I give the history of Muhammad’s massacre of the Qurayzah Jews in Onward Muslim Soldiers. But American schoolchildren are learning a somewhat different version. “Module for Teaching Islamic History in Public Schools Unfairly Maligns the Qurayzah Jews,” by Andre Rublev at the 6th Column Against Jihad blog:
Due to the exponential growth in demand for information about Islamic history, we cannot ignore the intense competition over what version of events our children will learn. After all, the impact of first impressions on impressionable young minds cannot be underestimated. Well ahead of the game, the Council on Islamic Education has prepared a teaching module for use in public high and middle schools whose sole purpose is to pre-empt all negative impressions relating to Muhammad’s harsh treatment of the Bani Qurayzah following the Battle of the Trench.
The CIE is not a stranger to controversy. William Bennetta of the California-based Textbook League first pointed out the CIE”s pernicious influence over history textbooks used in American schools in both the March-April and July-August 2000 issues of The Textbook Letter [1, 2]. More recently, Gilbert T. Sewall of the American Textbook Council in New York City made similar observations. In his 2003 publication “Islam and the Textbooks” Sewall described the CIE as “a content gatekeeper with virtually unchecked power over publishers” [3]. The CIE is also involved with teacher training and the preparation of supplemental teaching modules. The module in question incorporates the controversial Public Television special “Legacy of a Prophet” and adds insult to injury by going so far as to vilify the hapless Qurayzah.
No account of Muhammad’s time in Medina can inconspicuously gloss over this incident because it is linked to Muhammad’s most important victory over Mecca. The historical setting is referred to as the “Hiraj.” This began when Muhammad and his followers relocated from Mecca to Yathrib in 622 after two rival tribes had asked him to mediate an exhausting civil war. During the following six years, Muhammad sealed important alliances by way of diplomacy and marriage. He also built up the wealth and military prestige of the Muslim community by raiding caravans organized by the Quraysh and by appropriating the property of banished tribes. Yathrib was later re-named “Medina” in Muhammad’s honor.
Consequently, the Quraysh sent forces from Mecca to put an end to Muhammad’s disruption of their trade, culminating in the “Battle of the Trench” in 627. Muhammad’s success in outlasting the siege was a turning point in his rivalry with the leadership of Mecca. By the time of his death in 632 most of the Arab peninsula was consolidated under Islam.
In 622, Medina was also inhabited by three large tribes of Jews; the Bani Nadir, the Bani Qaynuqah, and the Bani Qurayzah. By 627, both the Bani Nadir and the Banu Qaynuqa had been expelled to Khaybar, a region north of Medina. During their final attempt to subdue Medina, the Meccans sent envoys to the Bani Qurayzah hoping to win their support. The Meccans had already obtained the support of the two exiled Jewish tribes now living in Khaybar. Although hesitant at first, the Qurayzah finally sided with the Meccans as the siege dragged on. However, before the Qurayzah could effectively act on their decision the Meccans broke the siege due to foul weather. Well aware of the Qurayzah’s dealings with the Meccans, the Muslims now laid siege to the Qurayzah fortress until they surrendered. Mortally wounded Arab chief Sa’d ibn Muadh was chosen by Muhammad to decide their fate. He ruled that all the men should be killed, and all the women and children be sold into slavery. The next day, between 700 and 900 men of the Bani Qurayzah were beheaded [4, 5].
To present this massacre to American high school students in a more positive light, the CIE module emphasizes the alleged “treachery” of the Qurayzah [6]. Below are no less than seven sentences or phrases from the lesson plan that use the t-word:
1) Title: The Concept of Treason in Comparative Law
2) Overview: This lesson explores the theme of treason.
3) Students should be able to”¦analyze the issue of treason in the United States Constitution and during the Battle of the Trench.
4) Have students organize into groups and read Student Handout: The Battle of the Trench, which contains background information on the Battle of the Trench, the comments of Professor Firestone on the Bani Qurayzah, and the clause on treason in the third article of the United States Constitution.
5) Why would the siding of the Bani Qurayzah with the Quraysh be seen as treason?
6) Could the definition of treason given in Section 3, Article 3 of the Constitution apply to the actions of the Bani Qurayzah? If so, why?
7) Why do you think treason is punished so severely in U.S. law? Give several reasons.
The authors of this module, Susan Douglass and Aiyub Palmer, are not alone in being so heavy-handed with the unfortunate Qurayzah. In her bestseller “Muhammad” Karen Armstrong points out that, “In the early seventh century, an Arab chief would not be expected to show any mercy to traitors like the Qurayzah” [7]. Armstrong is one of the featured narrators on “Legacy of a Prophet” and a frequent guest on Public Television and National Public Radio.
These charges against the Qurayzah are based on their failure to uphold the principles laid out in Muhammad’s Constitution of Medina, which presumably provided equal rights to both Muslims and Jews. Furthermore, Muhammad had tried to ingratiate himself with the Jews by initially instructing his followers pray facing Jerusalem, but his relations with these tribes were reportedly tense from the start. The Public Television website based on “Legacy of a Prophet” suggests “This was probably a matter of local politics” [4]. But it is difficult to imagine how any group of non-Muslims could feel at ease with a document that acknowledges Muhammad as “God’s apostle.” Since no Jewish account has been recovered, we may never really know their side of the story. The best we can do for now is to follow Muslim accounts leading up to this terrible event to put the Qurayzah’s actions in perspective.
In 624 two Arab poets, an old man and a young mother of five were assassinated in their sleep for insulting the prophet. Most sources agree that the murders of Abu Afak and Asma bint Marwan were carried out with Muhammad’s blessings, even though their poetry only ridicule and satire. In the same year, the Qaynuqah were expelled and Muhammad ordered the assassination of Ka”b Ibn Ashraf, a poet and Nadir chief who was trying to garner up support among the Meccans for deposing Muhammad.
The expulsion of the Qaynuqah started with a picaresque incident at an outdoor market whereby some Qaynuqah youths played a trick on a Muslim girl that exposed her private parts. In the resulting melee, one Muslim and one Jew were killed. Unable or unwilling to resolve this incident peacefully, Muhammad’s forces laid siege to the Qaynuqah until they agreed to leave with little more than their lives.
The expulsion of the Bani Nadir during the next year is even more peculiar. In a case of mistaken identity, Muslims killed two members of the Bani Amir, a Bedouin tribe that had recently formed an alliance with Muhammad. Consequently, Muhammad’s community was obligated to pay blood money to the Amir chief, and Muhammad asked the Nadir to share the costs. The Nadir leadership apparently agreed to this request, but with no explanation, Muhammad cut short his visit to their tribal elders. He later told his companions that the angel Gabriel had revealed to him a plot for his assassination organized by members of the Nadir. Based on this “evidence,” the Nadir were banished under the same conditions of the Qaynuqah that had preceded them [5].
The murder of two poets guilty of “intellectual attack,” the murder of one of their chiefs, and the poor handling of the vulgar incident involving the Qaynuqah gave the Nadir strong motives for eliminating Muhammad. However, motive alone does not make you guilty, and no decent tribunal can accept evidence provided by one man’s “divine revelation.” No doubt the Qurayzah saw the writing on the wall.
It could be argued that Muhammad’s annihilation of this tribe was a matter of self-preservation. After all, had the Qurayzah been merely expelled, they could have later re-grouped with the Qaynuqah and Nadir, who Muhammad’s forces were to confront the next year in Khaybar. In effect, the Qurayzah’s co-existence with the Muslims had become a zero-sum game, but in view of their de-facto second-class status, the Qurayzah’s collaboration with the Meccans could hardly qualify as “treason.” In fact, even the Constitution of Medina’s guarantee of “equal protection” is ambiguous at best. For example, point 15 of this document states that “Believers are friends one to the other to the exclusion of outsiders” [8]. Incredibly, the CIE still finds it appropriate to encourage students to draw an analogy between the Constitution of Medina and the Mayflower Compact [9]!
How do we counter the CIE”s flagrant distortions when most Americans know so little about the early history of Islam? No doubt senators, representatives, and even educators will be reluctant to do their homework on the Qurayzah’s circumstances leading up to the Battle of the Trench. This is not the kind of information that can be reduced to a sound-byte, and the narratives that are easiest to read are usually written by mealy-mouthed Islam apologists. In fact, Karen Armstrong’s “Islam: A Short History” now forms a part of the reading list that General John R. Vines has assigned to his top staff members now serving in Iraq [10]. It is troubling enough that officials who are on the frontline in the War on Terror are relying on the questionable scholarship of this self-described “free-lance monotheist,” whose spiritual disorientation is thoroughly demonstrated in her book’s total surrender to moral relativism [11]. But since American-based Islamist organizations like the CIE are too young to have influenced the general’s secondary education, things could be worse: Try to imagine the reading preferences of a CIE-indoctrinated generation of American leaders. Isn’t it time we gave our representatives some real history lessons?
Notes:
1. http://www.textbookleague.org/111muha.htm
2. http://www.textbookleague.org/113centu.htm
3. http://www.historytextbooks.org/islam.htm
4. http://www.pbs.org/muhammad/ma_jews.shtml
5. Maxime Rodinson “Mohammed” (1971) Pantheon Books, pp 171, 172, 176, 191, 193, 211-213
6. http://www.cie.org/teachers/LessonPlans/Legacy/default1.asp?section=11
7. Karen Armstrong “Muhammad” (1992) Harper’s, p 208
8. http://www.constitution.org/cons/medina/con_medina.htm
9. http://www.cie.org/teachers/LessonPlans/Legacy/default1.asp?section=9
10. http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/01/16/international/middleeast/16command.gif
11. http://www.meforum.org/article/115