Like Christianity, Islam permits
fighting in self-defense, in defense of religion, or on the part
of those who have been expelled forcibly from their homes. It lays
down strict rules of combat that include prohibitions against
harming civilians and against destroying crops, trees and
livestock. As Muslims see it, injustice would be triumphant in the
world if good people were not prepared to risk their lives in a
righteous cause.
One reads in the Qur'an: "Fight
in the cause of God against those who fight you, but do not
transgress limits. God does not love transgressors." (Qur'an
2:190)
"And fight
them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God. But if
they desist, then let there be no hostility except against
wrongdoers." (Qur'an 2:193)
"If they
seek peace, then you seek peace. And trust in God for He is the
One that hears and knows all things." (Qur'an 8:61)
War is therefore the last
resort, and is subject to the rigorous conditions laid down by the
sacred law. The often misunderstood and overused term jihad
literally means "struggle" and not "holy war" (a term not found
anywhere in the Qur'an). Jihad, as an Islamic concept, can be on a
personal level--inner struggle against evil within oneself;
struggle for decency and goodness on the social level; and
struggle on the battlefield, if and when necessary.
War is a Social Necessity
No doubt war is a social
necessity which nations practice in order to solve their social
problems which defy peaceful solution. Human communities have
plunged into fights not only for the mere accomplishment of
material aims but for the achievement of moral needs as well. Some
historians explain that in the absence of war, progress and
civilization would have been hindered in some nations.
Hegel, a pioneer of the study of
historical development, for instance, says that change can take
place only when there are opposing forces which struggle against
one another so that a new product, stronger than the rest, issues
from the clash. This view was later adopted by Marx and Engels,
and the favor of the Qur'an in this regard springs from the fact
that it offered this view fourteen centuries ago: "Had God not
checked one set of people by means of another, the earth would
indeed have been full of mischief; but God is full of bounty to
all the worlds" (2:251).
But Islam recognized war as a
means to solve some social problems at a time when tyranny was the
sole obstacle in the face of the call for justice.
After having attained a certain
level of scientific and cultural progress, western countries still
tend at present to solve their problems by way of war. Hence, on
the human level, one cannot see why Islam should have disallowed
was fourteen centuries ago, while it intended to bring about
general development, both on the religious and social scene. This
refutes the view of hostile people who claim that Islam is a
"military religion" and that "it spread only with the might of
sword" -- meaning to distort the reality of Islam. In the
"Encyclopedia of Islam," McDonald says, "Spreading the teachings
of Islam with the might of the sword, is the religious duty of
every Muslim." In the following I will try to refute such a false
accusation.
The View of Judaism and Christianity of War
A look at the ancient religions
shows that Judaism imposes war on its adherents to protect their
existence and to spread their rule and conquests in the earth
based on public massacres and the extermination of the people in
the conquered countries. In the fifth Book of the Psalms, one
reads: "When the Lord lets you into a land to rule it, after
having destroyed nations before, see that you fight its people
until you annihilate them all, and never make a covenant with them
or feel pity for them."
Christianity then came and made
a complete prohibition of war. In the Gospel of Matthew, Christ
says: "I tell you: Do not resist the wicked, and if one slaps you
on your right cheek, turn to him the other."
Similarly, those in favor of
absolute prohibition of war, rely on the words of Christ to Peter:
"Return your sword to its sheath, for all those who grab the
sword, shall by the sword be slain."
Some Christians sacrificed their
lives in the cause of prohibiting war, rather say the prohibition
of the military profession itself. Other Christians made
tremendous efforts to reconcile Biblical teachings and the
necessities of the State, and their efforts resulted in a
differentiation between permissible war and prohibited war. A war
is fair and just, according to them, when it is declared by the
prince or ruler, provided his motive is truthful without greed or
cruelty. In the fourth century, that is after having established a
State under the leadership of Constantine the Roman Emperor,
Christianity had to use force in order to uproot paganism from the
Roman Empire.
Islam's Call For Peace
In international law, there is a
set of well-established rules concerning the obligations of
nations toward each other in times of war and peace. The first of
these is that a country should base its relations with other
countries on terms of peace so that it may exchange benefit and
cooperate with others in order to promote humanity to utmost
perfection. Peaceful ties like these, they say, should not be
broken except in extreme urgencies that necessitate war, provided
that all peaceful steps have failed in terminating the cause of
dispute.
This is what Islam has always
been working for, and the relations of Muslims with others are
primarily based on peace and confidence. Islam refuses the killing
of people merely because they embrace a different faith, nor does
it allow Muslims to fight against those who disagree with them on
religious questions. It urges its followers to treat such people
kindly: "God forbiddeth you not, with regard to those who fight
you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from
dealing kindly and justly with them. God loveth those who are
just" (60:8).
In another place, God says: "If
they withdraw from you and fight you not, but (instead) send you
(guarantees of) peace, then God alloweth no way for you (to war
against them)" (4:90).
We also have: "If the enemy
incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and
trust in God" (8:61). Instructions like these pave the way
for the establishment of peace, and go in harmony with the present
tendency to set down principles that call for the abolishment of
war.
Islam, in fact, makes of peace a
special greeting which Muslims exchange whenever they meet by
saying, "Peace be unto you" (Assalamu 'Alaykum). The Muslim also
utters this statement at the end of every prayer; he concludes his
prayer by addressing those praying with him with the words: Peace
be unto you with God's Mercy!
Comparison between Islam and The International Law Concerning
War
Islam permits war but keeps it
within the limits of mercy at which the twentieth century
civilization has not yet been able to arrive, not even to come
near to. Islam has set down certain rules, the most merciful and
considerate to people, and required people to observe them.
Such rules go in line with the
principles of international law in many ways, but differ in that
they are divine rules legalized through religion and executed
through the faith of Muslims. The principle of international law
lack this authority that ensures putting them into practical
effect. Scholars even say that considering international rules as
laws is a kind of leniency. A law is a law only when it is
supported by some force that ensures its performance, and there is
no such force for international law. The Muslim rules, though they
aim at justice and mercy, have the faith of Muslims as an
authority to ensure their being carried out.
A. International law determines
that the citizens who are not regular members of an army are not
considered as fighters, and hence should not be inflicted with
harm; only regular soldiers (or armed men engaged in a war) are
considered as fighters.
The Shariiah agrees on this
point, for the Qur'an says: "Fight in the cause of God those who
fight you, but do not transgress limits. God loveth not
transgressors" (2:190). It is an act of transgression to
when believers fight those who do not fight them, people like
their enemy's children and wives, as well as their sick, old and
clergy.
In the Raid of Mu'tah, the
Prophet instructed his men, while about to set on, "Never kill a
woman, a weak infant, or a debilitated old person; nor burn palms,
uproot trees, or pull down houses!"
B. International law forbids
killing the wounded, torturing the enemy, destroying them by
treachery or deception, or using bombs, missiles or weapons which
add to their torture. It also prohibits the poisoning of wells,
rivers and foods; it recommends that the corpses of the dead be
respected, and prohibits any severity or mayhem be inflicted on
them, regardless of the nationality of dead people.
Islam applies the same
principles, for when the Prophet appointed an army or troop leader
he instructed him to be always God-fearing, and added: "Never
transgress limits, or take your enemy by surprise or perfidy, or
inflict atrocities or mutilation, or kill infants!"
Abu Bakr, the first Caliph in
Islam, instructed his senior officer Oussama, saying, "Never
betray, or transgress your limits, or take the enemy by surprise
or perfidy, or inflict atrocities or mutilation upon them; nor
kill young babies or old people or women; and never injure or burn
palms or cut down a fruitful tree, or slay a sheep, a cow or a
camel unless it is for your food!"
C. International law prescribes
a number of principles regarding the proper treatment of captives.
They should not be killed, injured, ill-treated or humiliated if
they surrender or if they are deprived of their freedom.
Islam also urges on the polite
treatment of captives in general, and God commends the righteous
who treat such people hospitably, saying: "And they feed, for the
love of God, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive, (saying),
'We feed you for the sake of God alone; no reward do we desire
from you, nor thanks'" (76:8-9).
The Prophet was generous to his
captives, but in return fir his setting them free he asked them to
teach Muslim infants writing.
The Poll Tax (Jizya)
The Jizya or poll tax is a
personal tax levied on non-Muslims in a Muslim State, and as such
it resembles the Zakat (Alms Tax) which is levied on Muslim
citizens by the Muslim State. The poll tax is levied so that all
the capable non-Muslim citizens of the State can contribute, each
from his own money, to the general welfare of the State, and that
in return for this, they can enjoy their rights as nationals of
this State, including compensation from the Muslim Exchequer when
they are in need.
Valor and mercy are not
forgotten here, as the poll tax is not collected from the weak and
poor. In his message to the people of Hijra, Khaled Ibn Al-Walid
says, "When a person is too old to work or suffers a handicap, or
when he falls into poverty, he is free from the dues of the pull
tax; his sustenance is provided by the Muslim Exchequer." In his
book "Al-Kharaj," Abu Yusuf says, "No Jizya is due on females or
young infants."
When the dues of the poll tax
are paid by these people, they have to be supported, protected,
granted a freedom of faith, and treated on a footing of justice
and equality with Muslims. They are called "Zimmis" (the Arabic
origin, "Zimma," meaning security, protection and custody) because
the said rights are guaranteed by God and His Apostle, and such
was the custom the Muslim leaders followed in dealing with the
Zimmins. In his book "Futooh Al-Buldan" (Conquests of Countries),
Al-Balathiri comments on this saying, "Khaled Ibn Al-Walid, on
entering Damascus as a conqueror, offered a guarantee of security
to its people and their properties and churches, and promised that
the wall of the city would not be pulled down, and none of their
houses be demolished. It was a guarantee of God, he said, and of
the Caliph and all believers to keep them safe and secure on
condition they paid the dues of the Jizya."
The poll tax is a small sum of
money indeed when compared to the services the Muslim State offers
to protect the Zimmis and support the army in charge to keep them
safe from others' assaults. In his book "Al-Kharaj," Abu Yusuf
gives the following reports: "After getting on peaceful terms with
the people of Syria and collecting the dues of the Jizya and the
Kharaj, news reached Abu 'Ubeida that the Byzantine had amassed
their troops to attack him. The effect of this was great on Abu 'Ubeida
and the Muslims. He sent messages to the rulers of cities with
whose citizens he had made peace, asking them to return to their
subjects the paid dues of the Jizya and Kharaj, with an
instruction to tell these: 'We hereby return to you the money you
have paid us, because of the news of the enemy troops amassed to
attack us, but, if God grants us victory against the enemy, we
will keep up to the promise and covenant between us.' When this
was delivered to the Zimmis and their money returned to them, they
told the Muslims: May God bring you back to us and grant you
victory over them!"
In his book, "The Spirit of
Laws," on dealing with the taxes levied by the government,
Montesqieu says, "Such levied taxes were one reason for the
strange facility which the Muslims faced during conquests. People,
then, preferred -- instead of being subjected to an endless series
of fines which entered the rich imagination of greedy rulers -- to
submit to the payment of a minimal tax which can be fulfilled and
paid with ease."
Those who Seek Protection
Among the principles of Islam
which reveal tolerance toward the enemy in the time of war, is
that it allows individuals and groups of the enemy who actively
fight against Islam, to get in touch with Muslims and to reside in
Muslim lands under the protection of a law which is known in the
Muslim Shariiah as the "Law of Protection." Islam ensures the
protection of such people and requires Muslims to protect them
with all they can afford as long as they are in Muslim
territories. It even offers them certain privileges and releases
them from certain obligations which Muslims have to observe.
The purpose of this Law of
Protection is to give these people a chance to learn the truth
about Islam. In this way, Muslims could effectively spread the
message of their faith. The origin of this lies in God's words:
"If one of the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so
that he may hear the Word of God; and then escort him to where he
can be secure" (9:6). One may add with a scholar that "if
they accept the Word, they become Muslims and brethren, and no
further question arises. If they do not see their way to accept
Islam, they will require double protection: (1) from the Islamic
forces openly fighting against their people, and (2) from their
own people, as they detached themselves from them. Both kinds of
protection should be ensured for them, and they should be safely
escorted to a place where they can be safe."
Islam deals with this point at
length and permits the Muslim individuals to protect and settle a
covenant with one or a group of non-Muslims. This measure of
protection and guarantee on his part is to be respected, for the
Prophet says: "The guarantee of all Muslims is one, and it may be
fulfilled by the weakest of them." Islam also confirms guarantees
reached by women, who typically do not do the fighting, for the
Prophet once addressed Um Hani' saying: "We will protect all those
to whom you offer your protection!"
Islam does not make specific
demands regarding such measures, except that which ensures safety
to Muslims, like making certain that those under protection have
no force or resistance of their own, and that there is no
likelihood of a tendency on their part to spread intrigue or spy
on Muslims. To this effect, Islam confirms the right of the Leader
to annul an individual's right for protection if this annulment be
for the general good of Muslims.
Covenants in Islam
Treaties have always been an
important means to strengthen relations and settle disputes
peacefully. They are based on mutual confidence between parties,
without which peace collapses.
Islam reserves special respect
to treaties and allots to them all possible guarantees, so that
Muslims may rise with such treaties above personal desires and
passions. In the view of Islam, it is not necessary that, if
situations arouse dispute between Muslims and their opponents, it
should only leave to them a choice between embracing Islam, paying
the poll tax, or joining in a war.
This is why, in many Qur'anic
verses, Islam requires Muslims to abide by their covenants:
"Fulfill (every) engagement, for (every) engagement will be
enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning)" (17:34).
In describing the qualities of
truthful believers, God says that they are "those who faithfully
observe their trusts and their covenants" (23:8).
In the view of Qur'an, refusal
to keep up trusts is like rejecting the virtues of humanity: "The
worst of beasts in the sight of God are those who reject Him and
will not believe. They are those with whom thou didst make a
covenant, but they break their covenant every time, and they have
not the fear (of God)" (8:55-56).
By honoring covenants with
others, Islam does not mean to gain colonial authority or make
stratagems to cheat people so as to attain strength over other
nations -- but to establish peace: "Fulfill the Covenant of God
when ye have entered into it, and break not your oaths after ye
have confirmed them and after ye have amde God your surety; for
God knoweth all that ye do. And be not like a woman who
unravelleth the yarn which she hath spun, after it hath become
strong. Nor take your oaths to practise deception between
yourselves because of a nation being more numerous than another"
(16:91-92).
The Qur'an charges Muslims to
keep up their covenants, even if it might prevent them from
rushing to the dupport of their brethren who live in a non-Muslim
Statewith whom they have a treaty of mutual alliance, though also
the Qur'an considers that Muslims, in spite of their different
races and nationalities, constitute one Nation, and that every
aggression inflicted on one Muslim community is an aggression
against the Islamic Nation as a whole. God says: "But if they seek
your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them except against
a people with whom ye have a treaty of mutual alliance. And
(remember) God seeth all that ye do" (8:72).
However, if such people violate
the terms of the treaty, the Muslims are allowed to fight them:
"But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and taunt
you for your Faith, then fight ye the chiefs of Disbelief -- for
their oaths are nothing to them -- that thus they may be
restrained" (9:12).
Testimony of Some Western Scholars on the Muslim Conquest
In his book "Civilization of the
Arabs," Dr. Gustav LeBon says, "The reader will find, in my
treatment of the Arabs' conquests and the reason of their
victories, that force was never a factor in the spread of the
Qur'anic teachings, and that the Arabs left those they had subdued
free to exercise their religious beliefs. If it happened that some
Christian peoples embraced Islam and adopted Arabic as their
language, it was mainly due to the various kinds of justice on the
part of the Arab victors, with the like of which the non-Muslims
were not acquainted. It was also due to the tolerance and leniency
of Islam, which was unknown to the other religions."
In another place of his book,
Dr. LeBon adds, "The early Arab conquests might have blurred their
common sense and made them commit the sorts of oppression which
conquerors usually commit, and thus ill-treat the subdued and
compel them to embrace the Faith they wanted to spread all over
the globe. Had they done so, all nations, which were still not
under their control, might have turned against them, and they
might have suffered what had befallen the Crusaders in their
conquest of Syria lately. However, the early Caliphs, who enjoyed
a rare ingenuity which was unavailable to the propagandists of new
faiths, realized that laws and religion cannot be imposed by
force. Hence they were remarkably kind in the way they treated the
peoples of Syria, Egypt, Spain and every other country they
subdued, leaving them to practisetheir laws and regulations and
beliefs and imposing only a small Jizya in return for their
protection and keeping peace among them. In truth, nations have
never known merciful and tolerant conquerors like the Arabs."
He further explains, "The mercy
and tolerance of the conquerors were among the reasons for the
spread of their conquests and for the nations' adoptions of their
Faith and regulations and language, which became deeply rooted,
resisted all sorts of attack and remained even after the
disappearance of the Arabs' control on the world stage, though
historians deny the fact. Egypt is the most evident proof of this.
It adopted what the Arabs had brought over, and reserved it.
Conquerors before the Arabs -- the Persians, Greeks and Byzantine
-- could not overthrow the ancient Pharaoh civilization and impose
what they had brought instead."
Then in another place he adds,
"A few impartial European scholars, who are well-versed in the
history of the Arabs, do confirm this tolerance. Robertson, in his
book "Biography of Charlequin," says that the Muslims alone were
the ones who joined between Jihad and tolerance toward the
followers of other faiths whom they had subdued, leaving to them
the freedom to perform their religious rites."
In his book "History of the
Crusades," Michel Michaud says, "Islam, besides calling for Jihad,
reveals tolerance toward the followers of other religions. It
released the patriarchs, priests and their servants from the
obligations of taxes. It prohibited, in special, the killing of
priests for their performance of worship, and Omar Ibn Al-Khattab
did not inflict harm on the Christians when he entered Jerusalem
as a conqueror. The Crusades, however, did slay Muslims and burn
the Jews when they entered the city."
In his book, "Islam: Impressions
and Studies," Count de Castri says, "After the Arabs yielded to,
and believed in the Qur'an, and people received enlightenment
through the True Religion, the Muslims appeared with a new show to
the peoples of the earth, with conciliation and treatment on basis
of free thinking and belief. The Qur'anic verses then succeeded
one another, calling on kind treatment, after those verses in
which warnings had been addressed to the heretic tribes... Such
were the instructions of the Apostle after the Arabs had embraced
Islam, and the Caliphs who seuueeded Mohammed followed his
example. This makes me say with Robertson that the people of
Mohammed were the only ones who combined kindness to others and
the pleasure of seeing their Faith spread. It was this affection
that pushed the Arabs on the way of conquest, a boubtkess reason.
The Qur'an spread its wings behind its victorious troops that
invaded Syria and moved on like a thunderbolt to North Africa,
from the Red Sea to the Atlantic, without leaving a trace of
tyranny on the way, except what is inescapable in every war, and
never did they massacre a nation who rejected Islam...
"The spread of Islam and the
submission to its authority seem to have another reason in the
continents of Asia and North Africa. It was the despotism of
Constantinpole which exercised extreme tyranny, and the
injustice of rulers was too much for people to bear...
"Islam was never imposed by
sword or by force, but it got into the hearts of people out of
longing and free will, due to the talents of stimulation and
captivation of people's hearts, lodged in the Qur'an."
Many historians admit that the
spread of Islam among the Christians of the Eastern Churches, was
mainly due to a feeling of dissatisfaction that arose from the
doctrinal sophistry which the Hellenistic spirit brought over to
Christian theology. It was also due to the abundance of good that
such Eastern Christians found in Islam, and due to its ability to
rescue them from the disorder they were struggling in. In Caetani,
for instance, one reads, "Known for its preference of simple and
plain views, the East suffered, religiously, a great deal from the
evil consequences of the Hellenistic culture which turned the
refined teachings of Christ into an ideology rampant with
complicated doctrines and doubts. This led to the rise of a
feeling of despair, and even shook the very foundations of
religious belief. When, at last, news suddenly came from the
desert of the New Revelation, such Eastern Christianity, being
torn by inner splits, was shattered... Its foundations were
shaken, and, due to such doubts, the clergy of the church were
taken by despair. Christianity was incapable, after this, of
resisting the appeals of the New Faith which eliminated, with a
mighty blow, all the trivial doubts and offered graceful, positive
qualities in addition to its doubtless, simple and plain
principles. It was then that the East forsake Christ and threw
itself into the lap of the Prophet of Arabs."
