Muhammad and The Jews — Page 89
THE FAILURE OF THE CONFEDERACY more convenient to sell them in the I;Iijaz than to travel with such a large number of captives to the Najd. Finally, according to Ibn Isl)aq, the Apostle divided the property of the B. Quray+ah among the Muslims. "On that day he declared the shares of horses and men, and took out the khums (the fifth). A horseman received three shares, two for the horse and one for the rider; a man without a horse got one share. . . . It was the first booty on which lots were cast and the khums was taken. According to the precedent set on this occasion, divisions were made, and it became the custom for raids". 1 In view of considerable controversy on the share of a horseman Ibn Isl)aq's report assumes great importance because it sets two precedents regarding the spoil of war: the share of the horseman and the procedure of casting lots on the booty and taking the khums. Abii. I;Ianifa gives one share to the rider and one to the horse, while al-Awzaci (d. 157/774) gives one to the rider and two to the horse. Imam Shafici ( 150/767-204/820) has dealt with the subject and quoted several authorities on the question without any reference to Ibn lsl)aq's reports. 2 Abu Yii. suf3 (d. 182/798), one of the founders of the I;Ianafi school of law, in his well-known treatise on public finance, taxation and other related matters, Kitiib al-Khariij, also does not mention the share of the horseman fixed on the defeat of the B. Quray:;r;ah. As regards khums, Abu Yii. sufis quite categorical: no khums was taken from the property of the B. Quray:;r;ah. 4 Yal)ya b. Adam,5 writing his Kitiib al-Khariij approximately twenty years after Abu Yusuf and dealing with the same subject does not mention the B. Quray:;r;ah at all. Imam Shaffi, Abu Yusuf and Yal)ya b. Adam, who were compiling judicial works based on authentic tradi- tions and well-established precedents, did not consider either Ibn Isl)aq's account or the current qii$$ material reliable. 6 Ibn lsl)aq's account of the punishment of the B. Quray:;r;ah is a plethora of self-contradictory statements. So are the accounts of 1 Ibn Hisham, pp. 692-93. Al-Waqidi has expanded it into more than four pages (Vol. II, pp. 521-22). Ibn Sa"d has not mentioned anything about the property of the B. Quray+ah. 2 Shafi"i, Kitiib al-Umm, Vol. VII, pp. 337-342. 3 Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Ta'rikh Baghdad, XIV, pp. 242 ff. Ibn Khallikan, No. 834. 4 Abo Yusuf, Kitiib al-Khariij (Cairo, 1346 A. H. ), p. 81. 5 Supra, Chapter Ill. 6 It confirms the view expressed earlier that most of Ibn lsl)aq's account is not based on al-Zuhri. Abu Yusuf frequently quotes al-Zuhri in his book. 89