SA‘AD IBN MU‘ĀDH’S JUDGMENT ON BANŪ QURAYẒAH: AN ANALYSIS OF ITS LEGAL AND HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS

The Battle of the Trench (626–627 A.D.) marked a pivotal moment in early Islamic history, during which the Banū Qurayẓah tribe was accused of treason. Following their alleged betrayal, Sa‘ad ibn Mu‘ādh, a key companion of the Prophet Muhammad and leader of the Aws tribe, issued a decisive verdict: all adult male members of the Banū Qurayẓah were to be executed, while the remaining members—women and children—were to be enslaved. Some contemporary scholars argue that this judgment was rooted in Jewish legal principles, suggesting that Sa‘ad ibn Mu‘ādh’s ruling mirrored legal prescriptions found in Jewish law. This study thoroughly examines this claim by analyzing primary sources from Jewish and Islamic legal traditions, alongside historical accounts. Through meticulous library-based research, we critically evaluate whether Jewish law played a role in shaping Sa‘ad ibn Mu‘ādh’s decision. Our findings indicate that there is scant evidence to support the assertion that his judgment was influenced by Jewish legal doctrine. Instead, a thorough analysis of historical and legal sources strongly suggests that Sa‘d’s ruling was grounded in the prevailing customs of Arabian tribal warfare, which were subsequently legitimized by Islamic law. This research thus challenges the notion of Jewish legal influence and highlights the broader socio-political and legal context within which Sa‘ad ibn Mu‘ādh’s verdict was rendered.