> Muslim Response Safiyya Bint Huyayy - the Jewish wife of Prophet Muhammad

[Qatada]

:

Umm ul-Mukminin Safiyyah: The Jewish Wife of Muhammad(P)

Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi

Introduction

There has been some criticism going around as to the nature of marriage of Safiyyah(R), the Jewish wife of Muhammad(P). A rabid missionary hostile to the Prophet Muhammad(P) had in fact the audacity to say that:

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.

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).

The Marriage of the Prophet(P) to Safiyyah(R)

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.

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.[1]

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.[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?"[3]

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.[4] 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.[5]

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.

Conclusion

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.

And only God knows best.


References

[1] Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad (North American Trust Publications, 1976), p. 373

[2] John L. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, pp. 19-20

[3] A. Guillaume (trans.), The Life of Muhammad: A translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah (Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 515

[4] An account of how Safiyyah's loyalty was affirmed by the Prophet(P) himself is recorded in Muhammad Husayn Haykal, Op. Cit., p. 374, of which an online document can be found.

[5] Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based On The Earliest Sources (George Allen & Unwin, 1983), p. 269

SOURCE

[TheBoxer]

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.[5]

Can anyone explain where Martin Lings got that information from? Which authentic Hadith, for example?

Also, is there a reason why Muhammad did not observe the required 'idda for widows?

~TheBoxer

[salamfromrom]

Also, is there a reason why Muhammad did not observe the required 'idda for widows?

I have googled this non-stop and cannot find any explanation, could you brothers and sisters maybe try and shed some light on this issue? it would be a great help.

Salams

[TheBoxer]

Oh, and another thing...since Muhammad already had many wives, why couldn't he just free Safiyya and let her go? Why did he have to marry her? She was young and very beautiful, and after Muhammad's death a few years later, she was forbidden from remarrying because of a revelation prohibiting the marriage of any of Muhammad's widows (Quran 33:53). What if she had wanted children?

And not only did he not observe the 'idda with her, but he did not allot a time for her (Sahih Muslim Book 8, Number 3455), which I thought was mandatory if someone was going to have multiple wives. I thought each wife was to be treated fairly and given equal time unless one specifically gave up her night to another wife or something, as in Sauda's case when she feared that Muhammad was going to divorce her (Tafsir Ibn Kathir - Quran 4:128).

Thanks.

~TheBoxer

[salamfromrom]

why couldn't he just free Safiyya and let her go? Why did he have to marry her?

It could be due to any number of factors, personal reasons, political reasons ( making peace with the jews). asking these sort of questions is pointless.

What if she had wanted children?

I think God took all this into consideration when the verse in question was revealed.

Question: About the idda issue, did Muhammad(swt) marry her before or after the verse stipulating the 4 month+ idda period was revealed?

salam a leikum

[salman]

as far your question about where that narration and similar are found then they have been most likely quoted from the books of history and Tabqat ibn Sa'ad

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

Oh, and another thing...since Muhammad already had many wives, why couldn't he just free Safiyya and let her go? Why did he have to marry her?

ROFL - you Islamophobe now have problem with people marrying each other? Why did the Prophets (peace be upon him) in the past had many wives? Are you going to accuse them too? Your argument would hold any leg only if the Messenger of of Allah (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam) forcefully married her! However, he set her free and then married her with her consent.

amazing thing about all these Islamophobes is that they want to be defendants of our mothers (may Allah be pleased with them) for being "abused", "treated unfairly" etc. when the victims themselves had no problem with it. Why are you jumping into other people's life and their decisions?

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

What if she had wanted children?

baseless and emotional assumptions do not hold any value in the work of polemics or common sense. Or maybe holy ghost came to you with a revelation.

[TheBoxer]

salamfromrom,

You wrote:

It could be due to any number of factors, personal reasons, political reasons ( making peace with the jews). asking these sort of questions is pointless.

Why are they pointless? The motives and intentions of a man claiming to be God's prophet should be examined thoroughly, don't you think? From what I have read, it appears that the reasons were purely personal--she was beautiful and had the highest status as chief mistress of the Quraiza and an-Nadir tribes (Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 367). Muhammad had intended on expelling the Jews but was talked out of it, and so he allowed them to remain as long as the Jews cultivated the land and gave the Muslims half its yield (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 881). I believe Umar ended up forcing them out of the Arabian peninsula after Muhammad's death. So, the marriage definitely wasn't for the purpose of making peace with the Jews.

I think God took all this into consideration when the verse in question was revealed.

Really? Most of Muhammad's wives were relatively young, weren't they? It seems like you are ASSUMING God took that into consideration when Muhammad revealed this verse to his followers.

Question: About the idda issue, did Muhammad(swt) marry her before or after the verse stipulating the 4 month+ idda period was revealed?

What does it matter? Isn't sin ALWAYS sin? If someone is ignorant of something does it make their action not a sin? No. It simply means they sinned in ignorance. Or was it not a sin to marry before a waiting period, but then Allah changed his mind and decided to make it a sin?

Besides, I thought the 'idda stipulation (Quran 2:234) was revealed long before the conquest of Khaibar. In fact, I thought Sura Qalam was revealed while Muhammad was still in Mecca.

salman,

You wrote:

as far your question about where that narration and similar are found then they have been most likely quoted from the books of history and Tabqat ibn Sa'ad

So can we rely on the historical accuracy of the books of history and the Tabqat ibn Sa'ad?

ROFL - you Islamophobe now have problem with people marrying each other? Why did the Prophets (peace be upon him) in the past had many wives? Are you going to accuse them too? Your argument would hold any leg only if the Messenger of of Allah (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam) forcefully married her! However, he set her free and then married her with her consent.

amazing thing about all these Islamophobes is that they want to be defendants of our mothers (may Allah be pleased with them) for being "abused", "treated unfairly" etc. when the victims themselves had no problem with it. Why are you jumping into other people's life and their decisions?

Um, I asked a question. How is that an argument? Wow, you got all huffy-puffy and defensive there. My goodness. And you had to resort to name-calling, too. Sheesh.
　
I was simply asking why Muhammad needed yet another wife (since he was in violation of Quran 4:3 already). And there is not a single narration from one of the "authentic six" Hadith that describes his marriage to her as being consensual.
　
Muhammad's life is examined down to the very things he ate and the way he used stones to clean himself. Since Muslims claim that he is the final messenger of God and a true prophet and that he is the BEST example of humanity, I do not think it so outrageous to examine why he did the things he did, especially in regards to captives and women.

baseless and emotional assumptions do not hold any value in the work of polemics or common sense. Or maybe holy ghost came to you with a revelation.

It's not an assumption. It's a question. What if Safiya had wanted children? Isn't that a legitimate question?

~TheBoxer

[salamfromrom]

From what I have read, it appears that the reasons were purely personal

that is your opinion, and you are entitled to it.



Bro Salman, please tell me if you know, is there an explanation for the idda issue or not? It's ok if we don't know, but at least we have to be honest with ourselves and admit it if so.

salam a leikum

[salman]

^:

akhee, I have asked the knowledgeable members at Multaqa to shed some light on this and I will post it once I get a response, insha'Allah

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

Why are they pointless? The motives and intentions of a man claiming to be God's prophet should be examined thoroughly, don't you think?

how does having multiple or young/beautiful wives prove that a man is not a prophet or put a question marks on his prophethood? Is this criteria revealed in OT? Or this is something your holy ghost revealed to you Christians so that you can relay on straws to deny the truth?

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

From what I have read, it appears that the reasons were purely personal--she was beautiful and had the highest status as chief mistress of the Quraiza and an-Nadir tribes (Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 367).

less assumption and more evidence. By your conclusion, any man who marries a beautiful girl with some status is doing so because of her status and beauty. Wonderful conclusion isn't?

Even if we assume your conclusion is correct, for sake of argument, why do you have problem with people marrying for personal reasons? Which person in the world does not marry for a personal reason? Like I mentioned above, when did marrying for personal reasons or beauty or such become a criteria for determining or rejecting prophethood?

The criteria of the Christians is amazing because somehow this exempted the previous Prophets (peace be upon them).

I think you need to spend less time with shamoun, wood and crew. They are not doing any good to you - deluding and draining your common sense.

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

Muhammad had intended on expelling the Jews but was talked out of it, and so he allowed them to remain as long as the Jews cultivated the land and gave the Muslims half its yield (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 881). I believe Umar ended up forcing them out of the Arabian peninsula after Muhammad's death. So, the marriage definitely wasn't for the purpose of making peace with the Jews.

excluding the cultivating part, please provide some evidence for your claims: Prophet (peace be upon him) wanted to expel residences of khaybar but he did not but Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) did it during his time

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

Really? Most of Muhammad's wives were relatively young, weren't they?

and your point is?

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

What does it matter? Isn't sin ALWAYS sin? If someone is ignorant of something does it make their action not a sin? No. It simply means they sinned in ignorance. Or was it not a sin to marry before a waiting period, but then Allah changed his mind and decided to make it a sin?

are you of real? How can a law be applied if it does not exist to begin with? Why did God reveal 10 commandments so late when they were already sins?

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

Besides, I thought the 'idda stipulation (Quran 2:234) was revealed long before the conquest of Khaibar.

and in which hijrah it was revealed?

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

In fact, I thought Sura Qalam was revealed while Muhammad was still in Mecca.

what does surah Qalam has to do with anything?

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

So can we rely on the historical accuracy of the books of history and the Tabqat ibn Sa'ad?

we do not take books of history at their face value - as long as the mentioned narration is authentic we have no problem with it. So each narration need to be judged individually. I thought you would at least know this

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

Um, I asked a question. How is that an argument? Wow, you got all huffy-puffy and defensive there. My goodness. And you had to resort to name-calling, too. Sheesh.

boxer, try this smartness with someone else; we know the in and out of you haters more than yourselves. The intent of your question is clearly displayed in your response to akhee salamfromrom. Why would you have a problem with two people marrying each other regardless of the reasons? Is your mother beautiful? If so I think your dad married her because he lusted her.

again, why would anyone has problem with anyone marrying anyone. I do not see you questioning the previous Prophets (peace be upon them). So why are you trying to ride the back of Prophet of Muhammad (sal-allahu aalayhi wa sallam). When did marriage become a deciding factor or an argument between truth and falsehood?

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

I was simply asking why Muhammad needed yet another wife (since he was in violation of Quran 4:3 already). And there is not a single narration from one of the "authentic six" Hadith that describes his marriage to her as being consensual.

do not expose your ignorance!
1 - How did he violate any rule when the exception was explicitly made for him in the Qur'an?
2 - Authenticity of a historical account is not limited to any book.
3 - Who told you that there are six books of sahih?
　

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

Muhammad's life is examined down to the very things he ate and the way he used stones to clean himself. Since Muslims claim that he is the final messenger of God and a true prophet and that he is the BEST example of humanity, I do not think it so outrageous to examine why he did the things he did, especially in regards to captives and women.

First, spend some time reading this. Secondly, less straw man and more common sense: no one said these questions are outrageous but we are asking what is the point of these questions and what do you want to prove. When did such things become criteria for determining truth and falsehood? Like I said before, you have a leg to stand if you can prove that he forced the free and captive women to submit to him.

Originally Posted by TheBoxer

It's not an assumption. It's a question. What if Safiya had wanted children? Isn't that a legitimate question?

we do not know if she did or not. So what if she wanted children? What if someone want to commit fornication?

[TheBoxer]

salman,

You wrote:

how does having multiple or young/beautiful wives prove that a man is not a prophet or put a question marks on his prophethood? Is this criteria revealed in OT? Or this is something your holy ghost revealed to you Christians so that you can relay on straws to deny the truth?

Well, I'm not saying it proves prophethood or not. What I was simply saying was that BECAUSE he claims to be a prophet, then it is understandable that we examine his motives for doing the things he did. For example, did he marry Safiya because God told him to? Did he marry Safiya because she would have been in danger had he not? Or did he marry Safiya because she was very beautiful and had a very high social status among the Jews, and therefore she befit no one but him? The Hadith corroborate the latter theory.
　
The Old Testament, the Holy Ghost, and Christianity have nothing to do with this. These are all questions a Muslim can come up with out of his or her own brain. And here's the really interesting part. The Quran stipulates that a man have no more than four wives, and Muhammad himself said that out of the four reasons a man marries a woman (beauty, social position, wealth, and religion) he should marry her for religion.
　
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 27: Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman (otherwise) you will be a losers.

Safiya was a Jew whose family had rebelled against Allah and his apostle, and Muhammad already had four wives. He did not need to marry her for her wealth because he had conquered her entire family and confiscated their wealth. Her social position did not really matter since all of Khaibar was under Muslim rule. So what have we got left? Beauty, right?
　
I'm just trying to get a grasp on why Muhammad did what he did, salman. That's all.
　

less assumption and more evidence. By your conclusion, any man who marries a beautiful girl with some status is doing so because of her status and beauty. Wonderful conclusion isn't?

Even if we assume your conclusion is correct, for sake of argument, why do you have problem with people marrying for personal reasons? Which person in the world does not marry for a personal reason? Like I mentioned above, when did marrying for personal reasons or beauty or such become a criteria for determining or rejecting prophethood?

The criteria of the Christians is amazing because somehow this exempted the previous Prophets (peace be upon them).

I think you need to spend less time with shamoun, wood and crew. They are not doing any good to you - deluding and draining your common sense.

Well, the evidence (hadith) shows that Muhammad did not know Safiya prior to her capture, and he took her for himself as soon as he learned about her, so obviously it wasn't about love. She was not a pious Muslim woman, so it wasn't about religion. Her wealth had already been taken from her by virtue of her being a captive and her entire community had been conquered, so it wasn't about wealth. Her social position mattered not since the Jews were completely under the rule of the Muslims, so it wasn't about family status. So WHY did he marry her, salman? What was the reasoning for it? Can YOU provide some evidence? I think I've provided plenty.

excluding the cultivating part, please provide some evidence for your claims: Prophet (peace be upon him) wanted to expel residences of khaybar but he did not but Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) did it during his time

I was under the impression that this was general knowledge. I apologize for assuming things.

Here is the Hadith that proves both claims--that Muhammad originally wanted to expel the Khaibar Jews, and that Umar eventually did expel them:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 39, Number 531: Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Umar expelled the Jews and the Christians from Hijaz. When Allah's Apostle had conquered Khaibar, he wanted to expel the Jews from it as its land became the property of Allah, His Apostle, and the Muslims. Allah's Apostle intended to expel the Jews but they requested him to let them stay there on the condition that they would do the labor and get half of the fruits. Allah's Apostle told them, "We will let you stay on thus condition, as long as we wish." So, they (i.e. Jews) kept on living there until 'Umar forced them to go towards Taima' and Ariha'.

are you of real? How can a law be applied if it does not exist to begin with? Why did God reveal 10 commandments so late when they were already sins?

I'm glad you asked. Seeing as how Cain was able to commit the sin of murder without "Thou shalt not commit murder" being engraved on a stone tablet, obviously the definition of sin has been around long before God put it into writing. A law does not need to be "on the books" for something to be considered a sin. Sin is based on God's righteousness and His definition of morality. These things existed long before we did.
　
I'm not talking about the application of 'idda. I'm talking about the morality of it. If it is a sin (immoral) for a man not to wait the 'idda of a widow, has it ALWAYS been a sin? Or does God simply come up with new sins as he goes along?
　

and in which hijrah it was revealed? what does surah Qalam has to do with anything?

Okay, maybe I have not made things clear enough for you. The 'idda for widows is stipulated in Surah al-Baqara, Ayah 234. Surah Baqara was one of the earliest to be revealed. It was revealed while Muhammad was still in Mecca, prior to his move to Medina. THEREFORE, Muhammad violated the 'idda for widows when he married Safiyah since he married her long after the 'idda law was revealed.
　

we do not take books of history at their face value - as long as the mentioned narration is authentic we have no problem with it. So each narration need to be judged individually. I thought you would at least know this

So, is that particular narration in Martin Lings' book AUTHENTIC? That's what I am trying to figure out.
　

do not expose your ignorance!
1 - How did he violate any rule when the exception was explicitly made for him in the Qur'an?
2 - Authenticity of a historical account is not limited to any book.
3 - Who told you that there are six books of sahih?

1. Does that mean marrying more than four women is a sin, except not for Muhammad? Does that mean the definition of "sin" varies depending on who we are talking about? Also, was 33:50 revealed before or after Muhammad took more than four wives?

2. I understand that, but I was under the impression that if something was not found in Sahih Bukhari or Sahih Muslim then the chain of narration had to be thoroughly examined to determine if the hadith in question was "strong" or "weak." So, if there is something proving Safiyah's marriage was consensual, I'd like to hear about it. Quoting Martin Lings doesn't really prove anything. Anyone can write a book. I want to know what his primary sources are and their "authenticity."

3. I never said there are six books of sahih. There are a group of hadith commonly known as the "authentic six." However, it is understood that only two of them are in fact sahih. These are Bukhari and Muslim. I was simply looking for proof from any of these books of hadith that Safiyah willingly consented to marriage with Muhammad.
　

First, spend some time reading this. Secondly, less straw man and more common sense: no one said these questions are outrageous but we are asking what is the point of these questions and what do you want to prove. When did such things become criteria for determining truth and falsehood? Like I said before, you have a leg to stand if you can prove that he forced the free and captive women to submit to him.

I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm trying to figure out exactly what happened and why. Can you prove, even if Safiyah consented, that she was not doing so in the hopes of freeing her family from slavery just as what happened in the case of Juwairiya? I mean, it seems like that would still be "consent under duress."
　

we do not know if she did or not. So what if she wanted children? What if someone want to commit fornication?

Well, fornication is a sin. Having children is not. Since it was Safiyah's life and Safiyah's body and no one else's, it seems rather unfair that she could not have a husband or children if she wanted considering that she was now a widow after Muhammad's death.

~TheBoxer