to dwell into a religion, rather history. It might be a violent history, but that does not mean modern day followers preform such actions. Granted some do, but it's hardly just an Islamic thing. They're found in all different cultures around the world.

If anyone has actual history about the question NAI asked, I'm really curious too!

Significant enough for entire countries to be governed by religious law.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sa.html here's just one, Saudi Arabia. Significant enough to produce well funded terrorist groups capable of large scale assault on the World Trade Center, and Madrid train bombings in '04. Significant enough for marital rape to be legal in Afghanistan.

While I don't have hard statistics, I watched a pretty good documentary called "Obsession" which had pretty solid statistics on the demographics of belief in the Islamic world.

Historically, it may or may not have happened that Mohammed murdered 1000 people and took slave brides. In fact, it's unimportant when compared to the fact that people accept and follow regardless, or make justification for the massacre.

 

[NeverAmI]

I noticed that the Quran talks extensively of slave ownership, but I don't think it ever talks on the morality of owning slaves.

But yea, I am looking for credible sources/evidence, not to say I am not tolerant of anyone going off on a tangent.

 

[NeverAmI]

S

Historically, it may or may not have happened that Mohammed murdered 1000 people and took slave brides. In fact, it's unimportant when compared to the fact that people accept and follow regardless, or make justification for the massacre.

One of the concepts of Islam is to model yourself after Mohammad, I think his morality is in fact the most important aspect of all.

 

[bamf]

One of the concepts of Islam is to model yourself after Mohammad, I think his morality is in fact the most important aspect of all.

+1

 

[ENTroP]

One of the concepts of Islam is to model yourself after Mohammad, I think his morality is in fact the most important aspect of all.

I agree.

If the Koran says that he did it, then to those that model themselves after Mohammed, he did it (the massacre). Regardless of the actual history. Also, he was a pedophile.

 

[midnightmelody]

I don't think I could ever model myself after one human. It sounds risky and inflexible.

The problem with Muhammad, humans, and religion in general is that weaknesses will always cloud the idealism of the said religion. Also, inherent beliefs can be a dangerous thing. Many people live by their beliefs because they do not require justification (although they should be analyzed for ethical value and possible future implications and impact upon humanity). Beliefs just are. If someone believes something, they may feel entitled and inspired to act accordingly, regardless of the beliefs of others.

Also, I agree with Raccoon Love about the crusades. Their beliefs justified all of those massacres. This is not to say that these beliefs should be deemed morally sound, because they are quite detrimental to the well-being of humankind. By justified, I mean to say that the massacres were congruent with their perception and rationale of what should be done.

 

[Faye]

Aren't you being culturally insensitive? (Said sarcastically)

Screw multiculturalism.

 

[Raccoon Love]

I noticed that the Quran talks extensively of slave ownership, but I don't think it ever talks on the morality of owning slaves.

But yea, I am looking for credible sources/evidence, not to say I am not tolerant of anyone going off on a tangent.

The quran is not the only place with slavery...

from the bible:


"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)

also the crusades, it's just that muslims get attacked by this not only because there's a much larger amount of christians in the western hemisphere, but because we are ignorant of their practices and we misunderstand them just like they might misunderstand christian texts, from both sides there are going to be radicals who follow this text literally, but both religions today have denied affiliations with this texts and that things have changed to fit society today.

 

[NeverAmI]

"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)

Is that passage accepted as the word of God? (This is an honest question)

So yea, God says "I am merciful and I am just. I will show you the path in life. But not you, go get my buddy some tea, slave. Sorry man, I am pro-slavery."

Oh wait, god controls everything in our life, but this slavery thing builds character.

I believe in God, I believe in acceptance, I don't believe God approached man and said, "Don't cheat on your wife, don't be lazy or eat too much. Don't let rage consume you." And someone asks about holding another human captive against their will and owning them. God replies "Yea, that's cool."

 

[randomsomeone]

Many of these texts came to exist in the midst of very different cultures and times. Certain practices were pretty much the normal...slaughtering enemies, torture...life in general was far more brutal. It was everywhere. We have our own disconnects today and we don't see them either.

I also think one has got to step away from the "voice of God" approach to these individual texts. Yes, across the whole work there is a Divine message...something is revealed....something is communicated to us. There are also tons of cultural, personal, and slice-of-life references that merely provide a backdrop for much, much larger actions. The overall actions are what you can build on.

One also much take into account that faith and culture intertwine like a rope...sometimes it is hard to seperate the two. Most commonly, religion is used to cloak our human ambitions, lust for power, fear, greed, and disconnected egos. Inasmuch as religion has been used to cause immeasurable suffering, within it, beneath all the drama, reside many of the only know paths to human enlightenment. Some people actually got it right...and yet we pay little attention to these.

 

[NeverAmI]

In the case of Islam, not sure about Christianity ( I suppose it wouldn't apply since christianity is based on simply accepting Jesus as your savior in the basic sense)
the religious text IS accepted as the word of god, and it is to be adhered to completely.

 

[NeverAmI]

I just figured if someone actually "talked" to, or represented, God, he might mention something negative about the whole slavery thing. I could see Jesus doing that, but not sure if he actually did.

 

[randomsomeone]

I could see Jesus doing that, but not sure if he actually did.

Jesus' take on societal norms tended to cut straight to core issues to the extent that he shocked a lot of people...bewildered others.....and made some frightfully mad. They tried to trip him up with this stuff. That is partly why they had him executed.

You're right, Scripture is viewed in a slightly different light within Christianity. Other things are factored in.