FACT CHECK: The Marriage of Saffiyah (s.a) to Prophet Muhammad (saw)
Did the Jews of Medina get treated unfairly by the Prophet?
Did the Prophet carry out unprovoked aggression against Banu Nadir, the Tribe of Safiyyah?
Did the Prophet act inhumanely towards the Father of Lady Saffiyah?
Was Kinana, first husband of Saffiyah tortured to death?
Did the Prophet kill Huyay the Father of Saffiyah and her husband and then make her walk past their bodies?
Did he force her to marry him and conssumate the marriage, although she hated him?
Let’s look past the propaganda to establish the historical truth behind the Anti-Islamic myths.
CLAIM 1: JEWS WERE TREATED UNFAIRLY BY THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN MEDINA.
VERDICT: FALSE
As Head of State, The Mercy to the worlds, Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) gave the Jewish community in Medina, total religious and political freedom and equality.
There had never been a precedent for equal citizenship between different races and religions, before the Constitution of Medina.
The Charter of Medina declares that all the Jewish tribes were one ‘ummah‘ (community) with the Muslims. This unique historical agreement back in the seventh century, proscribed anti-semitism and declared “No Jew was to be wronged for being a Jew“.
Compare this to Western Europe where Jews where persecuted and massacred throughout the centuries, even as late as the 1940s when millions were killed just for the ‘crime’ of being Jews.
The Constitution of Medina proclaimed:
“Those Jews who follow the Believers will be helped and will be treated with equality…
No Jew will be wronged for being a Jew… The enemies of the Jews who follow us will not be helped”
One by one the Jewish Tribes broke this agreement and plotted to kill the Prophet and destroy the Muslim community.
Reluctantly, the Muslims had to take defensive action to protect the State of Medina.
The Prophet’s compassion and humanity towards Jews, however, always remained in evidence.
For instance – despite being the Head of State – he stood up to honour the body of Jewish man, because of common humanity:
Qays ibn Sa’d reported: A funeral passed by the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, and he stood up. It was said to him, “It is a Jew.” The Prophet said, “Was he not a (human) soul?
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 1250
He even forgave a Jewish woman who attempted to poison him, and restrained Lady Aisha (s.a) from being harsh in replying to abuse from Jewish people towards himself. Such was his humanity and forebearance:
“The Jews came to the Prophet (ﷺ) and said to him,” As-Samu ‘Alaika (ie, Death be upon you). “He replied,’ The same on you. ‘
` Aisha said to them, "Death be upon you, and may Allah curse you and shower His wrath upon you! Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) I said,
"Be gentle and calm, O
`Aisha! Be gentle and beware of being harsh and of saying evil things.”She said, “Didn’t you hear what they said?” He said, “Didn’t you hear what I replied (to them)? Have returned their statement to them, and my invocation against them will be accepted but theirs against me will not be accepted.
Sahih al-Bukhari 6401
A Jewess brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet (ﷺ) who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, “Shall we kill her?”
He said, “No.”
I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ).
Sahih al-Bukhari 2617
It is thus evident that the Prophet treated the Jews of Medina with exemplary fairness and compassion.
CLAIM 2: THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (PBUH) CARRIED OUT UNPROVOKED AGGRESSION AGAINST BANU NADIR
VERDICT: FALSE
They had in fact conspired against Islam, violated their treaty with the Muslims and attempted to kill the Prophet. This article, provides a whole array of historical references that establish this beyond doubt.
It summarises their crimes as follows:
From the above historical evidences, we read that the Banu Nadir had friendly relations with the enemies of the Muslims. They deliberately handed over information to the Quraysh, with intend of killing Muslims. They were also guilty of having attempted to assassinate the Prophet (p). And their open refusal to renew the treaty was seen therefore tantamount to declaration of war. With these, the only course left for the Muslims was to treat them as enemies. The siege of the forts was laid, until they agreed to leave Madinah.
Analysing The Banu Nadir Incident
Despite this treason and warmongering, the Prophet mercifully allowed them to leave Medina peacefully and negotiated with them to achieve this.
He even allowed them to take all their goods, except weapons in a gesture of humanity that can only be marvelled at:
“Finally, Banoo An Nadeer agreed to leave Al Madeena, and the prophet (may Allaah send salutations upon him) allowed them to take all that their camels could carry except for weapons. However, he did not divide the spoils.” (Zaad al-Ma’ad, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, page 298)
Zaad al Ma’ad, Ibn Qayyim, Page 298
It is startling that the opponents of the Prophet ignore these inconvenient facts when they portray him as violent or bloodthirsty, purely from ignorance or prejudice.
Despite this graciousness, the Jews of Banu Nadir used their peaceful exile, to use Khaybar (where they had been allowed to settle and farm in peace) as a military base to attack Muslims:
1.The people of Khaybar were also involved in the Battle of Trench, when the Muslims were attacked in Madinah with ten thousand troops, again here they sided and waged war against the Muslims.
2. They made the Banu Qurayzah break their pact, and made them side with enemies in attacking the Muslims.
3. Al-Yusayr Ibn Rizam, one of their leaders gathered Banu Ghatafan to attack the Muslims.
We see from the above, that these people were not a peaceful lot. Instead of moving to Khaybar for peace, and get on with life, they used Khaybar as a military headquarters to attack and kill Muslims.
The Battle of Khaybar
CLAIM 3: THE PROPHET ACTED INHUMANELY TOWARDS THE FATHER OF SYEDA SAFFIYAH & TORTURED HER HUSBAND
VERDICT: FALSE
We can conclude from the aforementioned facts, that it was without choice that the Muslims had to take decisive military action against the group of terrorists, who were the leaders of the Banu Nadir.
Syeda Saffiyah’s Father – the Chief – and her husband Kinana were at the forefront of the military operations against the Muslim community:
A number of Jews who had formed a party against the Apostle, among whom were Sallan b. Abu’l-Huqayq al-Nadri, and HUYAYY B. AKHTAB al-Nadri and KINANA b. Abu’l-Huqayq al-Nadri, and Huadha b. Qays al Wa’ili, and Abu Ammar al-Wa’ili with a number of B. al-Nadir and B. Wa’il went to Quraysh at Mecca and INVITED THEM TO JOIN THEM IN AN ATTACK ON THE APOSTLE so that they might get rid of him altogether.
IBN ISHAQ, PAGE 450
The story of Kinana being tortured is also without a single corrobarating report in authentic hadith and should be totally rejected. Allama Shibli Nomani states:
While describing the battle of Khaibar, the history writers have committed a serious blunder in reported a totally baseless report, which has become a common place. It is said that the Prophet (p) had granted amnesty to the Jews on condition that they would not hide anything. When Kinana Ibn Rabi refused to give any clue to the hidden treasures, the Prophet (p) ordered Zubair to adopt stern measures to force a disclosure. Zubair branded his chest with a hot flint again and again, till he was on the point of death. At last he ordered Kinana to be put to death and all the Jews were made slaves.
The whole truth in the story is that Kinana was put to death. But it was not for his refusal to give a clue to the hidden treasure. He was put to death because he had killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (also Muslima). Tabari has reported it in unambiguous words: ‘Then the Holy Prophet (p) gave Kinana to Muhmmad Ibn Maslama (Muslima), ‘and he put him to death in retaliation of the murder of his own brother, Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima).’ In the rest of the report, both Tabari and Ibn Hisham have quoted it from Ibn Ishaq, but Ibn Ishaq does not name any narrator. Traditionists, in books on Rijal, have explicitly stated that Ibn Ishaq used to borrow from the Jews stories concerning the battle of the Prophet (p). As Ibn Ishaq does not mention the name of any narrator whatsoever in this case, there is every likelihood of the story having been passed on by the Jews.
Baseless Story of Kinana
That a man should be tortured with burns on his chest by the sparks of a flint is too heinous a deed for a Prophet (p) who had earned for himself the title of Rahma’lil Alamin (Mercy for all the Worlds). After all, did he not let the woman who had sought to poison him to go scot-free. Who would expect such a soul to order human body to be so burnt for the sake of a few coins.
As a matter of fact, Kinana Ibn Rabi Ibn al-Huquaiq had been granted his life on the condition that he would never break faith or make false statements. He had also given his word, according to one of the reports, that if he did anything to the contrary, he could be put to death. Kinana played false, and the immunity granted to him was withdrawn. He killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (or Muslima) and had, therefore, to suffer for it, as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari
CLAIM 4: The Prophet ordered the killing of the Father and former husband of Saffiyah and then made her walk past their bodies?
VERDICT: FALSE
Her Father had actuallly been executed for his crimes, some time previously.
At the battle of Khaybar her husband and brother were killed.
So, did the Prophet take Saffiyah past the dead bodies of her family with no compassion?
This story is based on the questionable narratives that came from Jewish sources in Ibn Ishaq nonetheless is it TOTALLY FALSE!
The Prophet (saw) is actually quoted as REPRIMANDING Bilal (r.a) for this very action, and putting his own cloak over Saffiyah as sign of honour and compassion towards her:
(The Prophet saw) took off his cloak and placed it over the shoulders of Safiyyah, whose husband had been killed in the battle. It was a gesture of pity, but from that moment she was to be honored and given great respect in the Muslim community. Then the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) turned to Bilal and said, “Bilal, has Allah plucked mercy from your heart that you let these two women pass by those of their menfolk who have been killed?” This was considered a severe reprimand, for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) rarely criticized the behavior of those who served him. Anas ibn Malik, for example once said, “I served the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) for eight years. He never once scolded me for something that I had done or for something that I had not done.”
Cited Here
CLAIM 5: Saffiyah (s.a) hated the Prophet, but he forced her to marry him and consummate the marriage.
VERDICT: FALSE
Critics allege that Saffiyah would have naturally hated the man responsible for the death of her family.
As such such could not have willingly married the Prophet (peace be upon).
They find some support for this assertion in the following report:
There was none more hateful to me then Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) as he killed my father and husband. [But] the Prophet (pbuh) explained, ‘O Safiya your father instigated the Arabs against me and did so and so…’ He kept on explaining until that feeling (of hatred) vanished from me.’ (Tabarani Kabeer, Hadith 19668.
Tabrani Kabeer, Hadith 19668
How can this report be reconciled with others which show she had already accepted the Prophet (peace be upon him) prior to her marriage and had been shocked that her father was determined to oppose him, despite knowing he truly was from God?:
I was my father’s and my uncle’s favorite child. When the Messenger of Allah came to Madinah and stayed at Quba, my parents went to him at night. And when they looked disconcerted and worn out, I received them cheerfully but to my surprise no one of them turned to me. They were so grieved that they did not feel my presence. I heard my uncle, Abu Yasir, saying to my father, “Is it really him?” He said, “Yes, by Allah”. My uncle said: “Can you recognize him and confirm this?” He said, “Yes”. My uncle said, “How do you feel towards him?” He said, “By Allah I shall be his enemy as long as I live.”
Ibn Hisham, As-Sirah an-Nabawiyyah, vol. 2, pp. 257-258, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.162
In fact, so well known was her affection for Islam and the Prophet amongst her people, that her Jewish husband – a domestic abuser – gave her a black eye, because of a dream she saw which he interpreted as her desire to marry the Prophet:
Safiya had seen in a dream when she was the wife of Kinana b. al-Rabi b. Abu’l-Huqayq that the moon would fall into her lap. When she told her husband he said, ‘This simply means that you covet the king of the Hijaz, Muhammad.’ He gave her such a blow in the face that he blacked her eye. When she was brought to the apostle the mark was still there, and when he asked to cause of it she told him this story.”
Ibn Ishaq, page 515
Finally, the following report makes it absolutely clear that she willingly married him and affirmed that she was already Muslim, despite being given the choice to stay with her own people:
When Safiya came to the Holy Prophet (pbuh), he said to her; ‘Among the Jews your father did not stop in his enmity towards me until Allah destroyed him.’ She said: ‘O Allah’s Messenger! Indeed Allah says in His book, ‘No one will take anyone else’s burden’. So the Holy Prophet (p) said to her: ‘MAKE YOUR CHOICE, if you will chose Islam I’ll select you for myself and IF YOU CHOSE JUDAISM, I WILL SET YOU FREE AND SENT YOU TO YOUR PEOPLE.’ She said; ‘O Allah’s Messenger indeed I longed for Islam and testified for you even before you gave me this invitation when I came to you. I have no guardian among the Jews, neither father nor brother and I prefer Islam over disbelief. Allah and His Messenger are dear to me then freedom and to return to my people
Ibn Saad volume 8, page 123
So which is true? That she hated him? Or that she was already a devoted follower of his and willingly married him? Indeed that he was more dear to her than her own people?
Actions speak louder than words.
It is an accepted fact that she had a choice and she chose the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). She could have easily married another one of her kinsman and remained with her tribe.
Some critics wrongly assume all the male members of her tribe had been killed.
This is quite wrong: many reports make it clear that large numbers of her tribesman had been spared, and she actually feared they might attack the Prophet.
She was a beautiful young daughter of a Chieftain. She would have found many suitable matches amongst her own community.
Why then did she marry the Prophet? It can only be that she wished to do, having willingly accepted Islam and wanting to be the wife of God’s Prophet (saw)
In the culture of Arabia, marrying the daughter of a formerly hostile tribe was a means to cement good relations. Forceful marriage could have not achieved this in any case.
It appears therefore, that the reports about her hating the Prophet have not been accurately reported.
One of the great issues we have is that despite the efforts of our scholars, serious mistakes did make their way into our books of Hadith and Seerah.
We need to be honest about this and be bold enough to reject such reports that contradict the Quran, other sound reports and common sense.
We can gauge this by looking at the many contradictions found in Sahih Al-Bukhari, the book generally regarded as most authentic.
So, what of the idea that she was somehow compelled to consumate the marriage?
The Prophet did not take her as a slave or concubine- as captives were prior to Islam- but married her, freed her and gave her honour.
As his lawfully wedded wife it was his right to consummate the marriage, with her consent.
Critics point to a narration that Abu Ayub Al Ansari (r.a), one of the companions, stood guard outside the Prophet’s tent the night of his marriage for fear that Lady Saffiyah might harm him.
They imply that the Prophet had stationed him there, since he knew his new bride had been compelled to marry him.
In fact the reports are clear that the Prophet did not even know that he was there, so this is clearly wrong:
Abu Ayyub al-Ansari held his sword and walked around the tent of the Prophet all night.
When the Messenger of God came out of the tent early in the morning, Abu Ayyub said, “Allahu Akbar!” When the Prophet saw him holding his sword, he asked, “O Abu Ayyub! What is the matter?”
The self-sacrificing Companion, who did not sleep a wink that night, said, “O Messenger of God! I feared that this woman (Saffiyah) who lost her father, brother, husband, uncle and her relatives and who had just become a Muslim, might harm you. That is why, I waited around the tent
Ibn Saad, cited here
In fact, there is a report that settles both issues conclusively:
a) Saffiyah, Mother of the believers, chose when she was willing to consummate the marriage – the Prophet did not force her.
b) Syeda Saffiya delayed only because she loved the Prophet and feared her tribesmen might harm him.
This demonstrates the falsehood of the claim that Saffiyah had any ill feelings toward the Prophet, and in fact confirms that she cared for him and was protective of him:
The Messenger of God did not want to enter the nuptial chamber with Safiyya in Khaybar. When they arrived in Sibar, Safiyya did not want to enter the nuptial chamber there. However, when they arrived in Sahba, twelve miles away from Khaybar, she agreed to enter the nuptial chamber. When the Prophet asked her, “Why did you not accept to enter the nuptial chamber in Sibar, Safiyya said, “O Messenger of God! I feared that the Jews would harm you there. When we moved far away from them, I felt safer.”
Ibn Sa’d, ibid, Vol. 3, p.122-123.
The blessed Saffiyah and the Prophet had a wonderful marriage born of mutual love and respect.
The Prophet Muhammad showed great affection and care towards Saffiyah, all throughout his life:
Once his wife Saffiyyah (May Allah be pleased with her) was crying because she was travelling with the Prophet and his others wives and her camel had knelt down, and so she lagged behind. The Prophet came down from his camel, consoled her and wiped her tears with his own hands and clothes (Musnad Ahmad, Volume 6).
On another occasion Safiyyah reported to the Prophet that she heard remarks being made about her Jewish origin which upset her. He told her to proud of who she was, stating:
”Tell them :”My father is the Prophet Moses, my uncle is Prophet Aaron and my husband is the Prophet Mohammed, what do you have to be more proud than me?’‘ (Mishkat Al- Masabih, 6143)
The Prophet of Mercy
Saffiyah too loved the Prophet, more than her own self, as the following touching incident shows:
Hz. Safiyyah could not stand it when the Prophet became ill and had pains. She wanted to suffer instead of him. When the Prophet became very ill, all of his wives gathered around him. Safiyyah stated the following sincerely and in tears:
“O Messenger of Allah! I wish I was suffering instead of you now.”
Ibn Saad, cited here
Conclusion:
The claims of the critics are completely baseless and must stand rejected.