Skip to main content
Refutations

Whoever You Find Among the Jewish Men, Kill Him' — Complete Chain of Transmission Analysis Proving All Paths Are Weak

39 min read 8752 words
How to Navigate This Note The Narration Under Examination — the hadith text attributed to the Prophet ﷺ the morning after the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf, and its two reported paths of transmission First: All Chains of Transmission Are Weak — systematic narrator-by-narrator critique of the Ibn Ishaq path and all three chains within the Al-Waqidi path, with full quotations from classical rijal works Second: The Text Contradicts a More Authentic Narration — the authenticated Sunan Abi Dawud account of the same events contains no order to kill Jewish men and no mention of Ibn Sunayna Third: A Contradicting Weak Narration Places the Event at Banu Qurayza — a mursal account in Ibn Hisham situates Huwaysa’s conversion in an entirely different historical context Fourth: Assuming Authenticity — No Blame Attaches to the Prophet — analysis of the Medina covenant, its breach by the Jews’ conduct after Ka’b’s killing, and the legal significance of the new covenant the Prophet ﷺ subsequently wrote Note: The Narration in Musnad Ibn Rahawayh — Interpolations Identified by Ibn Hajar — Ibn Hajar’s verdict on the chain and the identification of the passages Ibn Ishaq inserted beyond what Imam Ahmad narrated Conclusion — summary verdict on all four lines of argument

The narration attributed to the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ after the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf — “Whoever you find among the Jewish men, kill him” — was reported through two distinct paths of transmission, and every chain within both paths is weak. This response addresses the narration along four independent lines: first, by demonstrating that every chain of transmission is defective; second, by showing that the text of the narration is contradicted by a more authentic narration in Sunan Abi Dawud that covers the identical events without any such command; third, by presenting a competing weak narration that places Huwaysa’s famous conversion — used as the narrative frame for this hadith — in the entirely different context of the Banu Qurayza expedition; and fourth, by demonstrating that even if the narration were accepted as authentic, no blame would attach to the Prophet ﷺ, because the covenant between him and the Jews of Medina had already been broken by their conduct in the immediate aftermath of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf’s killing.

The Narration Under Examination

“Whoever You Find Among the Jewish Men, Kill Him” Reported in: Sunan Abi Dawud and Mu’jam al-Tabarani al-Kabir via the path of Ibn Ishaq; and in the Maghazi of Al-Waqidi via three separate chains Grade: Weak — declared so explicitly by Imam Al-Albani and Sheikh Abdul-Muhsin Al-Abbad

The narration states that on the morning following the night on which Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf was killed, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Whoever you capture from the Jewish men, kill him.” Following this, Muhaysa ibn Mas’ud attacked Ibn Sunayna — a Jewish merchant of Banu Haritha who had been an ally of Huwaysa ibn Mas’ud and who used to trade with the Muslims — and killed him. Huwaysa, who was at that time still a polytheist and was older than Muhaysa, then began to beat his brother and said: “O enemy of Allah, did you kill him? By Allah, there is much fat in your belly from his money!” Muhaysa replied: “By Allah, if the one who ordered me to kill him had ordered me to kill you, I would have killed you.” Huwaysa said: “By Allah, if Muhammad had ordered you to kill me, would you have killed me?” Muhaysa said: “Yes.” Huwaysa said: “By Allah, a religion that reaches this level is an amazing religion.” And Huwaysa embraced Islam that day.

First: All Chains of Transmission Are Weak

The narration was reported through two paths:

  1. The path of Ibn Ishaq, found in Sunan Abi Dawud and Mu’jam al-Tabarani al-Kabir, with the chain of transmission containing the defects detailed below.
  2. The path of Al-Waqidi in his Maghazi — and Al-Waqidi is, in the agreed judgment of the scholars, a dead liar.

The Path of Ibn Ishaq

This chain of transmission is weak, and the narration through it is not valid for two reasons.

Reason One: Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad is unknown.

The client of Zaid bin Thabit, Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad, is a narrator whose unknown status is confirmed independently by both Al-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar.

Al-Dhahabi — Mizan al-I’tidal, Part Four 8129 — Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad [Madani]. On the authority of Saeed bin Jubair, and others. Not known. Narrated by Ibn Ishaq.

Ibn Hajar confirmed the same in his biographical dictionary:

Ibn Hajar — Taqrib al-Tahdhib, Part One 6276 — Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad Al-Ansari, Mawla Zaid bin Thabit, Madani, unknown from the sixth generation. Ibn Ishaq was the only one to narrate from him.

Imam Al-Mizzi mentioned him in his biography in Tahdhib Al-Kamal, Part 26, without any criticism or approval:

Al-Mizzi — Tahdhib al-Kamal, Part 26 5590 — D: Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad Al-Ansari Al-Madani (4), Mawla Zaid bin Thabit. He narrated from: Saeed bin Jubair (D), and Ikrimah, Mawla Ibn Abbas (D). Narrated from: Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Yasar (D). Ibn Hibban mentioned him in the book “Al-Thiqat”. Abu Dawud narrated from him.

It should be noted that Ibn Hibban‘s authentication of this narrator carries no weight. Ibn Hibban was well-known for his leniency in authentication, and it was part of his established doctrine to be lenient in authenticating unknown narrators in particular. Ibn Hajar said in Lisan al-Mizan, Part One:

Ibn Hajar — Lisan al-Mizan, Part One Ibn Hibban said that whoever is a denier of hadith, despite his fewness, it is not permissible to authenticate him except after investigation. Even if he was one of those who narrates deniers and agrees with the trustworthy in the reports, he would be just and his narration is acceptable, because people are based on righteousness and justice in their statements until what necessitates criticism becomes clear from them. This is the ruling on the famous narrators. As for the unknowns from whom only the weak narrated, they are abandoned in all cases. I said: This which Ibn Hibban went to — that if the man’s ignorance of his identity is removed, he is on the level of justice until his criticism becomes clear — this is a strange doctrine and the majority are against it. This is the basis of Ibn Hibban in the book of the trustworthy ones that he wrote, as he mentions a group of people who Abu Hatim and others stated were unknown, and Ibn Hibban believed that the ignorance of the identity is removed by the narration of one famous person.

Reason Two: The daughter of Muhaysa is unknown.

The daughter of Muhaysa has no slander or documentation in the rijal literature, and she is known only through this single narration. Imam Al-Mizzi mentioned her in Tahdhib al-Kamal, Part 35, without slander or approval:

Al-Mizzi — Tahdhib al-Kamal, Part 35 8037 — D: The daughter of Muhaysa bin Masoud. On the authority of: her father (D), hadith: “Whoever you capture from the Jewish men, kill him.” Muhammad bin Ishaq (D) said it, on the authority of a client of Zaid bin Thabit on her authority. Abu Dawud narrated it on her authority.
Ibn Hajar — Taqrib al-Tahdhib, Part One 8786 — The daughter of Muhaysa bin Masoud, on the authority of her father. You do not know who the third one is.

It is worth mentioning that the scholars have explicitly weakened this hadith. Imam Al-Albani weakened it in Sahih and Da’if Sunan Abi Dawud, Part One, Hadith No. 3002, declaring it: “Also weak.” Sheikh Abdul-Muhsin Al-Abbad weakened it in his explanation of Sunan Abi Dawud, Part 353:

Sheikh Abdul-Muhsin Al-Abbad — Explanation of Sunan Abi Dawud, Part 353 It means: You ate a lot of it, either he gave it to you or by buying it, and your body grew on some of his money. And his saying “He used to dress with them” means: He mixed with them. This hadith is also not authentic; because it contains that unknown man who is the client of Zaid bin Thabit, and it also contains the daughter of Muhaysa, who is unknown and not known.

The Path of Al-Waqidi in His Maghazi

Al-Waqidi is a narrator whose reports are rejected in their entirety by the consensus of the hadith critics, and this alone would be sufficient to reject the narration through him. He reported this story via three separate chains of transmission. Al-Waqidi said in his Maghazi, Part One, while mentioning the story of the killing of Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf:

Al-Waqidi — Al-Maghazi, Part One Abd Al-Hamid bin Ja’far told me, on the authority of Yazid bin Ruman, and Ma’mar, on the authority of Al-Zuhri, on the authority of Ibn Ka’b ibn Malik, and Ibrahim ibn Ja’far, on the authority of his father, on the authority of Jabir ibn Abdullah. Each of them narrated to me a group, and the one upon whom they agreed was that Ibn al-Ashraf was a poet and he used to satirize the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and his companions, and he used to incite the infidels of Quraysh against them in his poetry. The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, had arrived in Medina… They said: When the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, woke up on the night in which Ibn al-Ashraf was killed, the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “Whoever you capture from the Jewish men, kill him.” The Jews were afraid, and none of their leaders appeared or spoke, and they were afraid that they would plot the night as Ibn al-Ashraf had plotted. Ibn Sunayna was from the Jews of Banu Haritha, and he was an ally of Huwaysa ibn Mas’ud. He had converted to Islam, so Muhaysa attacked Ibn Sunayna and killed him. Huwaysa began to beat Muhaysa, who was older than him, saying: O enemy of Allah, did you kill him? By Allah, there is many a fat in your belly from his money! Muhaysa said: By God, if the one who ordered me to kill him had ordered me to kill you, I would have killed you. He said: By God, what if Muhammad had ordered you to kill me? He said: Yes. Huwaysa said: By God, a religion that reaches this level is an amazing religion. So Huwaysa embraced Islam that day.

It is worth noting that Al-Waqidi‘s statement “everyone told me a group” indicates that some of the men of the chain of transmission from whom he took did not narrate everything he mentioned. Rather, Al-Waqidi collected the statement of this one and joined it with the statement of this one and that one, so the statements and chains of transmission became mixed up. This is one of his known shortcomings, as we do not know here which of these three chains of transmission mentioned the story of Muhaysa’s killing of Ibn Sunayna. However, based on evidence that will be mentioned later, we can tend to say that the chain of transmission ending with Ibn Ka’b ibn Malik has no connection to the story of Muhaysa.

The First Chain of Transmission

Al-Waqidi’s chain on the authority of Abd al-Hamid ibn Ja’far on the authority of Yazid ibn Ruman is weak for two reasons.

Reason One: Al-Waqidi is weak. The following critique was recorded by Al-Bukhari:

Al-Bukhari — on Al-Waqidi Al-Waqidi was from Madinah and lived in Baghdad. His hadith is rejected. Ahmad, Ibn Numayr, Ibn al-Mubarak, and Ismail ibn Zakariya rejected him. And he said in another place: Ahmad called him a liar. Muawiyah ibn Salih said: Ahmad ibn Hanbal told me: He is a liar. Muawiyah also said on the authority of Yahya ibn Ma’in: He is weak. Abu Dawud said: I was told by someone who heard Ali ibn al-Madini say: Al-Waqidi narrated thirty thousand strange hadiths. Muslim said: His hadith is rejected. Al-Nasa’i said: He is not trustworthy.

Reason Two: Yazid bin Ruman did not witness the incident. He is one of the Tabi’in (the generation that followed the Companions) and did not witness the events in question. We read from his biography in Tahdhib al-Kamal:

Al-Mizzi — Tahdhib al-Kamal — Biography of Yazid ibn Ruman The client of the family of al-Zubayr bin al-Awwam. [He narrated from:] Anas bin Malik, Salim bin Abdullah bin Omar, Salih bin Khawat bin Jubayr, Abdullah bin al-Zubayr, Ubaidullah bin Abdullah bin Omar, Urwah bin al-Zubayr, and Muhammad bin Muslim bin Shihab al-Zuhri from his peers, and Abu Hurairah — mursal. And Ibn Hibban mentioned him in the Book of Trustworthy People. Al-Waqidi said: His scribe was Muhammad bin Saad. And Amr bin Ali, and Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Numayr, and al-Tirmidhi: He died in the year 130.

The Second Chain of Transmission

Al-Waqidi’s chain on the authority of Ibrahim bin Ja’far, on the authority of his father Ja’far bin Mahmoud bin Muhammad bin Maslama, on the authority of Jabir ibn Abdullah, is weak for two reasons.

Reason One: Al-Waqidi is weak, as documented in full above.

Reason Two: Ibrahim bin Ja’far is not to be relied upon except in the mutaba’at (follow-ups) and shawahid (corroborating evidence). It might be argued that Ibrahim bin Ja’far is followed by what Al-Waqidi narrated on the authority of Abd al-Hamid on the authority of Yazid bin Ruman. We read from Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta’dil by Ibn Abi Hatim, Part Two:

Ibn Abi Hatim — Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta’dil, Part Two 234 — Ibrahim bin Ja’far bin Mahmoud bin Muhammad bin Muslimah Al-Harithi Al-Ansari narrated on the authority of his father on the authority of Sulayman bin Muhammad. Abdullah bin Abd al-Wahhab Al-Hajji, Ibrahim bin Hamzah, Dhu’ayb bin Umamah, Abd al-Aziz Al-Awwisi, and Ali bin Bahr narrated on his authority. I heard my father say that, and I asked him about it and he said: He is good.

Abu Hatim’s saying about a narrator that “he is good” means that he is not acceptable except for corroborating evidence and follow-ups. His son Ibn Abi Hatim clarified this explicitly in the introduction to Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta’dil, Part One.

The Third Chain of Transmission

Al-Waqidi’s chain on the authority of Mu’ammar on the authority of Al-Zuhri on the authority of Ibn Ka’b bin Malik is weak for two reasons.

Reason One: Al-Waqidi is weak. The scholars’ position on him is documented again here because it is the decisive and independently sufficient ground for rejection:

Al-Bukhari — on Al-Waqidi (Third Chain) Al-Waqidi, a Medinan who lived in Baghdad, his hadith is abandoned. Ahmad, Ibn Numayr, Ibn al-Mubarak, and Ismail ibn Zakariya abandoned him. And he said in another place: Ahmad called him a liar. And Muawiyah bin Salih said: Ahmad bin Hanbal told me: He is a liar. And Muawiyah also said about Yahya bin Ma’in: Weak. And Abu Dawud said: I was told by someone who heard Ali Ibn al-Madini say: Al-Waqidi narrated thirty thousand strange hadiths. And Muslim said: His hadiths are abandoned. Al-Nasa’i said: He is not trustworthy.

Reason Two: This chain of transmission is not related to the story of Muhaysa’s killing of Ibn Sunayna. We believe that the chain ending with Ibn Ka’b ibn Malik has no connection to the story of Muhaysa, and is specific only to the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf — because the narration of the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf was transmitted with almost the same chain of transmission without Al-Waqidi and Mu’ammar, and it contains no reference whatsoever to the story of the killing of Ibn Sunayna. We read from Sunan Abi Dawud, Book of Taxation, Emirate, and Booty, No. 3000:

Sunan Abi Dawud — No. 3000, Book of Taxation, Emirate, and Booty Narrator: Abd al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik, on the authority of his father — who was one of the three who repented Collection: Sunan Abi Dawud Grade: Al-Albani: “The chain of transmission is authentic.”

Muhammad bin Yahya bin Faris told us that al-Hakam bin Nafi’ told them, he said: Shu’ayb told us, on the authority of al-Zuhri, on the authority of Abd al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik, on the authority of his father — and he was one of the three who repented. Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf used to satirize the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and incite the infidels of Quraysh against him. When the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, came to Medina, its people were a mixture of Muslims and polytheists who worshipped idols and Jews, and they used to harm the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and his companions. So God Almighty commanded His Prophet to be patient and forgiving, and about them God revealed: (And you will surely hear from those who were given the Scripture before you) the verse. So when Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf refused to desist from harming the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered Sa’d ibn Mu’adh to send a group to kill him. So he sent Muhammad ibn Maslama and mentioned the story of his killing. When they killed him, the Jews and polytheists were alarmed and went to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and said: “Our companion was killed.” The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, mentioned to them what he had said, and the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, called on them to write a document between him and them and between them and the Muslims in general.

If there were no defect in any of these three chains of transmission except Al-Waqidi alone, this would have been sufficient and adequate to prove the weakness of the narration and to reject its credibility, because Al-Waqidi is a liar whose narrations are rejected and the scholars have agreed on his weakness. It is therefore clear from all of the above that every chain of transmission for this story is weak and not authentic.

Second: The Text Contradicts a More Authentic Narration

The text of this narration contradicts a more authentic narration — the narration of the killing of Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf transmitted in Sunan Abi Dawud with an authentic chain. We read from Sunan Abi Dawud, Book of Taxation, Emirate, and Booty:

Sunan Abi Dawud — No. 3000 (Full Text) Narrator: Abd al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik, on the authority of his father Collection: Sunan Abi Dawud Grade: Authentic chain — declared so by Al-Albani in Sahih and Da’if Sunan Abi Dawud

Muhammad bin Yahya bin Faris told us that Al-Hakam bin Nafi’ told them, that Shu’ayb told us, on the authority of Al-Zuhri, on the authority of Abd Al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik, on the authority of his father — and he was one of the three who repented — and Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf used to satirize the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and incite the infidels of Quraysh against him. When the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, arrived in Medina, its people were a mixture of Muslims, polytheists who worshipped idols, and Jews, and they used to harm the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and his companions. So God Almighty commanded His Prophet to be patient and to pardon, for in them Allah revealed: (And you will surely hear from those who were given the Scripture before you) the verse. So when Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf refused to stop harming the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered Sa’d ibn Mu’adh to send a group to kill him. So he sent Muhammad ibn Maslama and mentioned the story of his killing. So when they killed him, the Jews and polytheists were alarmed, so they went to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said: “Our companion was killed.” So the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, mentioned to them what he used to say, and the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, called upon them to write a document between him and them and the Muslims in general.

This authenticated narration establishes two critical points:

  1. The Jews did not mention the killing of Ibn Sunayna, but rather were satisfied with mentioning only the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf.
  2. The narration contains no mention of the killing of Ibn Sunayna, nor any report that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered the killing of the Jewish men they captured.

Third: A Contradicting Weak Narration Places the Event at Banu Qurayza

For anyone who likes to argue with weak narrations, there is another weak narration whose context contradicts the context of this story. This narration states that Huwaysa’s conversion to Islam and his rebuke of Muhaysa took place not after the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf, but during the Battle of Banu Qurayza. We read from the biography of Ibn Hisham, Part One:

Ibn Hisham — Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya, Part One — Narration of Abu Amr al-Madani Ibn Hisham said: Abu Ubaidah told me on the authority of Abu Amr al-Madani, who said: When the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, defeated Banu Qurayza, he took from them about four hundred Jewish men, and they were allies of the Aws against the Khazraj. So the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered that their necks be struck, so the Khazraj began to strike their necks and they were pleased with that. So the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, looked at the Khazraj and their faces were happy, and he looked at the Aws and did not see that in them. So he thought that the alliance between the Aws and Banu Qurayzah was broken, and only twelve men remained from Banu Qurayzah. So he sent them to the Aws, and he sent to every two men from the Aws a man from Banu Qurayzah and said: “Let so-and-so strike and so-and-so throw stones at him.” Among those he sent to them was Ka’b ibn Yahudah, who was a great man among Banu Qurayzah. So he sent him to Muhaysah ibn Mas’ud and to Abu Burdah ibn Niyar — and Abu Burdah was the one whom the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had given permission to slaughter a young goat on the day of sacrifice — and he said: “Let Muhaysah strike him and let Abu Burdah throw stones at him.” Muhaysah struck him a blow that did not cut off his head, and Abu Burdah threw stones at him and finished him off. Then Huwaysah, who was an unbeliever, said to his brother Muhaysah: “Did you kill Ka’b ibn Yahudah?” He said: “Yes.” So Huwaysah said: “By Allah, there is fat that has grown in your belly from his money. You are truly despicable, Muhaysah.” Muhaysah said to him: “He who had ordered me to kill you ordered me to kill him — I would have killed you.” He was amazed by what he said and then left him in astonishment. They mentioned that he would wake up at night and be amazed by what his brother Muhaysah had said, until morning he was saying: “By God, this is a religion.” Then he came to the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and converted to Islam. Muhaysah said some verses about that which we have written down.

This narration is weak because it is mursal from Abu Amr al-Madani, who is Asim ibn Umar ibn Qatadah — he did not witness the events and the chain does not reach a Companion. Nevertheless, it is binding on every stubborn person who wants to use weak narrations as evidence against us, because this narration places the identical scene — Muhaysa’s killing of a Jew, Huwaysa’s rebuke, and Muhaysa’s reply — in an entirely different historical setting from what the narration under examination alleges.

Fourth: Assuming Authenticity — No Blame Attaches to the Prophet

Assuming the authenticity of the narration for the sake of argument, there is no blame on the Prophet ﷺ, because he intended in his hadith the men of Banu Nadir, on account of what they did after the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf. What they did after his killing included: their excitement over his blood even though he had broken the covenant, and the showing of signs of war on their part, and his being one of their masters — even though he was of Arab descent from his father’s side. What they did before his killing included: their failure to deter him, their support for him, and their harming of the believers in Medina, among whom was Ibn Sunayna.

As for the covenant that the Prophet ﷺ concluded with the Jews when he arrived in Medina, its evidence is in Sahih Muslim:

Sahih Muslim — No. 1507, Book of Al-Atiqab Narrator: Jabir ibn Abdullah Collection: Sahih Muslim, Part Two, Book of Al-Atiqab — Prohibition of a Freedman Taking Over Someone Other Than His Mawla

Muhammad ibn Rafi’ told me, Abd al-Razzaq told us, Ibn Jurayj told us, Abu al-Zubayr told me that he heard Jabir ibn Abdullah say: The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, wrote on every tribe its intellects, then he wrote that it is not permissible for a Muslim to take over the mawla of a Muslim man without his permission. Then I was informed that he cursed in his document whoever did that.

The nature of this covenant and the standing of the three Jewish tribes of Medina within it is explained by Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah in Al-Sarim Al-Maslul:

Ibn Taymiyyah — Al-Sarim Al-Maslul ‘ala Shatim Al-Rasul, Part One That is because Medina had three types of Jews around it, and they are: Banu Qaynuqa’, Banu Nadir, and Banu Qurayzah. Banu Qaynuqa’ and Nadir were allies of the Khazraj, and Qurayzah were allies of the Aws. So when the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, arrived, he made a truce with them and made peace with them, while acknowledging them and those polytheists who were around Medina who were allies of the Ansar on their alliance and covenant that they were on, to the point that he made a covenant with the Jews that they would help him if he fought. Then the covenant was broken by Banu Nuqa’, then Nadir, then Qurayzah. This document is well-known to the people of knowledge. Muslim narrated in his Sahih on the authority of Jabir, who said: The Messenger of God wrote on every tribe its blood money, then he wrote that it is not permissible for a Muslim man to follow a Muslim without his permission. He explained in it that whoever follows the Muslims from the Jews will be granted victory. The meaning of following is making peace with him and not fighting him, not following in religion, as he explained in the middle of the document. So whoever resided in Medina and opposed it from the Jews who were not fighting him was included in this.

Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf broke the covenant and incited against the Prophet ﷺ, and when he was killed the Jews showed their disapproval of his killing and their excitement over his blood — which is itself one of the established signs of war and a declaration of the covenant’s breach. Assuming the authenticity of the hadith, this makes the Jews complicit with him in breaking the covenant, and Ibn Sunayna is included among them, especially since the Jews and hypocrites in Medina had shown harm to the believers in Medina before the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf.

Ibn Taymiyyah continues in the same work, engaging directly with the narration under examination:

Ibn Taymiyyah — Al-Sarim Al-Maslul ‘ala Shatim Al-Rasul, Part One (continued) Al-Waqidi said with the previous chains of transmission: They said: When the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, woke up on the night in which Ibn al-Ashraf was killed, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Whoever you capture from the Jewish men, kill him.” So the Jews were afraid, and no great one of their leaders appeared and they did not set out, and they were afraid to spend the night as Ibn al-Ashraf had spent the night. He mentioned the killing of Ibn Sunayna until he said: The Jews and the polytheists who were with them were terrified, and he narrated the story as he mentioned earlier.

This indicates that they had not made a truce, otherwise he would not have ordered the killing of those he encountered among them. This indicates that the treaty that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, wrote between him and the Jews was after the killing of Ibn al-Ashraf, and in that case Ibn al-Ashraf would not have been a treaty holder.

We said: The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered the killing of those he captured among them because Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf was one of their leaders. He said: “What do you have?” — meaning, regarding the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace — they said: “His enmity as long as we live.” And they were residing outside the city, so his killing was a great burden to them, and what incited them to fight and show the breach of the covenant was their breach of the covenant, their support for the murdered man and their defense of him. As for the one who remained, he remained in his previous covenant because he did not show enmity, and for this reason the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, did not besiege them or fight them until they showed enmity to him after that. As for this book, it is something that Al-Waqidi mentioned alone.

What Ibn Taymiyyah said is proven by what is mentioned in Sunan Abi Dawud, Book of Taxation, Emirate, and Booty, in the chapter on how the Jews were expelled from the city:

Sunan Abi Dawud — No. 3000, Chapter: How the Jews Were Expelled from the City Narrator: Abd al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik, on the authority of his father Collection: Sunan Abi Dawud

Muhammad bin Yahya bin Faris told us that Al-Hakam bin Nafi’ told them, he said Shu’ayb told us, on the authority of Al-Zuhri, on the authority of Abd Al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik, on the authority of his father — and he was one of the three who repented — and Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf used to satirize the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and incite the infidels of Quraysh against him. And when the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, came to the city, its people were a mixture of Muslims, polytheists, and Jews. They used to harm the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and his companions. So God Almighty commanded His Prophet to be patient and forgiving. It was about them that God revealed: “And you will surely hear from those who were given the Scripture before you.” When Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf refused to stop harming the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered Sa’d ibn Mu’adh to send a group to kill him. So he sent Muhammad ibn Maslama and mentioned the story of his killing. When they killed him, the Jews and polytheists were alarmed and went to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and said: “Our companion was killed.” So the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, mentioned to them what he used to say. The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, called on them to write a document between him and them and the Muslims in general.

And in Al-Sunan Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi, Book of Biographies, No. 18060:

Al-Sunan Al-Kubra — Al-Bayhaqi, No. 18060, Book of Biographies Narrator: Abd al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik, on the authority of his father — son of one of the three who repented Collection: Al-Sunan Al-Kubra, Al-Bayhaqi

Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn al-Hasan al-Qadi informed us, Abu Sahl ibn Ziyad al-Qattan informed us, Abd al-Karim ibn al-Haytham informed us, Abu al-Yaman informed us, Shu’ayb informed me, on the authority of Al-Zuhri, Abd al-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Malik informed me — I think — on the authority of his father — and he was the son of one of the three who repented — that Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf the Jew was a poet, and he used to satirize the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and incite the infidels of Quraysh against him in his poetry. The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, arrived in Medina, and its people were a mixture: among them were the Muslims who were united by the call of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace; and among them were the polytheists who worshipped idols; and among them were the Jews, who were the people of the circle and the fortresses, and they were allies of the two tribes, Aws and Khazraj. So when the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, arrived in Medina, he wanted to reform them all. A man might be a Muslim, but his father was a polytheist, and a man might be a Muslim, but his brother was a polytheist. When the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, arrived, the polytheists and Jews of Medina were harming the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and his companions with the most severe harm. So Allah ordered His Messenger and the Muslims to be patient with that and to forgive them. Regarding them, Allah, the Most High, revealed: {And you will surely hear from those who were given the Scripture before you and from those who associate others with Allah, much abuse} to the end of the verse. Regarding them, Allah, the Most High, revealed: {And many of the People of the Scripture wish they could turn you back to disbelief after you have believed, out of envy from themselves [after the truth has become clear to them]. So pardon and overlook}. When Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf refused to stop harming the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the Muslims, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, may Allah be pleased with him, to send a group to kill him. So Sa’d ibn Mu’adh sent to him Muhammad ibn Maslamah al-Ansari, Abu ‘Abs al-Ansari, and al-Harith, the nephew of Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, with five men. He mentioned the hadith about his killing. He said: When they killed him, the Jews and those who were with them from the polytheists were terrified. So they went to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, in the morning and said: “Our companion, a master of our masters, was killed last night.” The Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, mentioned to them what he used to say in his poems and forbid them from doing. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, called upon them to write a document between him, them, and the Muslims in which they would abide by what was in it. So the Prophet, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, wrote a document between him, them, and the Muslims for a year, which the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, wrote under the palm branch in the house of Bint Al-Harith. That document remained after the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, with Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him.

These two narrations clarify several matters for us:

  1. Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf was a master of the masters of the Jews and he incited against the Prophet ﷺ and broke the covenant.
  2. The Jews and the hypocrites used to harm the Prophet ﷺ and the believers, and there is no doubt that some of them were followers of Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf from among the Jews.
  3. The Jews appeared to deny the killing of Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf.
  4. The Prophet ﷺ argued with those who came to him about what Ka’b had said in his poems, as he considered it a breach of the covenant.
  5. The Prophet ﷺ called upon them to write another covenant between the Muslims and the Jews.

This last point is evidence that the covenant between the Prophet ﷺ and them had been breached, so there is no blame at that time for what was narrated from the Prophet ﷺ of his order to kill those Jewish men whom the Muslims captured, because at that time they would have been considered covenant breakers. There is also no blame on Muhaysa for killing Ibn Sunayna. Nor is it reasonable for the Prophet ﷺ to write another covenant if the covenant before it had not been breached.

All of this is assumed on the hypothesis of the authenticity of the hadith “If you capture a Jewish man, kill him” — and the hadith is not authentic in the first place, as has been established above.

Note: The Narration in Musnad Ibn Rahawayh — Interpolations Identified by Ibn Hajar

Ibn Hajar mentioned in his book Al-Matalib Al-‘Aliyah, in the book of Al-Siyar wa Al-Maghazi, in the chapter on the killing of Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf, quoting from Musnad Ishaq bin Rahawayh, the following narration:

Musnad Ishaq ibn Rahawayh — cited in Al-Matalib Al-‘Aliyah, No. 4373 Narrator: Ibn Abbas, on the authority of Ikrimah, on the authority of Thawr ibn Yazid Collection: Musnad Ishaq ibn Rahawayh (cited in Al-Matalib Al-‘Aliyah, Book of Al-Siyar wa Al-Maghazi, Chapter on the Killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf)

Ishaq said: I am informed by Wahb ibn Jarir ibn Hazim, he said: My father told us, he said: I heard Muhammad ibn Ishaq, he said: Thawr ibn Yazid told me, on the authority of Ikrimah, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, he said: They gathered at the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so he walked with them until he reached Baqi’ al-Gharqad on a moonlit night, so he said: “Go forth in the name of Allah, O Allah, help them.” And the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, returned to his house. He said: So they came until they reached his fortress, meaning Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf. Abu Na’ilah called out to him, so he came down to him while he was newly married. His wife said to him: “You are a warrior, and a warrior does not come down at a time like this.” He said to her: “He is Abu Na’ilah, and by God, if he had found me asleep, he would not have woken me.” She said: “By God, I know evil in his voice.” He said to her: “If the young man were called to a stab wound, he would respond.” So he came down to them, and they talked for an hour, then they said: “If we walked to the valley of the old woman and talked tonight, for we have no record of that.” He said: “Yes,” so they went out walking. Then Sham put his hand in the water of his head and said: “I have never seen a perfume better than tonight.” Then he walked for an hour, then returned for a similar time until he was calm. Then he put his hand in the water of his head and took hold of his hair, then he said: “Strike the enemy of Allah.” He said: Their swords clashed against him. He said: The enemy of Allah shouted a shout and there was no fortress left that was not lit with fire. He said: And Al-Harith’s leg was injured. Muhammad bin Maslamah said: “When I saw that the swords did not mean anything, I remembered the hilt of my sword, so I took it and placed it on his navel and pushed him until it reached his groin and he fell.” Then we went out and went to Banu Umayyah, then to Banu Qurayzah, then to Bu’ath, then we were taken prisoner in Harrat al-Urayd. Al-Harith was slow and bleeding profusely, so we stopped for him, then we carried him until we brought him to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, at the end of the night while he was praying. He came out to us and we informed him of the killing of the enemy of Allah. He said: The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, spat on Al-Harith’s wound, so we returned with him to his house, and the people dispersed to their camps. When we woke up and the Jews were afraid of our attack on the enemy of Allah, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Whoever you find among the Jewish men, kill him.” Then Muhaysah ibn Mas’ud attacked Ibn Sunaynah, a Jewish merchant who used to trade with them and associate with them, and killed him. He said: Then Huwaysah ibn Mas’ud, who was a polytheist at that time and was older than him, began to beat him and said: “O enemy of Allah, you killed him? By Allah, there is a lot of fat in your stomach from his money.” He said: “By Allah, a man ordered me to kill him. If he had ordered me to kill you, I would have beheaded you.” He said: “By Allah, if Muhammad had ordered you to kill me, would you have killed me?” He said: “Yes, by Allah.” He said: “By Allah, a religion that has reached this level is an amazing religion.” The first conversion to Islam of Huwaysa was because of what his brother had said, so Muhaysa said this poem about that.

The chain of transmission of this narration appears sound, except that it contains interpolations. Ibn Hajar commented after he mentioned this narration:

Ibn Hajar — Al-Matalib Al-‘Aliyah, commentary following narration No. 4373 A good, connected chain of transmission. Imam Ahmad included some of it up to his saying: “O God, help them” only. This is the connected, elevated version of it. The rest is interpolated, and it has a corroborating evidence in Sahih from the hadith of Amr ibn Jabir.

This means that the part following the words of the Prophet ﷺ “O Allah, help them” constitutes interpolations by Ibn Ishaq. It is therefore not correct to trace this portion back to the Prophet ﷺ, nor to Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with him, nor to Ikrimah, nor to Thawr ibn Yazid, may God have mercy on them both. This is confirmed by the fact that when Imam Ahmad and others narrated this same chain, they narrated it in abbreviated form stopping at “O Allah, help them.” We read from Musnad Ahmad, Part Four:

Musnad Ahmad — Part Four Narrator: Ibn Abbas, on the authority of Ikrimah, on the authority of Thawr ibn Zayd Collection: Musnad Ahmad

Ya’qub narrated to us, my father narrated to us, on the authority of Ibn Ishaq, Thawr ibn Zayd narrated to me, on the authority of Ikrimah, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, who said: The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, walked with them to Baqi’ al-Gharqad, then he directed them and said: “Go forth in the name of Allah,” and he said: “O Allah, help them” — meaning the group that he directed to Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf.

This confirms that all of the following passage is transmitted by Ibn Ishaq alone and is not connected to what is established in the authenticated accounts. All that follows the words “O Allah, help them” — comprising the detailed account of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf’s killing, the morning command to kill the Jewish men, the attack of Muhaysa on Ibn Sunaynah, and Huwaysa’s subsequent conversion — is identified as interpolated material not reliably traceable to Ibn Abbas, Ikrimah, or Thawr ibn Yazid:

The Interpolated Passage — As Identified by Ibn Hajar The following text, beginning after the Prophet’s words “O Allah, help them,” constitutes the interpolation Ibn Hajar identifies. It is not correctly attributed to Ibn Abbas, Ikrimah, or Thawr ibn Yazid, and carries only the authority of Ibn Ishaq’s transmission:

And the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, returned to his house. He said: So they came until they reached his fortress, meaning Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf. Abu Na’ilah called out to him, so he came down to him while he was newly married. His wife said to him: “You are a warrior, and a warrior does not come down at such an hour.” So he said to her: “He is Abu Na’ilah, and by God, if he had found me asleep, he would not have woken me.” She said: “By God, I know evil in his voice.” He said to her: “If the young man were called to a stab wound, he would respond.” So he came down to them, and they talked for an hour, then they said: “If we walk to the valley of the old woman and talk tonight, for we have no covenant with that.” He said: “Yes.” So they went out walking. Then Sham put his hand in the water of his head and said: “I have never seen a perfume better than tonight.” Then he walked for an hour, then returned for a similar time until he was calm. Then he put his hand in the water of his head and took hold of his hair, then he said: “Strike the enemy of Allah.” He said: Their swords clashed against him. He said: The enemy of Allah shouted a shout and there was no fortress left except a fire was lit on him. He said: And Al-Harith’s leg was injured. Muhammad bin Maslamah said: “When I saw that the swords did not mean anything, I remembered the hilt of my sword, so I took it and placed it on his navel and pushed him until it reached his groin and he fell.” Then we went out and went to Banu Umayyah, then to Banu Qurayzah, then to Bu’ath, then we were taken prisoner in Harrat al-Urayd, and Al-Harith was slow and the blood started to flow, so we stopped for him, then we carried him until we brought him to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, at the end of the night while he was praying. He came out to us and we informed him of the killing of the enemy of Allah. He said: So the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, spat on Al-Harith’s wound, so we returned with him to his house, and the people dispersed to their camps. When we woke up and the Jews were afraid of our attack on the enemy of Allah, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Whoever you find among the Jewish men, kill him.” Then Muhaysah ibn Mas’ud attacked Ibn Sunaynah, a Jewish merchant who used to trade with them and associate with them, and killed him. He said: Then Huwaysah ibn Mas’ud, who was still a polytheist at that time, and he was older than him, struck him and said: “O enemy of Allah, you killed him? By Allah, there is a lot of fat in your stomach from his money.” He said: “By Allah, a man ordered me to kill him. If he had ordered me to kill you, I would have struck your neck.” He said: “By Allah, if Muhammad had ordered you to kill me, would you have killed me?” He said: “Yes, by God.” He said: “By God, a religion that has reached this is an amazing religion.” The first conversion to Islam of Huwaysa was due to the words of his brother, so Muhaysa said this poem about that.

Conclusion

Summary Verdict The narration “Whoever you find among the Jewish men, kill him” — attributed to the Prophet ﷺ in the context of the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf — is established as weak on multiple independent grounds:

First — All chains are weak. The path of Ibn Ishaq contains two unknown narrators: Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad, whose unknown status is confirmed by both Al-Dhahabi in Mizan al-I’tidal and Ibn Hajar in Taqrib al-Tahdhib, and the daughter of Muhaysa, confirmed unknown by Ibn Hajar. Ibn Hibban’s authentication of Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad carries no weight given his well-documented leniency toward unknown narrators, a position confirmed by Ibn Hajar in Lisan al-Mizan. The path of Al-Waqidi is rejected through all three of its chains because Al-Waqidi is a narrator declared a liar by Al-Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma’in, Muslim, Al-Nasa’i, and Ali ibn al-Madini. The first chain within Al-Waqidi’s path carries the additional defect that Yazid ibn Ruman is a Tabi’i who did not witness the events. The second carries the additional defect that Ibrahim ibn Ja’far is only acceptable as corroborating evidence. The third carries the additional defect that the chain ending with Ibn Ka’b ibn Malik is almost certainly not connected to the story of Muhaysa, as the same chain without Al-Waqidi and Mu’ammar narrates the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf without any mention of Ibn Sunayna. Imam Al-Albani and Sheikh Abdul-Muhsin Al-Abbad both explicitly declared the narration weak.

Second — The text is contradicted by an authenticated narration. The Sunan Abi Dawud account of the same events, declared to have an authentic chain by Al-Albani, contains no order to kill Jewish men and no complaint from the Jews about any killing other than that of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf.

Third — A competing weak narration contradicts the context. The mursal account in Ibn Hisham — transmitted from Abu Amr al-Madani (Asim ibn Umar ibn Qatadah) — places the identical scene between Muhaysa and Huwaysa during the Banu Qurayza expedition, not after the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf. This contradicts the setting alleged by the narration under examination.

Fourth — Even on the assumption of authenticity, no blame attaches. The covenant between the Prophet ﷺ and the Jews of Medina had been broken by their conduct following the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf — their excitement over his blood and their display of the signs of war. That the Prophet ﷺ subsequently called upon them to write an entirely new covenant is itself proof that the previous one had been breached. This is confirmed by Ibn Taymiyyah in Al-Sarim Al-Maslul and by the authenticated narrations from both Sunan Abi Dawud and Al-Sunan Al-Kubra of Al-Bayhaqi. As for the Musnad Ibn Rahawayh narration whose chain Ibn Hajar described as appearing sound, Ibn Hajar himself identified the portion containing the command — everything following “O Allah, help them” — as an interpolation not carried by Imam Ahmad’s abbreviated transmission of the same chain.

The narration is therefore unauthentic and carries no argumentative weight against the Prophet ﷺ or against Islam.

2024 https://www.openislam.wiki/og/whoever-you-find-among-the-jewish-men-kill-him-complete-chain-of-transmission-analysis-proving-all-paths-are-weak.png