Assalamu Alaikum Brothers in Islam,

I was reading the conquest of Khaibar and although Alhamdulillah I don't doubt the decision taken by our Holy Prophet Muhammed (saw) , I do feel a bit uncomfortable at the fact that the conquest was mostly a pre emptive strike.

The People (Jews) of Khaibar surely were treacherous and a threat but we're not openly engaged in a war with the Muslim.

Are the reports of Ibn Ishaq or other writers trustworthy regarding this?

Were conquests like these considered the "norm" back then?

As Far As I know , the Jews of Khaibar were involved in the battle of Al Ahzab also known as the battle of the Trench , which was so intense that the Muslims were almost wiped out from their home base in Medina , and here I don't mean the Jewish residents of Medina , whom openly betrayed the prophet and were severely punished for it , but the attacking parties themselves , so Technically they were in open war with the prophet , maybe not exactly at the time of the battle of Khaibar, but the prophet didn't let their participation slide .
However , during the Rashidun Caliphate many wars were pre-emptive actually , so it isn't uncommon in Islamic history post the Prophet (PBUH).
References :

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.