Jump to: navigation, search


3,534 bytes added, 09:59, 18 October 2015
Reverted edits by (talk) to last revision by Sahab
When the Muslims conquered al-Qamus (the fort of B. Abu'1-Huqayq), Bilal (one of Muhammad's companions) brought Safiyah and another woman to Muhammad. He led them past the slain Jews, and when the woman with Safiyah saw them she shrieked and slapped her face and poured dust on her head. Muhammad said, "Take this she-devil away from me." He then commanded that Safiyah be put behind him and he threw his mantle over her, indicating that he had chosen her for himself. It had been said that the apostle asked Bilal, "Had you no compassion, Bilal, when you brought two women past their dead husbands?"<ref>Ishaq. I (Author), Guillaume. A (Translator). (2002). [ ''The Life of Muhammad'']. (p. 515). Oxford University Press</ref><br>
This story doesn't pan out because the Sahih Hadith describe Safiyah being brought with Dihya, not another woman, for the sole purpose of satisfying Muhammad's curiosity about her beauty.<br>
Safiyah had a mark on her face, and when Muhammad asked her about it, she told him that her husband had hit her so hard that he blacked her eye. She said she had a dream while she was married to Kinana, and in that dream the moon fell in her lap. When she described it to her husband, he said, "This simply means that you covet the king of the Hijaz, Muhammad", and then he hit her.<ref>Ishaq. I (Author), Guillaume. A (Translator). (2002). [ ''The Life of Muhammad'']. (p. 515). Oxford University Press</ref><br>
In another story, Safiyah was veiled after the wedding feast and Muhammad put her on his camel in order to conduct her to the bridal tent. In the morning, Muhammad heard the noise of someone rustling against the curtain of the tent. Abu Ayub was there, and he had kept watch all night with a drawn sword. When Muhammad asked his reason for being there, his friend explained that he did not trust Safiyah because Muhammad had just slain her husband the previous day. Muhammad thanked him for his vigilance and sent him away.<ref>Muir, Sir William. (1878). [ ''The Life of Mahomet, New Edition'']. (pp. 392-393) London:Smith, Elder and Co.</ref><br>
If this story is true, and it does sound realistic, then this puts an interesting spin on the narration in the Sahih Hadith. It states that Muhammad had sex with Safiyah the day her husband was tortured and executed. However, the Hadith state that she completed her menses prior to their marriage which took place on the way to Medina. Obviously this is just postulating, but one wonders if Muhammad even observed the rule of waiting until a captive had completed a menstrual cycle. We already know that he violated the rule of 'iddah. If the source that claims Safiyah was a bride of one day before her husband Kinana was killed is correct, then it really seems unlikely that she had been menstruating at the time of the conquest of Khaibar. What woman schedules a wedding when she is menstruating, especially when the Jews considered such a woman to be 'unclean' based on the strict ceremonial regulations described in the Torah?
==Typical Islamic Apologia==
The story of Safiyah is retold by Muslims in numerous biographies and books. This article provides a few examples of the ''Islamic'' version:
On his way to Medina the Holy Prophet halted at a place called Sahba where he held the Walima feast. While starting from Sahba, the holy Prophet got Hadrat Safiyah mounted on his own camel and covered her with his robe indicating that she had now become his wife. In happiness Hadrat Safiya forgot the tragedy that had befallen her family, thinking that now she was the most fortunate lady after marriage with the Holy Prophet of Islam.}}
The intellectual dishonesty required to write that is simply appalling. (And the author calls it an "encyclopedia")
The following quotes are from [ "Umm ul-Mukminin Safiyyah: The Jewish Wife of Muhammad"] by Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi, September 20, 2005:
''Muhammad forced himself on a captured woman on the same day that he killed her father, husband and many of her relatives. He was a rapist.''<br>
This statement made by this ignorant missionary is due not only to the gutter environment that he was brought up and subjected to, but also because of his inability to understand the circumstances surrounding this event. Insha’allah, our purpose here is to explain the circumstances and the nature of the marriage of Safiyyah to the Prophet(P).}}
Well, that little rant was especially educational.
{{Quote|2='''The Marriage of the Prophet(P) to Safiyyah(R)'''<br>
Safiyyah was the daughter of Huyayy ibn Akhtab, the undisputed leader of the Banu al-Nadir as well as a Jewish rabbi. Hence, she was of noble regal and rabbinical heritage. She became a captive of the Muslims when they seized al-Qamus, the fortress of Khaybar. When a Companion of the Prophet(P) heard of Safiyyah’s captivity, he approached the Prophet(P) with a suggestion that since she was a lady of Banu al-Nadir, only the Prophet(P) was fit enough to marry her. The Prophet(P) agreed to this suggestion and hence granted her freedom and married her.}}
Notice how the author makes no mention of the fact that Muhammad did not take her for himself until he saw how beautiful she really was.
{{Quote|2=This significant act of marrying Safiyyah(R) was indeed a great honour for her, for this not only preserved her dignity, it also prevented her from becoming a slave. Haykal notes that:
:The Prophet granted her freedom and then married her, following the examples of great conquerors who married the daughters and wives of the kings whom they had conquered, partly in order to alleviate their tragedy and partly to preserve their dignity.<sup>1</sup>}}
If for any reason other than lust, conquerors married the daughters and wives of the kings whom they had conquered to give themselves legitimacy as the new rulers. The feelings and dignity of the girls and women were the least of a conqueror's concern. In medieval England, for example, the Norman conquerors occasionally used intermarriage to claim land.
{{Quote|2=The marriage to Safiyyah(R) has a political significance as well, as it helps to reduce hostilities and cement alliances. John L. Esposito notes that
:As was customary for Arab chiefs, many were political marriages to cement alliances. Others were marriages to the widows of his companions who had fallen in combat and were in need of protection.<sup>2</sup>}}
However, it has already been shown in the Hadith that reducing hostilities and cementing alliances were not a priority for Muhammad who intended on forcing the Jews into exile anyway.
{{Quote|2=Indeed, when Bilal ibn Rabah(R), a Companion of the Prophet, brought Safiyyah along with another Jewess before him(P) by passing through the Jews that were slain in the battle, Muhammad(P) personally chided Bilal and said “Have you no compassion, Bilal, when you brought two women past their dead husbands?”<sup>3</sup>}}
Of course, the author fails to reveal how exactly Safiyah's husband died. Kinana was not slain in battle. He was brutally tortured and executed at the hands of the Muslims for the whereabouts of hidden treasure. True compassion would not have involved torture and execution of a captive.
{{Quote|2=As for the accusation that Safiyyah was coerced into marriage or taken advantage of, as alleged by a known Islamophobic, this claim has no basis at all. It is known that Safiyyah(R) remained loyal to the Prophet until he passed away.<sup>4</sup> We have in fact the Prophet(P) making the following offer to her, as recorded by Martin Lings:
:He '''[the Prophet Muhammad - Ed.]''' then told Safiyyah that he was prepared to set her free, and he offered her the choice between remaining a Jewess and returning to her people or entering Islam and becoming his wife. “I choose God and His Messenger,” she said; and they were married at the first halt on the homeward march.<sup>5</sup>}}
Where did the 20<sup>th</sup> century Martin Lings get this information from? Anyone can record anything, so, what's his source? It's notable that the author does not cite this and expects the reader to take the word of a Muslim apologist. However, we have Sahih Hadith that prove Safiyah was chosen for her beauty and kept captive up until her "wedding" nights with Muhammad. And this "loyalty" the author speaks of, Why couldn't Stockholm Syndrome apply in this situation?
{{Quote|2=The other wives of the Prophet(P) used to show their jealousy of her by making slights upon her Jewish origin. But the Prophet(P) always defended her. Once Safiyyah was vexed to the extreme by the taunts of all the Arab wives of the Prophet(P). She took the complaint to the Prophet(P), who felt great compassion for her. He consoled and encouraged her. He equipped her with logic by saying: “Safiyyah, take courage and be bold. They are in no way superior to you. Tell them: I am a daughter of the Prophet Harun, a niece of the Prophet Musa, and a wife of the Prophet Muhammad”. This is thus an excellent example of the Prophet Muhammad(P) trying to wipe out pre-Islamic anti-Semitism amongst the Arabs.}}
"...trying to wipe out pre-Islamic anti-Semitism amongst the Arabs" is a bit far-fetched considering Muhammad and his followers were responsible for killing or removing all the Jews from the entire Arabian peninsula. It's far more realistic that Muhammad was trying to keep peace in a house with far too many women--all wives of the same man. (And aren't the wives of Muhammad supposed to be the Mothers of the Believers? Great examples they set for us.)
With the evidences laid bare before us, we do not see the justification of accusing the Prophet(P) of being a “rapist”, as those anti-Islamic critics allege. That the Prophet(P) himself married Safiyyah(R) so as to avoid the certainty of her being a slave of the Muslims and helped her to defend herself from the taunts of her co-wives is enough proof that the Prophet(P) was a man of exemplary conduct and remained honourable even to relatives of his most bitter foes.}}
This is laughable considering the "certainty of her being a slave of the Muslims" was because the Muslims were responsible for invading Khaybar (with no real justification) and killing her husband and male family members, never-mind that Muhammad sanctioned the enslavement of non-combatants.
Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators

Navigation menu