Muhammad And His Personal Enemies

  • Thread starter Thread starter discipleofJesus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Gonzales.
What prior ‘treaty’ are you referring to? Please enlighten us.

And please translate for us Abu Dawud 2998 so we can read for ourselves what the hadith says, not merely your interpretation of it.

Much appreciated,
Rodrigo
 
40.png
discipleofJesus:
  1. Muhammad or one of Muhammad’s followers could of responded by writing a few poems against Ka’b (and at least one of his followers did, Hassan b. Thabit) and that would of been enough. He did not have to send people to murder him.
(and at least one of his followers did, Hassan b. Thabit) =
From what I understand, at least 2 of his followers (i.e. Muslims) did, Hassan b. Thabit and a Muslim woman, al-Ja’adira.

Again from what I understand,
Hassan b.Thabit wrote at least one poem in reply to Ka’b.

And al-Jad’adira wrote at least one poem in reply to Ka’b.
 
Rodrigo Bivar:
What prior ‘treaty’ are you referring to? Please enlighten us.
the treaty that was agreed to shortly after prophet muhammad’s arrival at al-madeenah. try referring back to post #8.
Rodrigo Bivar:
And please translate for us Abu Dawud 2998 so we can read for ourselves what the hadith says, not merely your interpretation of it.
what i stated above is clear from the current translation of the hadeeth available from your favourite source for hadeeth, the usc-msa database. it can be found here. you guys can read it yourself… and while it does contain mistakes, the jist of what i mentioned above is clear from the text and not my own “personal” interpretation. as is clear from hadeeth itself, the aggression shown by the tribe of banu an-nadeer occurred after the battle of badr, which occurred at least a year after the initial treaty with the jews in and around al-madeenah was agreed to.

the arabic text of the hadeeth along with its explanation can be found here.
 
40.png
r.gonzales:
the treaty that was agreed to shortly after prophet muhammad’s arrival at al-madeenah. try referring back to post #8.
Is this ‘treaty’ or ‘medina charter’ mentioned in the sahih hadiths? I don’t recall. Can you please enlighten us?

Is this ‘treaty’ or ‘medina charter’ mentioned in Abu Dawud 2998?
40.png
r.gonzales:
what i stated above is clear from the current translation of the hadeeth available from your favourite source for hadeeth, the usc-msa database. it can be found here. you guys can read it yourself… and while it does contain mistakes, the jist of what i mentioned above is clear from the text and not my own “personal” interpretation. as is clear from hadeeth itself, the aggression shown by the tribe of banu an-nadeer occurred after the battle of badr, which occurred at least a year after the initial treaty with the jews in and around al-madeenah was agreed to.

the arabic text of the hadeeth along with its explanation can be found here.
I don’t trust the msa translation as you have maligned them in the past. I would prefer your kind expertise. After all, we don’t want to be accused of misinterpreting the hadith because we don’t speak Arabic, do we?

Many thanks gonzales.

Awaiting your translation,
Cid.
 
Sensible enough. IF anyone can bring this mentioned Sunan Abu Dawud 2998, it will be better and we can continue the discussion based on this.
 
40.png
Neverland:
Sensible enough. IF anyone can bring this mentioned Sunan Abu Dawud 2998, it will be better and we can continue the discussion based on this.
i provided a link to both the available english translation and the arabic text of the hadeeth above in post #38.

bivar wants me to retranslate the hadeeth claiming that i’ve maligned the usc-msa in the past on account of my pointing out errors in translation made by m. khan in many of the hadeeths he’s quoted from the database.

regardless of the mistakes made in the translation i’ve linked to, the main points i’ve made are still clear from the hadeeth and show that the expulsion of banu an-nadeer took place at least a year after the initial treaty between the muslims and the jewish tribes in and around al-madeenah was agreed to.

as bivar requested, here’s a more accurate translation of the hadeeth, with it’s correct reference from sunan abee daawud (i.e., the original arabic text):
#3004 - muhammad bin daawud bin sufyaan narrated to us: 'abdur-razzaaq narrated to us: ma’mar informed us: from az-zuhree: from 'abdir-rahmaan bin ka’b bin maalik: from a man from the companions of the prophet (s), that while Allah’s messenger (s) on that day was in al-madeenah before the occurance of badr, the unbelievers of quraish wrote to ibn ubayy and whoever was with him who worshipped the idols from the aws and the khazraj [tribes]: indeed, you accommodate our companion and indeed, we swear by Allah, that you surely fight him or expel him or we will surely be headed for you in our entirety until we kill your warriors and confiscate your women. so when that reached abdillah bin ubayy and whoever was with him from the worshippers of the idols, they gathered in order to fight the prophet (s). so when that reached the prophet (s), he met them and said, “the threat of quraish has surely had an effect on you to the extent. they cannot deceive you with more than what you wanted to deceive your souls with. you want to fight your sons and your brothers!” so when they heard that from the prophet (s) they divided. so when that reached the unbelievers of quraish, the unbelievers of quraish wrote to the jews after the occurace of badr: indeed, you are the people of armor and fortresses, and indeed, you will surely fight our companion or we will do such and such, and nothing will come between us and between the khadam of your women - and they (i.e., the khadam) are the anklets. so when their message reached the prophet (s) banu an-nadeer united with betrayal: so they sent to Allah’s messenger (s) [the following message]: “come out to us amongst thirty men from your companions and thirty rabbis from us will come out until we meet at the neutral place, and they will listen to you. so if they attest to you and believe in you, we will believe in you.” so he [prophet muhammad] related their news [to the people]. so when it was the following day, Allah’s messenger (s) came to them with the squardon and surrounded them. then he said to them, "indeed you, by Allah, will not be safe with me, except with a treaty that you agree upon with me. they they refused to grant him a treaty, so he fought them on that day of their’s then the following day he came to bani quraidhah with the squardon and he left bani an-nadeer and he invited them (banu quraidhah) to contract a treaty with him and they agreed upon it. so he turned away from them and came to bani an-nadeer with the squardon and fought them until they yielded to departure. so banu an-nadeer departed and brought whatever the camel carried of their commodities, the doors of their homes and their wood. so the date palms of bani an-nadeer were for Allah’s messenger specifically Allah awarded it to him and bestowed it upon him, for He said, “whatever Allah bestowed upon His messenger from them, then you did not excite any horses nor riding camels for it (i.e., send them on an expedition).” (59:6) he says: without fighting. so the prophet gave most of it (i.e., the spoils) to the muhaajireen, a portion of it amongst them and a portion of it to two men from the ansaar and they were needy. he did not give a share to anyone from the ansaar other than them two. and Allah’s messenger’s charity remained from it, which was in the hands of the children of faatimah, may Allah be pleased with her.
the hadeeth has an authentic chain of transmission as mentioned by ash-shaikh al-albaanee, one of the top scholars of hadeeth of our era.

as is clear from the text, banu an-nadeer were the aggressors having been goaded by the polytheists of makkah into betraying the treaty that had been previously agreed to soon after prophet muhammad had arrived at al-madeenah.

khan’s translation on the usc-msa database also mistranslates the verb “ghadaa 'alaa” as attacked, but it actually means “came to”.
 
Many thanks senor Gonzales for the kind translation of Abu Dawud 3004.

Several points I’d like you to clarify for us:
  1. There is no mention of the Medina Charter in any of the Sahih or Sunan. Why is that?
  2. What actions did the B. Nadir do to ‘betray’ him? I see only that they invited Muhammad to talk to them. They said, “come out to us amongst thirty men from your companions and thirty rabbis from us will come out until we meet at the neutral place, and they will listen to you. so if they attest to you and believe in you, we will believe in you.” Isn’t that entirely reasonable?
  3. What action did Muhammad do following the B. Nadir offer to hear him out so they may ‘believe in him’?
  4. What actions did the B. Qurayza do that justified Muhammad going to them with armed men to ‘invite’ them to make a treaty?
Thanks again,
Rodrigo
 
In my opinion, at least the use of military strength to force the Qurayza sign any treaty was not valid, because the Qurayza did it under pressure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top