Rat I Mir U Islamu

WAR AND
PEACE
IN ISLAM
The Uses and Abuses of Jihad
Edited by
HRH Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad
Professor Ibrahim Kalin
Professor Mohammad Hashim Kamali
CONTENTS
Acknowledgements vii
A Note on the Translation of the Quran viii
Foreword by HE the Sultan of Sokoto ix
Introduction by Professor Mohammad Hashim Kamali xi
About the Contributors xviii
Part I: War and Its Practice
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
The Quran and Combat

HE Grand Imam Mahmoud Shaltut
(Translation: Lamya Al-Khraisha)
Warfare in the Quran
Professor Joel Hayward
Jihad and the Islamic Law of War1
Dr Caner Dagli
The Myth of a Militant Islam2
Dr David Dakake
The Spirit of Jihad3
Dr Reza Shah-Kazemi
A Fatwa on Jihad
HE Shaykh Ali Gomaa
Body Count: A Comparative Quantitative
Study of Mass Killings in History4
Dr Naveed Sheikh
28
56
99
132
153
165
Part II: Peace and Its Practice

Chapter 8
Chapter 9
War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 5
Islam and Peace: A Survey of the Sources

of Peace in the Islamic Tradition
The Concept of Peace/Security (Salm) in Islam
Dr Karim Douglas Crow
217
250
05/07/2013 15:21
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Human Dignity from an Islamic Perspective

The People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitb)
in the Quran
Professor Ismail Albayrak
Dhimm and Mustamin: A Juristic and
Historical Perspective
269
282
304
Part III: Beyond Peace: Forbearance,

Mercy, Compassion and Love
Chapter 13
Chapter 14
Chapter 15
Chapter 16
Appendix
The Uncommonality of A Common Word

Dr Joseph Lumbard
Divine Mercy and Love in the Quran5
Love of Others in the Quran
Mercy in the Hadith
Shaykh Sayyid Hassan Saqqaf and
The Conditions Necessary for Just War
in the Holy Quran
317
348
378
392
409
Notes 427
Quranic Index 491
General Index 501
vi
05/07/2013 15:21
INTRODUCTION
The book before us is presented in three parts, namely war and its practice, peace and its practice, and beyond peace: forbearance, mercy,
compassion and love. This volumes range is evidently not confined to
the study of jihad, yet jihad remains its central concernas indicated
by its title. The main issue concerning jihad has been eloquently stated
by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, who wrote: In modern times in the West
no vocabulary in the Islamic religion has been so distorted, maligned,
misunderstood, and vilified as the word jihad.8 Nasr added that this is
due not only to Western medias demonising epithets and constructions, but also to those extremist Muslims who readily provide the latter
with examples to justify their propagation of the distorted image of this
term.
Taking a balanced approach to the understanding of words and
concepts naturally begins with employing them for their true meanings.
The essence of this requirement is captured in a Quranic directive to
Muslims: And when you speakspeak with justice (Al-Anm, 6:152).9
Justice is inclusive of truth. The Quran seems here to be conveying the
awareness that one can tell the truth in different ways, and that it is best
if it is moderated with a sense of justice. The problem before us is one
of widespread distortion in the uses of jihad, not just by the Western
media, but by Muslims themselves, who have become a party to that
distortion. The concept of Jihad f sabl Allh (striving in the path of
God) as contained in the Quran and Hadith has often been distorted
and misused by the perpetrators of military violence and terrorism
against Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Matters are made worse by
the fact that the word has gained commercial appeal in Europe and
the United States. A number of writers seeking to make their books
commercially successful have been using jihad in their titles in any
way possible. It is important therefore to explain what jihad stands for,
through a careful reading of the Quran and Hadith. This is the basic
xi
05/07/2013 15:21
war and peace in islam
theme and message of the book before us, one which is articulated in
the writings of a number of outstanding scholars and opinion leaders
on the subject. To restore moderation and balance to a distorted picture,
one needs to begin with what one believes to be the truth about jihad.
Jihad derives from the root word jahada, which means to strive or
to exert effort. Its translation in the Western media as holy war would
in Arabic be equivalent to al-arb al-muqaddasah, which is totally unfamiliar and unknown to Arabic speakers. Jihad consists of the effort one
makes to do something good and to prevent or oppose evil. The effort
may be directed towards oneself or the outside world. The struggle to
control and refine ones ego, to conquer ignorance, to discipline ones
own base desires, to excel in the work undertaken to the best of ones
ability are the jihad of the self (jihad al-nafs). In a similar vein, the
Sufi contemplation used to combat the distractions of the soul is called
mujhadah. To combat poverty and disease, to build housing for the
poor, or to fight corruption and abuse would all qualify as jihad that
serves a social purpose of great benefit. We are cast into a world in
which there is disequilibrium and disorder both externally and within
ourselves. To create a life of equilibrium based on surrender to God
and following His injunctions involves constant jihad. For ordinary
Muslims, praying five times a day throughout their lives, or fasting from
dawn to dusk during the month of Ramadan are certainly not possible
without great effort, or jihad. A Muslim who works to earn a living and
support his family is also engaged in jihad. It is now common to hear
Muslim intellectuals speak of jihad in business, jihad in the acquisition
of knowledge, and jihad against social ills afflicting young people, drug
abuse and AIDS. Understood in its comprehensive sense, jihad is an
inherent aspect of the human condition in facing the imperfections of
this world. The Prophet Muhammad U has said that the mujhid is
one who wages a struggle against himself.10 The effort to facilitate a just
system of rule is underscored in another hadith: the best form of jihad
is to tell a word of truth to an unjust ruler.11 In a hadith al-Bukhari and
Muslim have recorded, a young man asked the Prophet: Should I join
the jihad? that was apparently in progress at the time. In response, the
Prophet asked him a question: Do you have parents?, and when the
man said Yes, the Prophet told him, Then strive by serving them.12
xii
05/07/2013 15:21
Introduction
The Quran refers to jihad in twenty-four verses, most of which

emphasise the spiritual and non-violent manifestations of jihad, such
as being steadfast in the faith and sacrifice in its cause, migration from
Mecca to Medina, and peaceful propagation of the faith. The reader will
find comprehensive coverage of the Quran in the various chapters of
this book. It is worth mentioning, however, that jihad as armed struggle
against the aggressor occurs only in the Medinan verses of the Quran.
During the first thirteen years of his campaign in Mecca, the Prophet
was not permitted to use force even for self-defence. Islam was propagated only through peaceful methods. The idolaters of Mecca persecuted
and forced a number of the Prophets companions to migrate, initially
to Abyssinia, and later to Medina. The Meccans not only continued but
stepped up their hostility and attacked the Muslims, some 270km away,
in the battles of Badr (624 CE) and Uhud (625 CE), with superior forces,
inflicting heavy casualties on them. Only then was permission granted
to: Fight in the way of God those who fight you, but begin not hostilities.
Verily God loves not the aggressors (Al-Baqarah, 2:190).
When a legitimate jihad is waged, it must not be based on anger and
hatred. The Quran thus warns: Let not your hatred of a people cause you
to be unjust. You must do justice (Al-Midah, 5:8). The believers were
also directed to repel the evil deed with one that is better, then verily he,
between whom and thee there was enmity (will become) as though he
were a protective friend (Fuilat, 41:34).
Islamic law provides a clear set of rules that regulate military
engagement, which have not, however, been consistently followed. The
Prophet U instructed the warriors to avoid harming women and children, the aged, monks and priests, the blind and the insane, and refrain
from acts of brutality and maiming. Destruction of livestock, trees and
crops was also forbidden unless it was for the purpose of sustaining
life. Innocent human life should be immune from all forms of unlawful
aggression, as the Quran proclaims: Whosoever kills a human being for
other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he
had killed all humanity (Al-Midah, 5:32).
The majority of Sunni and Shii jurists have held that jihad is legitimate only in defence against aggression. They also maintain that jihad
must be declared by the legitimate leader. Hence no group, party or
xiii
05/07/2013 15:21
organisation has the authority to take up arms in the name of jihad

without authorisation by lawful authorities. For there will otherwise be
disorder and anarchy. This is the purport of the hadith which provides
that: A Muslim ruler is the shield [of his people]. A war can only be
waged under him and people should seek his shelter [in war].13
From his reading of the source evidence, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah
(d. 1350 CE/751 AH) divided jihad into four main varieties: i) jihad
against the self; ii) jihad against the unbelievers; iii) jihad against the
hypocrites; and iv) jihad against the agents of corruption.14
Each of these has been subdivided into four types: a) jihad of the
heart; b) jihad of the tongue; c) jihad by wealth; and d) jihad by person.
Thus a total of sixteen varieties of jihad come into the picture, most of
which consist of peaceful struggle for a good cause. The last variety, that
is, of jihad in person, includes military jihad, but also actions such as
care for the ill and personal service.15 Jihad against the self is the foundation of all jihad, for fighting an external enemy would not be possible
without a successful engagement in inner jihad. Jihad by ones words
consists of education and advice given to promote good and prevent
evil. This is known in the present-day Arab countries as jihad al-tarbiyah (the education effort). In the Twelver Imami Shii doctrine, to quote
Nasr again, all the eminent authorities have consequently maintained
that jihad, except for self defence, is forbidden in the absence of the
masum, that is the inerrant Imam.16
Western media is apt to associate war and violence with Islam.
The book before us forcefully refutes this through a reading mainly of
the Quran and Hadithletting these sources speak for themselves, as
it were, before the learned authors advance their own interpretations
and insights. Some sections of the present volume also review factual
historical evidence on warfare. The fact is, as Ali Mazrui wrote, that in
the last 100 years, western civilisation has killed millions more people
than any other way of life in the annals of man in a comparable unit of
time ... It has also been the West in the last 100 years which had made
warfare less and less respectful of civilian life.17
Mahmud Shaltut, the late Shaykh of al-Azhar from 1958 to 1963,
and the contemporary Grand Mufti of Egypt, Shaykh Ali Gomaa, have
shown in their writings in the book before us that the Quran only
xiv
05/07/2013 15:21
Introduction
allows war for self-defence. Another Shaykh of al-Azhar, Muhammad

Sayyid Tantawi, issued a fatwa in 2001 to condemn hostage taking in the
Philippines: Islam rejects all forms of violence. These acts of violence
have nothing to do with Islam. He also condemned the terrorist act
of September 11, 2001 in the United States. The Chief Mufti of Saudi
Arabia, Abdulaziz bin Abdallah l al-Shaykh, similarly declared in 2004:
You must know Islams firm position against all these terrible crimes. The world must know that Islam is a religion of
peace ... justice and guidance ... Islam forbids the hijacking
of airplanes, ships and other means of transport, and it forbids all acts that undermine the security of the innocent.19
Seyyed Hossein Nasr added his voice to say:
Those who carry out terrorism in the West or elsewhere in
the name of jihad are vilifying an originally sacred term,
and their efforts have not been accepted by established and
mainstream religious authorities as jihad.20
The Jeddah-based Islamic Fiqh Academy affiliated to the
Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), in its sixteenth session
(510 January 2002) vehemently condemned all manifestation of
terrorism and its attributions to Islam:
Terrorism is an outrageous attack carried out either by
individuals, groups or states against the human being. It
includes all forms of intimidation, harm, threats, killing
without a just cause, all forms of armed robbery, banditry,
every act of violence or threat intended to fulfil a criminal
scheme individually or collectively, terrify and horrify people
by hurting them or by exposing their lives, liberty, and security
to danger. It can also take the form of inflicting damage on
the environment, a public or private utility all of which are
resolutely forbidden in Islam.
In her article The Revolt of Islam, Nikkie Kiddie, a US professor of
Middle Eastern history, explains the rise of militancy among Muslims.
She notes that with the exception perhaps of Wahhabism, militant jihad
movements in the modern era began and grew mostly as a response to
Western colonialism. The earliest examples in the eighteenth century in
Sumatra and West Africa emerged in the face of disruptive economic
change influenced by the West. In the nineteenth century, broader waves
xv
05/07/2013 15:21
of jihad movements cropped up in Algeria, Sudan, the Caucasus, and

Libya as a direct response to French, British, Russian and Italian colonial
conquest.21
The remainder of this Introduction consists of a summary of the
conditions under which military jihad may legitimately be waged. But
it may be said in passing that the relationship of jihad to peace is one of
means and end. Jihad is not an end in itself but a means towards peace,
freedom of conscience and justice. Unlike the Romans, for example, who
subscribed to the notion that silent enim legis enter arma (laws are silent
during wars), Islamic law regulated war and proscribed acts of oppression and injustice in the name of jihad. A set of rules were thus formulated to be observed before the onset of war, during it, and after the war
endswhich manifest in principle that laws are not silent during war. The
book before us is an articulation of the conditions and restraints that the
shariah imposes on jihad, just as it also underlines the message that the
quest for peace and justice must be the overriding purpose of all jihad.
Whereas jihad has been widely covered in the existing literature, this
book is distinguished by the insight it offers into the source evidence, not
only on jihad, but also on Islams teachings on peace, fraternity and love.
To summarise the conditions of jihad:
1) First and foremost, every effort must be made to avoid war. War
can only take place after all peaceful efforts to prevent it fail.
2) All war in Islam is defensive, a struggle for liberation to defend
ones freedom of conscience, home, property or homeland from
aggression.
3) Jihad must not be waged for ignoble purposes, personal objectives
and revenge. No personal interest or private gain should be the
aim of jihad.
4) Jihad must be declared by a legitimate ruler, but only after
necessary consultation with people of specialised knowledge and
technical know-how.
5) Justice must prevail during armed jihad. Excessive violence and
acts of brutality, maiming and dishonouring the human dignity
of the deceased must be avoided.
6) Action may be taken only against armed combatants. Civilians
and persons who are neither involved nor trained to be engaged
xvi
05/07/2013 15:21
Introduction
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
in combat may not be targeted. Killing and harming women and

children is prohibited.
Animals, crops and trees are to be spared unless it be for sustaining
life. Polluting the environment, rivers, wells and demolition of
houses is prohibited.
Treachery and deception, killing and attacking people by surprise
is prohibited.
Looting and plunder are prohibited, and peoples rights and
properties may not be violated.
The enemy must be among those with whom fighting is permitted
as compared to those with whom at truce has been agreed. Breach
of valid international agreements and treaties is a violation of the
rules of jihad.
It is impermissible to use human shields in jihad.
Even during conflict, all possible efforts must be made to end
war.
Prisoners of war (POWs) must be treated humanely and their
lives protected; they are entitled to dignified treatment, and
fulfilment of their essential needs.
If ransom is paid for a POW, he or she must be freed. Ransom
can consist of teaching ten Muslims to read and write.
Religious persecution and forced conversion cannot be the aim
of jihad. On the contrary, jihad must seek to establish freedom of
religion and enable people to practice their religious convictions
freely.
Places of worship, churches and synagogues must not be targeted.
Monks and priests who are not involved in violence must not be
harmed.
If a prisoner of war embraces Islam freely and willingly, he or
she must be freed.
Mohammad Hashim Kamali

International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies (IAIS) Malaysia
Kuala Lumpur, May 2013
xvii
05/07/2013 15:21
PART I: WAR AND ITS PRACTICE
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter one
THE QURAN AND COMBAT
Grand Imam Mahmoud Shaltut
Thanks be to God, and peace be upon His Messenger, Muhammad,
who was sent by God as a mercy to all mankind. God revealed the Holy
Quran to the Prophet Muhammad to clarify all things; it prescribes
for humanity correct doctrine and high morality and shows us how to
organise our relationships with each other in a manner that wards off
tyranny and preserves rights.
This is a study of combat (qitl) gleaned from the Holy Quran; it
is from a series of lectures I delivered on Egyptian radio. I wished to
present it again in written form so that people may read it and benefit
and so that, if they are so inclined, people may also offer their opinions
on the matter.
In the introduction I include what I see as the ideal approach to
Quranic exegesis. I also discuss the reason that drove me to choose this
subject in particular.
The research discusses the following subjects: the nature of the
call to Islam (dawah); the Holy Quran and the legitimacy of combat;
and the Holy Quran and the organisation of combat and its rules. The
research concludes that the practical combat which the Prophet U and
his two caliphs undertook was an exact and correct application of what
the Holy Quran prescribes in regards to legitimate combat, its organisation and its rules.
This is what you will read in this study and it is my fervent hope that
God has inspired me to write with reason and with wisdom.
My success is only with God. In Him I trust and to Him I turn
[repentant]. (Hd, 11:88)
05/07/2013 15:21
The Ideal Approach to Quranic Exegesis

There are two approaches to Quranic exegesis:
The First Approach: The exegete explains the verses and chapters
of the Holy Quran in their traditional order and elucidates the meaning of words and the relationships between verses. This is the approach
that people have become familiar with, as it is as old as Quranic exegesis itself. One characteristic of this approach is that exegesis is as varied
as the exegetes who interpret the verses. For example, exegetes who are
immersed in the sciences of rhetoric will employ rhetoric in interpreting
the verses of the Holy Quran. Likewise, exegetes who are immersed in
morphology and syntax will employ parsing words as a means of interpretation. Exegetes who are immersed in history will employ stories and
news; they may even be tempted to take this too far and relate Judaica, or
Isrliyyt; stories without due investigation or scrutiny. Furthermore,
exegetes who are immersed in philosophy will enjoy discussing creatures
and creation and this will be reflected in their exegesis. When they are
immersed in theology and jurisprudence, their interpretation will no
doubt be coloured by these things and so on and so forth. These varied
approaches to Quranic exegesis may make it difficult for people who turn
to Quranic commentaries for Divine Guidance, reassurance and wisdom
to find these things.
As a result of this approach, verses are sometimes explained in ways
that alter their true meaning or purpose; sometimes they are even considered to have been abrogated. Often verses are interpreted on the basis
of fundamental rules derived from jurisprudential branches by heads of
madhhib. These rules are taken to be fundamentals, and are referred to
in understanding the Holy Quran and the Sunnah and in deriving rules
and laws. This does not stop at legislation, or at the Verses of Legislation,
but encroaches into the area of beliefs and different groups opinions.
Thus we may hear them say: This verse does not agree with the Sunni
madhhib because its allegorical interpretation (tawl) is such and such.
Or they may say: This verse does not agree with the Hanafi madhab as
its allegorical interpretation is such and such. Or they might say: This
verse, or these versesaround seventy of themare incompatible with
the legitimacy of combat (qitl) and are therefore abrogated.
05/07/2013 15:21
Thus the Holy Quran has become the branch after it was the root,
a follower after it was followed, and something weighed on a scale after
it was the scale on which all things took their measure. God says in the
Holy Quran:
If you should quarrel about anything, refer it to God and the
Messenger, if you believe in God and the Last Day. (Al-Nis,
4:59)
Referring to God is referring to His Book, and referring to the
Prophet U is referring to his Sunnah. But some have reversed this and
have overturned legislation and referred God's Book and the Sunnah of
His Prophet to their opinions and the madhhib of their imitators. God
says:
They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside
God (Al-Tawbah, 9:31)
In his exegesis of this verse al-Fakhr al-Razi related that his shaykh
said: I witnessed a group of jurist imitators listen as verses from the
Holy Quran were recited to them in relation to particular issues; their
madhhib were at odds with these verses and they did not accept
them or pay them any heed. Instead, they continued to look at me in
astonishment as if to say: How can we comply with what these verses say
when the narrative of those who came before us is at odds with them?
As Razi related this about his shaykh, so have many other scholars such
as Ghazali, al-Izz bin Abdul-Salaam and many others.
These circuitous methods of interpreting the Holy Quran, and this
setback that the relationship between the Quran and jurisprudence and
beliefs suffered, caused a kind of intellectual chaos towards the Holy
Quran and the meanings of the Quran. This chaos had an impact in
making people feel averse to the Holy Quran and listening to exegetes.
The Second Approach: The exegete collects all the verses pertaining
to a particular subject and analyses them collectively, studying how they
relate to each other. In this way he can arrive at a proper judgement of
the verses and become clear on what the verses are saying. With this
approach the exegete also cannot impose an interpretation on any verse,
rather the verse reveals its meaning; and the exegete does not miss the
wonders of the Divine Word. In our view, this second approach is the
05/07/2013 15:21
ideal approach to Quranic exegesis; particularly if the intent is to spread

the Qurans guidance and to show that the topics the Quran deals with
are not purely theoretical, with no practical application in everyday life.
This approach also enables the exegete to deal with many practical
issues, each one separate and independent. This way people may know
the subjects of the Holy Quran with their clear titles, and know how
closely linked the Quran is to their practical daily lives. These subjects
include: the Quran and the roots of legislation; the Quran and science,
the Quran and the family, the Quran and the etiquette of social gatherings, the Quran and tourism, the Quran and economics, the Quran and
sacrifice, the Quran and kindness and so on and so forth on subjects that
build a strong and flourishing nation. In this way people are assured, in
a practical and clear manner that the Holy Quran is not far removed
from their lives or the way they think or their problems. They are assured
that the Holy Quran is not just a spiritual book whose sole mission is to
explain how to be closer to the Almighty without concerning itself with
the practical exigencies of daily life. This false and pernicious notion is
widespread, not only among the general public, but also among many
people who claim, or whom others claim, to be scholars. In the eyes of
such people the Holy Quran becomes merely a collection of texts to recite
or listen to in times of meditation, or a tool through which to invoke Gods
protection or seek healing. This is an injustice to the Holy Quran, indeed
an injustice to themselves, their minds and their chances for a good life
which they have deprived of an unstinting source of knowledge, wisdom,
legislation, politics, education, refinement and all one needs to manage
the issues that life throws at humans. God says in the Holy Quran:
Truly this Quran guides to that which is straightest and gives
tidings to the believers who perform righteous deeds that there
is a great reward for them. (Al-Isr, 17:9)
This approach that we have described bears generous fruit to those
who follow it and protects them from thinking ill of the Holy Quran and
its legislation. It also puts the exegete face to face with the subject he wishes
to discuss and places him in an environment steeped in relevant verses; he
may use one to understand another. The most correct explanation of the
Holy Quran is the explanation the exegete absorbs from the Quran itself.
It is often that an ordinary person perusing the Holy Quran misses the
4
05/07/2013 15:21
secret in a particular verse, but when he reads a sister verse discussing the
same subject, the secret is unveiled and revealed to him.
It was our wish, and that of some men blessed with religious insight,
to share this new approach to Quranic exegesis so that the topics of the
Holy Quran may be known and studied purely, in a manner innocent of
the impurities that may veil the Qurans truth or distort its beauty. Our
wish is for the Quran to be studied far from the circuitous approach,
and in a manner that transcends extrinsic tales and imaginings that no
sound mind seeking truth could possibly believe. It is my hope that in
this new approach to Quranic exegesis people may find what their souls
yearn for, in terms of learning about the guidance of the Holy Quran
and contemplating its secrets and its wisdom and benefitting from its
principles and teachings.
Years ago, I applied this second approach to the subject of The Quran
and Women and I believe that those who read it with good intent met it
with an open and assured heart. The topic I should now like to discuss,
utilising the second approach, is The Quran and Combat. Combat is a
very real issue in these troubled times and many people disparage Islam,
with regards to the matter of combat. Learning the Holy Qurans wise
prescriptions and rules regarding combat, its justifiable causes and its
purpose has never been more pressing. The Holy Quran proves to us that
Islam loves peace and hates bloodshed and the loss of life for the sake of
the transient and the ephemeral; it also hates greed, gluttony and love
of killing. Those who terrorise the world with their lethal wars should
know how far they have deviated from Islam, which they believe is the
only religion of peace. They should ask themselves if it is logical that a
religion which calls for peace and for people to devote what God has given
them to good and to building, and not to what is harmful and destructive,
would be a religion that approves of its followers terrorising the world
and causing heartache and laying waste to once-flourishing cities and
cultures. They even go so far as to say that their religion is the religion
of peace and that other religions are religions of war established by the
sword and coercion.
(The section The Nature of Islamic Dawah has been omittedan
unabridged version of the text of Shaltuts The Quran and Combat can be
found at www.mabda.jo.)
5
05/07/2013 15:21
There is absolutely no reason or justification for anyone to believe

or presume that the Islamic dawah forces people to believe in Islam
by means of the sword and combat.
First: The nature of the Islamic dawah is free of complexity, ambiguity and intellectual hardship that would require manifest or surreptitious coercion22.
Second: Islamic shariah law, taken from the Quran, is not in
contravention of, or in opposition to, Gods cosmic Sunnah which He
made the basis for the faith of the believers and the basis for the disbelief of the unbelievers i.e. man is free to choose for himself through
examination and conviction.
Third: Islamic shariah law, taken from the precise and unambiguous verses of the Holy Quran, rejects the use of coercion as a means
to call people to God, as do the laws of the other preceding (Divinely
revealed) religions.
Fourth: The Prophet Muhammad U was the first person to take
on the responsibility of dawah, and as such he was responsible before
God for the sole task of his Message which the Holy Quran expounded
in both its Meccan and Medinan parts. The task was to convey and
warn, not to use coercion and violence to demand faith from people.23
Fifth: The Holy Quran, which is the source of the Islamic dawah,
does not respect faith that has been coerced and forced and denies its
validity on the Day of Resurrection. How then could it enjoin coercion or
allow it as a method of calling people to believe in the Message of Islam?
We know these conclusions from the Quran itself and believing in them is part of believing in the Holy Quran. Here one may
ask: Given these conclusions, what is the significance of the Verses
of Combat (Ayt Al-Qitl) in the Holy Quran?
This will be the subject of our next section.
The Verses of Combat (yt Al-Qitl)

In this chapter we will review the Verses of Combat in the Holy Quran
in order to understand their meaning, significance, purpose and their
relation to each other. Then we shall arrive at a conclusion regarding
the verses which command combat and, together with the conclusions
reached in the preceding section, we shall elucidate the verses.
6
05/07/2013 15:21
The Holy Quran expounds two kinds of combat: the first is

combat between Muslims and the second is combat between Muslims
and non-Muslims.
First: Combat between Muslims is an internal matter of the
Muslim Ummah and is governed by its own laws, relating only to
the Ummah and no one else. The Holy Quran is clear about how
to handle instances of rebellion and breach of public order, whether
between subjects or between subjects and rulers. It legislates how to
manage such situations in a manner that preserves the unity of the
Muslim Ummah and the authority and standing of the ruling body
in a manner that protects the community from the evils of aggression and hostility. This is clear in the following verses from Srat
Al-ujurt:
And if two parties of believers fall to warfare, make peace
between them. And if one of them aggresses against the
other, fight the one which aggresses until it returns to Gods
ordinance. Then, if it returns, reconcile them, and act justly.
Surely God loves the just. / The believers are indeed brothers. Therefore [always] make peace between your brethren,
and fear God, so that perhaps you might receive mercy. (Alujurt, 49:910)
These two verses discuss a situation where disagreement that
cannot be solved by peaceful means breaks out between two groups of
believers, and both groups resort to the use of force and the judgment
of the sword. The verses stipulate that the Ummah, represented by
its government, should investigate the causes of strife between the
two groups and try to reconcile them. If this is achieved through
negotiations, and both parties receive their dues, aggression is warded
off and security restored; thus God saves the believers from combat.
If, however, one of the groups continues to aggress against the other,
refuses to comply with Gods commands and attacks the authority of
the believers, then it has become an aggressor that has rebelled against
the rule of law and the system. In this case, the community of Muslims
must fight (qitl) it until it submits and returns to what is righteous. The
verses then clarify the secret to successfully resolving any discord that
might arise between different groups. The secret is that when a group
05/07/2013 15:21
returns to what is righteous, they may not be oppressed or deprived of

their rights; indeed, justice must prevail and each group must be given its
dues. Consider the end of the first verse (Al-ujurt, 49:9): Surely God
loves the just. The verses tell us that the intention behind the legislation
is the preservation of the unity and indivisibility of the Ummah and the
safeguarding of religious brotherhood; one of the important matters of
faith. The second verse says:
The believers are indeed brothers. Therefore [always] make
peace between your brethren, and fear God, so that perhaps
you might receive mercy. (Al-ujurt, 49:10)
These wise Quranic legislations were revealed by an illiterate
Prophet to ensure peace and bring an end to aggression and violence.
They were revealed more than thirteen centuries before the human
mind came up with the League of Nations or the Security Council as
means to preserve peace and guarantee liberties and rights for people
and states.
If nations understood these wise legislations properly, gave them
the attention they deserve and followed them, they would never go
astray from the path of wisdom and they would have been spared the
repeated catastrophes caused by aggression and violence on the one
hand and disagreement and division on the other. These are the rules
legislated by the Holy Quran regarding combat between Muslims. This
combat clearly has no bearing on the principles of Islamic dawah and
faith in its Message.
Second: Combat between Muslims and non-Muslims. The Holy
Quran expounds in a comprehensive manner, in many verses and
chapters, the legitimate causes and purposes of combat between
Muslims and non-Muslims. It enjoins that when the purposes of legitimate combat are achieved, it must end. The Quran also elucidates what
Muslims should be prepared for, and the necessary cautions they must
take against an unexpected outbreak of war. The Holy Quran clarifies
the rules and regulations of this kind of combat, in addition to those of
truces and treaties. In the following we shall discuss the verses dealing
with the causes of this kind of combat, and how it must stop when its
purposes are achieved. We will then discuss the relationship between
the Verses of Forgiveness and the Verses of Combat.
8
05/07/2013 15:21
The early Muslims spent many years in Mecca suffering the worst
kinds of punishment, they were not free to worship, were persecuted
for believing in a creed that brought them reassurance and were terrorised with regard to property and personal safety. All this continued
until they were forced to emigrate. They left their homes and settled
in Medina, patiently accepting Gods will. Whenever they felt the urge
to resist oppression and seek revenge, the Prophet held them back and
urged them to be patient and await Gods will. The Prophet U said: I
have not been ordered to fight (qitl). This lasted until they were almost
overcome by despair and doubt. Just then God revealed the first Verses
of Combat:
Permission is granted to those who fight because they have
been wronged. And God is truly able to help them; / those who
were expelled from their homes without right, only because
they said: Our Lord is God. Were it not for Gods causing
some people to drive back others, destruction would have befallen the monasteries, and churches, and synagogues, and
mosques in which Gods Name is mentioned greatly. Assuredly God will help those who help Him. God is truly Strong,
Mighty/ those who, if We empower them in the land, maintain the prayer, and pay the alms, and enjoin decency and forbid indecency. And with God rests the outcome of all matters.
(Al-ajj, 22:3941)
These verses discuss and justify permission for combat because
of the injustices the Muslims faced, and because they were expelled
from their homes and forced to emigrate. The verses then explain that
this permission is in line with the Sunnah of people clashing, which
maintains a certain equilibrium and averts oppression. It also allows
the adherents of different faiths to perform their religious rituals and
preserve the doctrine of monotheism. Finally, these verses show that it
is Gods Sunnah to help those who help Him, the pious who do not use
war as an instrument for destruction and corruption, for subjugating
the weak and satisfying their own desires and ambitions. The verses
make it clear that God helps those who, if they are empowered in the
land, cultivate it with goodness and obey Gods orders, and are causes
for goodness and righteousness and not causes for what is wicked and
corrupt. Indeed, God knows who is destructive and who is a cause for
9
05/07/2013 15:21
good. God says at the end of these verses: And with God rests the outcome
of all matters.
As we have said, these verses are the first Verses of Combat. They are
very clear and do not contain even the slightest evidence of coercion. On
the contrary, they confirm that people clashing with each other is one of
Gods cosmic Sunnahs, inevitable for the preservation of order and the
continuation of righteousness and civilisation. Without this principle, the
earth would be corrupted and all the different places of worship would
be destroyed. Indeed, that would happen if tyrants had control over religion, free to abuse it without restraint, coercing people to convert without
anyone standing in their way. These verses are not specific to Muslims,
they are about humanity in general; they state clearly that destruction
would have befallen monasteries, churches and synagogues.
Now let us consider the Verses of Combat in Srat Al-Baqarah:
And fight in the way of God with those who fight against you,
but aggress not; God loves not the aggressors. / And slay them
wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where
they expelled you; sedition is more grievous than slaying. But
fight them not by the Sacred Mosque until they should fight you
there; then if they fight you, slay themsuch, is the requital of
disbelievers. / But if they desist, surely God is Forgiving, Merciful. / Fight them till there is no sedition, and the religion is for
God; then if they desist, there shall be no enmity, save against
evildoers. / The sacred month for the sacred month; holy things
demand retaliation; whoever commits aggression against you,
then commit aggression against him in the manner that he committed against you; and fear God, and know that God is with
the God-fearing. (Al-Baqarah, 2:1904)
These verses command the Muslims to fight (qitl) in the way of
God those who fight against them, to pursue them wherever they are and
to scatter them as they have scattered the Muslims. The verses prohibit
unprovoked aggression and emphasise that God does not love aggression
or aggressors. The verses then explain that expelling people from their
homes, terrorising and preventing them from living peacefully without
fear for their lives or possessions is sedition worse than murder and
bloodshed. Therefore, those who practice or provoke these things must
be fought in the same manner as fighters must be fought. The verses also
10
05/07/2013 15:21
prohibit combat in holy places and during holy periods, unless Muslims
are under attack in holy places or during holy periods. In these cases,
Muslims are allowed to retaliate in equal proportion. The verses then
clarify that when the purposes of legitimate combat are achieved, it must
end. These purposes are that there be no sedition in matters of religion
and that people enjoy religious freedom without oppression or torture.
When these purposes are accomplished and people feel safe, combat must
cease.
These verses and the principles they expounded regarding the
reasons and purposes of combat do not contain even the slightest trace
of the idea of coercion. On the contrary, these verses, like the ones that
precede them, state clearly and distinctly that the reason the Muslims
were ordered to fight (qitl) is the aggression they faced and the fact that
they had been expelled from their homes, and because Gods sacred institutions had been violated. Another reason explained in the verses is the
many attempts to create sedition in the faith of the Muslims. The verses
also clarify the purpose behind such combat, which is to end violence
against Muslims and to establish religious freedom devoted to God, free
from any pressure or coercion.
We see the principles expounded in these verses in many other Verses
of Combat in the following surahs of the Holy Quran: Al-Nis, Al-Anfl
and Al-Tawbah. God says in Srat Al-Nis:
What is wrong with you, that you do not fight in the way of
God, and for the oppressed men, women, and children who say,
Our Lord, bring us forth from this town whose people are evildoers and appoint for us a protector from You, and appoint for
us from You a helper. (Al-Nis, 4:75)
So fight in the way of God; you are charged only with yourself.
And urge on the believers; maybe God will restrain the might of
the disbelievers; God is mightier and more severe in castigation.
(Al-Nis, 4:84)
And so if they stay away from you and do not fight you, and
offer you peace, then God does not allow you any way against
them. / So, if they do not stay away from you, and offer you
peace, and restrain their hands, then take them and slay them
wherever you come upon them; against them We have given
you clear warrant. (Al-Nis, 4:901)
11
05/07/2013 15:21
Consider the following in these verses: maybe God will restrain

the might of the disbelieversandif they do not stay away from you
When we reflect on these verses we can understand the spirit of sedition that people harboured against Muslims and on account of which the
Muslims were ordered to fight (qitl) them. This is exactly the same principle that is expounded in the verses we sited from Srat Al-Baqarah,
Srat Al-Anfl and Srat Al-Tawbah. God says in Srat Al-Anfl:
And fight them until sedition is no more and religion is all
for God; then if they desist, surely God sees what they do. (AlAnfl, 8:39)
This verse is similar to what God says in Srat Al-Baqarah and Srat
Al-Tawbah:
But if they break their oaths after [making] their pact and assail your religion, then fight the leaders of unbeliefverily they
have no [binding] oaths, so that they might desist. / Will you
not fight a people who broke their oaths and intended to expel
the Messengerinitiating against you first? Are you afraid of
them? God is more worthy of your fear if you are believers.
(Al-Tawbah, 9:1213)
And fight the idolaters altogether, even as they fight you
altogether; and know that God is with those who fear Him.
(Al-Tawbah, 9:36)
Consider the following in these verses: But if they break their oaths
after [making] their pact and assail your religion and initiating against
you first and even as they fight you altogether. When we reflect on
these verses we can understand that they were revealed about people
who were recalcitrant in their sedition and in whom the elements of
corruption were so deeply rooted that oaths had become of no value to
them and virtue of no significance. There is no doubt that combat with
these people, purifying the earth from them and ending their sedition is
to serve the common good of mankind.
In Srat Al-Tawbah, after the verses we quoted above, there are
two verses that at first consideration seem to contradict the principles
regarding combat. We shall cite these two verses and clarify what they
signify in light of the verses which precede, which are many and clear,
and fundamental to the issue of the legality of combat (qitl) and the
12
05/07/2013 15:21
reasons for it. Therefore, other verses must be compared to the principles contained in those verses and interpreted accordingly.
The first verse is:
Fight those who do not believe in God, nor in the Last Day,
and who do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, nor do they practice the religion of truth, from among
of those who have been given the Scripture, until they pay the
jizyah tribute, readily being subdued. (Al-Tawbah, 9:29)
The second verse is:
O you who believe, fight those of the disbelievers who are near
to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that God
is with the pious. (Al-Tawbah, 9:123)
The first verse commands the Muslims to fight (qitl) a group that
God describes as people who do not believe in God. This group has
behaved towards the Muslims in a manner that is cause to fight them:
they broke pacts, attacked the dawah and placed obstacles in its path.
However, the verses do not state that unbelief in God and the other
descriptions mentioned are reasons for the Muslims to fight them;
the verses only mention them as descriptions and clarifications. These
descriptions are meant to serve as further incitement to fight them
once their aggression materialises. For they changed Gods religion to
suit themselves and took their rabbis and monks as lords beside God
(Al-Tawbah, 9:30), while allowing and forbidding things according
to their whims, unbelieving in what God has decreed as forbidden or
permissible. Nothing deters them from breaking pacts, violating rights
and aggression. These are the people who, according to the above verses,
must be fought continuously until they yield and desist from harm and
spreading sedition. The Holy Quran introduces a symbol to signify this
yielding; the payment of a tribute or poll tax (jizyah). The jizyah was a
means through which people participated in shouldering the burdens
of state and sharing the means for the common good of both Muslims
and non-Muslims.24
The verse also indicates the reason for combat which we have
already pointed out. The phrase readily being subdued shows us the
state they will be in when the jizyah is collected from them, a state of
yielding to the authority of the Muslims and living under their laws.
13
05/07/2013 15:21
Doubtless this means that previously they had been recalcitrant and
that there was good cause for the Muslims to fight them.
This is how this verse should be understood and its context
brings it in line with the other verses. If the intention behind this
verse was to have the Muslims fight them because of their unbelief
and to show that unbelief was the reason why they were fought, then
the verse would have stated that the purpose of this combat was to
have them convert to Islam. In this case jizyah would not have been
an acceptable result, nor indeed would allowing them to abide by
their own religion.
The second verse, ... fight those of the disbelievers who are near to
you ..., should not be compared with the previous verses which were
revealed to clarify the reasons and causes for combat. This verse was
revealed to show a practical war plan to be followed when legitimate
combat breaks out. The verse guides the Muslims, stating that, when
enemies are manifold, the nearest of them should be fought first
and so on, in order to clear the road from enemies and to facilitate
victory.25
This principle, established in the Holy Quran, is one of the principles followed today by warring states. No belligerent state attacks
until it has cleared the path before it and until it is sure that all
obstacles in its way have been removed. Thus, it is clear that these
two verses have no link to the reason for combat as formulated by
the other verses.
From what we have discussed one may infer:
There is not a single verse in the Holy Quran that indicates that
the aim of combat in Islam is conversion.
The causes for combatas seen in the preceding versesare
limited to fending off aggression, protecting the dawah and safeguarding freedom of religion.
When the Holy Quran prescribed combat, it distanced it from
avarice, selfishness and the abasement of the meek. Indeed the Holy
Quran intended combat (qitl) only as a means to peace, security
and a life of justice and equality.
The jizyah was never intended as payment in return for ones life
or retaining ones religion, it was intended as a symbol to signify
14
05/07/2013 15:21
yielding, an end of hostility and a participation in shouldering the

burdens of the state.
After this has been explained, nobody can malign Islam or
misinterpret the verses of the Holy Quran and assume what other
ignorant people have assumed; that Islam has chosen combat (qitl)
as a means of propagating its dawah, and that its calling was propagated by coercion and the use of force.
We shall now cite a verse from Srat Al-Mumtaanah that can
be considered an Islamic ordinance regarding how Muslims should
treat non-Muslims.
God does not forbid you in regard to those who did not
wage war against you on account of religion and did not
expel you from your homes, that you should treat them
kindly and deal with them justly. Assuredly God loves the
just. God only forbids you in regard to those who waged
war against you on account of religion and expelled you
from your homes and supported [others] in your expulsion,
that you should make friends with them. And whoever
makes friends with them, thosethey are the wrongdoers.
(Al-Mumtaanah, 60:89)
Read this ordinance then recall Srat Al-Midah, one of the last
parts of the Holy Quran to be revealed, and note what it says about
the relations between Muslims and non-Muslims:
Today the good things are permitted to you, and the food
of those who were given the Scripture is permitted to you,
and permitted to them is your food. Likewise, the believing married women, and the married women of those who
were given the Scripture before you, if you give them their
wages in wedlock, and not illicitly, or taking them as lovers.
Whoever disbelieves in faith, his work has indeed failed,
and in the Hereafter he shall be among the losers. (AlMidah, 5:5)
When one considers these verses, one understands the sublime
spirit that Islam possesses with regard to its relations with nonMuslims: kindness, justice, friendship and affinity. It is a relationship
so magnificent that even the most modern principles of international
relations known to man pale in comparison.
15
05/07/2013 15:21
The Relationship between the Verses of Forgiveness

and the Verses of Combat
It now behoves us to discuss an issue that has occupied the minds of
many people while examining the Holy Quran and comparing its
verses. These people fall into two categories:
A group that is antagonistic towards Islam and which searches the
Holy Quran for faults.
A group of Quranic exegetes whose religious zeal drives them to
reconcile between supposed inconsistencies within the Holy Quran.
This second group is inclined to consider that some verses abrogate others, and some of these exegetes allow themselves to get
carried away to such an extent that they seem to have paved the road,
unintentionally, for attacks by those who are antagonistic to Islam and
to the Holy Quran.
The antagonists have examined the relationship between the different Verses of Combat (Ayt Al-Qitl) and the Verses of Combat as a
whole; they have also examined the Verses of Pardon and Forgiveness.
Their conclusion is that while some Verses of Combat permit combat,
other verses urge combat and incite it. And while some verses order
combat against those who aggress and forbid instigating aggression,
other verses command that everyone be fought mercilessly, relentlessly and without distinction between aggressors and others. While
these verses as a whole order and regulate combat, there are many
other verses found in all surahs of the Holy Quran that command
forgiveness, pardon, countering evil with good and a calling to the
way of God with wisdom.
The antagonists claim that these are all contradictions incompatible with the idea that the Holy Quran was divinely revealed to the
Prophet Muhammad U. As for those who love the Holy Quran and
serve it, they hold that the Verses of Combat abrogate the Verses of
Forgiveness and Pardon, even verses like (Fuilat, 41:34): And they
are not equal, the good deed and the evil deed. Repel with that which
is better ... and (Al-Nal, 16:125): Call to the way of your Lord with
wisdom and fair exhortation, and dispute with them by way of that
which is best .... They also say that (Al-Tawbah, 9:36): ... fight the
16
05/07/2013 15:21
idolaters altogether, even as they fight you altogether ... abrogates any
preceding Verses of Forgiveness.
One of their more peculiar opinions is that (Al-Baqarah, 2:191):
And slay them wherever you come upon them ... abrogates the immediately preceding verse (Al-Baqarah, 2:190): And fight in the way of God
with those who fight against you ... They also say that (Al-Baqarah,
2:193): Fight them till there is no sedition ... abrogates (Al-Baqarah,
2:191): ... But fight them not by the Sacred Mosque until they should
fight you there ....
The above Quranic pericope from Srat Al-Baqarah is made up
of four verses; two abrogating verses and two abrogated verses: the
second verse abrogates the first and the fourth abrogates the third.
Al-Imam al-Razi commented on this opinion in his great work on
Quranic exegesis al-Tafsr al-Kabr: It is improbable that the Wise
One would combine verses in a row where each abrogates the other.
It is not improbable that this interpretation has paved the road for
antagonists of Islam to say that the Holy Quran contains contradictions. They do not accept the notion of abrogation as claimed by lovers
of the Holy Quran. Indeed how can they accept our claim when even
some of our own scholars do not?
After this explanation, one can see that there is no contradiction
or incompatibility between the different Verses of Combat and no
room for the idea that some have been abrogated, because abrogation
is only applied when there is contradiction. These verses are therefore
fixed and unassailable; amounting to the same thing and establishing
one rule, one reason and one purpose.
As for the Verses of Forgiveness and Pardon, they aim to shape
morality and are to be followed in a context that does not infringe on
pride and dignity. Every situation has its own legislation and these
verses are also fixed and unassailable.
Legislation that is built upon consideration for different situations, and for the different conditions of individuals and groups, and
asks of people that in each situation they follow what is most suitable,
cannot be accused of being a contradictory legislation or that some
parts of it abrogate others. Indeed, to people with sound minds, it is
a wise and extremely precise legislation that promotes the interest of
17
05/07/2013 15:21
those who fall under its authority and brings happiness to the individual and the community.
The Verses that Organise Combat

In the previous sections we concluded that the Holy Quran gives only
three reasons for combat: fending off aggression, protecting the dawah
and safeguarding freedom of religion. These are the only cases in which
God makes combat (qitl) lawful, urges it and considers it desirable.
God also reveals many of the ethics and rules that guarantee victory.
In this section we will discuss the verses that expound these aspects of
combat.
When one studies these verses in the Holy Quran, one finds that
Islam stipulates general principles that constitute an objective law for
combat that is better than any other found in modern civilisation.
This objective law for combat for a nation that wishes for itself pride
and dignity is based on three elements:
1) Strengthening the nations morale.
2) Preparing material force.
3) Practical organisation for combat.
In outlining the ways in which people may enjoy a good life, the
Holy Quran expounds these three elements in a manner that encompasses all the institutions and systems that humanity has produced in all
its varied cultures and throughout the ages. These elements are powerful, extensive and dominate peoples hearts and fill them with mercy,
compassion, devotion and a desire for Gods approval through purifying the earth from corruption and clearing it from tyranny and aggression. These notions are present in all three elements.
(A section here has been omitted regarding the details of strengthening the nations morale, preparing material force and practical details for
combat. An unabridged version of the text of Shaltuts The Quran and
Combat can be found at www.mabda.jo.)
Regarding declaration of war, the Holy Quran makes it a duty and
warns against attacking the enemy unawares. God says in the Holy
Quran: And if you fear, from any folk some treachery, then cast it back
to them with fairness. Truly God does not love the treacherous (Al-Anfl,
8:58). This verse commands that if there is fear that a party will be
18
05/07/2013 15:21
treacherous, any pact that has been made with them may be broken and
cast back to them. The verse also asks that this be done in an explicit
and clear manner lest the Muslims commit treachery, which God does
not love and does not approve of.
Regarding meeting the call to jihad, the Holy Quran warns against
tardiness and behaving as though it were a burden. God says in the
Holy Quran:
O you who believe, what is wrong with you that, when it is
said to you, Go forth in the way of God, you sink down heavily to the ground. Are you so content with the life of this world,
rather than with the Hereafter? Yet the enjoyment of the life
of this world is in the Hereafter but little. / If you do not go
forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement, and
He will substitute [you with] another folk other than you, and
you will not hurt Him at all; for God has power over all things.
(Al-Tawbah, 9:389)
These verses warn that if we are tardy in meeting the call to jihad,
we will suffer painful chastisement, humiliation, substitution and the
transfer of power and authority to another people.
(A section here has been omitted regarding purging the army of
elements of sedition and betrayal. An unabridged version of the text of
Shaltuts The Quran and Combat can be found at www.mabda.jo.)
Regarding truce and peace treaties, the Holy Quran orders us
to heed calls for peace and the termination of war if the enemy is so
inclined and if the enemy shows signs of sincerity and fidelity. God says
in the Holy Quran:
And if they incline to peace, then incline to it, and rely on God;
truly He is the Hearer, the Knower. / And if they desire to trick
you, then God is sufficient for you. He it is Who strengthened
you with His help and with the believers. (Al-Anfl, 8:61-62)
Regarding taking prisoners and the treatment of prisoners of war,
the Holy Quran says:
It is not for any Prophet to have prisoners until he make wide
slaughter in the land. (Al-Anfl, 8:67)
If the imam decimates the enemy and takes prisoners, he may
choose between liberating them without ransom and in return for
19
05/07/2013 15:21
nothing, or liberating them in exchange for money or men. The choice

should be made based on the common good. God says in the Holy
Quran:
So when you encounter [in battle] those who disbelieve, then
[attack them with] a striking of the necks. Then, when you
have made thoroughly decimated them, bind. Thereafter either [set them free] by grace or by ransom, until the war lay
down its burdens ... (Muammad, 47:4)
Regarding treaties and honouring them, the Holy Quran commands
the honouring of treaties and forbids violating them. It teaches that the
intention behind treaties is for security and peace to reign instead of
disorder and war. It warns against using treaties as an artful means to
deprive the other party of its rights or to oppress the weak. Consider
Gods words in the Holy Quran:
And fulfil Gods covenant when you made a covenant, and do
not break [your] oaths after pledging them and having made
God surety over you. Truly God knows what you do. / And
do not be like her who undoes her yarn after having made
it strong, [breaking it up] into fibres by making your oaths
a [means of] deceit, between you, so that one group may
become more numerous than [another] group ... (Al-Nal,
16:912)26
If the imam determines that Muslims will come to harm as a result
of a treaty and that the harm exceeds the advantages to be gained by
observing it, he is obliged to reject it. This rejection must be declared
openly. God says in the Holy Quran:
A proclamation from God and His Messenger to mankind
on the day of the Greater Pilgrimage that God is free from
obligation to the idolaters, and [so is] His Messenger ... (AlTawbah, 9:3)
These are the principles we were able to derive from the Holy
Quran concerning the practical aspects of combat. The Holy Quran
is an inexhaustible treasure, when we investigate its significations and
examine its meanings, we will always arrive at something new. The
best aid for the understanding of the Holy Quran is the observation of
current events and historical facts, for they are the best interpreters and
20
05/07/2013 15:21
the clearest road to comprehension of its purposes and its principles.

If one studies what the Holy Quran relates concerning the military
activities of the Prophet U, one grasps many of these purposes and
principles which will strengthen the faith of the believers that the Holy
Quran is a revelation by the omnipotent and omniscient Creator who
is cognizant of the intentions of our souls.
The Practical Application of the Quranic

Rules of Combat
In this epilogue we shall present the practical application of the principles expounded by the Holy Quran regarding combat during the
time of the Prophet U and his two successors (caliphs), Abu Bakr and
Umar. After this period the Muslims were afflicted by internal and
external affairs that prevented them from observing Gods prescriptions and laws. These affairs also compelled them, especially where
combat was concerned, to adopt practices of a much wider range than
those which God had prescribed for jihad in His way.
The phases of the Prophets life and the lives of the believers who
were with him before combat began are due to:
The clandestine call (dawah) which a small group of people
believed in. They were bound to the Prophet by close family ties or
friendship which revealed to them the sublime spirit and magnificent
nature of the Prophet.
The public call (dawah) directed to his clan and then to all mankind.
The temptations with which the Meccans tried to seduce the
Prophet U, offering him as much property, power and sovereignty as
he wished in exchange for him desisting from propagating the call
(dawah).
The violence and oppression which the Prophet and his companions suffered. History has recorded blood-chilling instances of torture.
The Hijrah to Abyssinia in order to save Islam and preserve lives.
The malefactions, maliciousness and conspiracies against the
Prophet, the Muslims and even against all the descendants of Abd
Manf in order to prompt the latter to deliver the Prophet and his
companions, and not to protect them from the aggression of the polytheists. One of these actions was the boycott of Abu Talib and his
21
05/07/2013 15:21
people, whichwere it not for the Grace of Godnearly broke their

spirit of resistance.
Seeking refuge in Al-Taif and seeking the help of Thaqf who met
the Prophet and his companions with mockery and derision and drove
them away.
The Hijrah to Medina which was facilitated by delegations that had
visited the Prophet, and by the pains taken by him to call the tribes
to Islam. Both factors helped the spread of the noble calling of Islam
and gained supporters among the Medinan youth who promised the
Messenger they would propagate and protect the call to Islam until
death. One of the consequences of this Emigration was that the fury
and rancour of the polytheists increased as the opportunity to assassinate the Prophet passed them by.
The role of the enmity between the Muslims and the Jews in
Medina. As soon as the Prophet settled in Medina it became clear to
him that the Jews there denied his call and plotted against him and his
companions. The Prophet had thought that the Jews would be his closest supporters because they were People of the Book and because they
had previously asked for his assistance in their wars against the polytheists. This induced the Prophet to extend his hand to them in order
to prevent sedition and strife and he concluded a treaty with them that
left them to their religion. After concluding this treaty, the Prophet
felt more secure and turned his attention to his original enemies who,
after his Hijrah, were attacking his followers at every turn. His followers could not emigrate for financial reasons and their enemies waited
for opportunities to oppose the call to Islam and scatter its adherents.
The harassment the Prophet and his companions faced at the
hands of their enemies. The Prophet foresaw that unless he propagated his Call to Islam in Medina, which was the task entrusted to him
by God, the Meccans would inevitably find a way to penetrate Medina
and attack him by surprise, especially since the Jews with whom he had
concluded a treaty were not to be trusted to keep their pledge. It was
not improbable that the Medinan Jews would open up opportunities in
Medina for the enemy outside and that they would subsequently join
forces with them in order to expel the believers from Medina, just as
they had been expelled from Mecca.
22
05/07/2013 15:21
For all these reasons the Prophet and his companions prepared to
resist those who opposed the call to Islam, the people of Mecca. The
Prophet engaged in skirmishes with them and displayed his strength
and determination to continue with his call and strive for its propagation and protection and indeed to save the meek men, women and
children who say as is related in the Holy Quran:
...Our Lord, bring us forth from this town whose people are
evildoers and appoint for us a protector from You, and appoint for us from You a helper. (Al-Nis, 4:75)
It was in this spirit that combat between the believers and the
polytheists began and battles between both parties took place; some
of which are related in the Holy Quran. And God crowned all these
confrontations with conquest and clear victory.
The Jews broke their pledge; they were not able to purify their hearts
from rancour and envy. Gods continuous favours to His Prophet and
his faithful companions kindled the fire of antagonism in the hearts of
the Jews until it induced them to break the pledges they had concluded
with the Prophet. This was done by Banu Qaynuq, Banu Al-Nadhr
and Banu Quraytha. They insulted the Prophet U and the believers
at a time when the Prophet needed to keep enemies and battles at a
minimum. But this was God's will and the Muslims had no choice but
to reject the pledge they had with the Jews and after a phase of peace
and treaties, enter a new phase in their relations, a phase of hostility
and war.
These were the phases that the Prophet went through, before and
after the Hijrah. From this it becomes clear to us that the polytheists
of Mecca fought the Prophet from the start of his Mission. They were
the first to commit aggression, chased the believers from their homes,
tyrannised the meek and subjected them to all kinds of maltreatment
and torture. It is also clear that the Jews of Medina were only attacked by
the Messenger after they had broken their pledge to him and aggressed
against him as the polytheists had done before.
It is also evident that the Prophet only fought those who fought
him, and he only fought to end sedition in religion and to stave off and
respond to aggression and violence. These are exactly the prescriptions
for combat (qitl) revealed in the Holy Quran, as we have discussed.
23
05/07/2013 15:21
The wars that took place after the death of the Prophet were
conducted by Abu Bakr and Umar and they were a continuation of
something for which the groundwork had been laid by the Byzantines
(Al-Rm) and the Persians (Al-Furs) during the Prophets lifetime.
These two caliphs had no choice but to fend off evil and enable people
to hear the call to Islam and to safeguard the security of the Muslims
with regard to their religion and their homes.
As a Prophet and a Messenger of God, Muhammad U called the
kings of the Byzantines and the Persians to Islam. To the king of the
Byzantines he dispatched his famous missive in which he called him
to Islam and held him, in the event of his refusal, answerable for the
injustice he inflicted on his own people by keeping them from Islam.
When the letter was translated for the king of the Byzantines, he assembled his patriarchs and high officials, submitted the letter to them and
asked for their advice as to whether he should accept the summons
or not. They turned stubbornly away and expressed their resentment
of his attitude. The king of the Byzantines appeased them by saying:
I only said what I said to test your resolve concerning religion and
kingship. So the king of the Byzantines abandoned his original intention, preferring kingship over Islam. Then the Byzantine high officials
and patriarchs began to sow the venomous seeds of hatred against
Islam and its Prophet in the hearts of commanders and subordinates.
One of the consequences was that when Shurhabil al-Ghassani met
the Prophets envoy to the Prince of Basra at the Battle of Mutah,
al-Ghassani gave orders to behead him. The Byzantines surmised
that the Muslims would not tolerate such an attack on their honour.
They therefore intensified their state of alert and assembled a force of
Byzantines and Christian Arabs in an attempt to annihilate the Prophet
U. When the Messenger of God heard about this, he prepared an army
to confront those who rose against him and mocked his call to Islam.
As soon as this army reached the place where the Muslim envoy had
been killed, they found the Byzantine troops in a state of high alert.
The two armies clashed and fought a fierce battle. Three Muslim heroes
were killed and had it not been for a stratagem that God disclosed to
Khalid ibn al-Walid, not a single soldier in the Muslim army would
have survived. There were continuous reports that the Byzantines were
24
05/07/2013 15:21
assembling troops against the Muslims, determined to attack them.

The Prophet prepared himself and set out with an army before they
could attack him in his own land. When he reached Tabuk, he found
that they had abandoned their plan. The Prophet remained there a
few days, during which some princes concluded peace treaties with
him. He then returned to Medina, thinking about those who had lost
because of Khalid ibn al-Walid's stratagem and assuming that they
would definitely fight back. Therefore, he equipped an army under the
command of Usama ibn Zayd. Immediately after this army had set
out, the Prophet U died and was succeeded by Abu Bakr who took
over command of the Muslims. Abu Bakr was of the opinion that firmness, loyalty and wisdom required that he dispatch the army that the
Prophet had assembled to counter the danger of the aggressors. This
was followed by a rapid succession of wars between the Muslims and
the Byzantines until the Muslims conquered their lands and enabled
their people to find Islam.
The spirit of hostility displayed by the Byzantines was matched by
the Persians, who were even more arrogant and powerful. For when the
Prophet sent a missive to Khosrau (Kisra), the latter tore it to pieces
and cast it on the floor. Indeed so haughty and arrogant was Khosrau
that he sent word to his governor in Yemen to send two strongmen
to the Prophet Muhammad U to bring him to Khosrau. They actually
reached the Prophet and informed him of the mission they had been
tasked with. The Messenger then said: This day Khosrau will be killed.
Once the two men learned that the words of the Prophet had come
true, they became Muslims. Their conversion caused the conversion of
the governor of Yemen to Islam. Following this, Bahrain and Oman
countries that were under Persian protectionbecame Muslim.
The Persians thought that the victory of the Muslims over the
Byzantines was only due to the weakness of the Byzantine armies. The
Persians began to attack their neighbouring Arab tribes, employing the
kings of Al-Hrah who attacked the Muslims forcefully. The Muslim
army then marched to meet them and war broke out until the proxy
of the Persians had to flee to Al-Madain and the kings of Al-Hirah
surrendered to the Muslims. This ignited hatred for the Muslims in
the hearts of the Persians; they recalled their might and equipped an
25
05/07/2013 15:21
army to expel the Muslims from their lands. Fighting broke out and in
the end the Muslims advanced to the lands of the Persians. Khosraus
throne fell and all the Persian lands yielded to the Muslims.
From this brief description it will be clear that, in the first period,
the Muslims only attacked people after they had shown hostility and
opposition to the call (dawah). It also shows that when such hostility
became manifest and once the Muslims were convinced of its danger
to themselves and to the call to Islam, they hastened to put out its
fire and eliminate it before it became pervasive. The Muslims did not
wait for their enemies to attack them in their own lands. This is in
accordance with a natural and instinctive sociological rule: When
people are attacked in their own home, they are inevitably humiliated. Nevertheless, according to Islamic prescriptions, whenever the
Muslims arrived in the land of an enemy whose hostility to them was
evident, they let him choose one out of three things: conversion to
Islam, poll-tax (jizyah) or combat (qitl). These choices were offered
in the hope that the enemy would come to his senses, look into his
heart and replace aggression and antagonism with wisdom. The
Prophet U enjoined the commanders of his army: If you meet your
polytheist enemy, call on him to choose one of three things. This
shows us that the enemys spirit of animosity preceded the dispatching of the Muslim army and that offering him choices was done in
the hope for peace and the abandonment of hostility. It is also clear
that the wars the Muslims fought in the first period of Islam were not
aimed at forcing people to convert to Islam, nor at subjugating or
humiliating them, neither were they prompted by greed for money
or greater power.
It behoves us to return to the Quranic prescriptions regarding
our behaviour with, and treatment of, the ahl al-dhimmah, who are
not adherents of Islam. One must also read how the Rightly Guided
Caliphs and the righteous army commanders dealt with those who
were not adherents of Islam. Then we can learn, based on reason and
evidence not supposition and conjecture, how lenient and magnanimous Islam is in the treatment of its non-Muslim subjects and how
deeply it loves universal peace and human solidarity. We can also
see how exalted Islams universal human laws are; laws that have
26
05/07/2013 15:21
attracted people to the faith of Islam of their own free will and under
the protection of which non-Muslims have lived for centuries, without
any complaints of injustice.
After reading this, it is my fervent hope that the reader be left in
no doubt that the Holy Quran and the life of the Prophet U together
establish a theory concerning combat, as I have described in this treatise. May God guide us in spreading His laws and guidance which
guarantee the dignity and honour of Muslims. He is the All-Hearing,
the All-Answering.
Originally published as an unabridged booklet by the Royal Aal
al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought in November 2012
(Translation: Lamya Khraisha).
27
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter two
WARFARE IN THE QURAN
Professor Joel Hayward
A frequently quoted saying, with slight variations, insists that, while
not all Muslims are terrorists, all terrorists are Muslims. This is a great
untruth. According to the American Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Muslims have not been responsible for the majority of terrorist attacks
identified and prevented, or committed throughout the world in the
last twenty years.27 Yet it is true that, even before the Bush administration initiated a concentrated campaign against anti-American terrorists
around the world in 2001a campaign which quickly came to be known
as the War on Terrorseveral states including the United States and
Israel had already experienced terrorism undertaken unmistakeably by
Muslims. For example, the bombings of US embassies in Nairobi and
Dar es Salaam in 1998 brought Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri
to the focused attention of US security services for the first time. These
terrorists and their ideological bedfellows embraced an extreme minority opinion within Islam. According to that opinion, militant opposition to any ostensibly oppressive political activity that weakens Islamic
states and their interests constitutes a righteous struggle (jihad) on Gods
behalf (f sabl Allh, literally in the path of Allah). Yet these jihadists
(a phrase not widely used in those pre-9/11 days) did not garner much
public interest until that dreadful day when nineteen of them hijacked
four aircraft and carried out historys worst single terrorist attack.
No one can doubt that Western attitudes towards Islam changed
for the worse at that time and have not returned to the way they were
before 2001. Among widely held negative views of Islam is a perception (or at least a concern) that, while Western states adhere to the Just
War tenets, other states and peoples, particularly Muslims in general
28
05/07/2013 15:21
and Arabs in particular, have no comparable philosophical framework

for guiding ethical behaviour during international disputes and during
warfare itself. According to this perception, the Western code of war
is based on restraint, chivalry and respect for civilian life, whereas the
Islamic faith contains ideas on war that are more militant, aggressive
and tolerant of violence.
This article analyses the Quran and attempts to explain its codes
of conduct in order to determine what the Quran actually requires or
permits Muslims to do in terms of the use of military force. It concludes
that the Quran is unambiguous: Muslims are prohibited from undertaking offensive violence and are compelled, if defensive warfare should
become unavoidable, always to act within a code of ethical behaviour
that is closely akin to, and compatible with, the Western warrior code
embedded within the Just War doctrine. This paper attempts to dispel
any misperceptions that the Quran advocates the subjugation or killing
of infidels and reveals that, on the contrary, its key and unequivocal
concepts governing warfare are based on justice and a profound belief
in the sanctity of human life.
The Importance of the Quran

Sadly, people do not tend to read the holy scriptures of other faiths
so it is not surprising that, although Muslims constitute one-quarter
of the worlds population, very few Muslims have studied the Jewish
Tanakh, the Christian Bible or the Hindu Vedas, and equally few nonMuslims have taken the time to study the Quran. Not many people
ever even dip into other holy books to get a quick feel for the language,
tone and message. Yet, given the geographical location of our major
wars throughout the last two decades, the strategic importance of the
Middle East and the cultural origin of some recent terrorist groups, it
is surprising that very few non-Muslim strategists and military personnel have taken time to read the Quran alongside doctrine publications
and works of military philosophy. The Quran is certainly shorter than
Clausewitzs widely read and constantly quoted Vom Kriege (On War)
and far easier to understand. The Quran is a relatively short book of
approximately 77,000 words, which makes it about the size of most
thrillers or romance novels and roughly half the length of the New
29
05/07/2013 15:21
Testament or one-seventh the length of the Old. It is not deeply complex

in its philosophy or written as inaccessible poetry or with mystical and
esoteric vagueness.
Muslims understand that the Quran was revealed episodically by the
Angel Jibril (the biblical Gabriel) to Muhammad, a Meccan merchant
in what is now Saudi Arabia, through a series of revelations from Allah
(Arabic for the God), over a period of twenty-three years beginning in
the year 610. Muhammads companions memorised and wrote down the
individual revelations almost straight away and compiled them into the
Qurans final Arabic form very soon after his death in 632. That Arabic
version has not changed in the last fourteen hundred years. The Quran
is therefore held by Muslims to be the very words of Allah, recorded
precisely as originally revealed through Muhammad. This explains why
most of the worlds 1.6 billion Muslims endeavour to learn at least the
basics of Quranic Arabic so that they can read and more importantly
hear Allahs literal words as originally revealed. This is also why they
consider all translations into other languages to be decidedly inferior
to the original Arabic. Muslims usually explain that these translations
convey the meaning of the revelations, and are therefore still useful, but
not the exact word for word declarations of Allah.
A fair and open-minded reading of the Quran will draw the readers
eyes to hundreds of scriptures extolling tolerance, forgiveness, conciliation, inclusiveness and peace. These are the overwhelming majority of the
scriptures and the central thrust of the Quranic message. A clear indication of that message is found in the fact that every one of the 114 surahs
(chapters) of the Quran except one opens with a reminder of Allahs
loving and forgiving attitude towards humans: bism Allh al-Ramn
al-Ram (In the name of God the All-Compassionate and the EverMerciful). Muslims understand that the compassion and forgiveness
extended by God to humans must be mirrored as much as is humanly
possible by their compassion and forgiveness to each other.
Yet readers will also find a few scriptures in the Quran that seem
to be Old Testament in tone and message and are more warlike than,
for example, Christians are used to reading in the words of Christ and
the New Testament writers. Critics of the Quran who advance what I
consider to be an unsustainable argument that Islam is the worlds most
30
05/07/2013 15:21
warlike major faithamong whom the US scholar and blogger Robert

Spencer is both the most prolific and influentialroutinely highlight
those Quranic passages to support their argument that Islam has a clear
tendency towards aggressive war, not inclusive peace.
Such writers commonly focus their attention on a few passages within
the Quran which seem to suggest that Allah encourages Muslims to
subjugate or drive out non-Muslimsand even to take their lives if they
refuse to yield. The critics especially like to quote surah 9, yah (verse) 5,
which has become known as the Verse of the Sword (yat Al-Sayf). This
verse explicitly enjoins Muslims to kill pagans wherever you find them,
and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem
(of war). (Al-Tawbah, 9:5)34
The critics often add to their condemnation of the aforementioned
surah 9:5 with equally strong attacks on surah 9:29. This verse directs
Muslims to fight those who believe not in Allah and the Day of Judgment,
who do not comply with Muslim laws, as well as those Jews and Christians
who reject the religion of Islam and will not willingly pay a state tax after
their submission.35 Many critics assert that this verse directs Muslims to
wage war against any and all disbelievers anywhere who refuse to embrace
Islam or at least to submit to Islamic rule.36
The critics also place negative focus on surah 2:1904, which states:
Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not
transgress limits: for Allah loves not the transgressors. / And slay
them wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where
they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse
than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque [alMasjid al-arm, the sanctuary at Mecca], unless they (first)
fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. / But if they cease, then Allah
is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. / And fight them on until there
is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and
faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to
those who practise oppression. (Al-Baqarah, 2:1904)
You could not imagine gentle Buddha or the peaceful, cheek-turning Jesus ever saying such things, the critics of Islam assert, ignoring the
heavily martial spirit and explicit violence of some sections of the Old
Testament; a revelation passionately embraced in its entirety by Jesus.
31
05/07/2013 15:21
They also brush off some of Jesus seemingly incongruous statements as

being allegorical and metaphoricalsuch as Luke 22:36, wherein Jesus
encourages his disciples to sell their garments so that they can purchase
swords, and Matthew 10:34 (Do not think I come to bring peace on earth.
I did not come to bring peace, but a sword).37
When they read the Quran, the opponents of its message place little
importance on the obvious differences of experiences and responsibilities
between Jesus and Muhammad. Jesus was the spiritual leader of a small
and intimate group of followers at a time of occupation but relative peace
and personal security throughout the land. He suffered death, according
to the Christian scriptures, but his execution by the Rome-governed state
came after a short burst of state anger that actually followed several years
of him being able to preach throughout the land without severe opposition and with no known violence. By contrast, the Prophet Muhammad
(in many ways like Moses or Joshua) found himself not only the spiritual
leader but also the political and legislative leader of a massive community
that wanted to be moderate, just and inclusive but suffered bitter, organised persecution and warfare from other political entities which were
committed to his communitys destruction. His responsibilities (including the sustenance, education, governance and physical protection of tens
of thousands of children, men and women) were very different.
A double standard also seems to exist. Many of the scholars and
pundits who dislike the fact that Muhammad had to fight military
campaigns during his path to peace, and who consider his religion to be
inherently martial, overlook the fact that many biblical prophets and leadersincluding Moses, Joshua, Samson, David and other Sunday School
favouriteswere also warriors through necessity. Despite our childrens
book image of these warriors, their actions included frequent killing and
were sometimes couched in highly bloodthirsty language. For example,
the Book of Numbers (31:1517) records that Moses ordered war against
the Midianites, but was gravely disappointed when, after having slain all
the men, his warriors chose not to kill the women. He therefore instructed
his warriors to kill every male child and to leave alive no females except
virgins, whom the Israelites were allowed to keep as slaves. This hardly
fits with our Charlton Heston-esque view of a very popular Jewish and
Christian prophet.
32
05/07/2013 15:21
It is worth observing that among the scriptures that form the bedrock
and bulk of the Judeo-Christian traditionthe Old Testamentone can
find numerous verses like these that explicitly advocate (or at least once
advocated) large-scale violence incompatible with any codes of warfare
that Jews and Christians would nowadays condone. For instance, when
Joshua led the Israelites into the Promised Land and promptly laid siege
to Jericho, which was the first walled city they encountered west of the
Jordan River, they destroyed with the sword every living thing in itmen
and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys (Joshua 6:21).
The lack of what we would today call discrimination between combatants and non-combatants accorded with Gods earlier commandment
that, in areas which God had set aside for their occupation, the Israelites
were to ensure that, without mercy, they did not leave alive anything
that breathed.38
The ancient world was certainly brutal at times, with military excesses
sometimes involving deliberate widespread violence against whole civilian communities. It is a wonderful sight, Roman commander Scipio
Aemilianus Africanus gushed in 146 BC as he watched his forces raze
the enemy city of Carthage to the ground following his order that no trace
of it should remain. Yet I feel a terror and dread lest someone should one
day give the same order about my own native city.39
No one can doubt that humanity has since made tremendous progress
in the way it conceives the purpose and nature of warfare and the role and
treatment of non-combatants. Yet we would be wrong to believe that the
Carthaginian approach has disappeared entirely. The Holocaust of the
Jews in the Second World War, one of historys vilest crimes, involved
the organised murder of six million Jews by Germans and others who
considered themselves Christians or at least members of the Christian
value system. Other crimes perpetrated by Christians during recent wars
have included the (Orthodox Christian) Bosnian Serb massacre of 8,300
Bosnian Muslim men and boys in and around the town of Srebrenica in
July 1995.
A fair assessment of historical evidence reveals that Christianity is
a faith of justice that cannot reasonably be considered blameworthy in
and of itself for the Crusades, the Holocaust, the Srebrenica massacre or
the Timothy McVeigh terrorist attack in Oklahoma City in 1995, even
33
05/07/2013 15:21
though Christians committed those horrendous acts and many others.

Similarly, a fair assessment of Islam reveals that it is equally a faith
of justice that cannot fairly be seen as blameworthy in and of itself
for the Armenian Genocide, the Iran-Iraq War, Saddam Husseins
invasion of Kuwait or the Al-Qaeda attacks on America in 2001, even
though Muslims committed those disgraceful deeds. Certainly Islams
framing scripture, the Quran, contains no verses which are as violent
as the biblical scriptures quoted above or any Quranic verses more
violent than those already quoted. In any event, even the most ostensibly violent Quranic verses have not provided major Islamic movements, as opposed to impassioned minority splinter groups, with a
mandate to wage aggressive war or to inflict disproportionate or indiscriminate brutality.
Understanding Abrogation
While Muslims hold the Quran to be Gods literal, definitive and final
revelation to humankind, they recognise that it is not intended to be
read as a systematic legal or moral treatise. They understand it to be a
discursive commentary on the stage by stage actions and experiences
of the Prophet Muhammad, his ever-increasing number of followers
and his steadily decreasing number of opponents over the twenty-three
year period which took him from his first revelation to his political
hegemony in Arabia.40 Consequently, several legal rulings within the
Quran emerged or developed in stages throughout that period, with
some early rulings on inheritance, alcohol, law, social arrangements
and so on being superseded by later passages; a phenomenon known
in Arabic as naskh that the Quran itself describes. For example, surah
2:106 reveals that when Allah developed any particular legal ruling
beyond its first revelation and He therefore wanted to supersede the
original verses, He would replace them with clarifying verses.
The removal or annulment of one legal ruling by a subsequent
legal ruling in some instances certainly does not mean that Muslims
believe that all later scriptures automatically cancel out or override
everything, on all issues, that had appeared earlier. The Quran itself
states in several surahs that Allahs words constitute a universally
applicable message sent down for all of mankind and that it was a
34
05/07/2013 15:21
reminder (with both glad tidings and warnings) to all of humanity.41

With this in mind, Muslims believe that to ignore scriptures on the
basis of a that-was-then-this-is-now reading would be as mistaken,
as, conversely, would be believing that one can gain meaning or guidance from reading individual verses in isolation, without seeing how
they form parts of consistent concepts which only emerge when the
entire book is studied. Adopting either approach would be unhelpful,
self-serving and ultimately misleading. It is only when the Qurans
key concepts are studied holistically, with both an appreciation of the
context of particular revelations and the consistency of ideas developed throughout the book as a whole, that readers will be able to
understand the Qurans universally applicable ethical system.
Opponents of Islam take a different view. Embracing a view that
all later Quranic scriptures modify or cancel out all earlier ones, they
have devised an unusual narrative. They have routinely argued that,
in the early years of his mission while still in his hometown of Mecca,
the powerless Muhammad strongly advocated peaceful coexistence
with peoples of other faiths, particularly Jews and Christians. Despite
mounting resistance and persecution, some of it violent and all of
it humiliating, Muhammad had to advocate an almost Gandhian or
Christ-like policy of forbearance and non-violence. Then, after he and
his followers fled persecution in 622 by escaping to Medina, where
they had more chance of establishing a sizeable and more influential
religious community, the increasingly powerful Muhammad became
bitter at his intransigent foes in Mecca and ordered warfare against
them. Finally (the critics claim), following the surprisingly peaceful Islamic occupation of Mecca in 630, the all-powerful Muhammad
realised that Jews and others would not accept his prophetic leadership or embrace Islamic monotheism, so he then initiated an aggressive war against all disbelievers. The critics furthermore claim that,
because Muhammad did not clarify or change his position before he
died two years later, in 632, after Allahs revelation to mankind was
complete, the verses encouraging the martial suppression of disbelief
(that is, of the disbelievers) are still in force today. These supposedly
include the so-called Verse of the Sword of surah 9:5 (and 29), quoted
above and revealed to Muhammad in the year 631. As scholar David
35
05/07/2013 15:21
Bukay, a strong critic of Islam, wrote:

Coming at or near the very end of Muhammads life
[surah 9] trumps earlier revelations. Because this chapter
contains violent passages, it abrogates previous peaceful
content.45
The critics of Islam who hold this view insist that these warlike
verses abrogate (cancel out) the scores of conciliatory and nonconfrontational earlier verses which had extolled spiritual resistance
(prayer and outreach) but physical non-violence.
They note that Osama bin Laden and other leading radical
Islamistswho also insist that the later Quranic verses on war have
cancelled out the earlier peaceful and inclusive verseshave justified
their terror attacks on the United States and other states by quoting
from the Verse of the Sword and the other reportedly aggressive scriptures mentioned above.
Bin Laden certainly did draw upon the Verse of the Sword and
other seemingly militant Quranic scriptures in his August 1996
Declaration of War against the Americans occupying the Land of the
Two Holy Places as well as in his February 1998 fatwa. The first
of these fatw (verdicts) instructed Muslims to kill Americans until
they withdrew from their occupation of Saudi Arabia, and the second
more broadly instructed them to kill Americans (both civilians and
military personnel) and their allies, especially the Israelis, for their
suppression of Muslims and their exploitation of Islamic resources in
various parts of the world.
Of course, the obviously partisan Bin Laden was not a cleric, a
religious scholar or a historian of early Islam. He was an impassioned,
violent and murderous extremist without judgement or moderation.
He was not representative of Islamic belief or behaviour and he had
no recognised status as an authority in Islamic Sciences that would
have allowed him to issue a fatwa. His assertions that the Verse of the
Sword and other martial Quranic verses are still in place and universally applicable therefore do not hold a shred of authority or credibility, except perhaps among already-radicalised fanatics who share
his world view and consider him worth following. Thankfully they are
very few in number.
36
05/07/2013 15:21
Certainly most Islamic authorities on the Quran and Prophet

Muhammad U today, as opposed to scholars from, say, the war-filled
medieval period, are firm in their judgement that the most warlike
verses in the Quran, even those revealed very late in Muhammads U
mission, do not cancel out the overwhelming number of verses that
extol tolerance, reconciliation, inclusiveness and peace. For example, according to British scholar Dr Zakaria Bashier (author of many
books on early Islam including a thorough analysis of war), all the
beautiful verses throughout the Quran which instruct Muslims to be
peaceful, tolerant and non-aggressive are:
Mukam [clear in and of themselves] verses, i.e. definite,
not allegorical. They are not known to have been abrogated, so they naturally hold. No reason exists at all to think
that they have been overruled.49
Bashier adds that even the contextual information revealed within
the Quran itself will lead readers to the inescapable conclusion that
the Verse of the Sword related only to a particular time, place and
set of circumstances, and that, in any event, claims of it superseding
the established policy of tolerance are not borne out by the facts of
history. Prolific British scholar Louay Fatoohi agrees, arguing that an
overwhelming number of Muslim scholars reject the abrogation thesis
regarding war. Fatoohi highlights the fact that throughout history the
Islamic world has never acted in accordance with this extreme view.
Fatoohi observes that Muslims have almost always coexisted very well
with other faith communities and that the 1600 million peaceable
Muslims in the world today clearly do not accept the view otherwise,
if they did, they would all be at war as we speak. Muhammad Abu
Zahra, an important and influential Egyptian intellectual and expert
on Islamic law, summed up the mainstream Islamic view by rejecting
any abrogation thesis pertaining to conflict and stating that War is not
justified to impose Islam as a religion on unbelievers or to support
a particular social regime. The Prophet Muhammad U fought only to
repulse aggression.
Explaining the Verse of the Sword

It is quite true that, taken in isolation, surah 9:5 (the Verse of the
37
05/07/2013 15:21
Sword) seems an unusually violent pronouncement for a Prophet who

had for twenty years preached tolerance, peace and reconciliation. Yet
it is equally true that, when read in the context of the verses above and
below surah 9:5, and when the circumstances of its pronouncement
by Muhammad are considered, it is not difficult for readers without
preconceptions and bias to understand it more fully. Here is the verse
again:
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay
the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer
them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war). (AlTawbah, 9:5)
The fact that the verse actually starts with the Arabic conjunction fa,
translated above as but, indicates that its line of logic flows from the verse
or verses above it. Indeed, the preceding four verses explain the context.
Verse 1 gives the historical context as a violation of the Treaty of
Hudaybiyyah, signed in 628 by the State of Medina and the Quraysh tribe
of Mecca. In short, this was a peace treaty between Muhammad and his
followers and those Meccans who had spent a decade trying to destroy
them. Two years after the treaty was signed the Banu Bakr tribe, which
had allied with the Quraysh, attacked the Banu Khuzaah tribe, which had
joined the side of the Muslims. Muhammad considered the Banu Bakr
attack a treaty violation, arguing that an attack on an ally constituted an
attack on his own community. Then, following his extremely peaceful
seizure of Mecca and his purification of its holy site (he destroyed no fewer
than 360 idols in the Kabah), the Quranic revelation contained a very
stern warning. (Other sources reveal that Muhammad then explained it
publicly from the steps of the Kabah and sent out deputies to the regions
around Mecca to destroy pagan shrines and idols and utter the warnings to local communities.) The scriptural warning was clear: anyone
wanting to undertake polytheistic pilgrimages to Mecca (or immoral rituals within it, such as walking naked around the Kabah) in accordance
with existing agreements with the Quraysh tribe or with Muhammads
own community should understand that henceforth they would not be
permitted to do so. No polytheism (worship of more than one god) and
idolatry (worship of any man or object instead of the one god) would ever
again be tolerated within Islams holy city. From that time on it would be
38
05/07/2013 15:21
a city devoted to Allah alone. As surahs 9:17 and 18 say:

It is no longer proper for idolaters to attend Allahs mosques,
since they have admitted to their unbelief. Allahs mosques
should be attended only by those who believe in Allah and the
Last Day, who observe prayer and give alms and fear none but
God. (Al-Tawbah, 9:1718)
Verses 2 and 3 were revealed through Muhammad to give polytheists
or idolaters living in Mecca and its environs, as well as any polytheistic
or idolatrous pilgrims in transit along Muslim-controlled trade and
pilgrimage routes, a clear warning that they should desist or leave. The
scriptures generously included a period of amnesty that would last until
the end of the current pilgrimage season. Thus, Arab polytheists and
idolaters would gain a four-month period of grace. Verse 4 makes clear
that during that period of amnesty, polytheists or idolaters were to be
left untouched so that Muslims would not themselves become promisebreakers. (So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of the term; for
Allah loves the righteous.) After clarifying that the threatened violence
would apply only to those who had ignored the warnings and continued
to practice polytheism or idolatry in and around the holy city and its
sanctuary, and were still foolish enough not to have left after four months,
verse 5the Verse of the Swordclearly warned them that there would
be a violent military purging or purification in which they seriously risked
being killed.
Although this is sometimes omitted by critics of the Verse of the
Sword, the verse actually has a secondary clause which, after the direction
to root out and kill anyone who had ignored the clear and solemn warnings
and continued their polytheism or idolatry, enjoined Muslims to remember that they must be merciful (to open the way) to those who repented
and accepted their penitent obligations in terms of Islam. Moreover, the
Verse of the Sword is immediately followed by an unusually charitable
oneagain ordinarily left out of Islam-critical treatmentsin which any
of the enemy who asked for asylum during any coming violence were
not only to be excluded from that violence, but were to be escorted to a
place of safety.
The rest of surah 9 contains more explanation for the Muslims as
to why they would now need to fight, and fiercely, anyone who broke
39
05/07/2013 15:21
their oaths or violated the sanctity of holy places, despite earlier hopes for
peace according to the terms of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. The controversial verse 29, which talks of killing polytheists and idolaters, actually
comes right after verse 28, which speaks specifically about preventing
them from performing religious rituals or pilgrimages in or around
the newly purified sanctuary in Mecca. Verse 29 thus also refers to the
purification of Mecca and its environs as well as to the need to secure
the borders of the Arabian Peninsula from greater external powers
which might smother the Islamic ummah (community) in its infancy.
The rest of surah 9 also apparently contains scriptures relating to the
later campaign against Tabuk, when some groups which had treaty
obligations with Muhammad broke their promises and refused to join
or sponsor the campaign. It is worth noting that, in this context also,
Muhammad chose to forgive and impose a financial, rather than physical, penalty upon those who genuinely apologised.
It is clear, therefore, that the Verse of the Sword was a contextspecific verse relating to the purification of Mecca and its environs of
all Arab polytheism and idolatry so that the sanctuary in particular,
with the Kabah at its centre, would never again be rendered unclean by
the paganism of those locals and pilgrims who had long been worshipping idols (reportedly hundreds of them) there. It was proclaimed
publicly as a warning, followed by a period of grace which allowed the
wrongdoers to desist or leave the region, and qualified by humane caveats that allowed for forgiveness, mercy and protection. It is thus not
bloodthirsty or unjust, as Robert Spencer and his colleagues portray it.
Indeed, it is so context-specific that, even if it were still in forceand I
share the assessment that it has not abrogated the scriptures encouraging peace, tolerance and reconciliationit would only nowadays have
any relevance and applicability if polytheists and idolaters ever tried to
undertake and re-establish pagan practices in the Saudi Arabian cities
devoted only to Allah: Mecca and Medina. In other words, in todays
world it is not relevant or applicable.
Critics apparently fail to grasp the specific nature of the context
the purification of Mecca from polytheistic and idolatrous pilgrimages
and ritualsand even misquote the famous medieval Islamic scholar
Ismail bin Amr bin Kathir al-Dimashqi, known popularly as Ibn Kathir.
40
05/07/2013 15:21
Spencer claims that Ibn Kathir understood the Verse of the Sword to
abrogate all peaceful verses ever previously uttered by the Prophet
Muhammad U. Ibn Kathir said no such thing. He quoted an earlier
authority, al-Dahhak bin Muzahim, who only stated that the Verse of
the Sword cancelled out every treaty which had granted pilgrimage
rights to Arab pagans to travel along Islamic routes, enter Mecca and
perform unpalatable rituals there. Because this earlier source referred
to the Verse of the Sword abrogating something, Spencer mistakenly
extrapolates this to claim that this one single verse cancelled out all
existing interfaith practices and arrangements and that it forever negatively changed attitudes to non-Muslims in general.
In case any readers are not convinced, there is another verse in the
Quranalso from the later period of Muhammads lifewhich (using
words virtually identical to the Verse of the Sword) also exhorts Muslims
to seize and slay wrongdoers wherever you find them (Al-Nis, 4:89).
Yet this verse, surah 4:89, is surrounded by so many other explanatory
and qualifying verses that its superficially violent meaning is immediately moderated by its context of tolerance and understanding. First, it
threatened violence in self-defence only against those people or groups
who violated pacts of peace with the Muslims and attacked them, or
those former Muslims (renegades) who had rejoined the forces of
oppression and now fought aggressively against the Muslims. Secondly,
it stated that, if those aggressors left the Muslims alone and free to practice their faith, and if they did not attack them, but offered them peaceful coexistence, then Allah would not allow Muslims to harm them in
any way (Allah has opened no way for you to war against them (Al-Nis,
4:90). The verse went even further. It not only offered peaceful coexistence to those who formally made peace with the Muslims, but also to
anyone, even Muslims who had slipped backwards and who merely
chose to stay neutral; that is, who did not take either side in the tense
relations between the Muslims on the one hand and the Quraysh and
their allies on the other.
The Origins of Self-defensive Concepts of War

It is worth remembering that, for the first fourteen years of his public life
(from 610 to 624), Muhammad had practised and proclaimed a policy
41
05/07/2013 15:21
of peaceful non-resistance to the intensifying humiliation, cruelty and

violence that the Quraysh, the dominant tribe of Mecca, attempted to
inflict upon him and his fellow Muslims. Throughout that period he had
strenuously resisted growing pressure from within the Muslim ranks to
respond in kind and insisted on the virtues of patience and steadfastness in the face of their opponents attacks. The persecution at one
point was so severe that Muhammad had to send two groups of followers to seek refuge in Abyssinia. Even after he and the rest of his followers fled the persecution in Mecca and settled in Medina in 622, the
developing ummah (Islamic community) experienced grave hardship
and fear. Some of the non-Muslims in Medina passionately resented the
presence of Muslims and conspired to expel them. From Mecca, Abu
Sufyan waged a relentless campaign of hostility against Muhammad
and the Muslims, who had now become a rival power and a threat to
his lucrative trade and pilgrimage arrangements. Abu Sufyan sought
no accommodation with Muhammad. In his mind, and according to
the norms of Arabic tribal warfare, the only solution was the ummahs
destruction.
In 624, two years after the migration of Muslims to Medinatwo
years in which the Quraysh continued to persecute them and then
led armies against themMuhammad finally announced a revelation
from Allah that Muslims were allowed physically to defend themselves
to preserve themselves through the contest of arms. Most scholars
agree that surah 22:39 contains that first transformational statement of
permission. Including the verses above and below, it says:
Verily Allah will defend (from ill) those who believe: verily,
Allah loves not any that is a traitor to faith, or shows ingratitude. / To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wrongedand verily, Allah is
Most Powerful for their aid. / (They are) those who have been
expelled from their homes in defiance of right (for no cause)
except that they say, Our Lord is Allah. (Al-ajj, 22:3840)
These verses continue by pointing out that, had not Allah in
previous eras allowed people to defend themselves from the aggression
and religious persecution of others, there would surely have been the
destruction of monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques, in which
42
05/07/2013 15:21
the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. The verses

add that Allah will surely aid those who aid him, and that he is truly
mighty and invincible.
The references to defending the faithful from harm in verse 38,
to those on the receiving end of violence in verse 39 and those who
have been driven from their homes in verse 40 reveal very clearly that
Allahs permission to undertake armed combat was not for offensive
war, but self-defence and self-preservation when attacked or oppressed.
Interestingly, it even extols the defence of all houses of worship, including the churches of Christians and the synagogues of Jews.
This permission for self-defensive war-fighting (the Arabic word
is qitl, or combat) corresponds precisely with the first Quranic
passage on war that one reads when one starts from the front cover:
surah 2:190, which, as quoted above, states: Fight in the cause of Allah
those who fight you, but do not transgress limits: for Allah loves not the
transgressors (Al-Baqarah, 2:190). Thus, the purpose of armed combat
was self-defence and, even though the need for survival meant that
warfare would be tough, combat was to adhere to a set of prescribed
constraints. The following verses instruction to slay them wherever
they turn up commences with the conjunction wa, here translated as
and, to indicate that it is a continuation of the same stream of logic.
In other words, Muslims were allowed to defend themselves militarily
from the forces or armies which were attacking them wherever that
happened. Tremendous care was to be taken not to shed blood in the
environs of Meccas sacred mosque, but if Muslims found themselves
attacked there, they could kill their attackers while defending themselves without committing a sin. This series of verses actually ends with
instructions that, if the attackers ceased their attacks, Muslims were not
to continue to fight them because Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful
(Al-Baqarah, 2:192). Thus, continued resistance couldand nowadays
canonly be a proportionate response to continued serious direct
oppression. In every Quranic example in which war-fighting (qitl) is
encouraged for protection against serious direct oppression or violence,
verses can be found that stress that, should the wrongdoers cease their
hostility, Muslims must immediately cease their own fighting.
The Quranic permission for defensive resistance to attacks or seri43
05/07/2013 15:21
ous direct oppression does not mean that Muhammad enjoyed war, or
took pleasure whatsoever in the fact that defensive warfare to protect his
ummah from extinction or subjugation would involve the loss of even
his enemies lives. He was no warmonger and forgave and pardoned
mortal enemies whenever he could. This reluctant warrior, to quote
one scholar, urged the use of non-violent means when possible and,
often against the advice of his companions, sought the early end of
hostilities. At the same time, in accordance with the revelations he had
received, he accepted that combat for the defence of Islam and Islamic
interests would sometimes be unavoidable. One of Muhammads
companions remembers him telling his followers not to look forward
to combat, but if it were to come upon them then they should pray for
safety and be patient.
Critics of Islam are fond of quoting surahs that seem to reveal a
certain savagery that today seems bloodcurdling to them. When you
meet the unbelievers, the Quran says in surah 47:4, strike at their
necks until you weaken them [that is, defeat them] and then bind the
captives firmly. Thereafter you may release them magnanimously or for a
ransom (Muammad, 47:4). In Srat Al-Anfl, 8:12 the Quran likewise
commands soldiers in battle to strike at necks and fingers. Although
these verses may seem out of place in a religious text, they are not out of
place within advice given by a military commander before a battle. That
was precisely the context of those particular revelations. Muhammads
community had not yet fought a battle or formed an army and those
Muslims who were about to become warriors needed to be taught how
to kill immediately and humanely. Decapitation, as opposed to wild
slashes at limbs or armoured bodies, ensured humane killing instead of
ineffective and brutal wounding. Even better, if a soldier could make an
enemy drop his weapon by striking at his hands, he might be able to take
him prisoner. Having him alive as a captive who could later be freed,
even with a wounded hand, was preferable to leaving him as a corpse.
Today all military or security forces in the world teach weaponhandling skills with the same focus. Recruits and officer cadets are
taught how to kill or wound on firing ranges where instructors teach
them which target areas will bring humane death and which ones
will cause someones incapacitation without death. The two Quranic
44
05/07/2013 15:21
passages mentioned above should be read in that light. Moreover, they

do not represent an instruction to all Muslims anytime to kill or wound
all non-Muslims anywhere. That would violate every concept of justice
embedded within Islam. The instructions were to one group of Muslims
(the nascent ummah, which had not yet experienced combat) in anticipation of a specific conflict: the Battle of Badr fought in March 624.
The fact that these combat-related instructions are contained within
a religious book which has powerfully clear central messages of forbearance, toleration and inclusiveness is easily explained by the fact that the
Quran, revealed episodically over decades, was (and is) considered by
Muslims to be Gods word. Every revelation on every issue was thus
faithfully recorded and retained, including ones dealing with all sorts
of thingswar, combat, diplomacy, finance, marriage, child-rearing,
divorce, death, education, science and so forthwith which the first
Muslims had to deal. It is thus a manual for life, with sections on war
and combat which are relevant when Muslims go to war for defensive
reasons, and on, say, pilgrimage when Muslims go on the Hajj for spiritual fulfilment.
The Quran and the Hadith (the recorded words and actions
of Muhammad) show that Muhammad took no pleasure in the fact
thatas also taught in later Western Just War theorythe regrettable combatant-versus-combatant violence inherent within warfare
would sometimes be necessary in order to create a better state of peace.
Explaining to fellow Muslims the need in some situations to undertake combat, Muhammad acknowledged Allahs revelation that warfare
was something that seemed very wrong, indeed a disliked activity, yet
it was morally necessary and thus morally right and obligatory under
some circumstances. Warfare was frightening and dreadful, but in
extremis better than continued serious persecution and attack.
Muhammads greatest triumphhis eventual return to his hometown Mecca in 630 at the head of an army of 10,000was itself a
bloodless affair marked by tremendous forgiveness and mercy. After
his forces entered the city, the panicked Quraysh tribe, which effectively surrendered after realising that resistance to the Muslim army
was futile, anticipated that their leaders and warriors would be slain.
After all, for two decades they had humiliated, persecuted and tried to
45
05/07/2013 15:21
assassinate Muhammad and had maltreated and even waged savage war
against his followers. Yet, aside from four murderers and serious oathbreakers who were judged to be beyond rehabilitation, Muhammad
chose to forgive them all in a general amnesty. There was no bloodbath. He reportedly asked the assembled leaders of Quraysh what fate
they anticipated. Expecting death, but hoping for life, they replied:
O noble brother and son of a noble brother! We expect nothing but
goodness from you. This appeal must have relieved Muhammad and
made him smile. He replied: I speak to you in the same words as Yusuf
[the biblical Joseph, also one of Islams revered prophets] spoke unto
his brothers. No reproach on you this day. Go your way, for you
are the freed ones. He even showed mercy to Hind bint Utbah, Abu
Sufyans wife, who was under a sentence of death for having horrifically
and disgracefully mutilated the body of Muhammads beloved uncle
Hamzah during the Battle of Uhud five years earlier. Hind had cut open
Hamzahs body, ripped out his liver and chewed it. She then reportedly strung the ears and nose into a necklace and entered Mecca wearing it as a trophy of victory. When justice finally caught up with her
five years later she threw herself upon Muhammads mercy. Extending
clemency of remarkable depth, Muhammad promised her forgiveness
and accepted her into his community.
Proportionate Response, Last Resort and

Discrimination
Mercy between humans, based on forgiveness of someone elses
acknowledged wrongdoing, was something that Muhammad believed
precisely mirrored the divine relationship between the Creator and
humans. The concepts of patience, forgiveness and clemency strongly
underpinned the early Islamic practice of warfare. Proportionalityone
of the core principals of Western Just Waralso serves as a key foundational principle in the Quranic guidance on war. Doing no violence
greater than the minimum necessary to guarantee victory is repeatedly
stressed in the Quran (and described as not transgressing limits). So
is the imperative of meeting force with equal force in order to prevent
defeat and discourage future aggression. Deterrence comes by doing to
the aggressor what he has done to the innocent: Should you encounter
46
05/07/2013 15:21
them in war, then deal with them in such a manner that those that [might
have intended to] follow them should abandon their designs and may
take warning (Al-Anfl, 8:57). With this deterrent function in mind, the
Quran embraces the earlier biblical revelation to the Israelites, which
permits people to respond to injustice eye for eye, tooth for tooth. Yet,
like the Christian Gospels, it suggests that there is more spiritual value
(bringing purification) in forgoing revenge in a spirit of charity. This
passage, interestingly, is from the same period of revelation as the Verse
of the Sword, which further weakens the abrogation thesis mentioned
above. Moreover, even on this matter of matching ones strength to
the opponents strength, the Quran repeatedly enjoins Muslims to
remember that, whenever possible, they should respond to provocations with patience and efforts to facilitate conciliation. They should
avoid fighting unless it becomes necessary after attempts have been
made to achieve a peaceful resolution (which is a concept not vastly
different from the Western Just War notion of Last Resort) because
forgiveness and the restoration of harmony remain Allahs preference.
Dearly wanting to avoid bloodshed whenever possible, Muhammad
created a practice of treating the use of lethal violence as a last resort
which has been imitated by Muslim warriors to this day, albeit at times
with varying emphasis. Before any war-fighting can commence
except for spontaneous self-defensive battles when surprisedthe
leader must make a formal declaration of war to the enemy force, no
matter how aggressive and violent that enemy is. He must communicate
a message to the enemy that it would be better for them to embrace
Islam. If they did (and Muhammad liked to offer three days for reflection and decision) then the grievance ended. A state of brotherhood
ensued. If the enemy refused, then a proposal would be extended that
offered them peace in return for the ending of aggression or disagreeable behaviour and the paying of a tax. If the enemy refused even that
offer, and did not cease their wrongdoing, they forfeited their rights to
immunity from the unfortunate violence of war.
Islamic concepts of war do not define and conceptualise things
in exactly the same way as Western thinking has done within the Just
War framework. Yet the parallels are striking. The reasons for going
to war expressed within the Quran closely match those within jus ad
47
05/07/2013 15:21
bellum, the Just War criteria which establishes the justice of a decision
to undertake combat. The criteria include Just Cause, Proportionality
and Last Resort. The behaviour demanded of warriors once campaigning and combat have commenced also closely match those within jus
in bello, the Just War criteria which establishes the proper behaviour of
warriors that is necessary to keep the war just. The Quran described this
as a prohibition against transgressing limits. Ibn Kathir, a famous
and relatively reliable fourteenth-century scholar of the Quran, accepts
earlier interpretations that the transgressions mentioned in the Quran
refer to mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing
women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare,
killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down
trees and killing animals without real benefit. Ibn Kathir points out
that Muhammad had himself stated that these deeds are prohibited.
Another source records that, before he assigned a leader to take forces
on a mission, Muhammad would instruct them to fight honourably,
not to hurt women and children, not to harm prisoners, not to mutilate
bodies, not to plunder and not to destroy trees or crops.
In the year after Muhammads death in 632, his close friend and
successor Abu Bakr, the first caliph, compiled the Qurans and the
Prophets guidance on the conduct of war into a code that has served
ever since as the basis of Islamic thinking on the conduct of battle. In a
celebrated address to his warriors, Abu Bakr proclaimed:
Do not act treacherously; do not act disloyally; do not act
neglectfully. Do not mutilate; do not kill little children or
old men, or women; do not cut off the heads off the palm
trees or burn them; do not cut down the fruit trees; do not
slaughter a sheep or a cow or a camel, except for food. You
will pass by people who devote their lives in cloisters; leave
them and their devotions alone. You will come upon people
who bring you platters in which are various sorts of food; if
you eat any of it, mention the name of God over it.85
There is no explicit statement within the Quran that defines the
difference between combatants and non-combatants during war, so
readers might think that any man of fighting age (children, women and
the aged having been excluded) is considered fair game. The Quran does
48
05/07/2013 15:21
not allow this. The verses that talk of combat are clear that war is only
permissible against those who are waging war; that is, those in combat.
Aside from those combatants and anyone acting unjustly to prevent
Muslims from practising their faith or trying to violate the sanctity of
Islams holy places, no one is to be harmed.
The rationale for this is clear. Central to the Quranic revelation
and stated unequivocally in many passages is the message that the decisions that pertain to life and death are Allahs alone, and that Allah
has proclaimed that human lifea sacred giftmay never be taken
without just cause. In the Quranic passages narrating the story of
Cain and Abel (surah 5:2732, revealed very late in Muhammads life)
one can read an explicit protection of the lives of the innocent. Srat
Al-Midah, 5:32 informs us that, if anyone takes the life of another
human, unless it is for murder, aggressive violence or serious persecution, it is as though he has killed all of humanity. Likewise, if anyone
saves a life, it is as though he has saved all of humanity. To discourage
war, the very next verse is clear: those who undertake warfare against
the innocent do not count as innocent, nor do those who inflict grave
injustice or oppression upon the innocent. They forfeit their right to
what we would nowadays call civilian immunity, and are liable to be
killed in battle or executed if they are caught and have not repented.
Jihad
It should already be clear that, far from serving as the foundation of a
callous faith in which human life is not respected, or a bellicose faith in
which peace is not desired, the Quran presents warfare as an undesirable activity. It should be undertaken only within certain constrained
circumstances and in a manner that facilitates the quick restoration of
peace and harmony and minimises the harm and destruction that war
inevitably brings. An analysis of such matters would not, of course, be
complete without making some sense of jihad, that famous word and
concept that nowadays is most controversial and misunderstood.
Interestingly, given that jihad is now associated with extremists who
are full of hatred, like Osama bin Laden and other terrorists, the Quran
does not allow hatred to form the basis of a military or other armed
response to perceived injustices. It explicitly states that the hatred of
49
05/07/2013 15:21
others must not make anyone swerve to [do] wrong and depart from
justice. Be just (Al-Midah, 5:8 and see 5:2). The Quran likewise praises
those who restrain their anger and are forgiving towards their fellow
men (l Imrn, 3:134). These and other verses communicating the
same message are clear enough to prevent crimes perceived nowadays
by Muslims from turning them into criminals. They certainly made
an impact on Muslims during Muhammads lifetime. During the Battle
of Khandaq in 627, for example, Ali ibn Abi Talib (who later served
as caliph) reportedly subjugated Amr ibn Abd al-Wudd, a powerful
warrior of the Quraysh. Ali was about to deal a death blow when his
enemy spat in his face. Ali immediately released him and walked away.
He then rejoined battle and managed to slay his enemy. When later asked
to explain why he had released his foe, Ali replied that he had wanted to
keep his heart pure from anger and that, if he needed to take life, he did it
out of righteous motives and not wrath. Even if the verity of this story
is impossible to demonstrate (it is first found in a thirteenth-century
Persian Sufi poem), its survival and popularity attest to the perceived
importance within Islam of acting justly at all times, even during the
heightened passions inevitable in war.
Despite some popular misperceptions that jihad is based on frustration or anger that many non-Muslims consciously reject the faith of
Islam, the Quran is quite clear that Islam can be embraced only by those
who willingly come to accept it. Islam cannot be imposed upon anyone
who does not. Surah 2:256 is emphatic that there must be no compulsion in religion (Al-Baqarah, 2:256). Truth is self-evident, the verse adds,
and stands out from falsehood. Those who accept the former grasp the
most trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks. Those who accept falsehood instead will go forth into the depths of darkness: the same hell that
Christ had preached about. The fate of individuals, based on the choice
they make, is therefore Allahs alone to decide. The Quran repeats in
several other verses that coerced religion would be pointless because
the submission of the heart wanted by Allah would be contrived and
thus not accepted as genuine. When even Muhammad complained
that he seemed to be surrounded by people who would not believe, a
divine revelation clarified that Muslims were merely to turn away from
the disbelievers after saying peace to them for they shall come to know
50
05/07/2013 15:21
(Al-Zukhruf, 43:889). The Quran itself enjoins believers to invite disbelievers to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and
argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious if you show
patience, that is indeed the best (cause) for those who are patient.
For Allah is with those who restrain themselves, and those who do good
(Al-Nal, 16:1258). At no point in Muhammads life did he give up
hope that all peoples would want to get along harmoniously. Despite
his grave disappointment whenever communities competed instead of
cooperated, in one of his later public sermons he revealed the divine
message that Allah had made all of mankind into nations and tribes,
that you may know each other (not: that you may despise each other).
This desire for tolerant coexistence even included other faiths and
Muhammad never stopped believing in the commonality of belief
between Muslims and the God-fearing among those who identified
themselves as Jews and Christians (Ahl al-Kitb, the People of the Book).
They shared the same prophetic line of revelation, after all. Despite
rejection by several powerful Jewish tribes, and frustration over trinitarian concepts, Muhammad remained convinced that the Jewish and
Christian faith communities (as opposed to some individual tribes which
acted treacherously) were eminently acceptable to Allah if they followed
their own scriptures. Verses saying precisely this were revealed very close
in time to the Verse of the Sword. The verses encourage the Jews and
Christians to believe (submit to God) and act faithfully according to their
own scriptures, the Torah and the Gospel. The verses state that, if they do
so, they, along with Muslims (fellow submitters (Al-Baqarah, 2:62)), will
have no need to fear or grieve (Al-Anm, 5:69). The revelation of these
religiously inclusive verses late in Muhammads life further undermines
the thesis that the verses revealed late in his life undid all of the interfaith
outreach that Muhammad had preached years earlier.
So what, then, is jihad and why does it seem so threatening? The
answer is that jihad, far from meaning some type of fanatical holy war
against all unbelievers, is the Arabic word for exertion or effort and
it actually describes any Muslims struggle against the things that are
ungodly within him or her and within the wider world. One major form
of jihad is the Muslims struggle against his or her nafs: an Arabic word
that may be translated as the lower self and refers to the individuals ego,
51
05/07/2013 15:21
carnal nature and the bad habits and actions that come from failure to
resist temptation or desire. For example, a Muslim who consciously
strives to break the habit of telling white lies, or the drinking of alcohol,
or who struggles against a bad temper, is involved quite properly in a
jihad against those unfortunate weaknesses. In surah 29:6 the Quran
explains this by pointing out that the striving (jihad) of individuals
against their personal ungodliness will bring personal, inner (that is,
spiritual) growth. Yet the very next verse goes further by exhorting
believers not only to work on their personal faith, but also to do good
deeds to others. Devoting time and giving money to the welfare of
the poor and needy (of all communities, not just Muslims), and to the
upkeep and governance of the ummah, is mentioned in several scriptures as this type of divinely recommended effort (jihad). Winning
souls to Islam through peaceful preaching is likewise a worthy effort.
Muhammad himself revealed a divine exhortation to strive with all
effort (Al-Furqn, 25:52) (in Arabic it uses two forms of the same word
jihad) using the powerful words of the Quran to convince unbelievers.
Jihad is also used in the Quran to mean physical defensive resistance to external danger. It appears in thirty verses, six of them revealed
during Muhammads years in Mecca and twenty-four revealed during
the years of armed attack by the Quraysh tribe and its allies and then
the protective wars to create security within and around the Arabian
Peninsula.93 Critics of Islam claim that this ratio reveals that jihad and
qitl (war-fighting) are effectively synonymous regardless of context.
This is incorrect. The struggle against ego and personal vice is a greater,
non-contextual and ever-required struggle, as Muhammad revealed.
After returning from a battle he told his supporters: You have come
back from the smaller jihad to the greater jihad. When asked what the
greater jihad was, Muhammad replied: The striving of Allahs servant
against his desires (mujhadt al-abd li-hawah).94
Moreover, the Verse of the Sword and the other supposedly bloody
verses quoted in this article do not use the word jihad for the recommended defensive war-fighting. They use qitl, which simply means
fighting or combat. Yes, qitl is permitted as part of a defensive struggle against serious oppression or persecution, but that does not mean
that all jihad is fighting. That would be using logic similar to saying
52
05/07/2013 15:21
that, because all fox terriers are dogs, all dogs are fox terriers. All lawful
qitl is jihada legitimately approved and rigorously constrained military struggle against evilbut not all jihad (or even much of it or the
greater type) is warfare. Questions about who can legitimately call
for or initiate qitl as part of any jihad, in a world which no longer
has caliphs leading the ummah, are debated by Islamic scholars, with
a vast majority arguing that only state leaders in Islamic (or Muslimmajority) lands would be legitimately able to do so if a genuine just
cause emerged. The fact that fatw and other calls for fighting made
in recent years by Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders have not been accepted
by the overwhelming majority of the worlds 1.6 billion Muslims is a
clear sign that few Muslims see them as legitimate leaders or agree that
armed fighting would be a just and appropriate response to the alleged
grievances.
Interestingly, all the verses mentioning jihad as armed struggle in
defence of the Islamic people and polity are exhortative in nature: with
pleas for effort, urgings of courage and a fighting spirit, assurances of
victory and promises of eternal rewards for those who might die in the
service of their community. This emphasis reveals that Muhammad
recognised that wars were so unpalatable to his peace-loving community that, even though the causes of Muslim war-fighting were just, he
had to go to extra lengthsmuch as Winston Churchill did during the
dark days of the Second World Warto exhort frightened or weary
people to persevere, to believe in victory and to fight for it. On 4 June
1940 Churchill gave a magnificent speech to inspire the British people
to continue their struggle against the undoubted evils of Nazism, even
though the German armed forces then seemed stronger and better in
battle. His speech includes the fabulous warlike lines:
We shall fight on the seas and oceans,
We shall fight with growing confidence and growing
strength in the air,
We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be,
We shall fight on the beaches,
We shall fight on the landing grounds,
We shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
We shall fight in the hills,
We shall never surrender.95
53
05/07/2013 15:21
No one would dream of calling Churchill warmongering, much

less murderous. Muhammads exhortations for Muslims to do their
dutya phrase used by Churchill in that speech and othersand to
struggle against the threat of defeat at the hands of the Muslims enemies
are best seen in the same light. Indeed, most of the verses which urge
qitl as part of the struggle (jihad) against enemies relate to the selfdefensive wars mentioned above, with the remaining verses relating to
the broader need to protect the nascent ummah from both the local
spiritual pollution of intransigent Arab polytheism and idolatry as well
as the external threat to unsafe borders around the perimeter of the
ummah. No verses in the Quran encourage or permit violence against
innocent people, regardless of faith, and no verses encourage or permit
war against other nations or states that are not attacking the Islamic
ummah, threatening its borders or its direct interests, or interfering in
the ability of Muslims to practice their faith. Armed effort against any
states that might do those oppressive things would still be permitted to
this day, at least according to a fair reading of the Quranjust as it is
within Western Just War theory. Yet such a situation would involve a very
different set of circumstances to those existing in the world today; those
which somehow wrongly prompted a very small number of radicalised
terrorists to undertake aggressive and offensive (not justly motivated
and defensive) struggles. Their reprehensible actions, especially those
that involve the taking of innocent lives, fall outside the behaviours
permitted by a reasonable reading of the Quran.
Conclusion
This paper is not an attempt at religious apologetics. It is written by a scholar
of military strategy and ethics for a general audience in an endeavour to
demonstrate that the worlds second largest religion (only Christianity
has more adherents) includes at its core a set of scriptures that contains a
clear and very ethical framework for understanding war and guiding the
behaviour of warriors. That framework only supports warfare when it is
based on redressing substantial material grievances (especially attack or
serious direct persecution), when it occurs after other means of addressing the grievances have been attempted, and when it includes the cessation of hostilities and the restoration of peace as soon as a resolution has
54
05/07/2013 15:21
been attained. It demands of warriors that they uphold the concepts of

proportionality (doing no more harm than is necessary) and discrimination (directing violence only at combatants whilst minimising harm to
civilians and their possessions and infrastructure). That framework is very
compatible with the Western Just War philosophy that, for example, gave
a moral underpinning to the United Kingdoms war against Argentinean
troops occupying the Falkland Islands in 1982, the US-led Coalitions
eviction of Saddam Husseins troops from Kuwait in 1991, and NATOs
seventy-eight-day air war against Slobodan Miloevis Yugoslavia in order
to protect Kosovars from ethnic violence in 1999.
So, then, if the Quran itself condemns any violence that exceeds or
sits outside of the framework for justice revealed within its verses, how
can we explain the barbarous 9/11 attacks, the home-grown 7/7 attacks
and other suicide-bombing attempts within the United Kingdom and
the murder of civilians by terrorists in other parts of the world who
claim to act in the name of Islam? British scholar Karen Armstrong
answered this obvious question so succinctly in the days after 9/11 that
her words make a fitting conclusion to this article. During the twentieth
century, she wrote, the militant form of piety often known as fundamentalism erupted in every major religion as a rebellion against modernity. Every minority fundamentalist movement within the major faiths
that Armstrong has studied is convinced that liberal, secular society
is determined to wipe out religion. Fighting, as they imagine, a battle
for survival, fundamentalists often feel justified in ignoring the more
compassionate principles of their faith. But in amplifying the more
aggressive passages that exist in all our scriptures, they distort the
tradition.97 Armstrong is correct, but her word distort is too weak for
Al-Qaeda-style terrorists. They have not merely distorted the Quranic
message; they have entirely perverted it and in the process created additional unhelpful hostility towards Islama faith of justice which seeks
to create peace and security for its believers and a state of harmony and
peaceful coexistence with other faiths.
Joel Hayward. Published by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for
Islamic Thought as a booklet in 2012.
55
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter three
JIHAD AND THE ISLAMIC LAW OF WAR
Dr Caner Dagli
Overview
Introduction
1) Does jihad mean holy war?
2) What is the role of non-violent jihad?
3) Do Muslims go to war against others merely because they are
non-Muslim?
4) What are the Five Basic Rights of Islamic law, and how do they
relate to war?
5) What does the Quran say about jihad and fighting?
6) When do Muslims make treaties?
7) What is the distinction between pre-emption and aggression?
8) What is the difference between The Abode of Islam and The
Abode of War?
9) Is forced conversion an Islamic teaching?
10) What is the sword verse?
11) What are the basic rules of combat as laid down in Islams
authoritative texts?
12) What is the status of non-Muslims under Islamic rule?
13) What is the jizyah, or poll tax, on non-Muslims?
14) Does orthodox Islam sanction rebellion against political
authority?
15) How does the Islamic law of war come to be violated?
Conclusion
Further Reading
56
05/07/2013 15:21
Jihad and the Islamic Law of War
Introduction
What is the Islamic law of war and peace? This crucial question underlies all discussion of jihad, perhaps the most misrepresented of ideas in
the Wests understanding of Islam. Holy war,98 a faith spread by the
sword,99 Islamo-fascism,100 infidel,101 and many of the other catchphrases so popular in the uninformed debate on this topic only serve to
muddle the issue. It is therefore useful, and even imperative, to explain
what jihad is, what it means to Muslims, and how it relates to the
concrete issues of war and peace. Since one cannot hope to understand
a law by studying the actions of those who break it, we will not discuss
here the actions of individuals, but focus on the very sources of Islamic
law itself as they relate to jihad, war and peace. Acts of violence and situations of peace can only be judged, from the point of view of Islam and
the shariah (Islamic law), on how fully they accord with the principles
set down by the Quran, the teachings of the Prophet, and the precedent
set by the tradition of religious scholars through the centuries.
Naked assertions by individuals who claim to speak in the name of
Islam without a foundation in these authoritative sources and principles must be examined in light of these very sources and principles, and
not accepted at face value. What follows is an attempt to describe the
most important issues surrounding the Islamic law of war and peace,
and to lay out the mainstream, traditional Islamic position, comprised
of three essential principles:
r Non-combatants are not legitimate targets.
r The religion of a person or persons in no way constitutes a cause
for war against them.
r Aggression is prohibited, but the use of force is justified in
self-defence, for protection of sovereignty, and in defence of all
innocent people.
We will expand upon these principles in what follows.
Question : Does Jihad Mean Holy War?

Although very often the Arabic word jihad is glossed as holy war, if
we were to translate holy war back into Arabic we would have al-arb
al-muqaddasah, a term which does not exist in any form in the Islamic
57
05/07/2013 15:21
tradition. Jihad, both linguistically and as a technical term, means

struggle, and is etymologically related to the words mujhadah, which
also means struggle or contention, and ijtihd, which is the effort
exerted by jurists to arrive at correct judgments in Islamic law.
Holy war is actually a term that comes out of Christianity. Until
its acceptance by the Emperor Constantine in the fourth century,
Christianity was a minority religion that was often persecuted and
which grew only through preaching and missionary activity. Christians
were in no position to make war, and indeed Christs teaching to turn
the other cheek kept them from retaliation against their persecutors
in most cases. When Christians came to possess real military power,
however, they were faced with the task of fighting wars and of deciding
when, if ever, a Christian could fight in a war and still be considered
a true follower of Christ. Augustine was one of the earliest of Church
thinkers to address this question in detail, discussing it under the
general rubric of just war. Both he and his mentor Ambrose of Milan
described situations in which justice would compel Christians to take up
arms, but without forgetting that war should only be seen as a necessary evil, and that it should be stopped once peace is achieved. Such
ideas were later elaborated upon by such figures as Thomas Aquinas
and Hugo Grotius.
It was with the rise of the Papal States and ultimately with the
declaration of the Crusades that the concept of holy war came to be
an important term. It is noteworthy that the earliest holy wars were
often wars by Christians against other Christians, in the sense that the
protagonists saw themselves as carrying out the will of God. However,
it was with the taking of the cross by the Christian warriors sent by
Pope Urban in the eleventh century that just war became holy war
in its fullest sense. It was only with the authorisation of the Pope that
a knight could adopt the symbol of the cross. Holy war, as a term,
thus has its origins in Christianity, not Islam.
This gradual transition from total pacifism to just war to holy war
did not occur in Islam. The non-violent period lasted only until the
Prophet emigrated to Medina, after which the community was forced
to ponder the conduct of war. The early history of Islam, unlike that
of Christianity, was marked by overwhelming military and political
58
05/07/2013 15:21
success. However, rather than stamp a permanently warlike character

on Islam, the very fact that Muslims received revelation and guidance
from the Prophet on matters of war established a set of rules and legal
precedent that set clear and unmistakeable boundaries. As Christians
came to learn after they had gained political power, in a world full of
evil and human passions war was inevitable, and even followers of
Christs teaching of turning the other cheek were forced to formulate
a concept of just war. They lacked, however, the advantage of a clear
and binding precedent that not only provided that jus ad bellum,
or the conditions under which a just war could be waged, but jus
in bellum, the rules on how the fighting itself is carried out. This is
precisely what the Quran, the life and teachings of the Prophet and the
actions of the early community gave to Islamic law.
The term holy war is thus inaccurate and unhelpful, implying that
for Muslims war has a kind of supernatural and unreasoned quality
removed from the exigencies of the world. On the contrary, Islamic law
treats war as a sometimes necessary evil, whose conduct is constrained
by concrete goals of justice and fairness in this world. If warfare has
any worth (and indeed, those martyred while fighting justly in the way
of God are promised paradise), it comes from what is fought for, not
from the fighting itself. Jurists of Islamic law never ask whether war is
holy. Rather, they determine, based on Islamic teaching, if it is right
and just. An unjust attack by a group of Muslims acting outside of the
law might be called war, but it is not jihad in the eyes of traditional
Islam. Moreover, as the verses of the Quran and sayings of the Prophet
below will show, jihad is also a name for a spiritual struggle, or taking
a principled stand in a difficult situation.
Thus, not all war is jihad, and not all jihad is war.
Question : What is the Role of Non-Violent Jihad?

The history of the Muslim community under the Prophet is normally
divided into two periods, the Meccan and the Medinan. Quranic chapters and verses are normally classified accordingly, depending on when
the verse was revealed. The Muslim hijri calendar begins with the
emigration (Hijrah) of the Prophet and his companions from Mecca
to Medina, where they established the first Islamic political entity. The
59
05/07/2013 15:21
Meccan period begins with the Prophets first revelation from the
archangel Gabriel, and ends thirteen years later with the Hijrah, while
the Medinan period begins with Hijrah and ends ten years later with
the Prophets death in 632 of the Common Era.
In the Meccan period the Muslims were a minority religious
community amongst the primarily polytheistic pagan Arabs, and
possessed no political power or protection aside from that which was
provided by their familial bonds. They did not constitute a formal
organisation, but rather were a self-selected group of individuals who
were bound to each other spiritually, and who were often verbally and
physically abused for their practices and their belief in the one God.
During this period the Prophet was neither judge nor ruler, but guide
and teacher, and brought news of the true nature of things, especially as it concerned the oneness of God and the inevitable Day of
Judgment. The commands and prohibitions during these years were
of a spiritual nature, such as performing prayer and keeping away
from unclean things, and there was no earthly punishment for going
against them.
Once the Prophet and his companions emigrated to Medina, the
Prophet took on the power to govern politically over the Muslims and
non-Muslims of Medina. He became both a spiritual and temporal
leader, and as such became responsible for both the spiritual and material needs of the people, whereas in the Meccan period his primary
mission was to be a bearer of good tidings, and a warner (Fir, 35:24).
These material needs included the defence and maintenance of the
new Islamic state, by force of arms if necessary. While the Muslims in
the Meccan period were expressly forbidden to take up arms against
their persecutors, in the Medinan period they were given permission
to fight their enemies militarily, as will be discussed below.
Some have speculated that the Muslim community was not permitted to take up arms in the Meccan period because they were weak and
outnumbered, but this is to forget that they were outnumbered three
to one at the Battle of Badr, which took place in the Medinan period.
Moreover, this explanation contradicts Quranic verses such as,
If there are ten steadfast among you, they will defeat two
hundred, and one hundred among you will defeat one thou60
05/07/2013 15:21
sand of those who disbelieve, for they are a people who do

not understand. (Al-Anfl, 8:65)
or,
How many a small party has defeated a larger party by
Gods leave! God is with the steadfast. (Al-Baqarah, 2:249)
Still, we find that in this period of non-violent steadfastness, under

the frequently violent persecution of the Meccan pagans to the new
religion, the Muslims are commanded to carry out struggle, or jihad:
Do not obey the disbelievers, and struggle against them with
it a great struggle. (Al-Furqn, 25:52).
Then indeed your Lordfor those who emigrated after they
were put through tribulation, then struggled and were patientindeed your Lord, after that, is forgiving, merciful.
(Al-Nal, 16:110).
Verse 25:52 is universally considered to be Meccan by traditional
exegetes of the Quran,102 and Ibn Abbas pointed out that struggle
with it means to struggle using the Quran, that is, with the truth
contained therein against the false beliefs of the pagans. Verse 16:110
is thought by some to be Medinan, but the majority of exegetes
consider the emigration mentioned to refer to the flight of some of
the Muslim community to seek asylum with the King of Abyssinia,
which occurred in the Meccan period.
The Prophet himself praised non-violent jihad. He said, The best
struggle (jihad) is to speak the truth before a tyrannical ruler,103 and,
The best struggle is to struggle against your soul and your passions in
the way of God Most High.104 Some have questioned the authenticity
of the hadith which describes the Prophet returning from a battle with
the companions and saying, We have returned from the lesser struggle to the greater struggle, which is often cited by those seeking to
recover the traditional meaning of jihad. If the hadith is indeed inauthentic, the meaning is still found in the aforementioned hadith that
places the struggle against the soul above all other struggles. Moreover
there are numerous other hadith which place the efforts required in
the spiritual life above the rewards of physical combat. The Prophet
once said, Shall I tell you of your best deed, the most pleasing to your
King, the loftiest in your ranks, better than the giving of gold and
61
05/07/2013 15:21
silver, and better than meeting your enemy in battle, beheading him
whilst he beheads you? The remembrance of God (dhikr Allh).105
Indeed, so important is the spiritual element of struggle that even
when Muslims are commanded to fight they must first insure that
the truth does not die with those who put their lives at risk in battle.
It is not for the believers to go forth altogether: why should
not a party of every section of them go forth so that they may
become learned in religion and that they may warn their
folk when they return to them, so that they may beware?
(Al-Tawbah, 9:122)
The superior and inherent worth of spiritual struggle over armed
struggle is an immutable value in Islam, but placing the spiritual
above the worldly does not erase worldly concerns. It is universally
agreed that Islamic law came to sanction armed struggle and war, but
this sanction came with a law of war which is binding for Muslims.
This law of war answers two fundamental questions: Why do we fight?
How should we fight?
In almost all cases during the career of the Prophet, armed combat
and war took place with Muslims on one side and non-Muslims on
the other. These were not tribal battles, since members of the same
tribe and often the same family fought on opposite sides. Nor were
they religious battles in the sense that Muslims fought non-Muslims
for the mere fact of their being non-Muslims. As we shall see, Muslims
fought for the protection of their basic rights: the right to life, property, honour and most importantly the right to believe and practice
their faith. Their grievances against their enemies were expulsion
from their homes and seizure of their property; persecution in the
form of torture and murder; and pressure to give up their faith in the
one God and the Prophet Muhammad U.
A cursory knowledge of the life of the Prophet will show that
one need not go into theology to explain why Muslims fought their
enemies. The fact that Muslims were persecuted, reviled, tortured,
pitted against their own families, exiled, ostracised and killed provides
more than enough justification for their resort to force.
62
05/07/2013 15:21
Question : Do Muslims go to War against Others

Merely Because they are Non-Muslim?
Most scholars agree that the first verses to permit fighting were:
Indeed God protects those who believe. Indeed God does not
love the treacherous, the ungrateful. Permission is granted to
those who fight because they have been wronged. And God is
truly able to help them; those who were expelled from their
homes without right, only because they said: Our Lord is
God. Were it not for Gods causing some people to drive back
others, destruction would have befallen the monasteries, and
churches, and synagogues, and mosques in which Gods Name
is mentioned greatly. Assuredly God will help those who help
Him. God is truly Strong, Mightythose who, if We empower
them in the land, maintain the prayer, and pay the alms, and
enjoin decency and forbid indecency. And with God rests the
outcome of all matters. (Al-ajj, 22:3841)106
It is of the greatest significance that the verses finally giving
Muslims permission to use force to defend themselves should make
mention of the houses of worship of other religions. God not only
protects Muslims by repelling some by means of others, He also protects
religion as such, which is described here in terms of the places wherein
the name of God is remembered. As will be made clear below, it is not
the religious identity of people which justifies the use of force against
them, but their aggression and crimes against the Muslim community
and, by extension, other religious communities under Muslim rule.
Question : What are the Five Basic Rights of Islamic

Law, and How Do they Relate to War?
The question of protecting religion in war is a crucial one, for indeed
the law of war in Islam is a subset of all Islamic law (the shariah), and as
such it must conform to the principles of that encompassing law. Jurists
of the (overwhelming majority) orthodox tradition have, in codifying
the law, identified those fundamentals which the law must protect and
which Muslims cannot violate. These are usually called The Aims of
the Law (maqid al-sharah), but in effect they amount to the Five
Basic Rights. They are: (1) Religion; (2) Life; (3) Mind; (4) Honour; (5)
Property. Muslims have always understood the value of the outward
63
05/07/2013 15:21
(the restrictions and prohibitions of the law) to derive ultimately from

its protection of the inward (the human beings relationship with God
and his own true nature), hence the traditional place of religion as the
first Basic Right before the law. It is one reason why the Prophet placed
the remembrance of God above all other acts. Yet Islamic law, and ipso
facto the law of war, must take into account the other Basic Rights.
The Right to Life includes safety from murder, torture, terror, and
starvation. The Right to Mind encompasses the Islamic prohibition of
intoxication, and more generally can be extended to those things which
hinder human objectivity, such as misinformation, mis-education, and
lying in general. The Right to Honour exists in what has come to be
known in the modern world as human dignity, which in the Islamic
context begins with the integrity of the family (and particularly of ones
lineage) and extends to the protection of ones good name and an environment of mutual respect in society. The Right to Property protects
against theft, destruction, and dispossession.
These Five Basic Rights all pertain to the conduct of war, enshrining the principle that the material is ultimately justified in light of the
spiritual, and that the spiritual must guide the conduct of the material.
In other words, morality and ethics apply to war, equally and according
to the same principles, as they apply to economic transactions, marriage
and sexuality, and government. Indeed, it is an abuse of good sense to
suppose that a civilisation which developed a highly sophisticated law
and system of justice, an international system of trade and credit, peaks
of art and philosophy and major advances in science and technology
all within a world view formed by the Quran and the teachings of the
Prophetcould somehow have omitted to address justice, harmony,
and fairness when it came to questions of war and peace.
Question : What Does the Quran Say about

Jihad and Fighting?
Below are some Quranic verses pertaining to jihad and fighting. Care
has been taken to quote these at some length, as the relevant passages
are often abbreviated and quoted out of context in much of the discussion about the Quran and jihad. When read as a whole, the justice and
fairness of the Quranic commands speak for themselves:
64
05/07/2013 15:21
but aggress not; God loves not the aggressors. And slay them
wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where
they expelled you; sedition is more grievous than slaying. But
fight them not by the Sacred Mosque until they should fight
you there; then if they fight you, slay themsuch, is the requital of disbelievers. But if they desist, surely God is Forgiving, Merciful. Fight them till there is no sedition, and the religion is for God; then if they desist, there shall be no enmity,
save against evildoers. The sacred month for the sacred month;
holy things demand retaliation; whoever commits aggression
against you, then commit aggression against him in the manner that he committed against you; and fear God, and know
that God is with the God-fearing. (Al-Baqarah, 2:1904)
Prescribed for you is fighting, though it be hateful to you. Yet
it may happen that you hate a thing which is good for you;
and it may happen that you love a thing which is bad for you;
God knows, and you know not. They ask you about the sacred
month, and fighting in it. Say, Fighting in it is a grave thing;
but to bar from Gods way, and disbelief in Him, and the Sacred Mosque, and to expel its people from itthat is graver
in Gods sight; and sedition is graver than slaying. They will
not cease to fight against you until they turn you from your
religion if they are able; and whoever of you turns from his
religion, and dies disbelievingtheir works have failed in this
world and the Hereafter. Those are the inhabitants of the Fire,
abiding therein. (Al-Baqarah, 2:2167)
God does not forbid you in regard to those who did not wage
war against you on account of religion and did not expel you
from your homes, that you should treat them kindly and deal
with them justly. Assuredly God loves the just. God only forbids you in regard to those who waged war against you on
account of religion and expelled you from your homes and
supported [others] in your expulsion, that you should make
friends with them. And whoever makes friends with them,
thosethey are the wrongdoers. (Al-Mumtaanah, 60:89)
Say to the disbelievers, that if they desist, that which is past
will be forgiven them; but if they return, the way of [dealing
with] the ancients has already gone before! And fight them
until sedition is no more and religion is all for God; then if
they desist, surely God sees what they do. (Al-Anfl, 8:389)
65
05/07/2013 15:21
Read as a whole, and not selectively quoted out of context, these

verses make it clear that Muslims fight because they have been wronged;
because they have been persecuted, which is seen as worse than killing;
because they have been made to renounce their religion; and because
they have been driven out of their homes. Muslims must fight their
enemies not because of who they are, but because of what they have done
to them and continue to do to them.
It must be remembered that the Prophet began preaching while still a
respected and admired member of his community. It was the teachings he
brought which the Quraysh saw as a threat, not the Prophet himself as a
man, nor his followers as a group. He never threatened the Quraysh (other
than warning them of the Day of Judgment) or used any kind of coercion
whatsoever. The young Muslim community began to suffer persecution
under the Quraysh because Islam was seen as a threat to its own pagan
religion and to Meccas role as a place of pilgrimage (and hence to the
tribes economic prosperity). The first reactions of the Muslims were to
endure, then to flee, since they were not yet permitted to fight back. It
was only after the Quraysh had made life unbearableby ostracising the
Muslims and finally even attempting to assassinate the Prophetthat the
young community finally migrated to Medina. Indeed, the Muslims had
exhausted all other options before resorting to force.
Question : When Do Muslims Make Treaties?

Though Muslims were eventually given permission to retaliate, in Islamic
law the goal of redressing grievances is not mere revenge, but the establishment of peace. For this reason the Quran often makes mention of
treaties of peace with non-Muslims, including the polytheists. The following verses are examples from the Quran involving treaties and agreements of peace with non-Muslims, again quoted at length so as to show
their context:
They long that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, so then
you would be equal; therefore do not take friends from among
them until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn
away, take them and slay them wherever you find them; and do
not take any of them as a patron, or as a helper. Except those
who attach themselves to a people between whom and you there
66
05/07/2013 15:21
is a covenant, or come to you with their breasts constricted

about the prospect of fighting you, or fighting their people. Had
God willed, He would have given them sway over you, so that
assuredly they would have fought you. And so if they stay away
from you and do not fight you, and offer you peace, then God
does not allow you any way against them. You will find others desiring to have security from you and security from their
own people; yet whenever they are returned to sedition, they
are overwhelmed by it. So, if they do not stay away from you,
and offer you peace, and restrain their hands, then take them
and slay them wherever you come upon them; against them We
have given you clear warrant. (Al-Nis, 4:8991)
But if they break their oaths after [making] their pact and assail your religion, then fight the leaders of unbeliefverily they
have no [binding] oaths, so that they might desist. Will you not
fight a people who broke their oaths and intended to expel the
Messengerinitiating against you first? Are you afraid of them?
God is more worthy of your fear if you are believers. Fight them,
and God will chastise them at your hands, and degrade them,
and He will give you victory against them, and He will heal the
breasts of a people who believe. And He will remove the rage in
their hearts. God turns [in forgiveness] to whomever He will.
And God is Knowing, Wise. Or did you suppose that you would
be left [in peace] when God does not yet know those of you who
have struggled and have not taken, besides God and His Messenger and the believers, an intimate friend? And God is aware
of what you do.(Al-Tawbah, 9:126)
Those of them with whom you have made a pact, and then
break their pact every time, and they are not fearful. So if you
come upon them anywhere in the war, [deal with them so as
to] cause those behind them to scatter, so that they might remember. And if you fear, from any folk some treachery, then
cast it back to them with fairness. Truly God does not love the
treacherous. And do not let those who disbelieve suppose that
they have outstripped [Gods purpose]; indeed they cannot escape. Make ready for them whatever force you can and of horses
tethered that thereby you may dismay the enemy of God and
your enemy, and others besides them, whom you know not: God
knows them. And whatever thing you expend in the way of God
shall be repaid to you in full, and you will not be wronged. (AlAnfl, 8:5660)
67
05/07/2013 15:21
The next verse clarifies that if they do maintain their treaties, then
the treaties are to be honoured.
And if they incline to peace, then incline to it, and rely on
God; truly He is the Hearer, the Knower. (Al-Anfl, 8:61)
The principles surrounding treaties is also seen in this verse:
Say to the disbelievers, that if they desist, that which is past
will be forgiven them; but if they return, the way of [dealing
with] the ancients has already gone before! And fight them
until sedition is no more and religion is all for God; then if
they desist, surely God sees what they do. (Al-Anfl, 8:389)
To command the state of non-violence through the observance
of an established treaty with non-Muslim polytheists shows that the
Muslim community was willing, and indeed commanded, to live in a
state of peace with its neighbours even if those neighbours practiced a
religion other than Islam. When the Muslims are commanded to fight
those who break their treaties, it is the breaking of the treaty that invites
warfare, not the fact that the treaty-breakers are polytheists.
The Prophet made several important treaties with the non-Muslim
communities around Medina, and these were of more than one kind.
Perhaps the best known is the treaty of Hudaybiyyah, where the
Muslim community made a truce with the Quraysh tribe allowing
the Muslim community to make a pilgrimage to Mecca the following year. This treaty was noteworthy for its pragmatism: the Prophet
made certain concessions in favour of a greater good. Though they had
set out to make a peaceful pilgrimage during the holy months when
fighting was forbidden, they were met on the road by the Quraysh and
ultimately did not reach Mecca that year as part of the treaty terms.
Moreover, the Quraysh even demanded that the Prophet remove the
Divine Name Al-Rahmn and the title of Messenger of God from the
treaty, which the Prophet agreed to despite the dismay of prominent
companions such as Ali ibn Abi Talib, and even as staunch a Muslim
as Umar ibn al-Khattab bristled at what he saw at the time as humiliating terms. Yet the Quran referred to Hudaybiyyah in these terms:
Verily We have given you a clear victory (Al-Fat, 48:1). Although the
Muslims did not achieve their immediate aims of pilgrimage, the treaty
of Hudaybiyyah created an environment of free travel and peace which
68
05/07/2013 15:21
served to strengthen the Muslim communitys position in Arabia.

Thus Muslims sought peace with non-Muslims, and in no case is the
reason for Muslim armed struggle against non-Muslims the mere fact of
their religious identity. As is made clear in the passages from the Quran
cited above, the reason for armed struggle is a state of war (haraba)
originating in the concrete actions taken by the non-Muslims to harm
the Muslim community, not their state of disbelieving in God (kufr) or
of belonging to another religion. As the example of the Prophet shows,
Muslims can make treaties with their enemies, even if they are polytheists,
and they are expected by God to keep to their treaties. If hostilities resume
with treaty-breakers, it is not because the treaty- breakers are non-Muslim
but because they have re-entered a state of hostility. This in fact occurred
on more than one occasion, notably the treaty of Hudaybiyyah, which
was meant to last ten years but which was rendered void by Meccans
actions against the Muslim community.
In short, in Islam treaties are not predicated on theology or religious
identity. Rather, like treaties anywhere, they rely on the two parties faithfully adhering to the terms. As in all transactions in Islamic law, such as
buying and selling, and even marriage, the religion of the person making a
treaty has no legal bearing on the force of the treaty. An agreement with a
Muslim is no more or less binding than an agreement with a non-Muslim,
whether it is a rental contract or the United Nations (UN) Charter.
Question : What is the Distinction between

Pre-Emption and Aggression?
Some have sought support for the idea that Muslims can kill disbelievers
for their disbelief in the Prophets hadith during the Al-Ahzab campaign,
Now we campaign against them but are not campaigned against by
them. We are going to them.107 A similar type of support is sought in
the battle of Khaybar, where the Muslims mounted a surprise attack
against the Jews there, or at the battle of Mutah, where Muslims attacked
the Byzantines.
If one restricted the meaning of hostility to shots being fired, then
these examples might show that Muslims claim the right to unprovoked
attack against others by reason of their being non-Muslims. However,
an enemy need not be storming the gates in order to pose a grave and
69
05/07/2013 15:21
imminent danger. An enemy can have the intent to cause harm, or can
be planning to cause harm, or can be conspiring with others who are
already causing harm.
Indeed while there were several cases in which the Muslims
campaigned when they were not campaigned against, there were
nevertheless reasons why this cannot be considered aggression but
rather pre-emption against a clear danger coupled with an intention
of future aggression. In the case of Ban Mustalaq, it came to the
Prophets attention that they were conspiring against the Muslims. In
the case of Khaybar, the Prophet learned that Ban Khaybar had made
a secret agreement with Ban Ghaafn to unite against them. In order
to pre-empt this action, the Prophet staged a surprise attack. In the
case of the attack at Mutah, tribes to the north (which were under
the protection of the Byzantines) showed their hostility towards the
Muslims by taking the egregious step of killing the Prophets emissary.
In the Tabuk campaign Muslims set out based on information that the
Byzantines were preparing to attack.
There exists a saying in Arabic, When the Byzantines are not
campaigned against, they campaign. This saying should remind us
that the modern concepts of pre-emptive war and aggression must be
understood in their proper context. Until the twentieth century, war
was an accepted right of all states. Indeed, in 1928 the Kellogg-Briand
Pact was the first major systematic attempt to renounce war as an
instrument of national policy. Over the course of the twentieth century
the Kellogg-Briand Pact was followed by the Nuremberg Principles,
the Charter of the United Nations, and the Geneva Conventions, all of
which laid the foundation for current international law. These agreements constitute binding treaties between the signatories. They make
military aggression between states illegal, and among other things
forbid the acquisition of territory by war, define war crimes during
the conduct of war, and govern the treatment of prisoners, civilians,
and combatants.
Such questions had already been an important part of Islamic law
for more than a thousand years. Though the content of the law was
differentreflecting a different international environmentthe effort
to regulate relations between states was well-established in Islam long
70
05/07/2013 15:21
before the treaties of the twentieth century. Indeed, while Islamic law
flowed from principles laid down in the Quran and the life of the
Prophet as part of a larger ethical law, the international treaties of the
twentieth century were, it must be said, fuelled largely by the horror
of the two World Wars and the fear of having such episodes repeated.
Question : What Is the Difference Between The Abode

of Islam and The Abode of War?
From the point of view of Islamic law, any Muslim signatory to the
Charter of the UN and the Geneva Conventions is just as bound to
abide by them as the Prophet was to abide by the treaties he completed
with the pagan Quraysh and with other tribes of Arabia and beyond.
The military encounters between political entities in the past cannot
be judged by the same standards that we judge such encounters today,
because in the absence of an explicit renunciation of international
agreements all nations are in a de facto treaty with all others, though
the situation is not usually framed in those terms. The classical laws of
jihad assumedcorrectlythat the default position between states was
a state of war, hence the name Dr al-arb, or Abode of War, which
is usually set in contrast to Dr al-Islm or the Abode of Islam. This
has been widely understood to mean that Muslims consider themselves
obligated to wage war on all non-Muslim lands until they become part
of Dr al-Islm, but this is not at all the case. The label the abode
of war signifies that the land in question is not in treaty with the
Muslims and that hostilities can break out at any time. Recall that war
was universally acknowledged as something states did to get what they
wanted; there was no idea of violating international law or of becoming
a rogue state. From the point of view of current international law, all
states were in a sense rogue states because there was no mechanism
for enforcing or even defining the rules of war, aside from customary
practices such as the receiving of emissaries.
Thus the explicit rules of the Islamic law of jihad were not imposed
from without, as has been the case for states in the twentieth century,
but were realised from within. The state of affairs in seventh century
Arabia and the surrounding areas made this state of war the rule rather
than the exception. Unless an explicit treaty was made between two
71
05/07/2013 15:21
groupsin the case of Arabia, these fundamental units were usually

tribesthen one could expect an attack at any time. The Quran reflects
the early Muslim communitys awareness of its weak and uncertain
position in this hostile state of affairs:
Or is it that they have not seen that We have appointed a secure Sanctuary, while people are snatched away all around
them? (Al-Ankabt, 29:67)
And remember when you were few and oppressed in the land,
and were fearful lest men should snatch you away (AlAnfl, 8:26)
And they say, If we were to follow the Guidance with you, we
will be deprived from our land (Al-Qaa, 28:57)
Muslims are described as Those to whom people said, The people
have gathered against you, therefore fear them ... (l Imrn, 3:173)
The Surah of Quraysh also testifies to the risks of living on the
Arabian Peninsula:
[In gratitude] for the security of Quraysh, their security for
the journey of winter and of summer, let them worship the
Lord of this House, Who has fed them against hunger and
made them secure from fear. (Quraysh, 106:14)
The separation of the world into the Abode of Islam and the Abode
of War reflects the reality, brutal and unavoidable, that the world was
not always governed by the universal treaties of today. The terms Dr
al-Islm and Dr al-arb are not terms from the Quran or from the
teachings of the Prophet, but grew out of the work of jurists coming
to terms with the new international profile of Islam. As such, they also
coined terms such as Dr al-ul (Abode of Reconciliation) and Dr
al-Ahd (Abode of Treaty), referring to those lands not ruled by Islam
but with which the Islamic state had some sort of peace agreement.
Such designations were common from the Abbasid period all the way
through to the Ottoman Empire in the twentieth century.
From the point of view of Islamic law, the gradual adoption and
advancement of moral principles in international law is a welcome
development, and brings the world closer to the Quranic ideal of
non-aggression and peaceful coexistence. And if they incline to peace,
then incline to it, and rely on God; truly He is the Hearer, the Knower
72
05/07/2013 15:21
(Al-Anfl, 8:61). This idealisation of peace is also echoed in the Prophets

command, Do not be hopeful of meeting the enemy, and ask God for
well-being.108
Question : Is Forced Conversion an Islamic Teaching?

Some texts exist which would, if misunderstood, seem to contradict the
spirit of the Quranic verses and hadith mentioned above regarding the
role of ones religion in war. One of these is the hadith which reads:
I have been commanded to fight the people until they bear witness
that there is no divinity but God and Muhammad is Gods Messenger,
perform the Prayer, and pay the Alms. When they have done this, their
blood and property are safe from me, except by the right of Islam and
their reckoning with God.109
Three main questions are raised. First, who are the people whom
the Prophet is commanded to fight? Second, what is the defining characteristic of these people, which makes them subject to the Prophets
fighting them? Third, and less obviously, is this hadith universal in its
temporal scope, or is it limited to a specific time and situation?
A minority position holds that this hadith points to the fact that
although in the beginning the Muslims were commanded to spread the
truth of Islam peacefully, at a certain point this command was abrogated and from that point forward Muslims were commanded to fight
non-Muslims until they accepted Islam. Abrogation (naskh) means
that the legally binding status of a Quranic verse is superseded by the
legally binding authority of a verse that is revealed later. For example, one verse of the Quran prohibits Muslims from praying while
intoxicated, while a later verse abrogates this verse by promulgating
an absolute prohibition on the consumption of alcohol. At issue here
is whether a previous command to preach peacefully is cancelled by a
later command to fight people until they accept Islam.
Among the verses which refer to preaching the truths in the Quran
and inviting non-Muslims to Islam are the following:
So remind. For you are only an admonisher; you are not a
taskmaster over them. But he who turns away and disbelieves, God will chastise him with the greater chastisement.
(Al-Ghshiyah, 88:21-24)
73
05/07/2013 15:21

But if they are disregardful, We have not sent you as a keeper
over them. Your duty is only to deliver the Message (AlShr, 42:48)
And whether We show you a part of that which We promise
them, or We take you [to Us], it is for you only to convey [the
Message], and it is for Us to do the reckoning. (Al-Rad, 13:40)
And obey God and obey the Messenger, and beware; but if
you turn away, then know that Our Messengers duty is only
to proclaim plainly. (Al-Midah, 5:92)
Some of these verses are Medinan, which means that they were
revealed after permission was given to the Muslim community to
struggle through force of arms.
This makes it clear that the preaching of Islam is a question of
allowing the truth to reach the ears of those who have yet to hear it,
not of forcing others to accept it. Indeed, to force another to accept a
truth in his heart is impossible, as acknowledged clearly in the Quranic
verse There is no compulsion in religion. The right way has become distinct
from error (Al-Baqarah, 2:256). This verse was revealed in Medina and
was in fact directed at Muslims who wanted to convert their children
from Judaism or Christianity to Islam.110 As the Quran is so clear that
the Prophets only responsibility as regards bringing others to the truth
is only to preach it to them, to bring the good news of paradise and to
warn of hell, we are left with the hadith which claims that the Prophet
has been commanded to fight until the people accept the oneness
of God, the Messengerhood of the Prophet, perform the canonical
prayer, and pay the Alms, all of which is tantamount to their becoming
Muslims. The majority of the scholars of Quranic exegesis and law
hold that the command to preach peacefully and to never coerce a
person in his choice of religion was never abrogated and continued to
hold sway up until the end of the Prophets life and beyond. Amongst
this majority there are two main positions. Some hold that the people
referred to in the verse are the Arabian idol-worshippers, while all
others fall into a separate category addressed by such verses as God
does not forbid you in regard to those who did not wage war against you
on account of religion and did not expel you from your homes, that you
should treat them kindly and deal with them justly. Assuredly God loves
74
05/07/2013 15:21
the just (Al-Mumtaanah, 60:8). A second group of scholars holds

that the command enshrined in There is no compulsion in religion is
universal and applies to everyone, be they idol-worshippers or Jews
or Christians. In both cases the only possible scope for the people is
limited to those with whom the Prophet was engaged in conflict at the
time. The majority of scholars thus do not consider that the people
in this hadith refers to all people everywhere.
Question : What is the Sword Verse?

One source of some controversy is the so-called sword verse, which reads:
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters
wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them,
and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they
repent, and establish prayer and pay the alms, then leave their
way free. God is Forgiving, Merciful. (Al-Tawbah, 9:5)
There is no disagreement that indeed this verse commands the
Muslims to kill the polytheists, but the question remains as to whether
they are to be killed because they are disbelievers or because of their
enmity towards the Muslims. Are they to be fought because they are
hostile to the Muslims or because they reject Islam? The second part of
the verse, which names repentance and the performance of the Prayer
and the giving of alms as a condition by which the polytheists can save
themselves from the Muslims, would seem to indicate that it is their
unbelief, not their hostility, which is the motivation for Muslims to kill
them. However, the next verse reads,
And if any one of the idolaters seeks your protection, then
grant him protection so that he might hear the words of God
and afterward convey him to his place of securitythat is because they are a people who do not know. (Al-Tawbah, 9:6)
This second verse commands Muslims to receive a polytheist if he
seeks asylum, to preach the truth to him, and then to let him go safely.
It sets no condition that he should repent or accept Islam. It is not a
condition for the asylum seekers safe return that he become a Muslim.
Indeed, these two verses present not one but two possibilities for the
non-Muslim to escape armed conflict with the Muslim community: the
first is to accept Islam, as mentioned in the first verse, and the second is
75
05/07/2013 15:21
to seek asylum with the Muslims, as mentioned in the second verse.111

Some have tried, creatively and erroneously, to assert that the second
verse is abrogated by the first, but this is an abuse of the principles of
abrogation, and twists verses of the Quran to mean what we want them
to mean. In fact, it would be impossible for Al-Tawbah, 9:5 to call for
fighting against others solely based on their belief without it abrogating
no less than 140 other verses calling for peace with those who do not
fight against Muslims, even if they are pagans. Indeed, it would have
to abrogate the verse immediately following it, 9:6. The verse There is
no coercion in religion is not a command, but a statement of fact, of the
same grammatical form as There is no god but God. Recall that this verse,
according to one account, was revealed in the context of people over
whose religious preferences the Muslims had no controlchildren of
theirs who were among an exiled tribe. It is a description of what religion
is in relation to the human will. In Quranic exegesis, only commands
can be abrogated, not truths. Thus by definition there is no way that
There is no coercion in religion (a statement, or khabar) can become Let
there be coercion in religion (a command, or amr). In fact, among the
four Sunni schools of jurisprudence only one, the Shafii school, contains
the view that a persons belief can be a reason for fighting against them.
This view, however, is mitigated by the fact that an opposite view, in
agreement with the majority, is also attributed to Shafii.
Moreover, it is also important to note that two similar sounding but
distinct words are used in the Quranic verse which says slay the idolaters wherever you find them and the hadith which reads, I have been
commanded to fight with the people until . In the Arabic, the two
verbs in question are qatala, which means to fight, kill, or murder, and
qtala, which means to fight, to combat, or to contend with something.
The resulting verbal nouns are qatl for qatala and qitl for qtala. Qatl
means killing, while qitl means combat. Sat al-qitl, for example,
means battlefield. The difference is crucial and is sadly sometimes
ignored. This is a case which demonstrates the importance of mastering
Arabic before deciding on matters of Islamic law.
The Prophet did not say, I will kill/slay/murder the polytheists until
He said, I will fight with them/ combat them/contend with them
Qatl is an action which, both linguistically and practically, requires only
76
05/07/2013 15:21
one agent. Qitl implies two agents, each contending with or resisting
the other. The use of qitl implies a state of mutual hostility, or, from
the Prophets point of view, of a response to the polytheists hostility.
Misunderstanding concerning such texts as these can be corrected
easily by referring to the traditional law. It is one thing to hunt for quotes
which serve a predetermined purpose, and quite another to understand
a text in its proper context and in light of the tradition that has dwelt
upon it for over 1400 years. Such problems become compounded
through mistranslation and, in some cases, deliberate misinformation.
Question : What are the Basic Rules of Combat as Laid

Down in Islams Authoritative Texts?
The fundamental rules of combat are not academic extractions cleverly derived from history, but are explicitly laid out in Islams authoritative texts:
but aggress not; God loves not the aggressors. (Al-Baqarah,
2:190)
When the Prophet dispatched his armies he would say, Go in the
name of God. Fight in the way of God [against] the ones who disbelieve
in God. Do not act brutally. Do not exceed the proper bounds. Do not
mutilate. Do not kill children or hermits.112 Once, after a battle, the
Prophet passed by a woman who had been slain, whereupon he said,
She is not one who would have fought. Thereupon, he looked at the men
and said to one of them, Run after Khalid ibn al-Walid [and tell him]
that he must not slay children, serfs, or women.113 In another hadith
the Prophet says clearly, Do not kill weak old men, small children, or
women.114
Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, the first caliph, gave these instructions to his
armies:
I instruct you in ten matters: Do not kill women, children,
the old, or the infirm; do not cut down fruit-bearing trees;
do not destroy any town; do not kill sheep or camels except for the purposes of eating; do not burn date trees or
submerge them; do not steal from the booty and do not be
cowardly.115
77
05/07/2013 15:21
Hasan al-Basri, one of the most important and influential of the

second generation of Muslims, described the following as violations of
the rules of war:
mutilation (muthla), [imposing] thirst (ghull), the killing of women, children, and the old (shuyukh)the ones
who have no judgment for themselves (l rayy lahum), and
no fighters among them; [the killing of] monks and hermits,
the burning of trees, and the killing of animals for other than
the welfare [of eating].116
The principles here are clear. The Islamic law of war prohibits naked
aggression, the harming of non-combatants, excessive cruelty even in
the case of combatants, and even addresses the rights of animals and the
natural environment.
Question : What is the Status of Non-Muslims under

Islamic Rule?
An integral part of any law of war is the law of peace. It has already been
established that the mere fact of a people being non-Muslim cannot
constitute a legally sanctioned reason to go to war with them, and it thus
follows that there must be a legally sanctioned way of living together
with peoples who are non-Muslim. Mention has already been made of
the possibility and legitimacy of treaties with non-Muslims, even with
pagans who are not enemies and are not planning hostilities. Treaties
can obviously also be made with the People of the Booka term usually
understood to be Jews and Christians but which in practice has applied
to other religious traditions with which Islam has come into contact, such
as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Zoroastrianism.
In Islamic law the People of the Book who live under the political rule
of Muslims are called ahl al-dhimmah, literally people of protection, or
often simply dhimm (protected person). The doctrine of dhimmah is a
natural outgrowth of the verse,
God does not forbid you in regard to those who did not
wage war against you on account of religion and did not expel you from your homes, that you should treat them kindly
and deal with them justly. Assuredly God loves the just. (AlMumtaanah, 60:8)
78
05/07/2013 15:21
As mentioned above, that area where Muslims are sovereign and

where Islam provides the law for the rulers is referred to as Dr al-Islm,
usually translated as the Abode of Islam, but sometimes left untranslated
or referred to, rarely, as Islamdom, to parallel the term Christendom. In
fact, often when the term Islam is used in Western writings, popular and
scholarly, what is being referred to is in fact Dr al-Islm, which is the
political entity and not the religion itself. Indeed, a population need not
be majority Muslim in order for it to be Dr al-Islm, and a population
may be mostly Muslim without the area they inhabit being a part of Dr
al-Islm.
Broadly speaking, there are two ways in which a given people may be
considered ahl al-dhimmah. In one case, the dhimmis live amongst the
Muslim population and share the same streets, markets, and neighbourhoods. In the second case, the dhimmis live in a land which is separate
and where they run most of their own affairs. There are naturally degrees
in between these two categories, but these are the two general types.
In the first case the dhimmis live under the laws and within the
framework provided by the Islamic state, but with a substantial amount of
autonomy as regards religious and cultural matters, often with the power
to adjudicate certain disputes in their own separate system of courts. This
was an extremely common arrangement, which began from the time of
the Prophet and the first caliphs and continued until the dissolution of
the Ottoman Empire in the twentieth century. The protected people were
not required to contribute to the military protection of Dr al-Islm, but
they were subject to a poll tax specific to them, most commonly known
as the jizyah but which had other names as well.
In the second case, there exists an arrangement with the Islamic state
that the dhimmi state will exist in peace with the Islamic state and will not
help or support any enemy of Islam. Examples of this include the Prophets
arrangement with the people of Bahrain, who were Zoroastrians, and
with the Christians of Najran. Under such an arrangement, the people
remain completely autonomous and run their own affairs. They remain
under the protection of the Islamic state, with no responsibility to provide
active protection in return. The Islamic state has no right to any of their
wealth or property except for the jizyah. The following is the text of the
agreement between the Christians of Najran and the Prophet:
79
05/07/2013 15:21

Najran and their followers are entitled to the protection of
God and to the security of Muhammad the Prophet, the Messenger of God, which security shall involve their persons, religion, lands, possessions, including those of them who are
absent as well as those who are present, their camels, messengers, and images [amthilah, a reference to crosses and icons].
The state they previously held shall not be changed, nor shall
any of their religious services or images be changed. No attempt shall be made to turn a bishop, a monk from his office
as a monk, nor the sexton of a church from his office.117
Such agreements were commonplace in the early conquests, such as

the agreements that the Muslim commanders made with the Christian
population of Aleppo, Antioch, Maarret Masrin, Homs, Qinnasrin, and
Baalbek. Upon the surrender of Damascus, the general Khalid ibn alWalid wrote the following to the inhabitants of the city:
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. This
is what Khalid ibn al-Walid would grant to the inhabitants
of Damascus, if he enters therein: he promises to give them
security for their lives, property, and churches. Their city
shall not be demolished, neither shall any Muslim be quartered in their houses. Thereunto we give to them the pact of
God and the protection of his Prophet, the caliphs and the
believers. So long as they pay the poll tax, nothing but good
shall befall them.118
Perhaps most famous of all is the agreement between Umar ibn alKhattab and the people of Jerusalem:
This is the assurance of safety (amn) which the servant of
God Umar, the Commander of the Faithful, has granted to
the people of Jerusalem. He has given them an assurance
of safety for themselves, for their property, their churches,
their crosses, the sick and healthy of the city, and for all
the rituals that belong to their religion. Their churches will
not be inhabited [by Muslims] nor will they be destroyed.
Neither they, nor the land on which they stand, nor their
crosses, nor their property will be damaged. They will not be
forcibly converted The people of Jerusalem must pay the
poll tax like the people of [other] cities, and they must expel
the Byzantines and the robbers 119
Such agreements also applied to other religions as well. This is the

80
05/07/2013 15:21
treaty made between the Prophets companion Habib ibn Maslamah and
the people of Dabil:
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. This
is a treaty of Habib ibn Maslamah with the Christians, Magians [i.e., Zoroastrians], and Jews of Dabil, including those
present and those absent. I have granted for you safety for
your lives, possessions, churches, places of worship, and city
wall. Thus ye are safe and we are bound to fulfill our covenant, so long as ye fulfil yours and pay the poll tax 120
The main advantage of the ahl al-dhimmah over Muslims was the
guarantee of their protection without the responsibility to actively
engage in that protection themselves. Thus a dhimmi was not required
to go to war to defend the Islamic state. The main disadvantage was the
jizyah, a tax which Muslims did not pay.
Dr al-Islm is an Islamic polity ruled by Muslims in accordance with
Islamic law, where the sovereignty and primacy of Muslim power is to
remain undisputed, and the protected peoples live under this arrangement
in a state of mutual agreement, with certain advantages given and others
taken. Under the dhimmi arrangement a protected people is subjected to
Muslim power in terms of political power only, while their identity, their
language, their culture and most importantly their religion remain intact
and under their control. This means that aside from paying the jizyah and
obeying the overarching laws applying to people living in Dr al-Islm,
the protected people are left alone to live their lives as they see fit. This
includes the education of their children, the maintenance of their houses
of worship, and even the handling of their own affairs (especially matters
such as marriage, divorce, and inheritance). Under Islamic rule, dhimmis
enjoyed true cultural and religious independence, and were in no way
compelled to adopt the culture or religion of their rulers. Despite their
theological differences with members of other faiths, Muslims did not
consider the conquered peoples to be fundamentally inferior and in need
of edification in order to be truly civilised. Military conquest did not entail
or require the conversion of the conquered people. Islamic law provided
Muslims with a ready-made and legally binding way of dealing with nonMuslims without robbing them of their selfhood, their language, or their
religion.
81
05/07/2013 15:21
Question : What is the Jizyah, or Poll Tax,

on Non-Muslims?
One source of confusion is the misapplication of the verse until they
pay the jizyah tribute, readily being subdued (Al-Tawbah, 9:29). A misunderstanding similar to the one which affects the Quranic verses pertaining to jihad occurs over the phrase wa hum ghirn, or in a state of
humility, lowness. That is to say, it is often thought that they pay the
jizyah in a state of humility for being non-Muslims, but the state of
being non-Muslim applies only to the giving of the jizyah, whereas
the state of being humbled is a result of the previous hostility and
enmity exhibited by the group against the Muslim community.
This is not to say that in Islamic history some rulers have not
enforced a kind of humiliation to accompany the paying of the
jizyah by the dhimmi communities, but in doing so they go against
the established precedent and legal opinion. For example, Imam
Nawawi, commenting on those who would impose a humiliation
along with the paying of the jizyah, said, As for this aforementioned
practice (hayah), I know of no sound support for it in this respect,
and it is only mentioned by the scholars of Khurasan. The majority
(jumhr) of scholars say that the jizyah is to be taken with gentleness, as one would receive a debt (dayn). The reliably correct opinion is that this practice is invalid and those who devised it should
be refuted. It is not related that the Prophet or any of the rightlyguided caliphs did any such thing when collecting the jizyah.121 Ibn
Qudamah also rejected this practice and noted that the Prophet and
the rightly-guided caliphs encouraged the jizyah to be collected with
gentleness and kindness.122
In a letter that Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz sent regarding the jizyah,
he gives the following instructions,
Look to the protected people around you who are old and
weak and who are no longer able to earn a living and pay
them from the treasury of the Muslims such as will do
them good. For indeed I have learned that the Commander of the Believers Umar ibn al-Khattab once passed an
old man who was begging at peoples doors. He said, We
have been unfair to you. We used to take jizyah from you
82
05/07/2013 15:21
when you were young, then neglected you when you were
old. Then he said, Pay him from the treasury of the Muslims such as will do him good.123
Moreover, the word jizyah itself simply derives from a root

meaning part, referring to the fact that it is taken as a part of the
wealth of the protected peoples. In fact, the use of the word jizyah is
not even required. The historian al-Tabari relates that some members
of the Christian community asked Umar ibn al-Khattab if they could
refer to the jizyah as adaqah, literally charity, which he agreed to.
It is also worth noting in this context that in most cases the jizyah
taken was actually less than the zakat, or alms, paid by Muslims,
which the dhimmis were not required to pay since the zakat is a
religious requirement for Muslims only.
Another aspect of the debate over the status of protected peoples
is the practice of requiring protected peoples to dress in some way
that was recognisably distinct from Muslims (such as a sash around
the waist which Muslims would then not be allowed to wear). In
Islamic law such a ruling is the prerogative of the ruler, who may
impose it for reasons of security, order, or for other reasons, though
it is not required by Islamic law. It is worth noting that this practice
was by no means universal and there is no record that the Prophet
himself ever required it.
The classical law governing protected peoples was developed in
a world where religious communities were also political communities. Some have said that the protected peoples were second-class
citizens, but this is to assume that all political arrangements can
be compared to the modern nation-state and its concept of citizenship. Indeed, many of the forms of independence the protected
peoples enjoyed, such as independence of education and having religious courts, would scarcely be possible in the context of the modern
nation state. In fact, the laws for protected peoples protected the very
same Five Basic Rights (Religion, Life, Mind, Honour, and Property)
which apply for Muslims, and the rights granted to the protected
peoples were generally the most one could expect, short of granting
them total sovereignty, which would negate their connection with
Dr al-Islm in the first place.
83
05/07/2013 15:21
In previous times Islamic law saw dominance within Dr al-Islm

as the only guarantee for these rights, but the demand for obedience
and deference from the protected people was geared, not towards
some egotistical exaltation of Islam, but towards a just order where
everyones rights could be protected without undue advantage being
taken. In the modern context, there is nothing in Islamic law that
would preclude Muslims living as equal citizens in a state run by
a democratically elected government, so long as their fundamental
religious rights were protected.
Question : Does Orthodox Islam Sanction Rebellion

Against Political Authority?
The relationship of the Muslim believer to those in political power reaches
back to the beginning of Islam, when the Prophet became not only the
spiritual guide of the new community but its political leader as well.
The question that Muslims have had to wrestle with since then
concerns the legitimacy of political authority. Even though there was
never a separation of church and state in Islam, there has always been,
since the advent of the Umayyad caliphate thirty years after the death of
the Prophet, a de facto separation of power between the ulama, or scholarly class, on the one hand, and the various caliphs, sultans, and kings on
the other. One might call this a separation between court and mosque,
between secretaries and scholars. What connected them was the duty of
the ruler to dispose of the affairs of state in accordance with Islamic law
and not his personal whim, and to do his part in maintaining the religion. It was the scholars who determined what that law was, and they
functioned in various degrees of independence from the political rulers
throughout most of Islamic history. That is to say, the rule of Islam is
not the rule of God directly, nor even the rule of the clerics, but the rule
of lawa law whose form is independent of the ruler whose role it is to
carry it out.
In the context of traditional Islamic law, the question arises as to
when it is permissible or even mandatory to take up arms against political
authority. Spiritual or armed rebellion against the Prophet in the name
of Islam would have been an absurdity, as he was Gods chosen prophet
and ruler and was thus universally acknowledged by anyone who called
84
05/07/2013 15:21
himself Muslim. However, after the Prophet, legitimacy and rebellion

become real questions.
In a situation where a Muslim country is being ruled by a Muslim
according to traditional Islamic law, if a ruler openly declares kufr (unbelief) in a way that is plain and not open to any reasonable doubt, then
traditional Islam holds that it is a duty to rise up against him. The declaration of kufr must be clear, however. For example, the ruler may openly
deny Islam and the veracity of the Prophets claim to being a Messenger
of God. He may openly mock and degrade some fundamental pillar of
religion like the pilgrimage to Mecca or the fasting in Ramadan. He may
also act in a way that conclusively proves his kufr, such as openly worshipping an idol. Such words and actions, if not mitigated by other factors,
would constitute proof of the rulers state of unbelief.
However, it is crucial to make a distinction, as traditional Islam does,
between apostasy, which is a denial of truth, and sin or even simple error,
which is a failure to live up to it. Thus, rejecting the principle of the five
daily prayers (which are performed with some variations amongst all
Muslims) constitutes a negation of Islam itself, while being too lazy to
pray is a sin. Mocking and degrading the Prophet is a rejection of Islam,
but calling the mufti a silly fellow is, at worst, a sin. Prostrating before an
idol in worship is a rejection of Islam, but rising when a respected elder
enters the room is religiously neutral or even commendable. In traditional
Islam, the sinner is allowed to respect the law and regret his weakness; by
contrast, the disbeliever disregards the law in order to indulge his weakness. In any ethical system, the should or ought follows the is, which
is to say that the truth always precedes and determines moral judgment.
Kufr endangers that truth, and destroys the basis for morality, while sin is
a failure to live up to that truth. Indeed, the very identification of an act as
a sin is a kind of affirmation of the truth which that sin fails to live up to.
Having said that, traditional Islam has recognised three ways in
which a ruler may legitimately come to power: (1) through receiving the
allegiance of ahl al-all wa al-aqd; (2) by being chosen as a successor
by the previous ruler; (3) or by force, on the condition that this is not
to unseat a legitimate ruler but rather occurs in the absence of one. Ahl
al-all wa al-aqd literally means people who untie and bind or those
with the authority to contract agreements. In the Islamic context they are
85
05/07/2013 15:21
those with religious and political authority, namely the ulama and others
who are the de facto representatives of the interests of the people. Imam
al-Nawawi said of political rulers,
As for rising up against them and fighting them, this is forbidden by the consensus of Muslims, even if they are sinful tyrants (fsiq, lim) The scholars have said that the
reason why one should not separate from him and why it is
forbidden to rise against him is the resulting strife, bloodletting, and corruption.124
This statement reflects the general consensus amongst traditional
scholars, which is based on hadith of the Prophet such as,
After me there will be rulers (immah, sing. imm) who
will not follow my guidance or practice my Wont (Sunnah).
Among them men will rise with the hearts of devils and the
bodies of men. He was asked, What should we do if we encounter that? He said, Listen and obey their command. Even
if they beat you and take your wealth, listen and obey.125
In another hadith he was asked, Messenger of God, should we not
oppose him by the sword? He said,
No, not so long as the Prayer is established among you. If
you see something you hate in your ruler, hate his action,
but do not cease to be obedient.126
Islamic law does not expound a utopian ideology of a perfect world
order. The Islamic tradition places paradise in the hereafter, not in this
world, and recognises that it is only within mens power to maximize
the level of justice in the world while maintaining a balance between
the spiritual and the worldly. In a perfect world, the ruler would be just,
wise, and pious, and would deal fairly with people while doing his part
to protect their spiritual welfare. However, in such cases where a choice
must be made between spiritual well-being and worldly justice, Islam
chooses the former. Man may gain the world and lose paradise, while
a man who gains paradise loses nothing in the ultimate sense. Thus a
tyrant who taxes excessively and unreasonably punishes dissent, while
maintaining the structure and tradition of faith (so long as the Prayer is
established among you), is superior to a ruler who makes the trains run
on time but whose programme uproots the very pillars of faith.
86
05/07/2013 15:21
But this perspective is not merely a matter of placing the spiritual over the material. It is based upon a common sense approach that
acknowledges that revolutions often bring about a sum total of suffering
much greater than the previous order they seek to overturn. Muslims
do not advocate doing nothing in the face of tyranny, but rather believe
that non-violent methods of counsel and protest are ultimately better
ways of improving the existing order. Indeed, Muslim jurists such as
al-Juwayni and al-Ghazali and many, many others have discussed the
conditions under which a ruler could be deposed and replaced by a new
one, and it was typical in Islamic law for this function of replacing an evil
(or insane) ruler to be seen as the role of the ahl al-all wa al-aqd (see
above). This is considered different from open rebellion by the population at large, which would entail not only the replacement of the ruler
but an upheaval affecting the broader society and destroying the order of
that society. In the chapter on Enjoining Right and Forbidding Wrong
(al-Amr bil-Marf wa al-Nahy an al-Munkar) in his seminal work
Iy Ulm al-Dn, al-Ghazali describes the levels of enjoining right and
forbidding wrong: the first is the identification of a wrong being committed, followed by friendly counsel and advice for the wrongdoer, beyond
which one can engage in a harsh critique and public protest against the
action, and in the most extreme cases one can resort to physical intervention to stop the wrong, but even in the case of the use of force a distinction
is also to be made between intervening to stop a mugger, for example, and
taking up arms against the sultan. Al-Ghazali states: As for intervening
through force, that is not for subjects to undertake against the sultan,
because it would lead to civil strife (fitnah) and generate harm, and that
to which it would give rise would be worse than the initial difficulties.
As for verbal condemnations such as O tyrant! or O you who does not
fear God and the like, if such words leads to civil strife (fitnah) against
others than this is not permissible, but if one fears only for oneself that is
permissible and indeed commendable. He quotes the famous hadith of
the Prophet, The best struggle (jihad) is a true word spoken in the presence of a tyrannical ruler. At the same time, jurists such as al-Mawardi
and others have laid out the ethics of how rulers should deal with those
who oppose them, setting out conditions on what is expected of a ruler
who encounters non-violent resistance, violent rebellion, and situations
87
05/07/2013 15:21
in between. Such issues are extremely complex, but as a general principle force should be used by the ruler against his opponents as a last
resort, when to do otherwise would result in even greater killing, fear,
and harm to the population. If a ruler can bring about a resolution to a
standoff or a conflict through persuasion or through addressing grievances then he must do so. Moreover, those who oppose the ruler with an
interpretation, meaning on the principled basis of their understanding
of what Islam requires, should be treated differently and more leniently
than those who destabilise the existing order simply for personal gain and
whose legal status would be that of a bandit or highwayman.
There is no doubt that some forms of tyranny impose upon the population a state of fear, suffering, and death that is so extreme that such a
tyranny constitutes that very state of civil strife (fitnah) and social disintegration or corruption in the land(al-fasd fi al-ar) which Islamic law
seeks to avoid by discouraging precipitous revolution or open rebellion.
In cases where there is already so much killing and mayhem that the
conditions are already as bad as that of a civil war or even lawlessness, and
where peaceful means such as counsel and protest have been exhausted
(according to the traditional Islamic ethical principle of enjoining right
and forbidding wrong), and where the ahl al-all wa al-aqd cannot or
will not intervene, then rebellion may be the only option. Also, some
jurists (such as Abd Allah bin Bayyah and Ali Gomaa) have distinguished between starting a rebellion on the one hand and joining in one
that is already underway on the other; the initiator bears responsibility for
whatever follows, but in the case of an already ongoing civil war one may
have to choose a side so that justice and order can be established and the
conflict and instability can come to an end.
Muslims are expected to resist a ruler insofar as he commands them
to go against the shariah; for example, a Muslim should not obey a
command to refrain from praying the five canonical prayers. But this is
not the same as rebelling against a ruler who himself does not completely
enact the shariah, especially since Islamic law allows Muslims to live in
a society in which Islamic law is not sovereign so long as their own religious rights are not violated. Those who advocate the overthrow of a ruler
who does not rule in accordance with their view of the shariah are a
tiny minority within Islamic law. They often make a compound error:
88
05/07/2013 15:21
first they accept only their own vision of Islamic law, then they consider
deviation from this vision to be a sin, and then they conflate this sin with
unbelief, thus making the ruler subject to rebellion.
It should also be noted that some have engaged in guilt by association or unbelief (kufr) by association to the absurd and vicious degree
that employees of the state, and people who simply pay taxes, are considered to be complicit in the crimes of that state. Others have even gone
so far as to say that anyone who merely lives in a society which does not
conform to their vision of Islamic law is guilty of kufr (unbelief), since
they passively accept it instead of actively fighting against it. There is no
basis for this in Islamic law whatsoever.
Question : How Does the Islamic Law of War

Come to be Violated?
Islam is the second largest religion in the world and in history after
Christianity. It is also today the worlds fastest growing religion, with
1.6 billion adherents all over the world. As of 2007 CE, some 25 percent
or so of the worlds population is Muslim. There were, historically, three
main doctrinal and juridical branches of the religion: Sunni, Shiite and
Khawarij. Currently (2007 CE) approximately 90 percent of all Muslims
are Sunni, 9% are Shia, and less than 1 percent are Ibadi. The Sunnis
(which include the Sufis or Mystics) are mostly followers of the four
recognised schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafii and Hanbali) of law, and a
minority are Salafi/Wahhabi, who historically arose from one of the four
schools (the Hanbali), but today are Sunnis who sometimes follow their
own interpretations outside of the four schools. Amongst the Shiites,
the Jafaris or Ithna ashari (Twelver) are the biggest group, followed by
the Zaydis and the Ismailis. The Ibadis are descended from the original
community of Khawarij, but the original radical Khawarij died out and
were replaced by todays moderate Ibadis.
Aside from Islams doctrinal and juridical divisions, a typical understanding of the spectrum in Islam, even within the Islamic world itself,
places the fundamentalists on one side and the modernists on the other. The
modernists are seen as open-minded, tolerant, peace-loving, and respectful of human rights. The fundamentalists are seen as fanatical, warlike,
obscurantist, backwards, and tyrannical. Above all, from the Western
89
05/07/2013 15:21
point of view the modernists are like us and hence are not threatening,
while the fundamentalists are inherently dangerous and different.
In fact, a more helpful and accurate description of the spectrum
of the worlds Muslims would be the following five categories, from
extreme secularism on one end to extreme sectarianism on the other.
Understanding the differences is crucial to understanding jihad and the
law of war.
secular fundamentalists: A complete rejection of Islam as a
substantial force in guiding society. At a maximum, religion is a private
affair, and should have nothing to say about human relations. Islamic
civilisation is something to be left behind, while modern Western civilisation is to be emulated, to the extent possible.
modernists and modern secularists: Islam must adjust and
change and learn the lessons of modernity; apologists holding that faith
is valuable as a guide to ethics, but Islamic teachings should change
with the times. The values of the modern West are generally seen as the
norm to which the Islamic world should adjust itself.
traditionalists: Islam is the source of meaning and guidance for
the inward and outward life. Islamic civilisation is a source and treasure
of intellectual, spiritual, and artistic nourishment. Loyalty to this tradition in no way precludes living sensibly and justly in the todays world,
and indeed the tradition offers considerable flexibility in terms of forms
of government and is a guarantor of basic rights.
puritanical literalists: (Usually referred to as religious
fundamentalists or Islamists). Both traditional Islamic civilisation and
secular ideologies are failures. Muslims must pass over most of the civilisation and tradition after the first century or two after the Prophet.
The state created by the Prophet and his successors was a golden age,
and Muslims must duplicate it to the extent possible. Society must be
cleansed of those elements which are innovations from the pure state
of the early Muslim community.
takfiris: (Sometimes called jihadists or militant religious fundamentalists). Those who do not follow true Islamic teaching (as defined
by them) are no longer actually Muslim and fall outside of the protection of the law. Most self-identified Muslims and all non-Muslims are
legitimate targets of violence, because they stand in the way of a very
90
05/07/2013 15:21
narrowly defined vision of Islam. Takfr means to declare another to be

an unbeliever/apostate. There are now both Sunni and Shiite takfiris
or rather, some takfiris consider themselves to be Sunnis and others
consider themselves to be Shiites.
In reality the modernists and the puritanical literalists (the fundamentalists) represent only a small percentage of the population of the
Muslim world, perhaps less than 10 percent combined. The majority
of people90 percentin the Islamic world fall within a range which
should be called traditional and which itself encompasses a certain
range of religiosity, but which is neither a complete affirmation of the
post-religious values which are so powerful today, nor of the religious
extremism of the fundamentalists. The takfiris and the secular fundamentalists represent a still smaller sliver of the worlds Muslim population. All told, there are no more than 150,000 militant takfiris (including both the Sunni and Shiite strands) worldwide. These are thus less
than one hundredth of one percent of all Muslims (that is, less than
0.01 percent), or less than one in every ten thousand Muslims. Secular
fundamentalism also usually has little traction with the general population and isparadoxicallylimited to small rebel groups, such as the
Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in Turkey and the Mujahedin-e khalq
(MEK) in Iran, and various establishment elites in a small number of
Muslim countries.
That which we call fundamentalism today (puritanical literalism)
has several salient characteristics vis--vis traditional Islam. First, puritanical literalists generally ignore or explicitly reject most of the classical
learned tradition of jurists and theologians, and limit themselves to their
own interpretation of the Quran, the Hadith, and the first three generations of Muslims, which they take as authoritative (as do all Muslims).
Second, they ignore or reject most of the philosophy, mysticism, and
artistic production of Islamic civilisation. This results in a kind of antiintellectualism and in a dry literalism. Third, they view religion almost
entirely as a project of social engineering combined with a rigid obedientialism. Religion is thus reduced to a system of commands and prohibitions, with an excessive emphasis on outward conformity. Even worse,
often these ideas are little more than a theological veneer for a crude
ethnic chauvinism which seeks to universalise a tribal culture.
91
05/07/2013 15:21
The modernists, for their part, generally share with the fundamentalists an aversion to the spiritual, artistic, and intellectual accomplishments of Islamic civilisation, and have an undiscerning West is best
approach to Islamic reform. Yet they both readily celebrate Islams
advances in science in technology and readily accept any modern technological innovation the West has to offer. These shared characteristics
can be explained in light of the fact that both modernism and fundamentalism, in the Islamic world, are largely responses to the loss of power to
the West over the last two hundred years. Thus, both modernism and
fundamentalism blame traditional Islam for this failure, and both seek
to re-establish the balance. The modernists hope to accomplish this by
imitating their conquerors, while the fundamentalists hope to emulate
the successes of the first generations of Muslims.
The secular fundamentalists and the takfiris, at the two extremes, are
both intrinsically utopian in their outlook, the former striving to create
a yet unseen paradise on earth while the latter hope to emulate a once
realised golden age.
Falling into the fatal trap of any utopian ideology, both the secular
and religious fundamentalists invert the traditional priorities and subjugate all values to the attainment of utopia. Robespierres notorious statement, You cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs enshrines
the notion that the perfect worldhere on earthjustifies any crime,
and describes the authoritarian approach of these two extremes to the
rest of the world. Thus, the bombing of innocent Muslims by a Muslim
or non-Muslim state can be justified in the name of democracy and freedom (or in another context the liberation of the worlds workers, or the
ascendancy of the Arian race) which means that some are chosen to die
so that the rest may live in freedom. Also, the bombing of innocent
Muslims by non-state actors can be justified because they stand in the
way of establishing an Islamic state, or, in a perverted twist of spiritual
logic, the killing of innocent Muslims in a terrorist attack is not really
a crime because they will go to paradise as a result of being innocent
victims in an attack justified by its ends.
Neither secular fundamentalists nor their religious counterparts
can reasonably claim an ultimate set of values by which to act, despite
appearances to the contrary. When one can justify any act in the name of
92
05/07/2013 15:21
a worldly utopia then one has passed into pure utilitarianism. This utilitarianism allows the secular fundamentalist to declare, without a hint of
irony, that freedom (the lives of some) must be sacrificed for the sake of
freedom (the liberty of others). It also allows the religious fundamentalist to assert, with the same obtuseness, that justice must be suspended
(by taking innocent life) in order to preserve justice (the protection of
innocent life).
What does all this mean for the law of war? In Islamic history, the
law of war, though based on the Quran and the life of the Prophet,
was constantly adapted to deal with new situations. Was it permissible
to use fire as a part of a catapult weapon? What does one do in case of
civilians inside of a citadel under attack? What constitutes the violation
of a treaty? Questions such as these were always asked and answered in
the context of the greater law, which was governed by immutable moral
principles. This law, moreover, grew and was nurtured in an environment of spirituality, beauty, and the accumulated wisdom of the centuries beginning with the Prophet and continuing generation after generation. Islamic civilisation grew more experienced and sophisticated, and
individuals lived in a world where tradition was alive, and the experience
(and mistakes) of the past were always available to learn from.
Though the modernists and puritanical literalists do not necessarily espouse the unjust use of violence (and indeed, the vast majority
of modernists and fundamentalists are explicitly non-violent in their
methods), their belief system removes the safeguards provided by
centuries of tradition by rejecting that tradition or treating it as irrelevant. Even though Islamic law declares attacks against non-combatants,
forced conversion and naked aggression to be illegal, life within traditional Islamic civilisation, with its integrated spirituality and nobility,
would have made them generally unthinkable as well.
The case of Osama bin Ladens fatwa ordering Muslims to kill both
soldiers and civilians is illustrative of the problems involved. Bin Laden
was trained as a civil engineer, not an authority in Islamic law, and it
takes little investigation to uncover that his interpretations of Islamic
law are uninformed and self-serving. He can only draw the conclusions
he draws by utterly ignoring everything Islamic law has had to say about
such questions. Using Bin Ladens takfiri cut-and-paste method, one can
93
05/07/2013 15:21
make the Quran and Hadith say anything at all. That every top authority on Islamic law in the world rejects both Bin Ladens conclusions and
his temerity in declaring a fatwa is, lamentably, often never mentioned
in the West.
But such condemnation is not necessarily a problem for Bin Laden
and his compatriots, because they never felt obligated to pay attention
to traditional Islamic law in the first place. Ostensibly they claim to be
following the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet, but their method
amounts to a cherry-picking of sources to arrive at a conclusion that was
decided beforehand. It is misleading to present Bin Laden, and others
like him, as men steeped in their religious tradition who take Islams
teachings to their logical conclusions. For all the talk about madrasahs, which is simply the word for schools, it is important to note that
the terrorists who claim to fight in the name of Islam today are almost
entirely men educated in medicine, engineering, mathematics, computer
science, etc. It is striking how absent graduates of recognised madrasahs
or Islamic seminaries (such as Al-Azhar in Egypt) are among the ranks
of the terrorists. It is not difficult to understand why: anyone who is
exposed to the established traditional law could never, with honesty and
good conscience, conclude that non-combatants are legitimate targets,
or that other Muslims become unbelievers through mere disagreement
with a certain interpretation of Islam.
Indeed, being steeped in the tradition of Islamic law is the best inoculation against the illegal use of force. Traditional Islam would not, and
does not, recognise a civil engineer (Bin Laden) or a physician (Ayman
al-Zawahiri) as competent to decide the rules of combat. Those who
follow them do so for other reasons, or are much misled as to the orthodoxy of their leaders. Unburdened by precedent, whether through ignorance or disavowal, these rebellious upstarts are free to pursue their goals
unrestrained by morality or justice. This is the sad legacy of both modernism and puritanical literalism: in seeking to reform Islam, they throw the
baby out with the bath water, losing the natural checks against aggression
and injustice in the process of jettisoning those aspects of the tradition
they find unhelpful to their projects. Though not advocating such abuses
themselves, the modernists and puritanical literalists leave the door open
to the violation of basic human rights at the hands of the takfiris and the
94
05/07/2013 15:21
secular fundamentalists. Modernism did not create Hitler, but it removed

the barriers, religious and cultural, which would have made his rise an
impossibility. Similarly, puritanical literalism did not create Bin Laden,
but it weakened the immune system, as it were, of Islamic society, leaving
some within it susceptible to the contagion of takfirism.
By marginalising traditional, mainstream Islam, one does not wipe
out the poison. One loses the antidote.
Conclusion
As with any religion or system of law, when it comes to the Islamic
law of war there is a gap between the ideal and its application in the
world. It is possible to sift through the long history of war and peace
in Islamic civilisation and find examples where political powers and
even religious scholars have acted and espoused views which are antithetical to the spirit and letter of the teachings of Islam regarding war
and peace outlined above. Indeed, it has happened that Muslims have
created situations amounting to forced conversion, or killed innocents
in battle, or treated the members of other religions with contempt
and cruelty. Yet there is an important difference between the flouting
of high ideal and the institution of a vicious teaching. If abuses have
occurred in the application of the Islamic laws of war, these exist in
spite of those teachings, not because of them. Moreover, a fair reading
of Islamic history will show that in the majority of cases the Islamic law
of warwith its principles of justice, sparing of innocents, and idealisation of peacewere largely held to, and very often the conduct of
Muslims in war exhibited the highest standards of chivalry and nobility.
Moving forward from the time of the Prophet and companions to
the Crusades, we observe the figure of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi, known
to the West as Saladin, a figure of almost proverbial gallantry in battle
and kindness in victory. The reconquest of Jerusalem by Saladin was
as memorable for its mercy as was the initial Christian conquest for its
brutality, mirroring the mercy the Prophet showed to his enemies when
he entered victorious into Mecca near the end of his life. But one need
not go so far back in history to find such examples. In the colonial era
several Muslim resistance movements distinguished themselves by their
high standards of conduct in their opposition to European aggression.
95
05/07/2013 15:21
Among them were Imam Shamil (d.1871), the Lion of Daghestan, in

his thirty year war against Russian domination, and Emir Abd al-Qadir
al-Jazairi (d.1883), in his battle against French imperialism. Both men
were distinguished scholars of Islam and spiritual leaders, in addition to
being almost legendary military commanders. Steeped in the legal and
spiritual tradition of Islam, these heroes won the grudging admiration
of their enemies. Emir Abd al-Qadir, having fought the French for so
many years, risked his life defending the Christians of Damascus, and
made no distinction between his defence of Algerian Muslims and his
protection of the Christians of Damascus against his fellow Muslims. For
these warriors, their wise courage and stern compassion were necessary
outgrowths of the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet. They would
not have recognised the Islamic principles of combat they so steadfastly
followed were they to witness some of the aberrations of the modern age.
In Islamic law, the ends do not justify the means, and justice is not
predicated on creating a paradise on earth, whether that paradise is an
imagined future or a recaptured past. The Islamic law of war has often
come to be ignored, sadly, in the name of a totalitarian mindset which seeks
to crush everything in its path for the sake of achieving its ultimate ends.
According to such a view, compassion, nobility, beauty, and fairness are
all to be sacrificed and then somehow recaptured later when the fighting
ends. In this respect, the utopian rebels of todaywhatever their religion
or ideologyhave much more in common with Lenin than with Saladin.
If we have not dwelt on historical battles or the minutiae of legal
discussions through the centuries it is because the principles are so clear,
even self-evident. The rules of war and peace in Islam can be distilled into
three principles: (1) Non-combatants are not legitimate targets, and as we
have seen this not only includes women, children, and the elderly but also
animals and the natural environment. (2) The fact of someones being
non-Muslim does not make them a legitimate target of attack. The Islamic
conquests were political in nature, and large areas under Muslim rule
remained non-Muslim for centuries. The agreements cited above show
that the Muslims intention was never to convert by force. (3) Muslims
are expected to live in peace with their neighbours whenever possible, and
must respect treaties, but this never precludes the right to pre-emptive
or responsive self-defence. Indeed, fourteen centuries ago Islam drew a
96
05/07/2013 15:21
line between pre-emption and aggression, allowing the former (as in the
Prophets campaigns at Khaybar and Mutah) and condemning the latter
(And fight in the way of God with those who fight against you, but aggress
not; God loves not the aggressors (Al-Baqarah, 2:190). In sum, God asks
neither that Muslims be belligerent nor that they be pacifist. Rather, they
must love peace but resort to force when the cause is just.
FURTHER READING (IN ENGLISH)

David Dakake, The Myth of a Militant Islam, in Joseph Lumbard, ed.,
Islam, Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal of Tradition (Bloomington,
Indiana: World Wisdom, 2004), pp.337. Discusses the Bin Laden
fatwa, the nature of authority in Islam, and the laws of jihad.
Khaled M. Abou El Fadl, The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from
the Extremists (HarperCollins, 2005). Valuable for its discussion of
puritanical literalism versus traditional law.
Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence
(Islamic Texts Society, 2005). One of the most complete and accessible introductions to Islamic law. Also valuable for its discussion
of the sword verse (pp. 2235).
Reza Shah Kazemi, Recollecting the Spirit of Jihad, in
Joseph Lumbard, ed., Islam, Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal of
Tradition (Bloomington, Indiana: World Wisdom, 2004), pp.121
42: Addresses the spiritual dimensions of jihad and the case of Emir
Abd al-Qadirs resistance against the French and his protection of
Syrian Christians.
Vincenzo Oliveti, The Myth of the Myth of a Moderate Islam,
in Islamica Magazine, no.15 (2006). An excellent treatment of
common allegations of Islamic endemic violence.
Rudolph Peters, Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam: A Reader
(Princeton, 1996). A sampling of some classical and contemporary
treatises pertaining to jihad.
FURTHER READING (IN ARABIC)

Abdullah Bin Bayyah, Al-Irhb, Al-Tashkhis wal-hulul. A discussion of terrorism. See also: www.binbayyah.net
Muhammad Said Ramadan al-Buti, Al-Jihad fil-Islam
(Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 2005): An excellent overall discussion of the
issues pertaining to jihad, from an eminent scholar and recognised
97
05/07/2013 15:21
authority, including the laws of war, protected peoples, political

rebellion, preaching Islam (dawah), treaties, and forced conversion.
Ali Gomaa, Questions and Answers on Jihad in Islam (Egypt:
Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, n.d.).
Originally published by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic
Thought as a booklet in 2007. The author wishes to state that his
views have developed further since writing this essay.
98
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter four
THE MYTH OF A MILITANT ISLAM
Dr David Dakake
In the post-September 11th environment there is an urgent need for a
clear enunciation of the views of traditional Islam in regard to jihad,
so-called holy war. The first matter which needs to be made clear is that
jihad is not simply fighting or holy warfare. In Arabic, jihad literally
means effort, that is, to exert oneself in some way or another. Within the
context of Islam, jihad has the meaning of exerting oneself for the sake of
God, and this exertion can be in an infinite number of ways, from giving
charity and feeding the poor, to concentrating intently in ones prayers,
to controlling ones self and showing patience and forgiveness in the
face of offences, to gaining authentic knowledge, to physical fighting to
stop oppression and injustice. Generally speaking, anything that requires
something of usthat is, that requires that we go beyond the confines of
our individual ego and desiresor anything that we bear with or strive
after for the sake of pleasing God can be spoken of as a jihad in Islam.127
This understanding of jihad is such that when the five pillars128 of the
faith are taught, jihad is sometimes classified as a sixth pillar which
pervades the other five, representing an attitude or intention that should
be present in whatever one does for the sake of God.
This being said, there is no doubt that jihad has an important martial
aspect. To understand this we should remember that within the Islamic
tradition the term jihad has been understood to possess two poles: an
outward pole and an inward pole. These two poles are illustrated in the
words of the Prophet of Islam when he said to his companions, after
they had returned from a military campaign in defense of the Medinan
community: We have returned from the lesser (aghar) jihad to the
greater (akbar) jihad.129 Here the lesser jihad refers to physical fighting,
99
05/07/2013 15:21
whereas having come back to the relative physical safety of their city
of Medina, the Muslims faced yet a greater jihadnamely, the struggle
against the passionate, carnal soul that constantly seeks its own selfsatisfaction above all else, being forgetful of God. This famous saying of
the Prophet emphasises the hierarchy of the two types of jihad, as well
as the essential balance that must be maintained between its outward
and inward forms,130 a balance often neglected in the approach of
certain modern Islamic groups that seek to reform people and society
from without, forcing change in the outward behaviour of men and
women without first bringing about a sincere change in their hearts
and minds. This is the lesson of the words of the Quran when God
says, We never change the state of a people until they change themselves
(Al-Rad, 13:11).131 This lesson, as we shall see when we examine the
earliest military jihad, was not lost on the first Muslims.
In the present crisis, the pronouncements of many self-styled
Middle East experts and Muslim authorities who have dealt with
the subject of jihad have generally been of two kinds. There have been
those who have sought, in a sense, to brush aside the whole issue and
history of military jihad in Islam in favour of a purely spiritualised
notion of striving in the way of God, and there have been those,
both Muslim and non-Muslim, who have provided literal or surface
readings of Quranic verses related to jihad and fighting (qitl) in an
attempt to reduce all of Islam to military jihad.132 The first view represents an apologetic attitude that attempts to satisfy Western notions
of non-violence and political correctness but, in so doing, provides an
understanding that lacks any real relationship to the thought of the
majority of Muslim peoples throughout Islamic history. The second
view, which would make Islam synonymous with warfare, is the result
either of sheer ignorance or of political agendas that are served by
the perpetuation of animosity between peoples. This second position
ignores entirely the commentary and analysis of the Islamic intellectual tradition that has served for over one thousand years as a key for
Muslims to understand Quranic pronouncements related to jihad. In
this essay we will neither water down the analysis of jihad to suit those
modernists who oppose any notions of legitimate religious struggle
and conflict, nor disregard, as do the fundamentalists, the intellec100
05/07/2013 15:21
The Myth of a Militant Islam
tual and spiritual heritage of Islam which has defined for traditional
Muslims the validity, but also the limitations, of the lesser jihad.
In carrying out this study we propose to examine those verses of
the Quran that deal with fighting, as well as those which define those
who are to be fought against in jihad. We will also provide, along
with this textual analysis of Quranic doctrines of war, an historical
analysis of the actual forms of the earliest jihad and the conduct of
the mujhidn, the fighters of jihad, as exemplified by the Prophet of
Islam and his successors, the Rightly-guided Caliphs, given that their
actions have served for Muslims as an indispensable example to clarify
Quranic pronouncements.133 In this way, we hope to avoid both the
etherialisation of jihad by Muslim apologists, and the distortion of the
tradition at the hands of the fundamentalists. Lastly, we will examine
fundamentalist interpretations of jihad and compare them with the
traditional understanding of jihad in the early Quranic commentaries
and the actual history of Islam.
Do Not Take Christians and Jews as Awliy

Following the events of September 11th there is one verse of the Quran
which has often been quoted by radio announcers, talk show hosts, and
fundamentalists in both the East and the West. Before we deal with the
actual issue of warfare or military jihad, it is necessary to say something
about this verse which, if not understood correctly, can bias any further
examination. This verse appears in chapter 5, verse 51 of the Quran:
O, you who believe [in the message of Muammad], do
not take Jews and Christians as awliy. They are awliy to
one another, and the one among you who turns to them is
of them. Truly, God does not guide wrongdoing folk. (AlMidah, 5:51)
The word awliy (sing. wal), which we left above in the original
Arabic, has been commonly translated into English as friends.134 Given
this translation, the verse appears to be a very clear statement opposing
what we might term normative or kindly relations between Muslims
and non-Muslims; but when we look at the traditional Quranic
commentaries of medieval times, which discuss the events surrounding
the revelation of this verse, the modern translation becomes suspect.
101
05/07/2013 15:21
But before examining this issue in depth, it is necessary to clarify the

importance of verse context in the Quran. Here a comparison between
the Biblical text and the Quran is helpful.
Comparing the Bible and the Quran, we can use certain images
to illustrate some of the major stylistic differences between the two
sacred scriptures. We could say, for example, that the Bible is like a
flowing stream; when one reads the text there is a constant contextualisation of the various verses, stories, chapters, and books. One begins
reading with the story of Genesis, the creation of the world and the
first man and woman, and then proceeds on through time, moving
into the stories of the early patriarchs, then the later Hebrew judges
and prophets, the coming of Christ, the post-Jesus community of the
apostles, and finally the end of the world in the Book of Revelation. As
one reads the Bible there is a historical context established for each of
the major stories and events which enables the reader to situate what is
being said within time and space, and indeed priority. The orientation
of events as related to the chapters and verses is made explicit through
the historical flow of the stories and, in the case of the New Testament,
the eventual culmination of the text and all history.
In contrast, if we were to use an image to illustrate the Quranic
revelation, it would be that of an individual standing upon a mountain at night as lightning flashes on him and in a valley below.135 As
this individual looks out upon the landscape shrouded in darkness, he
would see sudden flashes, sudden illuminations of different portions
of the mountain and the valley, but there would not appear to be any
immediate relationship between these different illuminated regions,
surrounded as they were by vast shadows. Of course, a relationship
does exist between the different areas illuminated by the lightning, but
that relationship is not explicit. It is hidden amid the darkness. This is
something like the situation that is faced by the reader upon first examining the Quran. One will often read sections of the text and wonder
what is the relationship between the various pronouncements that one
encounters, for the Quran does not tell stories as the Western reader
is accustomed to from the Biblical tradition. In fact, there is only one
full-length story in the Quranic text, in the chapter on the prophet
Joseph. The rest of the Quran is a series of verses grouped into chap102
05/07/2013 15:21
ters and sections, and often two verses right next to one another will
actually refer to two completely different events in the life of the early
Islamic community. It is for this reason that the Quranic commentary
tradition (tafsr) deals so extensively with what is known in Arabic as
asbb al-nuzl, or the occasions for God revealing particular Quranic
verses. Without reference to these occasions of revelation most of the
verses of the Quran would be susceptible to any and all forms of interpretation. This issue of the need for knowledge of the commentary
tradition is, of course, further complicatedfor those unable to read
the original Arabic textby translations, which often add yet another
layer of difficulty for coming to terms with the meaning of the verses.
When we examine verse 5:51, we encounter both these problems of
context and translation.
The difficulties in understanding verse 5:51 begin with the translation of the Arabic word awliy, commonly rendered as friends. In
the context of this verse, the word awliy does not mean friends at
all, as we use the term in English, and we know this from examining
the occasion for its revelation. While it is true that awliy can mean
friends, it has additional meanings such as guardians, protectors and
even legal guardians. When we consult the traditional commentaries
on the Quran, we are told that this verse was revealed at a particularly
delicate moment in the life of the early Muslim community. To understand this verse it is thus necessary to explain the existential situation
of the Muslims at this time in Arabia.
Before Al-Midah, 5:51 was revealed, the Prophet of Islam and the
Muslims had only recently migrated as a community from Mecca to
Medina, some 400 kilometres to the north. They had done so, according to Islamic histories, due to the persecution to which they were
subjected at the hands of their fellow tribesmen and relatives in Mecca.
Most Meccans worshipped many idols as gods and feared the rising
interest in the message of Muhammad U within the city, even though
he was himself a son of Mecca. The Meccans feared the growing presence of the Muslims amongst them because the Muslims claimed that
there was only one true God, who had no physical image, and who
required of men virtue, generosity, and fair and kind treatment of the
weaker members of society. This simple message, in fact, threatened to
103
05/07/2013 15:21
overturn the order of Meccan society, based as it was upon the worship
of multiple gods and the privilege of the strong and the wealthy. It also
threatened to disrupt the economic benefits of this privilege, the annual
pilgrimage season, when peoples from all over Arabia would come to
worship their many idols/gods at the Kabaha cubical structure which
the Quran claims was originally built by Abraham and his son Ishmael
as a temple to the one God, before the decadence of religion in Arabia.136
The message of Islam threatened to replace the social and economic
system of Meccan polytheism with the worship of the one God, Who
as in the stories of the Old Testamentwould not allow that others be
worshiped alongside Him. In this difficult environment the Prophet of
Islam peacefully preached the message of monotheism and virtue, but
he and his small band of followers were eventually driven from the city
by torture, embargo, threats of assassination, and various other forms
of humiliation and abuse. The Muslims then migrated to Medina where
the Prophet had been invited to come and live in safety with his followers and where the main Arab tribes of the city had willingly accepted
his message and authority.
According to one of the earliest and most famous Quranic commentators, al-Tabari (225310 AH/839923 CE), it was not long after this
migration to Medina that verse 5:51 was revealed. Specifically, al-Tabari
tells us that this verse came down around the time of the battle of Badr
(2 AH/623 CE) or perhaps after the battle of Uhud (3 AH/625 CE).137 In
these early days the Muslim community constituted no more than a few
hundred people and had already left the city of Mecca; yet the Meccans
continued to attempt to confront them militarily, and these two early
battles, as well as others, were crucial events in the history of the early
Islamic community. Militarily, the Meccans were a far more powerful
force than the Muslims and they had allies throughout Arabia. Given
the small numbers of Muslims, the Prophet and his fledgling community faced the real possibility of utter annihilation should they lose any
of these early conflicts. Al-Tabari tells us that within this highly charged
environment some members of the Muslim community wanted to make
individual alliances with other non-Muslim tribes in the region. Within
Medina there were Jewish tribes who constituted a powerful presence
in the town and who were on good terms with the Meccans, and to the
104
05/07/2013 15:21
north of the city there were also Christian Arab tribes. Some Muslims
saw the possibility of making alliances with one or more of these groups
as a way of guaranteeing their own survival should the Meccan armies
ultimately triumph. This was the stark reality of Arabia at that time; it
was only through the protection of ones tribe or alliances with other
tribes or clans that ones individual security was insured.
From the perspective of Islam, however, the Prophet realised
that a young community, faced with great peril, could not allow such
dissension in the ranks of the faithful as would be created by various
individuals making bonds of loyalty with other groups not committed
to the Islamic message. Indeed, from the Islamic point of view such
actions, had they been allowed, would have been a kind of communal
suicide that would have seriously undermined Muslim unity, broken
the morale of the community (ummah), and perhaps caused the many
individuals making such alliances to lack fortitude in the face of danger.
Bearing these historical issues in mind, it becomes obvious that the
translation of awliy as friends is incorrect. It should be rendered,
in accord with another of its traditional Arabic meanings, as protectors or guardians in the strict military sense of these terms. The verse
should be read as, Do not take Christians and Jews as your protectors.
They are protectors to one another. This is the true message of the
verse, and the appropriateness of this understanding is supported by the
fact that the Quran does not oppose simple kindness between peoples,
as is clear from verse Al-Mumtaanah, 60:8, to which we shall now turn.
To Deal Kindly and Justly

Verse 60:8 says, God does not forbid that you should deal kindly and justly
with those who do not fight you for the sake of [your] religion or drive you
out of your homes. Truly, God loves those who are just (Al-Mumtaanah,
60:8). Al-Tabari tells us that this verse was revealed on the occasion of
an incident involving the half-sister of one of the Prophets wives.138
According to him, Asma bint Abi Bakr, who was a Muslim living in
Medina, received some gifts from her mother, Qutaylah, who lived in
Mecca. Qutaylah had refused to convert to Islam and continued to practice the idolatrous ways of the Meccans. Asma said, upon receiving the
gifts, that she would not accept them, given that they came from one
105
05/07/2013 15:21
who had rejected the message of Islam and indeed one who had chosen
to live among the arch-enemies of the Muslims; but then the above
Quranic verse was revealed to the Prophet, indicating that there was
no need to be ungracious towards the one who gave these gifts, even
though she had rejected the message of the Prophet and was living with
the enemies of Islam.
Al-Tabari goes even further in his analysis of the verse by criticising those Muslims who say that 60:8 was later abrogated by another
Quranic verse which says, Slay the idolaters wherever you find them
(Al-Tawbah, 9:5).139 Al-Tabari says that the most proper interpretation
of verse 60:8 is that God commanded kindness and justice to be shown
amongst all of the kinds of communities and creeds (min jam asnf
al-mill wal-adyn) and did not specify by His words some communities to the exclusion of others. Al-Tabari says that here God speaks in
general of any group that does not openly fight against the Muslims or
drive them out of their homes, and that the opinion that this kindness
was abrogated by later Quranic statements makes no sense (l man
li-qawl man qla dhlik manskh).140 This understanding may seem to
be in contradiction with our previous statement that the Meccans were
indeed at war with the Muslims; however, Qutaylah, being a woman,
could not technically be considered a combatant according to Islamic
law. Indeed, this shows the essential distinction between combatants
and non-combatants in the rules of Muslim warfare. This distinction,
as we see from the example of Qutaylah, is to be upheld even in the
context of engagement with an actively hostile enemy, as were the
Meccans. Therefore, Islam does not oppose friendship and kindness
between peoples who are not at war with one another and, even in the
case of war, clear distinctions are to be made between those who fight
and those who do not fight. We shall examine this principle further in
the next section.
Slay Them Wherever You Find Them

Another verse that is related to jihad, and also deals with the subject
of those against whom jihad is to be waged, is 2:1901. According to
many accounts, these verses represents the first command given by
God to the Muslims to carry out military jihad,141 but this command
106
05/07/2013 15:21
had specific limitations placed upon it, as we shall see. The Quranic
text reads as follows:
Fight in the way of God against those who fight you, but
transgress not the limits. Truly, God does not love the transgressors [of limits]. / And slay them wherever you find them,
and turn them out from where they have turned you out.
(Al-Baqarah, 2:1901)
Al-Tabari tells us that this verse is not to be read as a carte blanche
to attack any and all non-Muslim peoples; rather, he says, the verse
was revealed specifically in relation to fighting the idolaters of Mecca,
who are referred to in Arabic sources by the technical term mushrikn
or mushrikn (sing. mushrik).142 This term comes from a three-letter
Arabic root sh-r-k which means to associate or take a partner unto
something, and the word mushrikn literally means those who take
a partner unto God, that is to say polytheists or idolaters. It should
be noted that from the point of view of Islamic law, this injunction to
perform jihad against the polytheists does not pertain to either Jews or
Christians. Neither Jews nor Christians are ever referred to within the
Quran by the terms mushrik or mushrikn. They have, in fact, a very
different status according to the Quran, which often refers to the two
groups together by the technical term Ahl al-Kitb or People of the
Book, meaning people who have been given a scripture by God other
than the Muslims. We shall discuss the status of Jews and Christians
later, but what is important to recognise here is that this call to jihad
was revealed in relation to a specific group of people, the idolaters
of Mecca, and within a specific context, a context of persecution and
the driving of Muslims from their homes in Mecca because of their
religion. Indeed, this understanding is accepted not only by al-Tabari
but, he says, it is the view of most Quran interpreters.143
In addition to this context for the first military jihad, there were also
limits placed upon the early Muslims who carried out jihad against the
mushrikn. Verse 2:190 speaks of fight[ing] in the way of God but
also of not transgressing the limits. What are these limits? Al-Tabari
gives many accounts detailing the limits placed upon the mujhidn.
He says, for instance, that the cousin of the Prophet of Islam, Ibn
Abbas, commented upon verse 2:190 as follows: Do not kill women,
107
05/07/2013 15:21
or children, or the old, or the one who greets you with peace, or [the
one who] restrains his hand [from hurting you], and if you do this
then you have transgressed.144 Another tradition related by al-Tabari
comes from the Umayyad Caliph Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz or Umar II
(99/717101/720 CE), who explained the meaning of 2:191 as: ... do
not fight he who does not fight you, that is to say women, children,
and monks.145
These statements quoted by al-Tabari are very much in keeping with other commands given specifically by the Prophet and the
Rightly-guided Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali) to the
Muslim armies involved in jihad. These commands are noted in the
various hadith collections, i.e., records of the sayings of the Prophet
and his companions, which along with the Quran form the basis for
determining the Islamic nature of any act. Some examples of these
hadith are:
Nafi reported that the Prophet of God U found women
killed in some battles, and he condemned such an act and
prohibited the killing of women and children.146
When Abu Bakr al-Siddq [the trusted friend of the Prophet and first of the Rightly-guided Caliphs] sent an army
to Syria, he went on foot with Yazid ibn Abu Sufyan who
was the commander of a quarter of the forces. [Abu
Bakr said to him:] I instruct you in ten matters: Do not kill
women, children, the old, or the infirm; do not cut down
fruit bearing trees; do not destroy any town; do not cut the
gums of sheep or camels except for the purpose of eating;
do not burn date-trees nor submerge them; do not steal
from booty and do not be cowardly.147
[The Umayyad Caliph] Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz wrote to
one of his administrators: We have learnt that whenever
the Prophet of God U sent out a force, he used to command
them, Fight, taking the name of the Lord. You are fighting
in the cause of the Lord with people who have disbelieved
and rejected the Lord. Do not commit theft; do not break
vows; do not cut ears and noses; do not kill women and
children. Communicate this to your armies.148
Once when Rabah ibn Rabiah went forth with the Messenger of Allah, he and [the] companions of the Prophet passed
108
05/07/2013 15:21
by a woman who had been slain. The Messenger halted and

said: She is not one who would have fought. Thereupon, he
looked at the men and said to one of them: Run after Khlid
Ibn al-Walid149 [and tell him] that he must not slay children,
serfs, or women.150
Such statements are common throughout the hadith collections and

leave little doubt as to the limits set upon the military jihad, regardless
of the enemy that is faced.
Perform Jihad against the Kfirn

As we noted earlier, the Quran does not speak of Jews or Christians as
mushrikn or polytheists. Therefore, none of the verses of the Quran
that pertain to fighting the mushrikn pertain to them. However, it
must be admitted that the Quran does, within a limited context, speak
of Jews and Christians as kfirn, a term often translated into English as
unbelievers, although its literal meaning is, Those who cover over [the
truth] in some form or another. Unfortunately, the common translation
of this term as unbelievers gives it nuances of meaning from Western
cultural history that do not necessarily apply to the original Arabic,
such as the fact that unbelief in English is synonymous with atheism. In Arabic, however, kufr or covering does not necessarily refer
to lack of faith but to a lack of correct thinking on one or more aspects
of faith. In fact Muslims can also be kfirn. For instance, according to
the traditional commentaries, verse 9:49, There are some who say, Give
me leave to stay behind and do not tempt me. Surely they have fallen
into temptation already and hell encompasses the unbelievers (kfirn)
(Al-Tawbah, 9:49) refers to those Muslims who refused to respond to
the Prophets call to go on an expedition to Tabuk.151
The important question that could be asked, however, is: Does
the Quran not speak about fighting against the kfirn, such as
in the verse O Messenger, perform jihad against the unbelievers
(kfirn) and the hypocrites (munfiqn) (Al-Tawbah, 9:73)? Does
this verse not imply an essential militancy between Muslims on the
one hand, and Jews and Christians on the other? In answering these
questions we must refer to both Quranic pronouncements and to the
historical actions of the early Muslims in jihad. We will deal with the
109
05/07/2013 15:21
issues of the Quran first and then turn, in the next section, to what the
Muslims actually did in jihad.
When we look at the comments of al-Tabari regarding verse 9:73,
as well as those of Ibn Kathir (d. 774 AH/1372 CE), perhaps the most
famous of Sunni Quran commentators, both seem to condone the idea
that this verse relates to violent or military jihad. Both make a distinction, however, between the two types of jihad mentioned in verse 9:73:
jihad against the kfirn, and jihad against the munfiqn. Each states
that the jihad against the munfiqn or hypocritesi.e., those Muslims
who knowingly disobey the commands of Godis bil-lisn, meaning
with the tongue. That is to say, one should reprimand the Muslim
hypocrites with critical speech, not with physical violence. Whereas,
in regard to the kfirn, both commentators make reference to the
idea that the jihad against them is bil-ayf, or by the sword.152 This
may seem to suggest that violent suppression of Jews and Christians
is demanded, since we have already mentioned that both Jews and
Christiansthough never called mushriknare sometimes referred
to as kfirn. But before drawing this conclusion we must look more
closely at how the Quran defines the kfirn. Here it is useful to refer
to a series of Quranic verses referring to the People of the Book such
as Al-Bayyinah, 98:1, 98:6; Al-Midah, 5:78; and Al-Baqarah, 2:105.
Verse 98:1 reads: Those who disbelieved (kafar) among (min)
the People of the Book and the polytheists (mushrikn) would not
have left off erring until the clear truth came to them (Al-Bayyinah,
98:1). This verse clearly indicates that to disbelieve is not a characteristic belonging to all Jews and Christians or People of the Book. Instead,
it declares that disbelief is a characteristic of some among the People
of the Book. This limiting of the declaration of unbelief is established
by the Arabic preposition min, which serves to distinguish a distinct
species within a genus, namely, those unbelievers present within the
larger believing Jewish and Christian communities. This delimitation
is also to be seen in verse 98:6 which says, Those who disbelieved
(kafar) among the People of the Book are in Hellfire (Al-Bayyinah,
98:6). Verses 5:78 and 2:105 are yet further examples of this qualifying
and limiting of kufr or unbelief in regard to the People of the Book.
They state, respectively:
110
05/07/2013 15:21
Those who disbelieved (kafar) among the Tribe of Israel were

cursed by the tongue of David and Jesus, son of Mary. (AlMidah, 5:78)
Neither those who disbelieved (kafar) among the People of
the Book, nor the polytheists (mushrikn), love that anything
good should be sent down to you from your Lord. (Al-Baqarah, 2:105)
We see in these verses that the Quranic perspective, as regards the

followers of faiths other than Islam, is a subtle one, not simply a blanket
condemnation of all non-Muslims. It is important to recall here the
words of verses 1135 of chapter 3 of the Quran, which say:
Not all of them are alike. Of the People of the Book are a group
that stand (in prayer), rehearse the signs of God throughout the
night and prostrate. / They believe in God and the Last Day;
they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and they
hasten in (all) good works. These are among the righteous. /
Of the good that they do, nothing will be rejected of them, and
God knows the God-fearing ones. (l Imrn, 3:1135)
Keeping these Quranic distinctions in mind, the injunction to fight
the kfirn by the sword does not then apply to all Jews and Christians,
but only to some among them. But this raises the question, who, among
the Jews and Christians, are the Muslims to fight? To answer this question
we must now turn to the historical facts of the jihad of the first Muslims.
The Jihad of the First Muslims

It is perhaps best to begin our examination of historical jihad by recalling that the first jihad in Islam was not martial and had nothing to
do with violence. The first jihad is referred to in the Quran in verse
25:52, which states, Do not obey the unbelievers (kfirn), but strive
against them (jhidhum) with it, a great striving (Al-Furqn, 25:52).
This somewhat enigmatic verse, traditionally understood to have been
revealed at Mecca, i.e., before any divine decree had been given as
regards performance of military jihad (which came only later in the
Medinan period), speaks of striving against the unbelievers by way of
it. Both al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir relate traditions from Ibn Abbs and
from Ibn Zayd ibn Harith, the son of the Prophets adopted son, telling
111
05/07/2013 15:21
us that this itthe means by which to carry out jihadis the Quran
itself.153 In other words, the earliest command to jihad was a kind of
preaching of the Quran to the Meccans, or perhaps a taking solace
or refuge in the divine word from the persecutions that the Muslims
were experiencing at that time in Mecca. It was not military in nature.
This brings up our first point regarding the historical form of military
jihad and what may be its most misrepresented feature: the notion
that the religion of Islam was spread through military force, that Jews,
Christians, and other peoples of the Middle East, Asia, and Africa were
forced to convert to Islam on pain of death.
There is No Compulsion in Religion

It has been a common view in the West, even to this day, to say that
the religion of Islam spread through conquest. Although this Orientalist
theory is now being shown to be a fallacy by modern scholarship,154 it
is important to mention that the peaceful spread of Islam throughout
most of the Middle East,155 Asia, and Africa was in fact due to principles flowing from the Quranic revelation itself. Here and in the next
section we will discuss some of these principles, beginning with the
injunction found in verse 2:256 which says, There is no compulsion in
religion (Al-Baqarah, 2:256). Our commentators tell us that this verse
was revealed during one of three possible situations.
The first possible context for the revelation of 2:256 has to do with
a practice that was fairly common among the women of Medina before
Islam came to the city. Our commentators tell us that if a woman did not
have any living sons, she would sometimes make a promise that if she
gave birth to a child and the child lived, she would raise the child in the
faith of one of the Jewish tribes of the city.156 Apparently this practice was
somewhat popular; we know this from the events following another of
the early military engagements of Islamic history: the siege of the fortress
of the Medinan Jewish tribe of Nadir (4 AH/625 CE). The reason for the
siege, according to Islamic sources, was that the Banu Nadir had broken
an alliance that they had concluded with the Prophet by secretly planning
to assassinate him. 157 As a result of this treason, the Muslims besieged
the Banu Nadir for some ten days in their fortress just south of Medina.
At the end of this siege the Banu Nadir accepted a punishment of exile
112
05/07/2013 15:21
from the region of Medina and the tribe left with their wealth packed
on their camels, some heading north to the town of Khaybar, others
going on further to Syria. Some of the Medinan Muslims protested the
punishment of exile, saying to the Prophet: Our sons and brothers are
among them!158 Indeed, some of the children of the Medinans had been
raised within the Jewish faith and were living with their adopted clan.
In response to the dissatisfaction of the Medinan Muslims the words
of the Quran were revealed: There is no compulsion in religion, for
truth has been made clear from error, meaning essentially that these
sons and brothers had made their choice to stay loyal to a treacherous
group against the Prophet, as well as against their own Muslim relatives,
and were party to a plan to murder Gods messenger. In this way, the
words of verse Al-Baqarah, 2:256, although harsh from a certain point
of view, also reveal an essential principle within the Muslim faith: no
one can be compelled to accept a religion, be it Islam or any other faith.
This particular narration of the context of 2:256 is highly significant for
delineating the attitude of Muslims on this issue, occurring as it does
during the jihad of the siege of the Banu Nadir and rejecting, within that
context, any compulsion in religion.
Another variant on this same story speaks of the people of Medina
desiring to compel those of their sons and brothers affiliated with
another Jewish tribe in the city, the Banu Qurayzah, into accepting Islam.
This version (whose number of narrations in the sources is much fewer
than that of the Banu Nadir narrations) makes no mention of there
being any hostilities at that time between the Muslims and the Jews, but
only recounts the desire of the Medinan Muslims to force their Jewish
relatives into Islam. In these narrations the Prophet responds to their
desire to compel their family members with the words of 2:256,159 again
affirming the absolute necessity of freedom in choosing ones faith.
This principle is also brought out in relation to a third possible
context for the revelation of verse 2:256. This is said to be the conversion
to Christianity of the sons of Abul-usayn, a companion of the Prophet.
The story is told that the two sons of Abul-uayn were converted in
Medina by Christian merchants visiting the city from Syria. They then
returned to Syria with the merchants.160 Upon hearing of what his sons
had done, Abul-uayn went to the Prophet and asked for permission
113
05/07/2013 15:21
to pursue them and bring them back. The Prophet then recited to him,
There is no compulsion in religion. After Abl-uayn heard the
words of the revelation, the narration concludes, So he let them go their
way (fa-khall sablahum).161
Regardless of the version of the story that we examine, the message
is always the sameto choose ones own religion is a free choice
whether in time of peace or war. Ibn Kathirs commentary upon 2:256
also reflects this fact when he says:
God, the Exalted, said, There is no compulsion in religion, that
is to say, you do not compel anyone to enter the religion of
Islam. Truly it is made clear [and] evident. It [Islam] is not
in need such that one compel anyone to enter it. Rather, the
one whom God guides to Islam and expands his breast and
illuminates his vision, he enters into it by way of clear proof. It
is of no use to enter the religion as one compelled by force.162
Although these words are hardly ambiguous, we should also note
that there have been those in the Islamic tradition who have tried to
say that this Quranic verse was later abrogated, but this is not the
opinion of either of our commentators. Both al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir
note that 2:256 has never been abrogated by any other verse(s) of the
Quran and that although 2:256 descended in regard to a particular case
(kha), i.e., in regard to either the Jews of Medina or the Christians
from Syria, nevertheless, its application is general (amm).163 This is to
say, the verse applies to all People of the Book, who should be free from
being compelled to accept Islam.164
Had God not Repelled some Men by

Means of Others
A related issue which goes beyond the simple idea of not forcing anyone
into Islam is the fact that one of the essential and expressed elements
of the earliest military jihad was the protection of the rights of worship
of the People of the Book, i.e., not simply avoiding using force to bring
them into Islam, but actively using force to preserve and defend their
houses of worship. This characteristic of the military jihad is mentioned
in verses 22:3940 and, as we shall see, it is confirmed by many historical examples.
114
05/07/2013 15:21
We noted earlier that verses 2:1901 are sometimes claimed to be

the first verses revealed relating to military jihad. This claim is also made
for verses 22:3940.165 It is, of course, impossible to determine on the
basis of the narrations given in the sources which group of verses is truly
the first to speak of military jihad, but the Islamic tradition in general
has simply accepted ambiguity on this issue. Verses 22:3940 say:
Permission is given to those who are fought because they have
been wronged. Surely, God is able to give them victory. / Those
who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they said: Our Lord is God. And if it were not that God
repelled some people by means of others, then monasteries,
churches, synagogues, and mosques, wherein the Name of God
is mentioned much would surely have been pulled down. Verily, God will help those who help Him. Truly, God is powerful
and mighty. (Al-ajj, 22: 3940)
Our commentators tell us that these verses were revealed just as
the Prophet and his companions were leaving Mecca and migrating to
Medina.166 Both al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir relay the words of Abu Bakr
al-iddiq upon hearing the new revelation. He is reported to have said,
I knew [when I heard it] that it would be fighting (qitl) [between
the Muslims and the Meccans].167 It is also interesting to note that alTabari relates traditions that state that the meaning of the phrase if it
were not that God repelled some people by means of others is if
it were not for fighting and jihad and if it were not for fighting and
jihad in the way of God.168 Furthermore, Ibn Kathir relates that many
famous early figures of Islam such as Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, Urwah ibn
al-Zubayr, Zayd ibn Aslam, Muqatil ibn Hayyan, Qatadah and others
also said that this is the first verse revealed concerning jihad.169 These
commentaries are particularly important because all of them refer to
the fact that jihad is to be understood, in its earliest sense, as a means
by which monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques are to
be preserved and protected.170 The call to jihad then was not for the
destruction of faiths other than Islam; rather, one of its essential aspects
was the preservation of places of worship belonging to the monotheistic
faiths and protecting them against those polytheistsin this case the
idolaters of Meccawho might endanger them.
115
05/07/2013 15:21
Some Applications of Quranic Principles to

the Military Jihad
When we turn to the many examples of the early military jihad found
in the sources, we see that the Muslim armies were actually quite
consistent in their application of the Quranic doctrines mentioned
in 22:3940 and 2:256. Although the historical record does not speak
definitively about the issue of whether or not these endeavours were
strictly defensivefor as with all such undertakings, they involved both
elements of true religious fervor and righteousness, as well as issues of
the realpolitik of the timewhat can be said rather definitively is that
the Muslim forces, in carrying out the early jihad, did act in accordance with the limits established by the Quran and Hadith. We know
this from the examination of the accounts presented in the various
Islamic histories, such as al-Tabaris universal history, Trkh al-rusul
wa al-mulk, as well as other important historical works that specialise
in the events of the early jihad, such as Baladhuris (d. 279 AH/892 CE)
Fut al-buldn or Openings of the Nations. In these accounts, there
is clear evidence of the importance Muslims attached to the idea of no
compulsion in religion, as well as to the preservation of the places of
worship of the People of the Book. Baladhuri, for instance, recounts a
text written by the Prophet to the Christian community of Najran in
southern Arabia guaranteeing them certain social and religious rights
under Islamic rule. The text reads:
Najran and their followers are entitled to the protection of
Allah and to the security of Muhammad the Prophet, the
Messenger of Allah, which security shall involve their persons, religion, lands, and possessions, including those of
them who are absent as well as those who are present, their
camels, messengers, and images [amthilah, a reference to
crosses and icons]. The state they previously held shall not
be changed, nor shall any of their religious services or images be changed. No attempt shall be made to turn a bishop,
a monk from his office as a monk, nor the sexton of a church
from his office.171
Both al-Tabari and Baladhuri make many references to similar
treaties concluded between Muslim commanders during the early
116
05/07/2013 15:21
jihad effort and the various populations that fell under Islamic political
control. Indeed, such examples are to be found on every major front of
the Islamic conquests from Persia to Egypt and all areas in between.
Within the region of Syria, we have the example of the companion
of the Prophet and commander of Muslim forces Abu Ubaydah ibn
al-Jarrah, who concluded an agreement with the Christian population of
Aleppo granting them safety for their lives, their possessions, city wall,
churches, homes, and the fort. Abu Ubaydah is said to have concluded
similar treaties at Antioch,172 Maarrat Marin,173 oms,174Qinnasrin,175
and Baalbek.176
Baladhuri reports that after the surrender of Damascus, Khalid ibn
al-Walid wrote for the inhabitants of the city a document stating:
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. This
is what Khalid would grant to the inhabitants of Damascus,
if he enters therein: he promises to give them security for
their lives, property, and churches. Their city shall not be
demolished; neither shall any Moslem be quartered in their
houses. Thereunto we give to them the pact of Allah and the
protection of his Prophet, the caliphs and the Believers. So
long as they pay the poll tax,177 nothing but good shall befall
them.178
In addition to these accounts, al-Tabari records the Covenant
of Umar, a document apparently addressed to the people of the city
of Jerusalem, which was conquered in the year 15 AH/636 CE. The
document states:
This is the assurance of safety (amn) which the servant of
God Umar, the Commander of the Faithful, has granted to
the people of Jerusalem. He has given them an assurance
of safety for themselves, for their property, their churches,
their crosses, the sick and the healthy of the city, and for all
the rituals that belong to their religion. Their churches will
not be inhabited [by Muslims] and will not be destroyed.
Neither they, nor the land on which they stand, nor their
crosses, nor their property will be damaged. They will not be
forcibly converted. The people of Jerusalem must pay the
poll tax like the people of [other] cities, and they must expel
the Byzantines and the robbers.179
These conditions, respecting Christian practices and places of
117
05/07/2013 15:21
worship, were also given to other towns throughout Palestine, according

to al-Tabari.180
In regard to the Armenian front, we have references to treaties
made with Jewish and Christian as well as Zoroastrian inhabitants of
the region. It is noteworthy that both al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir in their
Quran commentaries mention Zoroastrians (al-majs) within the classification of People of the Book181Zoroastrianism being the other
major faith, besides Judaism and Christianity, that was encountered by
the Muslim armies as they spread out of Arabia and which, like Judaism
and Christianity, possessed a sacred text. Baladhuri mentions the treaty
concluded by the companion of the Prophet, Habib ibn Maslamah
al-Fihri (d. 42 AH/662 CE), with the people of the town of Dabil which
states:
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. This
is a treaty of Habib ibn Maslamah with the Christians, Magians [i.e., Zoroastrians], and Jews of Dabil, including those
present and absent. I have granted for you safety for your
lives, possessions, churches, places of worship, and city wall.
Thus ye are safe and we are bound to fulfil our covenant, so
long as ye fulfil yours and pay the poll tax182
In addition to this, al-Tabari mentions treaties that the Muslims
made with the Armenians of Al-Bab and Muqan in the Caucasus
Mountains guaranteeing their possessions, their persons, [and] their
religion.183
When we turn to the region of Persia, Baladhuri mentions two agreements, one with the people of Rayy,184 and the other with the people of
Azerbaijan.185 The texts of each of these agreements guarantees the safety
of the lives of the inhabitants, as well as offering a promise not to raze any
of their fire temples, a reference to Zoroastrian tashkdas. In al-Tabaris
history as well, treaties are recounted involving the town of Qumis,186
the peoples of Dihistan in the province of Jurjan,187 and the people of
Azerbaijan,188 each treaty granting safety for their religion.
Finally, in Egypt we can point to the example of Amr ibn al-s,
a companion of the Prophet and the commander of Muslim forces on
the Egyptian front. He concluded a treaty with the Bishop of Alexandria
on the orders of the Caliph Umar, guaranteeing the safety of the city and
118
05/07/2013 15:21
agreeing to return certain Christian captives taken by the Muslims after

an initial skirmish. According to al-Tabari, Umars instructions to Amr
were as follows:
propose to the ruler of Alexandria that he give you the jizyah in the understanding that those of their people who were
taken prisoner and who are still in your care be offered the
choice between Islam and the religion of their own people.
Should any one of them opt for Islam, then he belongs to the
Muslims, with the same privileges and obligations as they.
And he who opts for the religion of his own people has to pay
the same jizyah as will be imposed on his co-religionists.189
Amr also concluded an agreement with Abu Maryam, the Metropolitan of Mir. Al-Tabari quotes Amrs words in an apparent face to face
meeting with the Metropolitan: We call upon you to embrace Islam. He
who is willing to do so will be like one of us. To him who refuses, we suggest that he pay the jizyah and we will give him ample protection. Our
Prophet has determined that we keep you from harm. If you accept
our proposition, we will give you constant protection.190 Al-Tabari then
quotes the actual text of the treaty agreed to between them as follows:
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
This is the text of the covenant that Amr b. al-s has granted the people of Mir concerning immunity for themselves,
their religion, their possessions, churches, crucifixes, as well
as their land and their waterways. It is incumbent upon the
people of Mir, if they agree on the terms of this covenant and
when the rise of the Nile water comes to a halt to afford the
jizyah. He who chooses [not to agree to these terms but] to
depart will enjoy immunity, until he has reached his destination where he can be safe, or has moved out of the territory
where our authority prevails.191
With these treaties in mind we can now return to a question which
we raised earlier: Who, in the opinion of the early Muslims, were the
People of the Book that had to be fought? In short, given this picture of
the history, the answer to this question is that those who were to be fought
among the People of the Book were only those who refused to submit to
Islamic political authority, i.e., who refused to pay the poll tax (jizyah).
The Muslims made no hair-splitting theological determinations regarding
119
05/07/2013 15:21
the issue of true belief , as some might think is implied in certain Quranic
verses that we quoted earlier. All People of the Book were simply treated
as believers within their respective religious communities, regardless
of whether they followed, for instance, in the case of Christianity, a
Monophysite, Arian, Jacobite, Nestorian, or Catholic rite. There was no
litmus test of faith which the Muslims applied to determine true belief on
the part of the people who came under their political control, other than
the self-declarations of those people themselves to be Jews, Christians,
or Zoroastrians, and their willingness to pay the jizyah.192 The earliest
mujhidn, the Prophet, his companions, and their immediate successors,
essentially placed all People of the Book under the general category of
faith. This fact played itself out not only in terms of treaties concluded
between Muslims and non-Muslims, which as we have seen demonstrate
no theological scrutiny of non-Muslim communities, but also in terms of
the very composition of the Muslim forces involved in the jihad, to which
we will now turn.
The Composition of the Forces of Jihad

In relation to the practice of the military jihad we can see that Islams
universal perspective on faith also had an important effect on the makeup of the Muslim armies. Here we can point to the fact that military jihad
was not seen as the exclusive prerogative of Muslims. This is particularly
true during the formative years of the Islamic conquests, i.e., from the first
command to military jihad in Medina through the early Umayyad period.
Again, this is made clear in various treaties the Muslims concluded with
both the Jewish and Christian populations of the Near East at this time.
Perhaps the most famous of these treaties is the Constitution of Medina,
which was composed during the lifetime of the Prophet himself and
which speaks of the Jews and Muslims fighting together as one ummah
or community.
The Constitution of Medina

The Constitution of Medina, recorded in Ibn Ishaqs (d. 151 AH/768
CE) Srat Rasl Allh (The Biography of the Messenger of God), the most
important historical account of the life of the Prophet, indicates that
jihad was for any community willing to fight alongside the Muslims
120
05/07/2013 15:21
(with the exceptions of polytheists). Ibn Ishaq prefaces his account of the
Constitution by saying:
The Messenger of God U [composed] a writing between the
Emigrants and the Anr,193 in which he made a treaty and
covenant with the Jews, confirmed their religion and possessions, and gave them certain rights and duties.194
The text of the treaty then follows:
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
This is a writing of Muhammad the prophet between the
believers and Muslims of Quraysh and Yathrib195 and those
who follow them and are attached to them and who crusade
(jhada) along with them. They are a single community distinct from other people. Whosoever of the Jews follows
us has the (same) help and support, so long as they are
not wronged [by him] and he does not help [others] against
them.196 [emphasis added]
Here we see that the participation in military jihad, translated
above as crusade, is open to those attached to the Prophet and the
Muslims, and that together they constitute a single community (ummah
widah) in the face of all others. It is interesting to note that the claim
that animosity has always existed between Muslims and Jews does not
accord with this very early document dealing with military cooperation
and mutual protection between the two communities.197 Indeed the
treaty seems not only to form a basis for an important military alliance
between the Muslim and Jewish communities, but it also anticipates
orderly and peaceful interactions on a general social level. Thus the
constitution goes on to say:
The Jews bear expenses along with the believers so long as
they continue at war. The Jews of Banu Awf are a community
(ummah) along with the believers. To the Jews their religion
(dn) and to the Muslims their religion. [This applies] both
to their clients and to themselves, with the exception of anyone who has done wrong or acted treacherously; he brings
evil only on himself and on his household. For the Jews of
Banun-Najjar the like of what is for the Jews of the Banu
Awf. For the Jews of Banul-Harith the like. For the Jews
of Banu Saidah the like. For the Jews of Banu Jusham the
121
05/07/2013 15:21

like. For the Jews of Banul-Aws the like. For the Jews
of Banu Thalabah the like of what is for the Jews of Banu
Awf.198
Another portion of the document speaks even more directly to the

social attitudes that should form the basis of interactions between the
two communities:
Between them [Muslims and Jews] there is help (nar)
against whoever wars against the people of this document.
Between them is sincere friendship (na wa-naah) and
honourable dealing, not treachery. A man is not guilty of
treachery through [the act of] his confederate. There is help
for the person wronged.199
What this document shows is that early in the life of the Islamic
community, there was the anticipation of normal and friendly
relations between the Jews and Muslims and indeed, help between
them in terms of war. These ideas are also supported by the authenticity
generally accorded to the Constitution by modern scholarship. In
terms of this authenticity, both the language and the content of the
document suggest that it is an early piece of work, i.e., pre-Umayyad.200
This is due to the fact that later falsifiers, writing during the time of
the Umayyads or the Abbasids, would not likely have included nonMuslims as members of the ummah (a term later reserved for the
Muslim community exclusively), nor retained the other articles of
the document (from which we did not quote) that speak against the
Quraysh,201 nor made such prevalent and constant use of the term
muminn (believers) rather than muslimn to refer to the followers
of the Prophet and his message.202 Both Julius Wellhausen and Leone
Caetani placed the writing of the document sometime before the
battle of Badr. Hubert Grimme argued for a date just after Badr, and
W. Montgomery Watt, a date following siege of the Banu Qurayah (5
AH/627 CE).203 In any case, it is clear that we are dealing here with
a document whose early date of composition is claimed both from
within and from without the tradition, suggesting a high degree of
reliability that it does indeed express early Islamic attitudes toward the
openness of the institution of military jihad.
122
05/07/2013 15:21
Christians in Jihad
Another important point regarding the armies of jihad is that traditional Islamic histories give accounts of Christians taking part in some
of the early battles alongside the Muslim armies. This is discussed by
Fred Donner in his book The Early Islamic Conquests. He notes that,
according to Muslim historical sources, in the very early period of
jihad, Christian Arabs from tribes such as the Banu ayyi of Najd, the
Banu al-Namir ibn Qasiu of the upper Euphrates river valley, and the
Banu Lakhm participated in the jihad with the Muslim armies.204 Other
allusions to this kind of activity can be found in al-Tabaris Trkh
where he notes, for instance, a treaty signed during the reign of the
caliph Umar by Suraqah ibn Amr in 22 AH/642 CE. Suraqah was a
commander of Muslim forces in Armenia, which was predominantly
Christian. The treaty discusses the poll tax which the Christian population is to pay to the Islamic government, unless they are willing to
supply soldiers to the jihad effort, in which case the poll tax would be
cancelled.205 In addition to this account, Baladhuri notes many other
agreements in the Fut al-buldn concluded by Muslim commanders with the Christian populations of various regions. Such is the case
of the Jarjimah, a Christian people from the town of Jurjumah.206
This town had been under the control of the patrician and governor
of Antioch but surrendered to the Muslim armies, commanded by
Habib ibn Maslamah al-Fihri, when they attacked the town. Baladhuri
recounts the terms of the peace between Habib and the Jarajimah as
follows:
Terms were made providing that al-Jarajimah would act as helpers
to the Moslems, and as spies and frontier garrison in Mount al-Lukam.
On the other hand it was stipulated that they pay no tax, and that they
keep for themselves the booty they take from the enemy in case they
fight with the Moslems.207
Here jihad is an endeavour open to the Christian Jarajimah.
Another treaty concluded with them during the reign of the Umayyad
Caliph al-Walid ibn Abd al-Malik (8696 AH/70515 CE), states:
Al-Jarjimah may settle wherever they wish in Syria;
neither they nor any of their children or women should be
compelled to leave Christianity; they may put on Moslem
123
05/07/2013 15:21

dress; and no poll tax may be assessed on them, their children, or women. On the other hand, they should take part
in the Moslem campaigns and be allowed to keep for themselves the booty from those whom they kill; and the same
amount taken from the possessions of the Moslems should
be taken [as tax] from their articles of trade and the possessions of the wealthy among them.208
These agreements, along with the many others that we have

noted in the previous sections, in addition to revealing something of
the martial applications of Islams universal perspective on faith, also
demonstrate that historically jihad was directed against those who
stood in opposition to the political authority of the Islamic state.
It was not directed against a people simply because they professed a
faith other than Islam. The point of the jihad was not to establish a
world populated only by Muslims; it was to create a social order in
which the freedom to practice the worship of God was guaranteed, for
Muslims as well as for the People of the Book. Although military jihad
had as its goal the establishment of this Islamic authority, there were
also certain essential and religiously unavoidable limitations placed
upon the means to achieving this goal. These limitations were defined
by the injunctions of the Quran and the Hadith and manifested, as
well as clarified, by the conduct of the earliest mujhidn, the Prophet,
and his companions. These teachings and examples have served as an
indispensable guide to Muslims throughout their 1400-year history,
not only in terms of jihad but in relation to all matters of faith. When
we look at the attempts of certain contemporary figures to revive the
military jihad, their words and actions must always be judged by way
of the limits and examples mentioned in the early tradition. This is the
only way to determine the essential Islamicity of their claims and to
know if their actions constitute some form of reprehensible (makrh)
or forbidden (arm) innovation (bida) upon the tradition.209
Muslims have always been cautioned to exercise the utmost care when
introducing new interpretations or practices, as a famous hadith of the
Prophet states: Beware of newly invented matters, for every invented
matter is an innovation, every innovation is a going astray, and every
going astray is in Hellfire.210
124
05/07/2013 15:21
Some Contemporary Fundamentalist

Interpretations of Jihad
To begin our analysis it is perhaps best to start with the form of the jihad
envisaged by the modern fundamentalists; that is to say, is the form of
this jihad consistent with the established principles of the Islamic faith
or not? It has been claimed that the jihad which Muslims must now
wage involves killing Americans and their allies, civilian and military.
Any such declaration would immediately place the endeavour outside
the bounds of true jihad whose limits, as we noted earlier, would clearly
exclude, for instance, attacks upon women and children. In fact, the
categories of civilian and military often used by these extremists are
somewhat alien to the Islamic tradition which always speaks on this issue
of warfare in terms of those who fight against the Muslims and those
who do not, the tradition being unanimous in defining those who do
not as women and children, with other categories such as monks and
the elderly often included. Therefore, the declarations making lawful
the indiscriminate killing of civilians unequivocally transgress the limits
of warfare defined in the traditional sources. Indeed, some claim that
now is the time for a new fiqh or jurisprudence in Islam that would
leave behind such traditional constraints.211 Some have even attempted
to cast their arguments in the guise of religion by calling their declarations of jihad fatwas212 and by quoting liberally from the Quran. Of
course, the determination of the Islamicity of any fatwa must be in
relation to its content, and yet if we analyse the Quranic verses chosen
by extremists to justify their own exegesis, it reveals that, far from being
representatives of traditional Islam and the pious forefathers (salaf) of
the Muslim community, their perspective is actually what we might call
the other side of the coin of modernism, due to its near total disregard
for the established contexts of the verses they quote.213
One verse often mentioned in this regard is verse 9:5:
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and
slay the polytheists [mushrikn] wherever you find them,
seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in
every stratagem [of war] (Al-Tawbah, 9:5).
It is interesting that this verse should be cited in the context of calls
125
05/07/2013 15:21
for Muslims to fight Jews and Christians, particularly since this verse has
nothing to do with the issue of the People of the Book. As we mentioned
earlier, the Quran does not refer to Jews and Christians as mushrikn
but reserves this term for the idolatrous Arabs of Muhammads U time.
In the case of verse 9:5, however, we are not dealing with a reference to
the idolaters of Mecca specifically because, according to tradition, the
ninth chapter of the Quran was revealed after the conquest of Mecca
by the Muslims, that is to say, at a time when there were no longer any
polytheists in the city as a result of conversion to Islam. The mushrikn
referred to in verse 9:5 are therefore the Arab polytheists/idolaters who
remained in other parts of Arabia not yet under Muslim control. This
being the case, the use of 9:5 would represent a misappropriation of
this verse to an end other than the one intended from its established
traditional context of fighting the pagan Arabs.
Other verses which have become popular proof texts for the jihadist
position are 9:36 and 2:193. The verses are, respectively: And fight the
polytheists [mushrikn] together as they fight you together (Al- Tawbah,
9:36), and Fight them [i.e., the mushrikn] until there is no more oppression and religion is for God (Al-Baqarah, 2:193). These verses have been
cited as direct support for killing civilians, yet both these verses, as with
verse 9:5, refer directly to fighting the mushrikn, not Jews or Christians
and certainly not civilians. Neither al-abari nor Ibn Kathir have much
to say regarding 9:36, except to emphasise that the Muslims should act
together or in unison during warfare against the polytheists. The injunction to fight the polytheists together as they fight you together, which
has sometimes been taken to mean that Muslims should respond in
kind to the attacks of an enemy, cannot be understood as an invitation
to transgress the established Islamic rules of warfare. It is telling in this
regard that al-abari and Ibn Kathir only refer in their comments on
9:36 to the verses meaning in relation to the unity of the ummah, and
do not mention issues of responding in kind to offenses, which would
seem to be a subject worthy of at least some comment, if indeed that
was the verses intended meaning.
In terms of verse 2:193, Ibn Kathir sees it as part of a series of
related verses beginning with 2:190. Like al-abari, he mentions that
these verses refer to the first military jihad against the mushrikn of
126
05/07/2013 15:21
Mecca, and he also emphasises the fact that these verses are in no way
an invitation to kill non-combatants, even those who live among the
communities of the enemies of Islam. Like al-abari, Ibn Kathir in his
comments quotes many narrations about the transgressing of limits
in warfare, such as the words of the famous Quran commentator and
theologian Hasan al-Basri (d. 728 CE), who said that the acts which
transgress the limits of war are:
mutilation (muthla), [imposing] thirst (ghull), the
killing of women (nis), children (ibyn), and the old
(shuykh)the ones who have no judgment for themselves
(l rayy lahum), and no fighters are among them, [the killing of] monks and hermits (ab al-awmi), the burning
of trees, and the killing animals for other than the welfare
[of eating].214
In addition to this, Ibn Kathir mentions various sayings of the
Prophet with meanings similar to the words of Hasan al-Basri, such as:
When he [the Prophet] dispatched his armies, he said, Go
in the Name of God! Fight in the way of God [against] the
ones who disbelieve in God! Do not act brutally!215 Do not
exceed the proper bounds! Do not mutilate! Do not kill children or hermits!216
As if such statements were not enough, from the Islamic point of view,
to reject the indiscriminate violence endorsed by many fundamentalists,
Ibn Kathir also relays another hadith in which the Prophet tells the
story of a community of people who were weak and poor and were
being fought by a stronger group who showed animosity and harshness
towards them. The Prophet says that the weaker group was eventually
given help by God to overcome their enemies, but in their success, these
weak ones became oppressors of those who had first tried to oppress
them. He concludes with the words, And God was displeased with them
till the Day of Resurrection. The meaning of this prophetic story says
Ibn Kathir, is: When they [the weak] possessed power over the strong,
then they committed outrageous/unlawful/brutal acts (atad) against
them ... and God was displeased with them by reason of this brutality
(itid). Thus, Ibn Kathir points out an important principle of warfare in
Islam: acts of brutality committed against Muslims are not an excuse for
127
05/07/2013 15:21
Muslims to respond in kind. This idea, so clear in the traditional sources,

stands in direct contrast to the positions of the fundamentalists, which
through their use of Quranic citations seek to hide what ultimately can
only be described as disobedience to these teachings of the Prophet.
Another Quranic verse often quoted is 4:75:
And why should you not fight in the way of God and those
who are weakmen, women, and children, whose cry has
been: Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are
oppressors, and raise for us, from you, one who will help.
(Al-Nis, 4:75)
This verse has been mentioned as justification for open warfare
against the West and to inspire Muslims to fight the United States and
its allies who threaten the Muslim lands in particular. According to our
commentators, however, the reason for the revelation of 4:75 was the
fact that even after the Prophet had made his migration to Medina, there
were still some Muslims who remained in Mecca although they could
not practice their religion, and some Meccans who wished to be Muslims
but would not convert out of fear of their fellow tribesmen.217 In both
cases these difficulties were due to the weakness of these people vis-vis the polytheistic members of their own clans who sought to oppress
them with threats and even torture. Therefore, verse 4:75 was revealed to
call the Muslims of Medina to a twofold jihad: (1) to free their brethren
who were left behind in Mecca from religious oppression, and (2) to give
those Meccans who desired to convert the ability to do so without fear
of reprisals from the enemies of Islam. This clearly established context
is very different from the manner in which the verse is understood by
extremists, for the least that can be said is that in the West, unlike many
places in the Islamic world itself, Muslims are basically free to worship
as they see fit, nor is there any attempt to stop men or women from
converting to Islam. Clearly then, the use of 4:75 as a proof text for
jihad against the West and America is at best disingenuous considering
the traditional understanding of the circumstances surrounding its
revelation.
In addition to these verses, some cite verses 3:139 and 4:89 in their call
for each Muslim to kill Americans and plunder their wealth in any place
he finds them. Verse 3:139, which says, Do not lose heart, and do not
128
05/07/2013 15:21
be sad. For you will gain mastery if you are believers (l Imrn, 3:139)
like so many misplaced quotations, actually occurs in the context of the
fight against the Meccan polytheists at the battle of Uhud, while Al-Nis,
4:89 refers to the munafiqn or hypocrites among the early Islamic
community. The munafiqn, as mentioned earlier, were those Muslims
who disobeyed Gods commands knowingly. Many of them converted to
Islam only out of a sense of the advantage that could be gained from not
openly opposing the Prophet while his power was waxing. Secretly they
hoped for and worked toward victory for the polytheists. It is in regard
to these traitors within the Muslim community that the verse speaks with
such harshness, not in reference to those outside of the ummah. One last
verse that is popular in modern jihadist literature is verse 9:38:
O you who believe, what is the matter with you that when you
are asked to go forth in the way of God, you cling heavily to the
Earth. Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter?
Unless you go forth, He will punish you with a grievous torment and put others in your place. (Al-Tawbah, 9:38)
According to our commentators, this verse relates to the military
expedition (ghazwah) led by the Prophet to Tabuk, a region in what is
today northwestern Saudi Arabia. During this expedition the Muslims
went out in search of Byzantine military in the region. It is said that the
Muslims stayed, manoeuvring in the field some ten days, but did not
encounter any Byzantine forces. As regards the use of this verse, it has
been quoted with the hope of encouraging Muslims today to go forth
against the United States and its allies, as the early mujhidn did against
another world power, the Byzantines. The expedition to Tabuk, however,
did not constitute some kind of special case in which the Islamic limits
of warfare were neglected. Although the Muslims potentially would
be facing a foe far more capable and powerful than any they had yet
encountered, namely, the standing army of the Byzantine Empire which
had only recently conquered much of Persia, this did not constitute an
excuse for transgression. Despite the danger, at no time in the expedition
did the Prophet ever give orders to his army to transgress or discard
the limits set upon jihad. Therefore, any such use of this verse within
the context of encouraging such transgression is inconsistent with the
historical reality of the ghazwah to Tabuk. In fact, the expedition was an
129
05/07/2013 15:21
occasion for establishing treaties of protection very similar to those we

have mentioned in previous sections of this essay, those concluded with
the people of Ayla and the Christians of Duma.218
In the case of each of these verses we have cited, extremists have tried
to apply them in ways which entail clear innovations from their generally
accepted meanings. Such exegesis not only goes against basic aspects of
the science of Quranic commentary, it also introduces innovation into
the very practice of Islam itself, by making jihad into a path of unbounded
bloodshed. In this manner, the fundamentalists violate the fundamental
principles of warfare in Islam and betray the example of the Prophet,
as well as that of the first Muslims engaged in jihad, and as Reza ShahKazemi shows in a following essay, many generations into the modern
era. In fact their teachings are a not-so-subtle perversion of the very
Islam they claim to want to preserve. So systematic is their disregard of
the facts of early Islamic history and the circumstances surrounding the
revelations of the Quran that one is left wondering what of Islam, other
than a name, would they claim to save?
Conclusion
We have attempted to show in this paper that, properly understood, the
traditional doctrine of jihad leaves no room for militant acts like those
perpetrated against the United States on September 11th. Those who
carried out these crimes in the name of God and the Prophet, in fact,
followed neither God nor the Prophet, but followed their own imaginings about religion without any serious understanding of the traditional
sources of the Islamic faith. No textual justifications for their acts can
be found in the Quran, nor can one cite examples of such brutality and
slaughter of innocents from the life of the Prophet or the military jihad
of the early decades of Islam. The notion of a militant Islam cannot be
supported by any educated reading of the source materials, be they the
Quran and its commentaries, the Hadith tradition, or the early Islamic
historical works. On the contrary, what is clear when looking at these
texts is the remarkable degree of acceptance and, indeed, respect that
was shown to non-Muslims, Jews and Christians in particular, at a
timethe early medieval periodwhen tolerance and acceptance of
religious differences were hardly well known attitudes. Even in cases
130
05/07/2013 15:21
of warfare, the Muslim armies acted with remarkable dignity and principle, irrespective of the weakness or strength of their opposition. In
short, the early Islamic community was characterised not by militancy,
but primarily by moderation and restraint.
These traits were not in spite of the religion of Islam but because of
it. This can be seen in the Quran in Chapter 2, verse 143, where God
says to the Muslims, We have made you a middle people (Al-Baqarah,
2:143), that is, a people who avoid extremes, and in another famous
verse which says, and He [God] has set the Balance [of all things].
Do not transgress the Balance! (Al-Ramn, 55:7-8). Traditional
Muslims saw all of life in terms of balance, from simple daily activities
to fighting and jihad. Each activity had its limits and rules because God
had set the balance for all things. It has primarily been certain modernised Muslims, whose influences are not the traditional teachings of the
faith, but the attitudes and excesses of modernity (only cloaked with
turbans and beards), who have transgressed all limits and disregarded
the Balance that is true Islam.
Originally published by World Wisdom in Islam, Fundamentalism
and the Betrayal of Tradition. Reproduced with the kind permission of
the author and World Wisdom Press.
131
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter five
THE SPIRIT OF JIHAD219
Dr Reza Shah-Kazemi
When we think how few men of real religion there are, how
small the number of defenders and champions of the truth
when one sees ignorant persons imagining that the principle
of Islam is hardness, severity, extravagance and barbarity
it is time to repeat these words: Patience is beautiful, and
God is the source of all succour. (Sabr jaml, wa Allhu almustanYsuf, 12:18)
Emir Abd al-Qadir al-Jazairi220
If these words were true in 1860, when the emir wrote them, they are sadly
even truer today. In the aftermath of the earth-shaking events of September
11 many in the West and in the Muslim world are rightly appalled by the
fact that the mass murder perpetrated on that day is being hailed by some
Muslims as an act of jihad. Only the most deluded souls could regard the
suicide attacks as having been launched by mujhidn, striking a blow in the
name of Islam against legitimate targets in the heartland of the enemy.
Despite its evident falsity, the image of Islam conveyed by this disfiguration of Islamic principles is not easily dislodged from the popular imagination in the West. There is an unhealthy and dangerous convergence of
perception between, on the one hand, thosealbeit a tiny minorityin the
Muslim world who see the attacks as part of a necessary anti-western jihad,
and on the other, those in the Westunfortunately, not such a tiny minoritywho likewise see the attacks as the logical expression of an inherently
militant religious tradition, one that is irrevocably opposed to the West.
Although of the utmost importance in principle, it appears to
matter little in practice that Muslim scholars have pointed out that the
terror attacks are totally devoid of any legitimacy in terms of Islamic
law and morality. The relevant legal principlesthat jihad can only be
132
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
proclaimed by the most authoritative scholar of jurisprudence in the

land in question; that there were no grounds for waging a jihad in the
given situation; that, even within a legitimate jihad, the use of fire as a
weapon is prohibited; that the inviolability of non-combatants is always
to be strictly observed; that suicide is prohibited in Islamthese principles, and others, have been properly stressed by the appropriate shariah
experts; and they have been duly amplified by leaders and statesmen
in the Muslim world and the West. Nonetheless, here in the West, the
abiding image of Islamic jihad seems to be determined not so much by
legal niceties as by images and stereotypes; in particular, in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, the potent juxtaposition of two scenes: the
apocalyptic carnage at Ground Zero, where the Twin Towers used to
stand, and mobs of enraged Muslims bellowing anti-western slogans to
the refrain of Allhu Akbar.
In such a situation, where the traditional spirit of Islam, and the
meaning, role and significance of jihad within it, are being distorted
beyond recognition, it behoves all those who stand opposed both to
media stereotypes of jihadism and to those misguided fanatics who
provide the material for the stereotypes to denounce in the strongest
possible terms all forms of terrorism that masquerade as jihad. Many,
though, will understandably be asking the question: if this is not jihad,
then what is true jihad? They should be given an answer.221
Whilst it would be a relatively straightforward task to cite traditional Islamic principles which reveal the totally un-Islamic nature of
this ideology of jihadism, we believe that a critique on this plane of principle will be much more effective if it is complemented with images,
actions, deeds, personalities, and episodes that exemplify the principles
in question, thereby putting flesh and blood on the bare bones of theory.
The salience of intellectual argument, especially in the domain being
considered here, is immeasurably deepened through corroboration by
historically recorded cases in which the spirit of authentic jihad is vividly
enacted; and the pretensions of the self-styled warriors of Islam can be
more acutely perceived in the light cast by true mujhidn.
There is a rich treasure of chivalry in Muslim history from which to
draw for this purpose. What follows is a series of scenes drawn from this
tradition which might serve as illustrations of key Quranic and prophetic
133
05/07/2013 15:21
values which pertain to principled warfare. For it is one thing to quote

Quranic verses, and quite another to see them embodied.
As regards the virtue of chivalry itself, it is no exaggeration to say
that, throughout the Middle Ages, the very name Saladin (Salah al-Din
al-Ayyubi) was a byword for chivalry, and this remains to some extent
true even to this day. The contemporary chroniclesby Muslims and
Christians alikewhich describe his campaigns and his consistent fidelity to the most noble principles of dignified warfare speak volumes. Again
and again, often in the face of treachery from his adversaries, Saladin
responded with magnanimity. Suffice it to draw attention to his forbearance, mercy, and generosity at the moment of his greatest triumph: the
reconquest of Jerusalem on Friday 2 October, 1187, a memorable day
indeed, being 27 of Rajab, the anniversary of the Prophets Laylat al-Mirj,
his ascent through the heavens from Jerusalem itself. After detailing many
acts of kindness and charity, the Christian chronicler Ernoul writes:
Then I shall tell you of the great courtesy which Saladin
showed to the wives and daughters of knights, who had fled
to Jerusalem when their lords were killed or made prisoners
in battle. When these ladies were ransomed and had come
forth from Jerusalem, they assembled and went before Saladin crying mercy. When Saladin saw them he asked who they
were and what they sought. And it was told him that they
were the dames and damsels of knights who had been taken
or killed in battle. Then he asked what they wished, and they
answered for Gods sake have pity on them; for the husbands
of some were in prison, and of others were dead, and they
had lost their lands, and in the name of God let him counsel and help them. When Saladin saw them weeping he had
great compassion for them, and wept himself for pity. And he
bade the ladies whose husbands were alive to tell him where
they were captives, and as soon as he could go to the prisons
he would set them free. And all were released wherever they
were found. After that he commanded that to the dames and
damsels whose lords were dead there should be handsomely
distributed from his own treasure, to some more and others
less, according to their estate. And he gave them so much that
they gave praise to God and published abroad the kindness
and honour which Saladin had done to them.222
134
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
Saladins magnanimity at this defining moment of history will always

be contrasted with the barbaric sacking of the city and indiscriminate
murder of its inhabitants by the Christian Crusaders in 1099. His lesson
of mercy has been immortalised in the words of his biographer, Stanley
Lane-Poole:
One recalls the savage conquest by the first Crusaders in 1099,
when Godfrey and Tancred rode through streets choked with
the dead and the dying, when defenceless Moslems were
tortured, burnt, and shot down in cold blood on the towers
and roof of the Temple, when the blood of wanton massacre defiled the honour of Christendom and stained the scene
where once the gospel of love and mercy had been preached.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy was a
forgotten beatitude when the Christians made shambles of
the Holy City. Fortunate were the merciless, for they obtained
mercy at the hands of the Moslem Sultan If the taking of
Jerusalem were the only fact known about Saladin, it were
enough to prove him the most chivalrous and great-hearted
conqueror of his own, and perhaps of any, age.223
Saladin, though exceptional, was but expressing essentially Islamic
principles of conduct, as laid down by the Quran and the Prophet. These
principles of conduct were exemplified in another telling incident which
occurred some fifty years before Saladins victory: a mass conversion of
Christians to Islam took place, as a direct result of the exercise of the
cardinal Muslim virtue of compassion. A Christian monk, Odo of Deuil,
has bequeathed to history a valuable record of the event; being openly
antagonistic to the Islamic faith, his account is all the more reliable. After
being defeated by the Turks in Phyrgia in 543 AH/1147 CE, the remnants
of Louis VIIs army, together with a few thousand pilgrims, reached the
port of Attalia. The sick, the wounded and the pilgrims had to be left
behind by Louis, who gave his Greek allies 500 marks to take care of
these people until reinforcements arrived. The Greeks stole away with
the money, abandoning the pilgrims and the wounded to the ravages
of starvation and disease, and fully expecting those who survived to
be finished off by the Turks. However, when the Turks arrived and saw
the plight of the defenceless pilgrims, they took pity on them, fed and
watered them, and tended to their needs. This act of compassion resulted
135
05/07/2013 15:21
in the wholesale conversion of the pilgrims to Islam. Odo comments:

Avoiding their co-religionists who had been so cruel to them,
they went in safety among the infidels who had compassion
upon them Oh kindness more cruel than all treachery!
They gave them bread but robbed them of their faith, though
it is certain that, contented with the services they [the Muslims] performed, they compelled no one among them to renounce his religion.224
The last point is crucial in respect of two key Islamic principles: that
no one is ever to be forced into converting to Islam; and that virtue must
be exercised with no expectation of reward. On the one hand, There
is no compulsion in religion (Al-Baqarah, 2:256), and on the other, the
righteous are those who feed, for love of Him, the needy, the orphan, the
captive, [saying] we feed you only for the sake of God; we desire neither
reward nor thanks from you (Al-Insn, 76:89).
Mercy, compassion, and forbearance are certainly key aspects of the
authentic spirit of jihad; it is not simply a question of fierceness in war,
it is much more about knowing when fighting is unavoidable, how the
fight is to be conducted, and to exercise, whenever possible, the virtues
of mercy and gentleness. The following verses are relevant in this regard:
Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you. (AlBaqarah, 2:216)
Muhammad is the messenger of God; and those with him are
fierce against the disbelievers, and merciful amongst themselves. (Al-Fat, 48:29)
And fight in the way of God those who fight you, but do not
commit aggression. God loves not the aggressors. (Al-Baqarah,
2:190)
The Prophet is told in the Quran: It was by the mercy of God
that thou was lenient to them; if thou had been stern and fierce
of heart they would have dispersed from around thee. (l
Imrn, 3:159)
Repeatedly in the Quran one is brought back to the overriding
imperative of manifesting mercy and compassion wherever possible.
This is a principle that relates not so much to legalism and as to the
deepest nature of things, for, in the Islamic perspective, compassion is
136
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
the very essence of the Real. A famous saying of the Prophet tells us
that, written on the very Throne of God are the words, My mercy takes
precedence over My wrath. Mercy and compassion (ramah) express
the fundamental nature of God. Therefore nothing can escape from
divine mercy: My compassion encompasses all things (Al-Arf, 7:156).
The name of God, al-Ramn, is coterminous with Allah: Call upon
Allh or call upon al-Ramn (Al-Isr, 17:10). The divine creative force
is, again and again in the Quran, identified with al-Ramn; and the
principle of revelation itself, likewise, is identified with this same divine
quality. The chapter of the Quran named Al-Ramn (55) begins thus:
Al-Ramn, taught the Quran, created man.
This ontological imperative of mercy must always be borne in mind
when considering any issue connected with warfare in Islam. The examples of merciful magnanimity given above are not only to be seen as
instances of individual virtue, but also, and above all, as natural fruits
of this ontological imperative; and no one manifested this imperative so
fully as the Prophet himself. Indeed, Saladins magnanimity at Jerusalem
can be seen as an echo of the Prophets conduct at his conquest of Mecca.
As the huge Muslim army approached Mecca in triumphal procession,
a Muslim leader, Sad ibn Ubada, to whom the Prophet had given his
standard, called out to Abu Sufyan, leader of the Quraysh of Mecca, who
knew that there was no chance of resisting this army:
O Abu Sufyan, this is the day of slaughter! The day when the
inviolable shall be violated! The day of Gods abasement of
Quraysh. O Messenger of God, cried Abu Sufyan when
he came within earshot, hast thou commanded the slaying
of thy people?and he repeated to him what Sad had said.
I adjure thee by God, he added, on behalf of thy people,
for thou art of all men the greatest in filial piety, the most
merciful, the most beneficent. This is the day of mercy, said
the Prophet, the day on which God hath exalted Quraysh.225
The Quraysh, having full reason to be fearful, given the intensity
and the barbarityof their persecution of the early Muslims, and
their continuing hostility and warfare against them after the enforced
migration of the Muslims to Medina, were granted a general amnesty;
many erstwhile enemies were thereby converted into stalwart Muslims.
137
05/07/2013 15:21
This noble conduct embodied the spirit of the following verse: The good
deed and the evil deed are not alike. Repel the evil deed with one which is
better, then lo! He, between whom and thee there was enmity [will become]
as though he were a bosom friend. (Fuilat 41: 34)
The principle of no compulsion in religion was referred to above.
It is to be noted that, contrary to the still prevalent misconception that
Islam was spread by the sword, the military campaigns and conquests of
the Muslim armies were on the whole carried out in such an exemplary
manner that the conquered peoples became attracted by the religion
which so impressively disciplined its armies, and whose adherents so scrupulously respected the principle of freedom of worship. Paradoxically,
the very freedom and respect given by the Muslim conquerors to believers of different faith communities intensified the process of conversion
to Islam. Arnolds classic work The Preaching of Islam remains one of
the best refutations of the idea that Islam was spread by forcible conversion. His comprehensive account of the spread of Islam in all the major
regions of what is now the Muslim world demonstrates beyond doubt
that the growth and spread of the religion was of an essentially peaceful
nature, the two most important factors in accounting for conversion to
Islam being Sufism and trade. The mystic and the merchant, in other
words, were the most successful missionaries of Islam.
One telling document cited in his work sheds light on the nature of
the mass conversion of one group, the Christians of the Persian province
of Khurasan, and may be taken as indicative of the conditions under
which Christians, and non-Muslims in general, converted to Islam.
This is the letter of the Nestorian Patriarch, Isho-yabh III to Simeon,
Metropolitan of Rev-Ardashir, Primate of Persia:
Alas, alas! Out of so many thousands who bore the name
of Christians, not even one single victim was consecrated
unto God by the shedding of his blood for the true faith
(the Arabs) attack not the Christian faith, but on the contrary, they favour our religion, do honour to our priests and
the saints of our Lord and confer benefits on churches and
monasteries. Why then have your people of Merv abandoned
their faith for the sake of these Arabs?226
This honouring of Christian priests, saints, churches and monasteries
138
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
flows directly from the practice of the Prophet Uwitness, among other
things, the treaty he concluded with the monks of St Catherines monastery
in Sinai;227 it is likewise rooted in clear verses relating to the inviolability
of all places wherein the name of God is oft-invoked. Indeed, in the verse
giving permission to the Muslims to begin to fight back in self-defence
against the Meccans, the need to protect all such places of worship, and
not just mosques, is tied to the reason for the necessity of warfare:
Permission [to fight] is given to those who are being fought, for
they have been wronged, and surely God is able to give them
victory; those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly, only because they said: Our Lord is God. Had God not
driven back some by means of others, monasteries, churches,
synagogues and mosqueswherein the name of God is oftinvokedwould assuredly have been destroyed. (Al-ajj, 22:
3940)
The long and well-authenticated tradition of tolerance in Islam
springs directly from the spirit of this and many other verses of similar
import. We observe one of the most striking historical expressions of
this tradition of tolerancestriking in the contrast it provides with the
intolerance that so frequently characterised the Christian tradition
in the fate of Spanish Jewry under Islamic rule. Before looking at this
particular case, we should note that, in general terms, active, systematic
persecution of Jews is virtually unknown under Muslim rule. It is
important to stress this fact in the strongest possible terms in the present
context, and to debunk the pernicious lie that is circulating in our times,
the lie that there is in Islam an inherent, deep-rooted, theologically
sanctioned hostility to Judaism. One must not regard the present anger
on the part of most Muslims against particular policies of the state of
Israel as some atavistic resurgence of a putative anti-Semitism ingrained
in the Islamic view of the world. Today, it is the extremists on both
sidesthat is the jihadists and the Zionistswho share an interest in
promoting this myth of an intrinsically and eternally anti-Jewish Islam;
it is of the utmost importance to show the falsity of this notion.
One should also add here that it is not just the moderates on both
sides who come together, for the sake of peace and justice, in opposing
this false characterisation of Muslim-Jewish relations; it is also the lovers
139
05/07/2013 15:21
of traditional, orthodox Judaism that come together, from all religions,

to denounce, for the sake of veracity, that deviation from Judaism which
Zionism is. Thus we find such groups as the Naturai Kartatraditional
Jews opposed to Zionism on irrefutable theological groundsjoining
hands with Muslim human rights groups to defend the legitimate rights
of the Palestinians against the injustices perpetrated against them in
the Holy Land. One must take care to distinguish, therefore, not only
between Judaism and Zionism, but also between legitimate opposition to
particular policies of the state of Israelpolicies that reflect and embody
Zionist aspirations in different degreesand illegitimate jihad against
Jews or Westerners simply on account of the fact that they are Jews or
Westerners. The first expresses a legitimate grievance; the second makes
of this grievance the pretext for terrorism.
As regards the refutation of the myth that Muslim-Jewish relations
have traditionally been antagonistic and oppressive, a cursory perusal of
the historical record suffices. Even so fierce a critic of Islam as Bernard
Lewis cannot but confirm the facts of history as regards the true character of Muslim-Jewish relations until recent times. In his book The Jews
of Islam, he writes that even though there was a certain level of discrimination against Jews and Christians under Muslim rule, Persecution,
that is to say, violent and active repression, was rare and atypical. Jews
and Christians under Muslim rule were not normally called upon to
suffer martyrdom for their faith. They were not often obliged to make
the choice, which confronted Muslims and Jews in reconquered Spain,
between exile, apostasy and death. They were not subject to any major
territorial or occupational restrictions, such as were the common lot of
Jews in premodern Europe.228 He then adds the important point that
this pattern of tolerance continued to characterise the nature of Muslim
rule vis--vis Jews and Christians until modern times, with very minor
exceptions.
It is not out of place to note here that the phenomenon of anti-Semitism has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. It was, as Schleifer notes,
Church Triumphantthat is the Byzantine Church which triumphed
over the Roman Empire, and founded its new capital in Constantinople
in the fourth centuryit was this Church that was to unleash upon the
world the phenomenon of anti-Semitism. For if we are to differentiate
140
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
between the vicissitudes which any minority community may endure,

and a principled and systematic hostility, then one can boldly state, with
the consensus of modern historians, that anti-Semitism originated as a
Christian phenomenon.229
The story of anti-Semitism in Europethe violent episodes of what
today would be labelled ethnic cleansingis too well known to need
repeating here. But it should be borne in mind that at the same time as
the Christian West was indulging in periodic anti-Jewish pogroms, the
Jews were experiencing what some Jewish historians themselves have
termed a kind of golden age under Muslim rule. As Erwin Rosenthal
writes, The Talmudic age apart, there is perhaps no more formative
and positive time in our long and chequered history than that under the
empire of Islam.230
One particularly rich episode in this golden period was experienced
by the Jews of Muslim Spain. As has been abundantly attested by historical
records, the Jews enjoyed not just freedom from oppression, but also an
extraordinary revival of cultural, religious, theological and mystical creativity. As Titus Burckhardt writes, The greatest beneficiaries of Islamic
rule were the Jews, for in Spain (sephrd in Hebrew) they enjoyed their
finest intellectual flowering since their dispersal from Palestine to foreign
lands.231 Such great Jewish luminaries as Maimonides and Ibn Gabirol
wrote their philosophical works in Arabic, and were fully at home in
Muslim Spain.232 With the expulsion, murder or forced conversion of
all Muslims and Jews following the reconquista of Spainbrought to
completion with the fall of Granada in 1492it was to the Ottomans that
the exiled Jews turned for refuge and protection. They were welcomed
in Muslim lands throughout North Africa, joining the settled and prosperous Jewish communities already there, while also establishing new
Jewish communities.
It was at this time also that Jews were suffering intense persecution in central Europe; they likewise looked to the Muslim Ottomans
for refuge. Many Jews fleeing from persecution in central Europe would
have received letters like the following, from Rabbi Isaac Tzarfati, who
reached the Ottomans just before their capture of Constantinople in
1453. This is what he replied to those Jews of central Europe who were
calling out for help:
141
05/07/2013 15:21

Listen, my brethren, to the counsel I will give you. I too was
born in Germany and studied Torah with the German rabbis.
I was driven out of my native country and came to the Turkish
land, which is blessed by God and filled with all good things.
Here I found rest and happiness Here in the land of the
Turks we have nothing to complain of. We are not oppressed
with heavy taxes, and our commerce is free and unhindered
every one of us lives in peace and freedom. Here the Jew
is not compelled to wear a yellow hat as a badge of shame, as
is the case in Germany, where even wealth and great fortune
are a curse for the Jew because he therewith arouses jealousy
among the Christians Arise, my brethren, gird up your
loins, collect your forces, and come to us. Here you will be
free of your enemies, here you will find rest 233
Given the fact that so much of todays jihadist propaganda is directed

against Jews, it is important to stress that this tolerance of Jews under
Muslim rule is one expression of an underlying theological harmony
between the two religionsa harmony that is conspicuously absent
when one compares Christian and Jewish theology. Islam was never
considered the messianic fulfilment of Judaism, as was Christianity;
it was put forward as a restoration of that primordial Abrahamic faith
of which both Judaism and Christianity were alike expressions. Islam
calls adherents of both faiths back to that pristine monotheism; far from
rejecting their prophets, the Quran asserts that all the prophets came
with one and the same message, and that therefore there should be no
distinction made between any of them:
Say: We believe in God and that which is revealed unto us,
and that which is revealed unto Abraham and Ishmael and
Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and that which was given unto
Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord. We make
no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have
submitted. (l Imrn, 3:84)
The consequences of this acceptance of the pre-Quranic scriptures
albeit conditioned by the need to beware of certain distortions
(tarf), distortions which, however, the Quran does not specify
these consequences were far-reaching as regards theological relations
between Muslims and Jews. As the Jewish scholar Mark Cohen notes:
Rabbinic exegesis of the Bibleso repugnant to Christian theologians
142
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
bothered Muslim clerics only insofar as it distorted pristine Abrahamic

monotheism. Thus the Islamic polemic against the rabbis was much less
virulent and had far less serious repercussions. The Talmud was burned
in Paris, not in Cairo or Baghdad.234
Therefore, the refusal of the Jews to follow the shariah was not a
challenge to Islamic belief; this in contrast to the Jewish rejection of
Christ as messiah, which not only challenged a cardinal tenet of Christian
dogma, it also deeply insulted Christian faith and sensibility. Whereas in
Christendom, the Jews were reviled as the killers of Jesus, in Islam, the
Jews were protected, as ahl al-dhimmah, by the very law that they refused
to follow for themselves. To quote Cohen again, More secure than their
brethren in the Christian West, the Jews of Islam took a correspondingly
more conciliatory view of their masters. In Europe, the Jews nurtured a
pronounced hatred for the Christians, whom they considered to be idolators, subject to the anti-pagan discriminatory provisions of the ancient
Mishnah The Jews of Islam had a markedly different attitude towards
the religion of their masters. Staunch Muslim opposition to polytheism
convinced Jewish thinkers like Maimonides of Islams unimpeachable
monotheism. This essentially tolerant view of Islam echoed Islams own
respect for the Jewish people of the Book235
The tolerance extended by Islam to Jews (and, indeed, all believers,
including Hindus, Buddhists and Zoroastrians) should be seen, again,
not as arising only out of a sense of virtue or justice or expediency on
the part of the majority of the rulers and dynasties throughout Muslim
historyand thus as some kind of interesting historical prefiguration
of modern, secular tolerance; rather, the fact that this phenomenon
of Muslim tolerance is so clearly defined must be seen as organically
connected to the spirit of the Quranic revelation, a spirit grasped in
depth by traditional Muslims, and deliberately ignored or subverted by
modern jihadists. This spirit is well expressed in the following verses:
Truly those who believe, and the Jews, and the Christians, and
the Sabeanswhoever believes in God and the Last Day and
performs virtuous deedssurely their reward is with their
Lord, and no fear shall come upon them, neither shall they
grieve. (Al-Baqarah, 2: 62)
Of the People of the Scripture there is a staunch community
143
05/07/2013 15:21

who recite the revelations of God in the watches of the night,
falling prostrate. / They believe in God and the Last Day, and
enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency, and vie with one
another in good works. These are of the righteous. / And whatever good they do, they will not be denied it; and God knows
the pious. (l Imrn, 3: 1134)
The lifeblood of terrorism is hatred; and this hatred is often in

turn the disfigured expression of grievancea grievance that may be
legitimate. In the present day, few doubt that the ongoing injustices in
Palestine and other parts of the Muslim world give rise to legitimate
grievances, but there is nothing in Islam that justifies the killing or
injuring of civilians, nor of perpetrating any excess as a result of hatred,
even if that hatred is based on legitimate grievances. The pursuit of
justice must be conducted in accordance with justice; the means should
not undermine the end:
O ye who believe, be upright for God, witnesses in justice; and
let not hatred of a people cause you to be unjust. Be justthat
is closer to piety. (Al-Midah, 5:8)
The principle here established is perfectly exemplified in the
conduct of Emir Abd al-Qadir, leader of the Algerian Muslims in their
heroic resistance to French colonial aggression between 1830 and 1847.
The French were guilty of the most barbaric crimes in their mission
civilisatrice; the emir responded not with bitter vengefulness and
enraged fury but with dispassionate propriety and principled warfare. At
a time when the French were indiscriminately massacring entire tribes,
when they were offering their soldiers a ten franc reward for every pair
of Arab ears, and when severed Arab heads were regarded as trophies
of war, the emir manifested his magnanimity, his unflinching adherence
to Islamic principle, and his refusal to stoop to the level of his civilised
adversaries, by issuing the following edict:
Every Arab who captures alive a French soldier will receive
as reward eight douros Every Arab who has in his possession a Frenchman is bound to treat him well and to conduct
him to either the khalifa or the emir himself, as soon as possible. In cases where the prisoner complains of ill treatment,
the Arab will have no right to any reward.236
144
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
When asked what the reward was for a severed French head, the
emir replied: twenty-five blows of the baton on the soles of the feet.
One understands why General Bugeaud, governor-general of Algeria,
referred to the emir not only as a man of genius whom history should
place alongside Jugurtha, but also as a kind of prophet, the hope of
all fervent Muslims.237 When he was finally defeated and brought to
France, before being exiled to Damascus, the emir received hundreds
of French admirers who had heard of his bravery and his nobility; the
visitors by whom he was most deeply touched, though, were French
officers who came to thank him for the treatment they received at his
hands when they were his prisoners in Algeria.238
Also highly relevant to our theme is the emirs famous defence of
Christians in Damascus in 1860. Now defeated and in exile, the emir
spent his time praying and teaching. When civil war broke out between
the Druze and the Christians in Lebanon, the emir heard that there
were signs of an impending attack on the Christians of Damascus. He
wrote letters to all the Druze shaykhs, requesting them not to make
offensive movements against a place with the inhabitants of which you
have never before been at enmity. Here we have an expression of the
cardinal principle of warfare in Islam: never to initiate hostilities. And
fight in the way of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression.
God loves not the aggressors (Al-Baqarah, 2: 190).239
The emirs letters proved to no avail. When the Druze were approaching the Christian quarters of the city, the emir confronted them, urging
them to observe the rules of religion and of human justice.
What, they shouted, you, the great slayer of Christians,
are you come out to prevent us from slaying them in our
turn? Away!
If I slew the Christians, he shouted in reply, it was ever
in accordance with our lawthe Christians who had declared war against me, and were arrayed in arms against
our faith.240
This had no effect upon the mob. In the end, the emir and his
small band of followers sought out the terrified Christians, giving
them refuge, first in his own home, and then, as the numbers grew, in
the citadel. It is estimated that no less than fifteen thousand Christians
145
05/07/2013 15:21
were saved by the emir in this action; it is important to note that in

this number were included all the ambassadors and consuls of the
European powers. As Churchill prosaically puts it:
All the representatives of the Christian powers then residing in Damascus, without one single exception, had
owed their lives to him. Strange and unparalleled destiny!
An Arab had thrown his guardian aegis over the outraged
majesty of Europe. A descendant of the Prophet had sheltered and protected the Spouse of Christ.241
The French consul, representative of the state that was still very
much in the process of colonising the emirs homeland, owed his life
to the emir; for this true warrior of Islam, there was no bitterness,
resentment or revenge, only the duty to protect the innocent, and all
the People of the Book who lived peacefully within the lands of Islam.
It is difficult to conceive of a greater contrast than that between the
emirs conduct and the present-day self-styled mujhidn, who indiscriminately portray the West as the enemy tout court, and perpetrate
correspondingly illegitimate acts against Westerners. The emirs action
exemplifies well the Quranic verse:
God forbids you not from dealing kindly and justly with
those who fought not against you on account of your religion, nor drove you out of your homes. Truly God loves
those who are just. (Al-Mumtaanah, 60:8)
It is interesting to note that another great warrior of Islam, Imam
Shamil of Dagestan, hero of the wars against Russian imperialism,242
wrote a letter to the emir when he heard of his defence of the Christians. He praised the emir for his noble act, thanking God that there
were still Muslims who behaved according to the spiritual ideals of
Islam:
I was astonished at the blindness of the functionaries who
have plunged into such excesses, forgetful of the words of
the Prophet U, Whoever shall be unjust towards a tributary,243 who shall do him wrong, who shall lay on him any
charge beyond his means, and finally who shall deprive
him of anything without his own consent, it is I who will
be his accuser in the day of judgement.244
146
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
While the emir fought French colonialism militarily, in the following

century another great Sufi master in Algeria, Shaykh Ahmad al-Alawi,
chose to resist with a peaceful strategy, but one which pertained no
less to jihad, in the principal sense of the term. One has to remember
that the literal meaning of the word jihad is effort or struggle, and that
the greater jihad was defined by the Prophet as the jihad al-nafs, the
struggle against the soul. The priority thus accorded to inward, spiritual
effort over all outward endeavours must never be lost sight of in any
examination of jihad. Physical fighting is the lesser jihad, and only has
meaning in the context of that unremitting combat against inner vices,
the devil within, that has been called the greater jihad.
One contemporary Sufi master vividly contrasts the kind of inner
warfare that characterises the true warriors of the spirit from the
mass of ordinary believers. He does so in connection with the Quranic
distinction, within the category of those who are saved in the hereafter,
between the companions of the right (ab al-yamn) and the foremost
(al-sbiqn) (Al-Wqiah, 56: 810):
Every Muslim is at war with the devil. As regards those of
the right, however, this warfare is desultory and intermittent,
with many armistices and many compromises. Moreover
the devil is aware that as fallen men they are already to a
certain extent within his grasp, and having by definition no
faith in the Divine Mercy, he cannot foresee that they will escape from his clutches in the life to come. But as regards the
foremost, he feels them actually throwing off his domination
in the present, and they even carry the war into his territory.
The result is a terrible retaliation 245
The individuals moral and spiritual effort in this inner struggle is
a necessary but not sufficient condition for victory; only by means of
heaven-sent weapons can the war be won: sacred rites, meditations,
incantations, invocationsall of which are summed up in the term
remembrance of God. In this light, the strategy of Shaykh al-Alawi can
be better appreciated. It was to put first things first, concentrating on the
one thing needful and leaving the rest in Gods hands. It might be seen,
extrinsically, as an application, on the plane of society, of the following
esoteric principle, enunciated by one of his spiritual forbears, Mulay Ali
al-Jamal: The true way to hurt the enemy is to be occupied with the love
147
05/07/2013 15:21
of the Friend; on the other hand, if you engage in war with the enemy, he
will have obtained what he wanted from you, and at the same time you
will have lost the opportunity of loving the Friend.246
Shaykh al-Alawi concentrated on this love of the Friend, and of all
those values connected to this imperative of remembrance, doing so
to the exclusion of other, more overt forms of resistance, military and
political, against the French. The Shaykhs spiritual radiance extended
not just to a few disciples but also, through his many muqaddams, to
hundreds of thousands of Muslims whose piety was deepened in ways
that are immeasurable.247 The Shaykh was not directly concerned with
political means of liberating his land from the yoke of French rule, for
this was but a secondary aspect of the situation: the underlying aim of
the French mission civilisatrice in Algeria was to forge the Algerian
personality in the image of French culture,248 so in the measure that one
perceives that the real danger of colonialism was cultural and psychological rather than just territorial and political, the spiritual indomitability of the Shaykh and his many followers assumes the dimensions of
a signal victory. The French could make no inroads into a mentality that
remained inextricably rooted in the spiritual tradition of Islam.
Lest this approach be regarded as a prescription for unconditional
quietism, one should note that the great warrior, the emir himself, would
have had no difficulty whatsoever in asserting its validity, for even while
outwardly engaging with the enemy on the battlefield, he was never
for a moment distracted from his remembrance of the Friend. It was
without bitterness and rage that he fought, and this explains the absence
of any resentment towards the French when he was defeated by them,
submitting to the manifest will of God with the same contemplative
resignation with which he went into battle with them in the first place.
One may suspect us of romanticising somewhat, and of overstating the
emirs capacity to deal with the exigencies of a brutal war whilst simultaneously plumbing the depths of contemplative experience; it is therefore useful to present the following account, written by a Frenchman,
Lon Roche, who entered the inner circle of the emirs entourage by
pretending to have converted to Islam. During the siege of Ayn Madi
in 1838, Roche was traumatised by the fighting and killing, and sought
out the emir; entering his tent, he pleaded with the emir to help him.
148
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
He calmed me and had me drink an infusion of schiehh (a

kind of absynthe common in the desert). He supported my
head, which I could no longer hold up, on one of his knees.
He was squatting in the Arab fashion. I was stretched out
at his side. He placed his hands on my head, from which
he had removed the haik and the chechias, and under this
gentle touch I soon fell asleep. I awoke well into the night. I
opened my eyes and felt revived. The smoky wick of an Arab
lamp barely lit the vast tent of the amir. He was standing
three steps away from me. He thought I was asleep. His two
arms were raised to the height of his head, fully displaying
his milky white bernous and haik which fell in superb folds.
His beautiful blue eyes, lined with black lashes, were raised.
His lips, slightly open, seemed to be still reciting a prayer
but nevertheless were motionless. He had come to an ecstatic state. His aspirations towards heaven were such that
he seemed no longer to touch the earth. I had on occasion
been granted the honour of sleeping in Abd al-Kaders tent
and I had seen him in prayer and been struck by his mystical transports, but on this night he represented for me the
most striking image of faith. Thus must the great saints of
Christianity have prayed.249
From this account one sees that the following official description of
the emir, given as the conclusion to a pamphlet defining army regulations
in 1839, was not simply pious propaganda:
Il Hadj Abdel Kader cares not for this world, and withdraws
from it as much as his avocations permit He rises in the
middle of the night to recommend his own soul and the
souls of his followers to God. His chief pleasure is in praying
to God with fasting, that his sins may be forgiven When
he administers justice, he hears complaints with the greatest
patience When he preaches, his words bring tears to all
eyes, and melt the hardest hearts.250
This remarkable combination of roleswarrior and saint, preacher
and judgerecalls perhaps the greatest model of all Muslim mujhidn,
Ali ibn Abi Talib, son-in-law and cousin of the Prophet, the fourth caliph
of Islam and first Shii imam, unrivalled hero of all the early battles of
Islam. The Prophet U said: I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its
gate. He also said, in a hadith bearing the highest degree of authenticity
149
05/07/2013 15:21
(mutawtir): For whoever has me as his master (mawl), Ali is his

master. And the Prophet U referred to Ali as having the same rank
in relation to him as Aaron had in relation to Moses, except that Ali
was not a prophet. This paragon of wisdom and virtue stands forth as
the most compelling holy warrior in the Islamic tradition. As Frithjof
Schuon puts it, Ali appears above all as the Solar Hero, he is the
Lion of God; he personifies the combination of physical heroism on
the field of battle with a sanctity wholly detached from the things of
the world; he is the personification of the wisdom, both impassive and
combative, which the Bagavad-Gita teaches.251
One of the great lessons of principled warfare, of fighting in the
path of God, imparted by Ali was immortalised by Rumi in his poetic
rendering of the famous incident in which Ali sheathed his sword
instead of finishing off his defeated enemy, who had spat at him in a
last gesture of defiance. Although the immediate spiritual significance
of the action is clearly Alis refusal to kill on the basis of personal
angerthe warrior must be detached from self, and fight wholly for
Godit is also given a deeper metaphysical meaning by Rumi. In his
Mathnawi, Rumi turns the incident into a sublime commentary on
the Quranic verse, Ye slew them not, but God slew them. And thou
(Muhammad) didst not throw when thou threwest, but God threw
(Al-Anfl, 8:17). The last part of the verse refers to the throwing by
the Prophet of a handful of dust in the direction of the enemy before a
battle. But the verse as a whole alludes to the reality that the true, ontological agent of all actions is God Himself; mans actions are good only
if he is conscious of this, and insofar as he is effaced in this consciousness. Rumi puts the following words into the mouth of Ali, who replies
to the question of the baffled, defeated warrior on the ground: why
did you not kill me?
He said, I am wielding the sword for Gods sake, I am the
servant of God, I am not under the command of the body.
I am the Lion of God, I am not the lion of my passion: my
deed bears witness to my religion.
In war I am (manifesting the truth of) thou didst not
throw when thou threwest: I am (but) as the sword, and
the wielder is the (Divine) Sun.
150
05/07/2013 15:21
The Spirit of Jihad
I have removed the baggage of self out of the way, I have

deemed (what is) other than God to be non-existence.
I am a shadow, the Sun is my lord; I am the chamberlain, I
am not the curtain (which prevents approach) to Him.
I am filled with the pearls of union, like a (jewelled) sword:
in battle I make (men) living, not slain.252
Blood does not cover the sheen of my sword: how should the
wind sweep away my clouds?
I am not a straw, I am a mountain of forbearance and patience and justice: how should the fierce wind carry off the
mountain?253
The true warrior of Islam smites the neck of his own anger with the
sword of forbearance;254 the false warrior strikes at the neck of his enemy
with the sword of his own unbridled ego. For the first, the spirit of Islam
determines jihad; for the second, bitter anger, masquerading as jihad,
determines Islam. The contrast between the two could hardly be clearer.
The episodes recounted here as illustrations of authentic jihad
should be seen not as representing some unattainably sublime ideal, but
as expressive of the sacred norm in the Islamic tradition of warfare; this
norm may not always have been applied in practiceone can always
find deviations and transgressionsbut it was continuously upheld in
principle, and, more often than not, gave rise to the kind of chivalry,
heroism and nobility of which we have offered a few of the more striking
and famous examples here.
This sacred norm stood out clearly for all to see, buttressed by the
values and institutions of traditional Muslim society. It can still be
discerned today, for those who look hard enough, through the clouds
of passion and ideology. The emir bewailed the paucity of champions of truth in his time; in our own time, we are confronted with an
even more grotesque spectacle: the champions of authentic jihad being
blown to pieces by suicide bombers claiming to be martyrs for the faith.
One of the truly great mujhidn in the war against the Soviet invaders in Afghanistan, Ahmed Shah Massoud, fell victim to a treacherous
attack by two fellow Muslims, in what was evidently the first stage of
the operation that destroyed the World Trade Center. It was a strategic
imperative for the planners of the operation to rid the land of its most
151
05/07/2013 15:21
charismatic leader; a hero who could credibly be used by the West as

a figurehead for the revenge attack on Afghanistan that was provoked,
anticipated, and hoped for, by the terrorists. But, politics aside, the
reason why Massoud was so popular was precisely his fidelity to the
values of noble warfare in Islam; and it was this very fidelity to that
tradition that made him a dangerous enemy of the terroristsmore
dangerous, it may be said, than that more abstract enemy, the West.
To present the indiscriminate murder of Western civilians as jihad, the
values of true jihad needed to be dead and buried.
The murder of Massoud was thus doubly symbolic: he embodied
the traditional spirit of jihad that needed to be destroyed by those who
wished to assume its ruptured mantle; and it was only through suicide
subverting ones own soulthat this destruction, or rather, this apparent destruction, could be perpetrated. The destruction is only apparent
in that, on the one hand:
They destroy [but] themselves, they who would ready a pit of
fire fiercely burning [for all who have attained to faith]. (AlBurj, 85:45) 255
And on the other hand:
Say not of those who are slain in the path of God: They are
dead. Nay, they are alive, though ye perceive not. (Al-Baqarah,
2:154)
Finally, let it be noted that, while it is indeed true that the martyr
is promised paradise, a shahd is one whose death truly bears witness
(shahdah) to the truth of God. It is consciousness of the truth that must
animate and articulate the spirit of one who fights in the Path of God;
fighting for any cause other than the truth cannot be called a jihad, just
as one who dies fighting in such a cause cannot be called a martyr. Only
he is a martyr who can say with utter sincerity:
Truly my prayer and my sacrifice, my living and my dying are
for God, Lord of all creation. (Al-Anm, 6:162)
Reza Shah-Kazemi. This article was originally published
in Seasons: Semi-annual Journal Zaytuna Institute.
152
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter eight
ISLAM AND PEACE: A Survey of The Sources of Peace in
the Islamic Tradition
Is Religion a Source of Violence?
This question haunts the minds of many people concerned about religion
in one way or another. For the critics of religion, the answer is usually in
the affirmative, and it is easy to cite examples from history. From Rene
Girards depiction of ritual sacrifices as violent proclivities in religions to
the exclusivist claims of different faith traditions, one can easily conclude
that religions produce violence at both social and theological levels. As
is often done, one may take the Crusades or the inquisition in medieval
Europe or jihad movements in Islamic history and describe the respective
histories of these traditions as nothing more than a history of war, conflict,
violence, schism, persecution. The premeditated conclusion is unequivocal: the more religious people are, the more violent they tend to be. The
solution therefore lies in the desacralisation of the world. Religions, and
some among them in particular, need to be secularised and modernised to
rid themselves of their violent essence and violent legacy.
At the other end of the spectrum is the believer who sees religious
violence as an oxymoron at best and the mutilation of his/her religious
faith at worst. Religions do not call for violence. Religious teachings are
peaceful at their base, meant to re-establish the primordial harmony
between heaven and earth, between the Creator and the created. But
specific religious teachings and feelings are manipulated to instigate
violence for political gains. Violence is committed in the name of religion but not condoned by it. The only valid criticism the secularist
can raise against religion is that religions have not developed effective
217
05/07/2013 15:21
ways of protecting themselves from such manipulations and abuses. As

Juergensmeyer has shown in his extensive survey of religious violence
in the modern period, violence does not recognise religious and cultural
boundaries and can easily find a home in the most sublime and innocuous teachings of world religions. At any rate, religions are vulnerable when they fail to find ways of preventing the use of force in their
names. This becomes especially acute when they fall short of inculcating
a consciousness of peace and non-violence in the minds and hearts of
their followers. In short, religion per se cannot be seen as a source of
violence. Only some of its bad practitioners can be held accountable.
Both views have strong cases and make important points about religion and violence. Both, however, are equally mistaken in resorting to a
fixed definition of religion. And both views reduce the immense variety
of religious practices to a particular tradition and, furthermore, to a
particular faction or historic moment in that tradition. In speaking of
Islam and violence or Hinduism and war, the usual method is to look
at the sacred scriptures and compare and contrast them with historical realities that flow from their practice, or lack thereof. We highlight
those moments where there are discrepancies between text and history
as the breaking points in the history of that religion, viz., moments
when the community has not lived up to the standards of the religion
as demanded by the text.
Although there is some benefit to be gained from this approach, it
fails to see the ways in which religious texts are interpreted and made
part of the day-to-day experience of particular religious communities.
Instead of looking at how religiously binding texts are read, revealed
and enriched within the concrete experiences of the community, we
separate text from history and somehow assume historical immunity
for the text and/or textual basis for all history.
This is not to deny the centrality of the scripture. In the case of
Islam, the Quran, together with the Sunnah of the Prophet of Islam, is
and remains the main source of the Islamic Weltanschauung. After all,
the numerous interpretations that we may talk about are interpretations
of the Quran, the one text that is the subject of variant readings from
the Sufis and Hanbalis to the Wahhabis and the modernists. The fact
that the Prophetic Sunnah is part of the Islamic worldview and religious
218
05/07/2013 15:21
Islam and Peace: A Survey of the Sources of Peace in the Islamic Tradition
life, without which we cannot understand a good part of the Quran, can
be seen as confirming the significance of reading the scripture within
the concrete experiences of the Muslim community. This was in fact
how the first Muslims, who became the spiritual and moral examples
of later generations, learnt about the Quran, under the guidance and
tutorship of the Prophet.
In this sense, Islamic history is not alien to the idea of reading religiously binding texts primarily within the context of a living and evolving tradition. This is why the Sunnah was part of the Islamic law from
the outset and this is how the tradition of transmitted sciences (al-ulm
al-naqliyyah), dealing primarily with religious sciences, came about,
namely, by looking at how the previous generations of Muslims understood the Quran and the Hadith. Taken out of this context, Quranic
verses become abstruse, abstract, and impenetrable for the non-Muslim,
or for anyone who is indifferent to this tradition and, by virtue of this,
may be misled into thinking that a good part of Islamic history has come
about in spite of the Quran, not because of it.
I deemed it necessary to insert these few words of caution and
methodology for the following reasons. Much of the current debate
about Islam and violence is beset by the kind of problems that we see
in the secularist and apologetic readings of the scriptural sources of
Islam. Those who consider Islam as a religion that essentially condones
violence for its theological beliefs and political aims pick certain verses
from the Quran, link them to cases of communal and political violence
in Islamic history, and conclude that Quranic teachings provide justification for unjust use of violence. While the same can be done practically
about any religion, Islam has enjoyed much more fanfare than any other
religion for the last thousand years or so. The apologist makes the same
mistake but in a different way when he rejects all history as misguided,
failing to see the ways in which the Quran, or the Bible or the Rig Vedas,
can easily, if not legitimately, be read to resort to violence for intra- and
inter-religious violence. This is where the hermeneutics of the text (in
the sense of both tafsr and tawl) becomes absolutely necessary: it is
not that the text itself is violent but that it lends itself to multiple readings, some of which are bound to be peaceful and some violent.
The second problem is the exclusive focus of the current literature
219
05/07/2013 15:21
on the legal and juristic aspects of peace and violence in Islam. Use
of violence, conduct of war, treatment of combatants and prisoners of
war, international law, etc. are discussed within a strictly legal context,
and the classical Islamic literature on the subject is called upon to
provide answers. Although this is an important and useful exercise, it
falls short of addressing deeper philosophical and spiritual issues that
must be included in any discussion of religion and peace. This is true
especially in the case of Islam, for two main reasons. First of all, the
legal views of peace and violence in the classical period were articulated
and applied in the light of the overall teachings and aims of Islamic law
(maqid al-sharah). The maqid provided a context within which
the strict legality of the law was blended into the necessities and realities of communal life. Political conflicts couched in the language of
juridical edicts remained political conflicts, and were never extended
to a war of religions between Islam or Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism
or African religions, which Muslims encountered throughout their
history. It should come to us as no surprise that the fatwa of a jurist of
a particular school of law allowing the use of force against a Christian
ruler was not interpreted as an excuse for attacking ones Christian or
Jewish neighbour.
Secondly, the spiritual and ethical teachings of the Quran and the
Sunnah underpin everything Islamic in principle, and this applies mutatis mutandis to the question of peace and violence. The legal injunctions
(akm) of the Quran concerning peace and war are part of a larger set
of spiritual and moral principles. The ultimate goal of Islam is to create
a moral and just society in which individuals can pursue a spiritual life,
and in which the toll of living collectively, from economic exploitation
and misuse of political authority to the suppression of other people,
can be brought under control to the extent possible in any human
society. Without taking into account this larger picture, we will fail to
see how Islam advocates a positive concept of peace as opposed to a
merely negative one, and how its political and legal precepts, which are
exploited so wildly and irrationally by both the secular and religious
fundamentalists of our day, lead to the creation and sustaining of a just
and ethical social order.
With these caveats in mind, this paper has two interrelated goals.
220
05/07/2013 15:21
The first is to analyse the ways in which the Islamic tradition can be
said to advocate a positive concept of peace. This will be contrasted with
negative peace, defined conventionally as absence of war and conflict.
It will be argued that positive peace involves the presence of certain qualities and conditions that aim to make peace a principal state of harmony
and equilibrium rather than a mere event of political settlement. This
requires a close examination of the philosophical assumptions of the
Islamic tradition which have shaped the experience of Muslim societies
vis--vis the peoples of other faiths and cultures. These philosophical
suppositions are naturally grounded in the ethical and spiritual teachings of Islam, and without considering their relevance for the cultural
and political experience of Muslims with the other, we can neither do
justice to the Islamic tradition, which spans a vast area in both space and
time, nor avoid the pitfalls of historical reductionism and essentialism,
which are so rampant in the current discussions of the subject.
This brings us to the second goal of the paper. Here I will argue that
an adequate analysis of peace and war in the Islamic tradition entails
more than fixating the views of some Muslim jurists of the ninth and
tenth centuries as the definitive position of orthodox Islam and thus
reducing the Islamic modus operandi of dealing with non-Muslims
to a concept of holy war. With some exceptions, the ever growing literature of Islam and peace has been concerned predominantly
with the legal aspects of declaring war (jihad) against Muslim and/or
non-Muslim states, treatment of the ahl al-dhimmah under the shariah,
and expanding the territories of the Islamic state. This has obscured, to
say the least, the larger context within which such legal opinions were
discussed, interpreted and evolved from one century to the next, and
from one cultural-political era to another.
I therefore propose to look at the concept of peace in the Islamic
tradition in four interrelated contexts. The first is the metaphysicalspiritual context in which peace (salm) as one of the names of God is
seen as an essential part of Gods creation and assigned a substantive
value. The second is the philosophical-theological context within
which the question of evil (shar) is addressed as a cosmic, ethical, and
social problem. Discussions of theodicy among Muslim theologians
and philosophers provide one of the most profound analyses of the
221
05/07/2013 15:21
question of evil, injustice, mishap, violence and their place in the great
chain of being. I shall provide a brief summary to show how a proper
understanding of peace in the Islamic tradition is bound to take us to the
larger questions of good and evil. The third is the political-legal context,
which is the proper locus of classical legal and juristic discussions of war,
rebellion, oppression, and political (dis)order. This area has been the
exclusive focus of current literature on the subject and promises to be an
engaging and long-standing debate in the Muslim world. The fourth is the
socio-cultural context, which would reveal the parameters of the Muslim
experience of religious and cultural diversity with communities of other
faiths and cultural traditions.
As will become clear in the following pages, all of these levels are
interdependent and call for a larger context within which the questions of
peace and violence have been articulated and negotiated by a multitude
of scholars, philosophers, jurists, mystics, political leaders, and various
Muslim communities. The Islamic tradition provides ample material for
contemporary Muslim societies to deal with issues of peace, religious
diversity and social justice, all of which, needless to say, require urgent
attention. Furthermore, the present challenge of Muslim societies is not
only to deal with these issues as internal affairs but also to contribute to
the fostering of a global culture of peace and coexistence. Before turning
to the Islamic tradition, however, a few words of definition are in order,
to clarify the meaning of positive peace.
Peace as a Substantive Value

Peace as a substantive and positive concept entails the presence of certain
conditions that make it an enduring state of harmony, integrity, contentment, equilibrium, repose, and moderation. This can be contrasted with
negative peace that denotes the absence of conflict and discord. Even
though negative peace is indispensable to prevent communal violence,
border disputes or international conflicts, substantive-positive peace calls
for a comprehensive outlook to address the deeper causes of conflict, hate,
strife, destruction, brutality, and violence. As Lee states, it also provides
a genuine measure and set of values by which peace and justice can be
established beyond the short-term interests of individuals, communities
or states. This is critical for the construction of peace as a substantive
222
05/07/2013 15:21
value because defining peace as the privation of violence and conflict

turns it into a concept that is instrumental and accidental at best, and relative and irrelevant at worst. In addition, the positive-substantive notion
of peace shifts the focus from preventing conflict, violence, and strife to a
willingness to generate balance, justice, cooperation, dialogue, and coexistence as the primary terms of a discourse of peace. Instead of defining
peace with what it is not and forcing common sense logic to its limit, we
may well opt for generating a philosophical ground based on the presence
and endurance, rather than absence, of certain qualities and conditions
that make peace a substantive reality of human life.
Furthermore, relegating the discourse of peace to social conflict and
its prevention runs the risk of neglecting the individual, who is the sine
qua non of collective and communal peace. This is where the spiritual
individualism of Islam versus its social collectivism enters the picture:
the individual must be endowed with the necessary qualities that make
peace an enduring reality, not only in the public sphere but also in the
private domain of the individual. The Quranic ideal of creating a beautiful soul that is at peace with itself and the larger reality of which it is a
part brings ethics and spirituality right into the heart of the discourse of
positive peace. Peace as a substantive value thus extends to the domain
of both ethics and aesthetics, for it is one of the conditions that bring
about peace in the soul, and resists the temptations of discord, restlessness, ugliness, pettiness, and vulgarity. At this point, we may remember
that the key Quranic term isn carries the meanings of virtue, beauty,
goodness, comportment, proportion, comeliness, and doing what is
beautiful all at once. The active particle musin denotes the person who
does what is good, desired, and beautiful.
In this regard, peace is not a mere state of passivity. On the contrary,
it is being fully active against the menace of evil, destruction, and turmoil
that may come from within or from without. As Collingwood points out,
peace is a dynamic thing, and requires consciousness and vigilance, a
constant state of awareness that one must engage in spiritual and intellectual jihad to ensure that differences and conflicts within and across
the collective traditions do not become grounds for violence and oppression. Furthermore, positive peace involves the analysis of various forms
of aggression including individual, institutional and structural violence.
223
05/07/2013 15:21
Peace as a substantive concept is also based on justice (adl); for

peace is predicated upon the availability of equal rights and opportunities for all to realise their goals and potentials. One of the meanings of
the word justice in Arabic is to be straight and equitable, i.e., to be
straightforward, trustworthy, and fair in ones dealings with others.
Such an attitude brings about a state of balance, accord, and trust,
and goes beyond the limits of formal justice dispensed by the juridical system. Defined in the broadest terms, justice encompasses a vast
domain of relations and interactions from taking care of ones body to
international law. Like peace, justice is one of the Divine names, and
takes on a substantive importance in view of its central role in Islamic
theology as well as law. Peace can be conceived as an enduring state of
harmony, trust, and coexistence only when coupled and supported with
justice because it also means being secure from all that is morally evil
and destructive. Thus the Quran combines justice with isn when it
commands its followers to act with justice and good manner (bil-adl
wal-isn) (Al-Nal, 16:90).
The Spiritual-Metaphysical Context:

God as Peace (al-Salm)
The conditions that are conducive to a state of peace mentioned above are
primarily spiritual and have larger implications for the cosmos, the individual, and society. Here I shall focus on three premises that are directly
relevant to our examination. The first pertains to peace as a Divine name
(al-Salm) (Al-ashr, 59:23). The Quranic concept of God is founded
upon a robust monotheism, and Gods transcendence (tanzh) is emphasised in both the canonical sources and in the intellectual tradition. To
this absolutely one and transcendent God belong all the beautiful names
(Al-Arf, 7:180, Al-ashr, 59:24), i.e., the names of beauty (jaml), majesty
(jall), and perfection (kaml). It is these names that prevent God from
becoming an utterly unreachable and wholly other deity. Divine names
represent Gods face turned towards the world and are the vessels of finding God in and through His creation.
The names of beauty take precedence over the names of majesty
because God says that my mercy has encompassed everything (Al-Arf,
7: 156) and God has written mercy upon Himself (Al-Anm, 6:12, 54).
224
05/07/2013 15:21
This is also supported by a famous hadith of the Prophet according

to which God is beautiful and loves beauty. In this sense, God is as
much transcendent, incomparable and beyond as He is immanent,
comparable (tashbh) and close. As the ultimate source of peace,
God transcends all opposites and tensions, is the permanent state of
repose and tranquility, and calls His servants to the abode of peace (Dr
al-Salm) (Ynus, 10:25). It is He who from high on has sent [sends]
down inner peace and repose (saknah) upon the hearts of the believers,
says the Quran (Al-Fat, 48:4). The proper abode of peace is the hearts
(qulb), which are satisfied only by the remembrance of God (dhikr
Allh) (Al-Rad, 13:28). By linking the heart, mans centre, to Gods
remembrance, the Quran establishes a strong link between theology
and spiritual psychology.
In addition to the Quranic exegetes, the Sufis in particular are
fond of explaining the mystery of creation by referring to a sacred
saying (hadth quds) attributed to the Prophet of Islam: I was a hidden
treasure. I wanted (lit. loved) to be known and created the universe
(lit. creation). The key words love (ubb, maabbah) and know
(marifah) underlie a fundamental aspect of the Sufi metaphysics of
creation: Divine love and desire to be known is the raison dtre of all
existence. Ibn al-Arabi says that Gods love for His servants is identical with the origination of their engendered existence the relation of
Gods love to them is the same as the fact that He is with them wherever
they are (Al-add, 57:4), whether in the state of their nonexistence or
the state of their wujd they are the objects of His knowledge. He
witnesses them and loves them never-endingly. Commenting on the
above saying, Dawud al-Qaysari, the fourteenth century Turkish Sufi
philosopher and the first university president of the newly established
Ottoman state, says that God has written love upon Himself. There is
no doubt that the kind of love that is related to the manifestation of
[His] perfections follows from the love of His Essence, which is the
source of the love of [His Names and] Qualities that have become the
reason for the unveiling of all existents and the connection of the species
of spiritual and corporeal bodies.
The second premise is related to what traditional philosophy calls
the great chain of being (dirat al-wujd). In the cosmic scale of things,
225
05/07/2013 15:21
the universe is the best of all possible worlds because, first, it is actual,
which implies completion and plenitude over and against potentiality,
and, second, its built-in order derives its sustenance from the Creator.
The natural world is in a constant state of peace because according to
the Quran it is muslim (with a small m) in that it surrenders (taslm)
itself to the will of God and thus rises above all tension and discord (l
Imrn, 3:83; Al-Tawbah, 9:53; Al-Rad, 13:15; Fuilat, 41:11). In its
normative depiction of natural phenomena, the Quran talks about stars
and trees as prostrating before God (Al-Ramn, 55:6) and says that all
that is in the heavens and on earth extols His glory (Al-ashr, 59:24). By
acknowledging Gods unity and praising His name, man joins the natural world in a substantive waya process that underscores the essential
link between the anthropos and the cosmos or the microcosm and the
macrocosm. The intrinsic commonality and unity between the human
as subject and the universe as object has been called the anthropocosmic vision. The thrust of this view is that the anthropos and the
cosmos cannot be disjoined from one another and that the man-versusnature dichotomy is a false one. Moreover, the world has been given to
the children of Adam as a trust (amnah) as they are charged with the
responsibility of standing witness to Gods creation, mercy, and justice
on earth. Conceiving nature in terms of harmony, measure, order and
balance points to a common and persistent attitude towards the nonhuman world in Islamic thought, and has profound implications for the
construction of peace as a principle of the cosmos.
The third principle pertains to mans natural state and his place
within the larger context of existence. Even though the Quran occasionally describes the fallen nature of man in gruesome terms and
presents man as weak, forgetful, treacherous, hasty, ignorant, ungrateful, hostile, and egotistic (cf., inter alia, Ibrhm, 14:34; Al- Isr, 17:11;
Al-Kahf, 18:54; Al-ajj, 22:66; Al-Azb, 33:72; Al-Zukhruf, 43:15;
and Al-diyt, 100:6), these qualities are eventually considered deviations from mans essential nature (fitrah), who has been created in the
most beautiful form (asan taqwm) (Al-Tn, 95:4), both physically
and spiritually. This metaphysical optimism defines human beings as
Gods vicegerent on earth (khalfat Allh fl-ar) as the Quran says,
or, to use a metaphor from Christianity, as the pontifex, the bridge
226
05/07/2013 15:21
between heaven and earth. The firah (Al-Rm, 30:30), the primordial
nature according to which God has created all humanity, is essentially a
moral and spiritual substance drawn to the good and God-consciousness
(taqw) whereas its imperfections and excessiveness (fujr) (Al-Shams,
91:8) are accidental qualities to be subsumed under the souls struggle to
do good (al-birr) and transcend its subliminal desires through his intelligence and moral will.
The Philosophical-Theological Context: Evil and

the Best of All Possible Worlds
In the context of theology and philosophy, questions of peace and violence
are treated under the rubric of good and evil (usn/khayr and sharr/
qub). War, conflict, violence, injustice, discord, and the like are seen as
extensions of the general problem of evil. Muslim philosophers and theologians have been interested in theodicy from the very beginning, and for
good reasons, because the basic question of theodicy goes to the heart of
religion: how can a just and perfect God allow evil and destruction in a
world which He says He has created in perfect balance, with a purpose,
and for the well-being of His servants? We can rephrase the question in
the present context as follows: why is there so much violence, turmoil and
oppression rather than peace, harmony and justice in the world? Does
evil, of which violence is an offshoot, belong to the essential nature of
things or is it an accident that arises only as the privation of goodness?
These questions have given rise to a long and interesting debate about
evil among theologians. One particular aspect of this debate, known as
the best of all possible worlds (asn al-nim) argument, deserves
closer attention as it is relevant to the formulation of a positive concept
of peace. The classical statement of the problem pertains to Divine justice
and power on the one hand, and the Greek notions of potentiality and
actuality on the other. The fundamental question is whether this world in
which we live is the best that God could have created. Since, from a moral
point of view, the world is imperfect because there is evil and injustice
in it, we have to either admit that God was not able to create a better
and more perfect world or concede that He did not create a better world
by will as part of the Divine economy of creation. Obviously, the first
alternative calls into question Gods omnipotence (qudrah) whereas the
227
05/07/2013 15:21
second jeopardises His wisdom and justice (adlah). Following another

line of discussion in Kalam, we can reformulate the question as a tension
between Gods nature and will: can God go against His own nature, which
is just, if He wants to, or is it that His will cannot supersede His nature?
Still, can God contradict Himself? If we say yes, then we attribute imperfection to God and if we say no, then we limit Him.
Even the most modest attempt to analyse these questions within the
context of Kalam debates will take us too far afield. What is directly related
to our examination here is how the concepts of evil, injustice, oppression
and their variations are seen as the accidental outcomes of the world
of contingencies in which we live. True, the weaknesses and frailties of
human beings contribute enormously to the creation and exacerbation of
evil, and it is only reasonable to take a situational position and attribute
evil to ourselves rather than to the Divine. In fact, this is what the Quran
holds vis--vis evil and mans accountability: Whatever good happens to
you, it is from God; and whatever evil befalls you, it is from your own self/
soul (Al-Nis, 4: 79; cf. also l Imrn, 3:165). The best of all possible
worlds argument, however, shifts the focus from particular instances of
individual or structural violence to the phenomenon of evil itself whereby
we gain a deeper insight into how evil arises in the first place.
We may reasonably argue that evil is part of the Divine economy of
creation and thus necessary. In a moral sense, it is part of Divine economy
because it is what we are tested with (cf. Al-Anbiy, 21:36; Al-Kahf, 18:9).
Without evil, there would be no accountability and thus no freedom.
Mulla Sadra calls this a necessity of Divine providence (al-inyah) and
the concomitant of the ultimate telos of goodness (al-ghyat al-khayriyyah). In an ontological sense, it is a necessity because the world is by
definition imperfect, the ultimate perfection belonging to God, and the
world is not God. That is why God has not created all beings as pure
goodness. Evil as limitation and imperfection is an outcome of the first
act of separation between the Divine and the non-divine or what Muslim
theologians call m siw Allh (all that is other than God). Ultimately,
however, all is from God (Al-Nis, 4:78). This implies that evil as the
contrastive manifestation of the good ceases to be evil and contributes to the greater good, which is what the best of all possible world
argument asserts. In a rather paradoxical way, one cannot object to the
228
05/07/2013 15:21
existence of evil itself because it is what makes the world possible. But
this does not absolve us of the moral duty of fighting against individual
cases of evil. Nor does it make evil an essential nature of things because
it was Gods decision to create the world with a meaning and purpose in
the first place. In short, evil remains contingent and transient, and this
assumption extends to the next world.
The notion of evil as an ontological necessity-cum-contingency has
important implications for how we look at the world and its evil side.
From a psychological point of view, the acceptance of evil as a transient
yet necessary phenomenon prevents us from becoming petty and bitter in
the face of all that is blemished, wicked, imperfect, and tainted. It gives
us a sense of moral security against the onslaught of evil, which can and
must be fought with a firm belief in the ultimate supremacy of the good. It
also enables us to see the world as it is and for what it is, and strive to make
it a better place in terms of moral and spiritual perfection. From a religious point of view, this underscores the relative nature of evil: something
that may appear evil to us may not be evil, and vice versa, when everything
is placed within a larger framework. Thus the Quran says that it may well
be that you hate a thing while it is good (khayr) for you, and it may well be
that you love a thing while it is bad (sharr) for you. And God knows, and
you know not (Al-Baqarah, 2:216). Mulla Sadra applies this principle to
natural evils, and says that even death, corruption (al-fasd) and the like
are necessary and needed for the order of the world (al-nim) when they
occur by nature and not by force or accident.
The best of all possible worlds argument is also related to the scheme
of actuality and potentiality which Muslim philosophers and theologians have adopted from Aristotle. The argument goes as follows. This
world in which we live is certainly one of the possibilities that the Divine
has brought into actuality. In this sense, the world is pure contingency
(imkn) and hung between existence and non-existence. From the point
of view of its present actuality, however, the world is perfect and necessary
because actuality implies plenitude and perfection whereas potentiality
is privation and non-existence. The sense of perfection in this context
is both ontological and cosmological. It is ontological because existence
is superior to non-existence and whatever is in the sphere of potentiality
remains so until it is brought into actuality by an agent which itself is
229
05/07/2013 15:21
already actual. It is cosmological because, as stated before, the world has

been created with care, order, and beauty, which the Quran invites its
readers to look at as the signs of God (ayt Allh or vestigia Dei as it was
called by the Scholastics). The perfect state of the cosmos is presented as
a model for the establishment of a just social order. It then follows that
evil is a phenomenon of this world, but not something that defines the
essential nature of things.
An important outcome of this point of view is to identify evil as
a rationally discernible phenomenon. This may appear to be a simple
truism. Nevertheless, it is a powerful position against the notion of evil as a
mysterious, mythical or even cosmological fact over which human beings
have no control. Evil is something that can be discerned by the intellect
and correct reasoning and, of course, with the help of revelation. and
this places tremendous responsibility on our shoulders vis--vis the evil
that may come from within or from without. One may disagree with
Mutazilite theologians for pushing the sovereignty of human freedom to
the point of endangering Gods omniscience and omnipotency. In fact,
this was what had prompted al-Ashari, once a Mutazilite himself, to
carry out his own itizl and lay the foundations of Asharism. He and his
followers believed that good and evil were ultimately determined by the
Divine law (al-sharah), leaving no space for the independent judgment
of human reason (al-aql). Paradoxically, however, the moral voluntarism
of the Asharites agrees with Mutazilite rationalism in underscoring the
relative and contingent nature of evil: whether determined by reason
or revelation, evil is the privation of good and does not represent the
essential nature of things.
Muslim philosophers assert the same point through what we might
call the ontological argument. In addition to the fact that actuality is
perfection over potentiality, existence (al-wujd) is pure goodness (khayr
ma, summun bonum). All beings that exist partake of this ontological
goodness. Since God is the only Necessary being (wjib al-wujd) by its
essence, and in all regards, this perfection ultimately belongs to Him.
According to Ibn Sina, evil has no enduring essence and appears only as
the privation (adm) of goodness:
Every being that is necessary by itself is pure goodness and
pure perfection. Goodness (al-khayr), in short, is that which
230
05/07/2013 15:21
everything desires and by which everythings being is completed. But evil has no essence; it is either the nonexistence
of a substance or the nonexistence of the state of goodness
(al) for a substance. Thus existence is pure goodness, and
the perfection of existence is the goodness of existence. Existence is pure goodness when it is not accompanied by nonexistence, the non-existence of a substance, or the non-existence of something from that substance and it is in perpetual
actuality. As for the existent contingent by itself, it is not pure
goodness because its essence does not necessitate its existence
by itself. Thus its essence allows for non-existence. Anything
that allows for non-existence in some respect is not free from
evil and imperfection in all respects. Hence pure goodness is
nothing but existence that is necessary by its own essence.285
Elaborating on the same idea, Mulla Sadra argues that good and evil
cannot be regarded opposites for one is the non-existence of the other;
therefore goodness is existence or the perfection of existence and evil is the
absence of existence or the non-existence of the perfection of existence.
By defining good and evil in terms of existence and non-existence, Sadra
shifts the focus from a moralistic to a primarily ontological framework.
Like Ibn Sina, Sadra defines goodness as the essential nature of the present
world order for it is an existent, viz., something positive. This leads Sadra
to conclude that goodness permeates the world order at its foundation.
In spite of the existence of such natural evils as death and famine, what
is more and permanent is the desired goodness in nature. Once evil is
relativised, it is easier to defend this world as the best of all possible worlds.
This is what Sadra does when he says that the universe in its totality (bikulliyatihi) is the most perfect of all that may be and the most noble of all
that can be conceived.
The Political-Legal Context: Law and Its Vicissitudes

The shariah rules concerning war, peace, jihad, religious minorities, and
the religio-political divisions of Dr al-Islm, Dr al-ul/Ahd, and Dr
al-arb constitute an important component of the Islamic law of nations.
Their contextual and historical interpretation presents a significant challenge to the modern scholars of Islam on the one hand, and the Muslims
themselves on the other. In analysing the views of the jurists on these issues
231
05/07/2013 15:21
from the second Islamic century onwards, an extremely common tendency

is to fixate specific legal rulings by certain jurists as the orthodox view of
Islam applicable to all times and places. While it is granted that Islamic
law is based on the ultimate authority of the Quran and the Sunnah, the
shariah as legal code is structured in such a way as to allow considerable freedom and leeway for Muslim scholars and communities to adjust
themselves to different times and circumstances. The early generations of
Muslim scholars, jurists (fuqah), Quranic commentators (mufassirn),
traditionists (muhaddithn), and historians have made extensive use of this
simple fact, paving the way for the rise and flourishing of various schools
of law and legal opinions in Islam. This adoptionist and resilient nature
of the shariah, however, has been grossly overlooked and understated not
only in Western scholarship but also in the Islamic world. In the present
context, this has led to the oft-repeated conclusion that the teachings of the
shariah and, by derivation, Islam itself do not warrant a substantive notion
of peace and a culture of coexistence.
To analyse the legal-political aspects of traditional shariah rulings
concerning war and peace, I shall limit myself to three interrelated issues.
The first is the Muslim communitys right to defend itself against internal
or external aggression and the transition of the first Muslim community
from the overt pacifism of Mecca to the activism of Medina. This issue
necessarily raises the question of jihad as an offensive or defensive war
and its relation to what is called jus ad bellum in the Western tradition.
The second is the political context of the legal injunctions of certain
jurists, namely Imam Shafii (d. 820 CE) and the Hanafi jurist Sarakhsi
(d. 1090 CE), concerning the legitimacy of the territorial expansion
of Muslim states on religious grounds. Some contemporary scholars
have disproportionately overstated Shafiis justificatory remarks about
launching jihad against non-Muslim territories on the basis of their
belief system. The third issue is the treatment of religious minorities,
i.e. the dhimmis under the Islamic law and its relevance for religious
diversity and cultural pluralism in the Islamic tradition.
To begin with the first, a major concern of the Prophet of Islam in
Mecca was to ensure the security and integrity of the nascent Muslim
community as a religio-political unit. This concern eventually led to
the historic migration of the Prophet and his followers to Medina in
232
05/07/2013 15:21
622 CE after a decade of pressure, sanctions, persecution, torture, and

a foiled attempt to kill the Prophet himself. During this period, the
communitys right to defend itself against the Meccan polytheists was
mostly exercised in what we would call today pacifist and non-violent
means of resistance. Even though the Prophet was in close contact with
the Meccan leaders to spread his message as well as to protect his small
yet highly dedicated group of followers, his tireless negotiations did not
mitigate the aggressive policies of Meccans against the growing Muslim
community. The transition from the robust pacifism of Mecca to the
political activism of Medina took place when the permission to fight
was given with the verses Al-ajj, 22:3840:
Verily, God will ward off [all evil] from those who attain to
faith: [and] verily, God does not love anyone who betrays his
trust and is bereft of gratitude. Permission [to fight] is given
to those against whom war is being wrongfully wagedand,
verily, God has indeed the power to succor them--: those who
have been driven from their homelands against all right or no
other reason than their saying, Our Sustainer is God! For,
if God had not enabled people to defend themselves against
one another, [all] monasteries and churches and synagogues
and mosquesin [[all of] which Gods name is abundantly
extolledwould surely have been destroyed. (trans. M. Asad)
This and other verses (Al-Baqarah, 2:1903) define clearly the
reasons for taking up arms to defend religious freedom and set the
conditions of just war (jus ad bellum) in self-defence. That the verse,
revealed in the first year of the Hijrah, refers to the grave wrongdoing
against Muslims and their eviction from their homeland for professing
the new faith confirms that the migration of the Prophet was the last
stage of the forceful expulsion of the Muslim community from Mecca.
This was a turning point for the attitudes and ensuing tactics of the
Prophet and his followers to protect themselves against the Meccans. The
subsequent battles fought between the Meccans and the Medinans, from
Badr to Handak until the Prophets triumphant return to Mecca. were
based on the same principles of religious freedom, collective solidarity,
and political unity. In addition to enunciating the conditions of just war,
the above verse defines religious freedom as a universal cause for all
the three Abrahamic faiths. Like any other political unit, communities
233
05/07/2013 15:21
tied with a bond of faith have the right and, in fact, the responsibility of
securing their existence and integrity against the threats of persecution
and eventual extinction. As I shall discuss below, this ecumenical
attitude towards the religious freedom of all faith communities was a
major factor in the Prophets signing of a number of treatises with the
Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians of the Arabian Peninsula as well as
the treatment of religious minorities under the shariah.
The construction of jihad as armed struggle to expand the borders
of Dr al-Islm and, by derivation, subsume all Dr al-arb under the
Islamic dominion is found in some of the jurists of the ninth and tenth
centuries. Among those, we can mention Shafii and Sarakhsi who interpreted jihad as the duty of the Muslim ruler to fight against the lands
defined as the territory of war. Shafii formulated his expansionist
theory of jihad as a religious duty at a time when Muslim states were
engaged in prolonged military conflicts with non-Muslim territories
and had become mostly successful in extending their borders. While
these jurists had justified fighting against non-Muslims on account of
their disbelief (kufr) rather than self-defence, they were also adamant
on the observation of jus in bello norms, i.e., avoiding excessiveness,
accepting truce, sparing the lives of non-combatants, women, children,
etc. In spite of these conditions, the views of Shafii and his followers represent a shift from the Quranic notion of self-defence to armed
struggle to bring about the conversion of non-Muslims. Having said
that, two points need to be mentioned.
First of all, the views of Shafii and Sarakhsi do not represent the
majority, let alone the orthodox, stance of the jurists. The common
tendency to present this particular definition of jihad as the mainstream
position of Islam not only disregards the views of Abu Hanifah, Malik
ibn Anas, Abu Yusuf, Shaybani, Awzai, Ibn Rushd, Ibn Taymiyyah,
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah and others but also ignores the historical
and contextual nature of such juridical rulings. The same holds true
for Muslim political philosophers and theologians who take a different position on the bifurcationist framework of Dr al-Islm versus
Dr al-arb. Moreover, these rulings were by and large the jurists
response to the de facto situation of the military conquests of Muslim
states rather than their cause. Certain jurists begin to stress such recon234
05/07/2013 15:21
ciliatory terms as Dr al-Ahd (the Land of the Covenant) and Dr

al-ul (the Land of Peace) during and after the eleventh and twelfth
centuries when the Muslim states were confronted with political realities
other than unabated conquest and resounding victories. This change in
tone and emphasis, however, was not a completely novel phenomenon
for the concept of Dr al-ul can be traced back to the treaty that the
Prophet had signed with the Christian population of Najran when he
was in Medina. As I shall discuss below, this treaty, whose text has
been preserved, lays the foundations of making peace with non-Muslim
communities. In addition, the policy of giving amn (safe conduct),
i.e., contractual protection for non-Muslims residing or travelling in
Muslim territories, was a common practice. Such people were known
as mustamn, and to grant them this status was not only the prerogative of the head of state or the ulam but also individuals, both men
and women.
Secondly, the idea of bringing the world under the reign of Dr
al-Islm by military means and territorial expansion should be seen
within the context of the geo-political conditions of the classical Islamic
world. The medieval imperial world order, of which Muslim states were
a part, was based on the idea of continuously expanding ones borders
because conquest (fat) provided economic, political and demographic
stability. In this sense, as Hitti points out, the Islam that conquered the
northern regions was not the Islamic religion but the Islamic state
it was Arabianism and not Muhammadanism that triumphed first.
In a world in which one was either a conqueror or conquered, the
triumphant Muslim states depended heavily on the expansion of their
territories against both their Muslim rivals and non-Muslim enemies.
The historic march of Muslim armies into territories once under nonMuslim rule was not jihad in the religious sense of the term, but an
outcome of the power struggle to which all political establishments,
Muslim or non-Muslim, were subject.
This is further made clear by the fact that territorial expansion and
military conquest did not always and necessarily mean conversion.
Beginning with the early history of Islam, conversion through persuasion and calling (dawah) was encouraged, and a multitude of methods
were put in place to facilitate the conversion of individuals and masses
235
05/07/2013 15:21
through peaceful means. Conversion by force, which would make Islam

a proselytising religion, however, was not imposed as a policy either by
the ulam or the rulers. Furthermore, conversion was not a condition
to become part of the Muslim community to gain religious freedom,
receive protection, and possess property under the Islamic law. The
considerably protean concept of the dhimm allowed religious minorities
to maintain their traditions and resist any attempts at forceful conversion. Since Islam does not ordain a missionary establishment, the agents
of conversion responsible for the enormously successful and unprecedented spread of Islam were multifarious and extended from the Arab
traders and the Sufis to the development of Islamic communal institutions. Otherwise we cannot explain the en masse conversion of various ethnic, religious and cultural communities to Islam by the military
prowess of a handful of Muslim groups in Anatolia, Iran, Africa or India.
Paradoxically, the policies of religious tolerance secured both the
rights of religious minorities and the loyalties of new converts. In a
manner that was simply unimaginable in the Christian kingdoms of
Europe at the time, Jews, Christians, Sabeans and Hindus had access
to considerably high state posts from the time of Muawiyah (661680
CE) to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire at the beginning of the
twentieth century. Jewish and Christian scientists, physicians, accountants, counsellors and statesmen were employed at Umayad courts. St
John the Damascene, one of the most influential figures of the Eastern
Orthodox Church and the author of the earliest anti-Islamic polemics,
and his father Ibn Mansur held positions under the Caliph Abd al-Malik
(685-705). During the Buwayhid era in Persia, the vizier of the powerful Persian king Adud al-Dawlah (949-982), Nasr ibn Harun was a
Christian. We find similar cases in India and the Ottoman Empire
where the vertical mobility of religious minorities in state affairs was a
common phenomenon. Even the devshirme system of the Ottomans,
which has been criticised and labelled as a form of forced conversion,
provided religious minorities with unfettered access to the highest
government positions. Three grand viziers of Suleiman the Magnificent,
the most powerful Ottoman sultan, were of Christian origin: Ibrahim
Pasha was a Greek and an able diplomat and commander; Rustem Pasha
was a Bulgarian and had handled the treasury with utmost competence;
236
05/07/2013 15:21
and the celebrated Sokollu Mehmet Pasha was a Slav from Bosnia and
had served in his youth as an acolyte in a Serbian church. Among
these, the case of Sokollu is probably the most interesting for it shows
the extent to which the devshirme system eventually worked to the benefit of Christian communities under Ottoman rule. Although Sokollu
embraced Islam and became one of the most powerful men of his time,
he kept close contact with his brother who was an important religious
figure in Bosnia and helped him with his status as the grand vizier.
In the light of these points, we have to make a distinction between
jihad as just war and jihad as holy war, which brings us to our third
issue. Just war refers to a communitys right to defend itself against
aggression and oppression. It is defensive in nature whereas holy war
entails converting everybody into ones religion by force, armed struggle,
territorial expansion, and other means. In the first sense, jihad is an
extension of the jus ad bellum tradition and can be seen as a necessity
to protect justice, freedom and order. In this regard, the position taken
by the Quran and the Prophet concerning the use of force against
oppression by Muslims and non-Muslims alike is essentially a realist
one and aims at putting strict conditions for regulating war and using
force. The guiding principle is that of fighting against aggression,
which is to fight in the way of God, and not to be the aggressors: Fight
(qatilu, lit. kill) in the way of God against those who fight against you,
but do not transgress the limits. Verily, God does not love aggressors
(Al-Baqarah, 2:190; Cf. also Al-Nis, 4:91 and Al-Tawbah, 9:36). Both
the classical and modern commentators have interpreted the command
not to transgress (l taadadu) as avoiding war and hostilities in the first
place, resorting to armed struggle only to defend ones freedom, and,
once forced to fight, sparing the lives of noncombatants that include
women, children, and the elderly.
Contrary to what Khadduri claims, the global bifurcation of Dr
al-Islm and Dr al-arb does not translate into a holy war nor a
permanent state of war between Muslims and non-Muslims. No figure
can illustrate this point better than Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1327 CE) whose
views have been widely distorted and exploited to lend legitimacy to
extremist interpretations of the classical Islamic law of nations. Even
though Ibn Taymiyyah lived through the destruction wrought upon
237
05/07/2013 15:21
the Islamic world by the Mongols and could have been expected to take
a more belligerent stance against the infidels, he was unequivocal in
stating that Muslims could wage war only against those who attacked
them. The idea of initiating unprovoked war to convert people to
Islam, namely to engage in holy war, belies the religion itself because,
according to Ibn Taymiyyah, if the unbeliever were to be killed unless
he becomes a Muslim, such an action would constitute the greatest
compulsion in religion, which would be contrary to the Quranic
principle that there is no compulsion in religion (A-Baqarah, 2:256).
Ibn Taymiyyahs famous student Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah reiterates
the same principle when he says that fighting (qatl) is permitted on
account of war (arb), not on account of disbelief (kufr).
This extended meaning of jihad as jus ad bellum, i.e., armed
struggle in self-defence can also be seen in the anti-colonialist resistance
movements of the modern period. In the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, calls for jihad were issued across the Islamic world to fight
against colonialism. For the anti-colonialist resistance movements of this
period, jihad functioned, first, as the religious basis of fighting against
colonialism and, second, as a powerful way of mobilising people to join
the resistance forces. Among others, the Barelvi family in India, Shaykh
Shamil in Chechenya, Shaykh Abd al-Qadir al-Jazairi in Algeria, the
Mahdi family in the Sudan, Ahmad Urabi in Egypt, and the Sanusiyyah
order in Libya fought against European colonial powers. It was
during this period of resistance that jihad took a cultural tone in the
sense that the fight against colonial powers was seen as both a military
and religio-cultural struggle. Despite the enormous difficulties faced
by Muslim scholars, leaders, merchants, and villagers in Egypt, Africa,
India and other places, the jihad calls against the European armies did
not lead to an all-out war against local non-Muslim communities. Even
in cases where the Muslim population had to bear the full brunt of
colonialism, extreme care was taken not to label local non-Muslims
as the enemy because of their religious and cultural affiliation with
European colonial powers. When, for instance, the Sanusi call for jihad
against all unbelievers caused a sense of urgency among the Christians
in Egypt, Muslim scholars responded by saying that jihad in Libya was
directed at the Italian aggressors, not all Westerners or Christians.
238
05/07/2013 15:21
Since jihad as armed struggle was fought against the invasion of

European powers, it was not difficult for it to take religious and cultural
tones. Napoleons attempt to paint himself as a defender of Islam
when he invaded Egypt in 1798, for instance, was seen by the celebrated
Egyptian historian Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti (17541825) as no more
than outright lies expected only from an infidel (kfir). In his letter to
local Egyptian leaders, imams and scholars, Napoleon said that he more
than the Mamluks, serve[s] Godmay He be praised and exaltedand
revere[s] His Prophet Muhammad and the glorious Quran and that the
French are also faithful Muslims. For Jabarti and his generation, this
was yet another fact confirming the necessity of launching jihad against
the afranj (the French, i.e., Europeans). This sense of jihad as anti-colonialist struggle has not completely disappeared from the minds of some
Muslims in the post-colonial period. In fact, the modern calls for jihad as
holy war by such Muslim extremists as Abd al-Salam Farajwho wrote
the celebrated al-Fariat al-ghaibah (The Neglected Duty) presumably
justifying the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981and Osama bin
Laden are as much the product of their strict and ahistorical reading of
the classical shariah sources as the legacy of colonialism.
Lastly, I would like to turn briefly to the status of religious minorities
under Islamic law. As mentioned before, the dhimmi status granted the
religious minorities and especially Jews and Christians under Muslim
rule some measure of economic and political protection, freedom of
worship, right to own property, and, in some cases, access to high government positions. The religious-legal basis of the notion of the dhimmi
goes back to the time of the Prophet. While the status of dhimmi was
initially given to Jews, Christians, Sabeans and Zoroastrians, its scope
was later extended to include all non-Muslims living under Islam.
A similar course of action was followed in India when Muhammad b.
al-Qasim, the first Muslim commander to set foot on Indian soil in the
eighth century, compared Hindus to Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians
and declared them as part of the ahl al-dhimmah. This decision, which
was later sanctioned by the Hanafi jurists, was a momentous event in
the development of the Muslim attitude towards the religions of India.
This politico-legal ruling could be seen as laying the foundations of the
Hindu-Muslim mode of cultural coexistence, which I shall discuss below.
239
05/07/2013 15:21
That the Prophet and his companions were lenient towards the
People of the Book is not only attested by the communal relationships
that developed between Muslims and non-Muslims in Medina, but also
recorded in a number of treatises signed by the Prophet. The Medinan
Constitution (wathqat al-madinah), for instance, recognises the Jews
of Banu Awf, Banu al-Najar, Banu Thalaba and others as a distinct
community with their own religion. Another treatise signed with the
People of the Book of Najran reads as follows:
They [People of the Book] shall have the protection of Allah and the promise of Muhammad, the Apostle of Allah,
that they shall be secured; their lives, property, lands, creed,
those absent and those present, their families, their churches, and all that they possess. No bishop or monk shall be
displaced from his parish or monastery, no priest shall be
forced to abandon his priestly life. No hardships or humiliation shall be imposed on them nor shall their land be occupied by [our] army. Those who seek justice shall have it:
there will be no oppressors nor oppressed.314
The privileges given to dhimmis included things that were
prohibited for Muslims such as breeding pigs and producing alcohol,
which were not outlawed for Christians. The religious tax called jizyah
was the main economic responsibility of the dhimmis under the
shariah. Contrary to a common belief, the primary goal of the jizyah
tax was not the humiliation of the People of the Book. While many
contemporary translations of the Quran translate the words wa hum
saghrn as so that they will be humiliated, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah,
who has written the most extensive work on the People of the Book,
understands it as securing the allegiance of the People of the Book to
laws pertaining to them (akm al-millah). Instead, wa hum saghrn
should be understood, says Ibn Qayyim, as making all subjects of the
state obey the law and, in the case of the People of the Book, pay the
jizyah.
According to Abu Yusuf, one of the foremost authorities of the
Hanafi school of law, jizyah was 48 dirhams on the wealthy, 24 on
the middle class and 12 dirhams on the poor ploughman-peasant and
manual worker. According to Shafii, the jizyah is one dinar for the poor
and four dinars for the rich. It is collected once a year and may be paid
240
05/07/2013 15:21
in kind, i.e., as goods and similar property which is accepted according

to its value. Those who cannot afford to pay it are not forced to do
so. The exempted also include women, children, the elderly and the
sick. To the best of our knowledge, the jizyah tax was not a significant
source of income for the state, and it exempted the dhimmis from
military service. In some cases, the jizyah was postponed or abandoned
altogether by the head of the state as we see in India under the reigns of
Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan. The jizyah was a compensation for
the protection of the dhimmis by the state against any type of aggression
from Muslims or non-Muslims. This is attested by the fact that the poll
taxes were returned to the dhimmis when the Muslim state had been
unable to provide the security of its non-Muslim minorities. In most
cases, the jizyah was imposed not as individual tax like the kharj but
as collective tribute on eligible dhimmis.
While Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyas famous work on the dhimmis
contains many rulings that present a condescending view of nonMuslims and advocate policies of humiliation against them, many
other jurists were insistent on treating the dhimmis with equity and
justice. As people under the protection of the Prophet, Jews, Christians
and other religious minorities were not to be forced to pay more than
they could afford nor to be intimidated and oppressed because of their
religious affiliations. Advising Harun al-Rashid (d. 803 CE), the famous
Abbasid caliph, on the treatment of the dhimmis, Abu Yusuf exhorts
him to treat with leniency those under the protection of our Prophet
Muhammad, and not allow that more than what is due to be taken
from them or more than they are able to pay, and that nothing should
be confiscated from their properties without legal justification. In
making this strong advice to the caliph, Abu Yusuf narrates a tradition
of the Prophet in which the Prophet says that he who robs a dhimmi or
imposes on him more than he can bear will have me as his opponent.
Another well-known case is the execution on the order of the Prophet
of a Muslim who had killed a dhimmi. In response to this incident, the
Prophet has said that it is most appropriate that I live up fully to my
(promise of) protection.
These and other rules concerning the dhimmis show that Islam
accepts the reality of the religious other in terms of a de jure reality
241
05/07/2013 15:21
rather than as a matter of political exigency. The underlying principle

behind this attitude of accommodation is that the interests of human
beings are served better in peace than in conflict. To reveal the extent
of the Islamic theology of peace and cultural pluralism, we need to look
at the cultural attitudes and practices of Muslim societies vis--vis other
communities, to which we now turn.
The Socio-Cultural Context: Confrontation,

Coexistence and Peace
Islam does not prescribe a particular form of cultural identity. There
are both doctrinal and historical reasons for this. The absence of a
central religious authority or clergy in the Islamic tradition pre-empts
authoritarianism as a model of negotiating religious affairs in the public
sphere. This is attested by the multiplicity of schools of law as well as the
notorious differences of opinion among them. This fact, often stated by
Muslims with a sense of pride, however, does not negate the presence
of established and commonly accepted views in the Islamic tradition.
Assuming that there is a set of beliefs and practices that we may legitimately
consider as mainstream and orthodox, it is based on the consensus of the
community over the generations rather than a centralised body of legal
rulings. The incremental process of establishing orthodox etiquettes is
not the monopoly of the ulam. Rather, it is shaped by a multitude of
social agents that include men of letters, dervishes, saints, heretics, bards
and folk singers, storytellers, political leaders, rulers, scientists, artists,
traders, diplomats, philosophers, and theologians. While it is true that the
dissemination of religious authority on the one hand and the malleability
of cultural expressions in Muslim societies on the other has challenged
centralism and authoritarianism, it has also raised the question of
legitimacy and authenticity. Some, including the Wahhabis and some
Orientalists, have called this a deviation from the norms of the religion,
arguing that Islamic history has been not so much Islamic as antinomian.
Even if we admit that there are presumably overt discrepancies between
what the ulama envision as a perfect shariah society and the cultural
practices of Muslim societies, it is a healthy tension and functions as
a mechanism of checks and balances against the strictly text-based,
relatively abstract, and reductively legalistic approach of the jurists.
242
05/07/2013 15:21
In creating their cultural orthopraxies, Muslim communities were

functioning within the framework of the ethical universalism of the
Quran and the Sunnah. The Quranic call to enjoin what is good and
praised (marf) and forbid what is morally evil and disliked (munkr)
is not a culture-specific injunction. It is addressed to all peoples
regardless of their religious affiliations. The Prophet is considered a
perfect example (uswah asanah) for all humanity in his fight against
all that is evil and oppressive and in defence of all that is praiseworthy
and virtuous, whatever their origin might be. The notion of middle
community (ummah wasaah) (Al-Baqarah, 2:143) supports the same
ethical universalism: And thus We willed you to be a community of the
middle way, so that [with your lives] you might bear witness to the truth
before all mankind, and that the Apostle might bear witness to it before
you (trans. M. Asad). The aim of this ethical-spiritual universalism is
to create an open society based on moral values, not on the received
traditions of one tribe, city, or nation. This is in tandem with the fact
that the Quran positions itself against the cultural localism and tribal
parochialism of pre-Islamic Arabiaa rule that has been an invariable
factor in the rapid spread of Islam outside the Arabic cultural zone.
Once established as major cultural units, Muslim societies articulated
this ethical universalism into various societal mechanisms by which the
ideal of creating a virtuous and just human habitat could be realised. The
politics of gaining status and social ascendancy in the Islamic context is
thus based on the acquisition of two universal qualities: knowledge (ilm)
and virtue (falah and isn). Both of these qualities are implicit in
the Quranic notion of taqw (Al-ujurt, 49:13), God-consciousness,
which is the ultimate criterion of nobility among people. In a broad
sense, this forms the basis of an Islamic meritocracy whereby every
member of society is urged to contribute to the creation of a moral
and just social order. As the few examples below will show, the Muslim
philosophers and scientists regarded seeking knowledge and leading a
virtuous life as the basis of their interest in other cultures and traditions.
Historically, as the borders of the Islamic world expanded outside
and beyond the Arabian Peninsula, Muslims became heir to all of the
major cultural traditions of the time. The Graeco-Roman heritage
through the Byzantine Empire and the pre-Islamic Persian culture
243
05/07/2013 15:21
through the Sasanids were the first two important traditions that
Muslims encountered in less than a century after the death of the
Prophet. This was followed by Mesopotamian, Indian, black African,
central Asian, Chinese, and finally Malay-Indonesian civilisations in
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The rapid establishment of the
different cultural zones of the Islamic world went hand in hand with
the rise of the numerous schools of law, Kalam, philosophy, and Sufi
orders, generating a remarkable tapestry of cultural diversity within and
across the Dr al-Islm. In spite of occasional sectarian conflicts such
as the minah incident in the third/ninth century or the Kadizade
movement in the Ottoman Empire in the tenth/sixteenth century,
traditional Muslim societies succeeded in creating a stable and peaceful
habitat in which both Muslim and non-Muslim members of the ummah
contributed to the cultivation of a world civilisation in such diverse
fields as arts, sciences, trade and architecture. The notion of cultural
and religious coexistence that came about in this milieu was not
merely based on the temporary absence of conflict and confrontation
between Islamic and non-Islamic elements. Its positive character was
nurtured and sustained by the inclusivist attitude of Muslims towards
other cultures and religious traditions, which makes Islamic civilisation
simultaneously both Islamic and Islamicate.
There is a plethora of examples in the history of Islam to illustrate
the cultural ecumenism of Muslim societies. We may begin with the
attitude of Muslim philosophers towards pre-Islamic traditions of
learning. For the early Muslim philosophers, scholars, and scientists,
the search for truth was both within and beyond religious boundaries.
The Prophets famous exhortations to seek knowledge even if it is in
China and wisdom is a Muslims lost [treasure]. He takes it wherever
he finds it were frequently referred to by the philosophers of the
intellectual sciences (ulm aqliyyah) interested in Greek-Alexandrian
thought as well as the scholars of transmitted sciences (ulm naqliyyah)
specialised in such disciplines as hadith, Quranic commentary, and
jurisprudence (fiqh). Even though some later scholars have opposed
philosophical sciences, especially its strictly Aristotelian version, and
defined knowledge (al-ilm) as religious science, this did not obstruct
the steady development of philosophy and science in the Islamic world.
244
05/07/2013 15:21
Contrary to Goldzihers attempt to present the critical views of certain

Hanbalite jurists on the ancient sciences (ulum al-awil), meaning
Greek philosophy and science, as the orthodox Muslim position,
anti-intellectualism remained largely parochial to the traditionists
(al-muaddithn) who were as much opposed to the lore of pre-Islamic
times as to Kalam and doctrinal Sufism. For the overwhelming majority
of the Muslim intelligentsia, the universality of truth was the guiding
principle and ground of their quest for knowledge. No one has stated
this point better than al-Kindi, the philosopher of the Arabs.
We owe great thanks to those who have imparted to us even
a small measure of truth, let alone those who have taught us
more, since they have given us a share in the fruits of their
reflection and simplified the complex questions bearing on
the nature of reality. If they had not provided us with those
premises that pave the way to truth, we would have been
unable, despite our assiduous lifelong investigations, to find
those true primary principles from which the conclusions of
our obscure inquiries have resulted, and which have taken
generation upon generation to come to light heretofore.335
That al-Kindis attitude in the above quote was emblematic of his
generation and later Muslim scholars is attested by Said al-Andalusi
who has divided nations (umam) according to their contribution to
knowledge and science (al-ilm). He states this point in unequivocal
terms when he says that:
We have determined that all nations, in spite of their differences and the diversities of their convictions, form tabaqatayn [two categories]. One tabaqah has cultivated science,
given rise to the art of knowledge, and propagated the various aspects of scientific information; the other tabaqah did
not contribute enough to science to deserve the honour of
association or inclusion in the family of scientifically productive nations.336
The belief that truth transcends the contingencies of history was the
conviction of educated classes across the Islamic world as they studied the
countless schools of thought, both Islamic and pre-Islamic, producing
an extensive literature on the history of ideas. The long list of scholars
interested in intellectual history before and after Islam included, inter
245
05/07/2013 15:21
alia, Ibn al-Qifti, al-Mubashshir ibn Fatik, Abu Sulayman al-Sijistani,

Said al-Andalusi, Ibn al-Nadim, al-Jahiz, and Ibn Abi Usaybiah as well
as such major writers of the Milal tradition as Shahrastani, Baghdadi
and Ibn Hazm. Among these works, the Egyptian amir Abu al-Wafa
al-Mubashshir ibn Fatiks Mukhtr al-ikm wa masin al-kilm
was noticed very early by medieval Europeans, translated into Latin
and other languages, and, in fact, became the first book printed by
William Caxton in England in the fifteenth century as The Dicts and
Sayings of the Philosophers. The continuity of humanitys search for
truth had a normative value for most of these writers in that their quest
for knowledge was part of a larger tradition to which every seeker of
knowledge belonged. When Hasan ibn Sahl, for instance, was asked why
he always invoked the views of those who came before him (kalm alawil), he answered that because it [i.e. those views] has been passed
down before us; had it been unworthy and imperfect, it would have
never reached us and gained [universal] approval.
The concept of perennial philosophy (al-ikmat al-khlidah)
enjoyed a similar prestige due to the same notion of truth and its persistence in history. Suhrawardi, the founder of the school of Illumination
(ishrq) made a strong case for the perennity of certain philosophical
questions and the answers given of them when he said:
Do not think that wisdom has existed only in these recent
times [i.e., the pre-Islamic Persian and Greek philosophers].
No, the world is never bereft of wisdom and the person who
possesses it with arguments and self-evident proofs. He is
Gods vicegerent on His earth, and this shall be so as long as
the heavens and the earth exist.340
Apart from the sublime world of the intellectuals, the Islamic
concept of cultural pluralism was extended to virtually all minorities
living in the lands of Islam. The experience of convivencia among Jews,
Christians, and Muslims in Andalusia was a result of the Islamic notion
of cultural inclusivism. While the Jews of Europe were subject to woeful
vilifications and persecutions during the Middle Ages, a major Jewish
intellectual tradition had developed under the Muslim rule and included
such prominent figures of medieval Jewish thought as Saadiah Gaon
al-Fayyumi, Ibn Gabirol, Judah Halevi, Maimonides, Ibn Kammunah,
246
05/07/2013 15:21
Ibn Paquda, and Gersonides (Levi ben Gershom). This resulted in a

unique interaction between medieval Jewish philosophy on the one
hand, and Islamic philosophy, Kalam, and Sufism on the other.
In the subcontinent of India, a cultural syncreticism developed
between Hindu and Muslim cultures. From the translation of Indian
astronomical works into Arabic as early as the eighth century to
Birunis historic study of India and Amir Khusraws formulation
of an Islamic identity in the Indian cultural environment, a vast
literature came into being, generating a unique mode of symbiosis
between the two worlds on social, philosophical, and artistic levels.
Perhaps the most important figure to illustrate this is Dara Shikuh
(16151659), the famous Mughal prince and son of Shah Jahan. Dara
Shikuh translated and authored two important works dealing with
Hinduism from an Islamic point of view. He made a translation of
the Bhagavad Gita and some fifty Upanishads into Persian as Sirr-i
akbar (Great Mystery), which he interpreted in light of the school of
Advaita-Vedanta or the non-dualism of Shankaracharya. In making
his case for the translation, Dara Shikuh says that he read the Old and
the New Testaments and the Psalms of David and other scriptures but
the discourse on Tawd found in them was brief and in a summary
form. He then turned to the Upanishads which is undoubtedly the
first heavenly Book and the fountainhead of the ocean of monotheism, and, in accordance with or rather an elucidation of the Kuran.
Dara Shikuh also wrote a treatise called Majm al-barayn, referring
to the Quranic verse Maryam,19:60, in which he attempted a monotheistic interpretation of Hinduism. In tandem with his universalist
outlook, he defined his work as a collection of the truth and wisdom
of two Truth-knowing (haqq-shinas) groups, referring to Muslims
and Hindus. In addition to Dara Shikuh, we may also refer to the
sixteenth century Persian philosopher Mir Findiriski, who is reported
to have met a number of Hindu mystics during his travels to India,
and translated and wrote a commentary on the Hindu mystical and
philosophical text Yoga-Vasishtha.
Such modes of cultural coexistence would have been impossible
without the recognition of the diversity of cultures and societies as
part of human existence. The Quran takes up this issue in several
247
05/07/2013 15:21
places. Working towards a common good is made conditional upon

the existence of different communities:
Unto every one of you We have appointed a [different] law
and way of life. And if God had so willed, He could surely have
made you all one single community: but [He willed it otherwise] in order to test by means of what He has vouchsafed
unto you. Vie, then, with one another in doing good works!
(Al-Midah, 5:48; also Hd, 11:118)
This theme is further developed in the following verse. This time the
emphasis is on the civic responsibility of knowing one another.
O humans! Behold, We have created you all out of a male and a
female, and have made you into nations and tribes so that you
might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in
the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him.
Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware. (Al-ujurt, 49:13)
The examples from the history of Islamic culture briefly analysed
above are neither scarce nor contrary to the norm. Even though the
fundamentalists, for lack of a better term, consider cases of cultural
symbiosis and syncretism in the Islamic world as deviations from an
idealised and essentially ideological construct of Islam, both the Islamic
intellectual tradition and Muslim societies have envisaged peace as a
cross-cultural and inter-communal value.
I have argued in the preceding pages that a proper examination of
the Islamic concept of peace takes us beyond the minimal definition of
peace as absence of conflict, and certainly beyond the limited sphere of
law. In a broad sense, the Islamic tradition has articulated a concept of
peace that extends from metaphysics and cosmology to law and culture.
We cannot possibly understand the experience of Muslim societies with
the cultural and religious other(s) without taking into account these
elements. The relevance of this tradition for the present day Muslim
world requires little explanation. Today numerous Muslim intellectuals,
scholars and leaders from Bosnia, Turkey and Egypt to Iran, Malaysia
and the United States are engaged in constructing an Islamic political
ethics that is compatible with the Islamic tradition as well as responsive to the challenges of the modern world. Questions of war and peace,
communal violence, terrorism, international relations, constitutional
248
05/07/2013 15:21
and participatory democracy, pluralism, openness, civility and the attitude towards the religious other are being discussed from a multitude
of perspectives, and the views expressed are by no means uniform and
homogenous. There is, however, an emerging consensus on upholding
peace as a value in itself regardless of the political state of Muslim countries and communities across the globe.
In conclusion, we should emphasise the significance of this consensus in the present context. Muslim communities can no longer address
issues of conflict and violence without developing a proper ethics of
peace. While most of the factional conflicts in the Islamic world can
be resolved through non-violent means, the lack of a comprehensive
discourse of peace supported by a network of scholars, intellectuals, leaders, activists, and state agencies, pre-empts the possibility of
preventing communal strife and use of force. Conflicts in our age have
become both local and global, making the distinction between the two
a blurred one. We can no longer speak of local and national conflicts
without considering their international implications nor can we ignore
the impact of global trends and relations on local issues. The Kashmir
problem or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict defy the conventional notions
of interstate and/or territorial disputes. This presents a particular challenge to contemporary Muslim political thought in its transition from
the large political units of the empire and its constellation states to the
current system of nation states on the one hand, and globalisation on
the other. It remains to be seen what the weakening of the nation state
model will bring to Muslim societies in their struggle to cope with the
current challenges of economic and cultural globalisation. Be that as it
may, achieving a culture of peace is an urgent need for Muslim communities in their inter-communal relations as well as their relations with
other societies.
Originally published as Islam and Peace: A Survey of the Sources of
Peace in the Islamic Tradition, Islamic Studies 44:3 (2005),
pp. 32762.
249
05/07/2013 15:21

chapter nine
THE CONCEPT
OF PEACE/SECURITY (SALM)
IN ISLAM


Overview
The conception of
salm peace/security in early Islamic sources is
re-examined by exploiting early linguistic materials in the Quran and
Hadith. The most essential
value at the heart of Islam may be characterised as security/peace (see Quranic terms silm and salm). This data on
what Islam teaches about
peace and security may now be aligned with the
contemporary understanding linking human security to wider developmental and societal needs.
The double thrust of the Islamic understanding
of peace is evident: social and communal, and individual and salvational.
The current concern with human security finds ample support in Muslim
thought and experience.
Man l yaramu,
l yuram. One who does not practice
compassion [show loving/kindness] toward othersis not
shown merciful/compassion
(by God).

Gods Messenger Muhammad (Recorded in: Muslim, K. al-Fail, bb

ramatihi al-ibyn
wa l-iyl 5979; Ab Dawd, K. al-Adab, bb
f qublati l-rajuli waladih 5218; al-Tirmidhi, K. al-Barr wa l-ilah,

bb m ja f ramati l-wlid 1911. Tradition states that the Prophet
uttered this after al-Aqra b. Habis witnessed him kissing his grandson,
and then told the Prophet: I have ten children and never kissed even
one of them.)
250
05/07/2013 15:21
Introduction
It is frequently held that the religion of Islam was first presented and
understood as a salvational practice of peace through outward submission
and inner surrender. Today this assertion is radically questioned by many
non-Muslims, who emphasise the combative role of a militant faith intent
on conquest and dominiona medieval European perception now
cultivated among intelligence and security establishments countering
terrorism. How should we properly understand the original context
and meaning of peace in Islam? Inherent in its historical appearance
was an integral connection of peacemaking with security. This linkage
may aid us to grasp the intent and conception of an authentic Islamic
understanding of peace. It becomes relevant now to take into account the
current appreciation of the role of religion in establishing and promoting
human security. We mean the concept of human security in its dialogic
relations linking the field of development and that of security and conflict
studies, including peace and conflict resolution studies.
Human Security
This term appeared in mainstream development circles with the 1994
global Human Development Report,347 and was the subject of a 2003
Global Commission co-chaired by Sadako Ogata and Nobel Laureate
Amartya Sen.348 Yet this notion previously had its own proponents and
critics within security studies among scholars who for decades argued
the pros and cons of expanding the notion of security. Some have
argued that the concept of security should be broadened to include
underdevelopment as a threat. Yet a realist school rejects the inclusion
of social, human and economic threats in the same category as national
security.349 Traditionally security has been defined as a function
of protection of the interests of the state. Until recently interstate
relationswhether cooperative, competitive or complementary
remained confined to a function of nation states, with foreign policy
and diplomacy conceived as a defining characteristic of the state in the
international system. The self-interest of the nation state determined the
concept of securitydefined in the limiting terms of state security as
perceived by ruling elites and power brokers who frequently identify
251
05/07/2013 15:21
their vision of state interests with their own economic and political
preferences, namely their own self-interest.
However, many critics and human rights practitioners maintain that
this privileging of state and elite interests is an overly narrow, state-centric
and ultimately counterproductive conceptualisation of true security.
These critics perceive that it is the level of the individual and his or her
innate rights that most needs protection from perceived threats.350 Such
privileging of the individual might also be extended further to embrace the
well-being of the collectivity or the community. If security is conceived as
a response to threats, then the perception of what constitutes threat may
also need revisitinge.g. by taking into account the ecological-planetary
and socio-economic dimensions of human existence. Many security
establishments now accept a widened concept of non-traditional security
embracing natural disasters and ecological degradation. As the need to
find concerted, collective responses to new threats became increasingly
clear, human security conceived in terms of the link between security
and development became a topic of reform agendas during 20042005 in
the United Nations and in regional organisations such as the European
Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
A fundamental value and activity taught by Islam is security/peace.
In classical Arabic usage the term salm peacemaking denotes the opposite
of arb war.351 The very name of the faith al-Islm may be understood
to signify the safety and security experienced in acts of mutual harmony
and concord between humans, springing out of the inner peace between
individual creatures and their Creator. This name al-Islm points to the
real purpose and source of true security: to draw closer to the ultimate
origin of Peacenamely Allah. To better appreciate this conjunction of
security with peace requires one to re-examine the early employment of
these terms paying attention to their linguistic features and conceptual
aura. Thereby one may be enabled to recover the basis upon which Islamic
peace is grounded.
Security-Peace
There exists an intimate connection between the term al-Islm with
peacemaking and human security, confirmed by linguistic and Quranic
evidence. The concept of peace is primarily associated with Arabic verbal
252
05/07/2013 15:21
nouns derived from the root SLM (base form: salima/yaslamu). The
main nouns from this base form are salmah, salm & silm, and salm.
In classical Arabic the term salm peacemaking denotes the opposite
of arb war. Verbal forms II sallama (lit. to make/render salutations
of peace and securityor to make the taslm352), as well as form IV
aslama (to deliver up, surrender, give oneself up to) may also signify
inqda to follow/obey, yield, submit; the verbal noun is islm while
its active participle is muslim (m.) and muslimah (f.). Yet widespread
contemporary Arabic usage of salm (literally: salutations conveying
assurance of safety and peaceful security) generally understands it to
connote peacewhether positive or negative peace.353 Although the
main nouns from the base form (salmah, salm and silm, and also salm)
often converge in meaning and might even be used interchangeably in a
loose sense, they also exhibit specific distinctions whose scrutiny yields
significant insights.
Furthermore, the semantic scope of several other verbal roots
overlaps in meaning with salima, whereby salmah or salm may be
equivalent to amn/surety, as well as ul/conciliation; although the root
SLM possesses an undeniable primacy.354 We provide here a very brief
conspectus of related notions whose semantic fields overlap conceptually and comprise significant extensions of meaning for peace in Islamic
understanding.
L : ul and al and il conciliation and peacemaking in
resolving conflict between individuals or groups to ensure the harmony
of the wider community. ul forms one of the pillars of peace in Islamic
thought and practice, carrying the meanings of reconciliation, peacemaking, making amends and reforming, as well as moral rectitude and
integrity/righteousness. When employed with its objectil lahum,
or il baynahum and al dht al-baynthe expression connotes
promoting well-being, setting aright, or peacemaking. This practice is
central to Quranic teaching on ending conflict: aliu dhti baynikum/
and do you rightly dispose-order the case that is between you and be of
one accord in unison; or quite simply peacemaking.355 Muslims must
be of one accord after divisions over spilt blood, disputed property or
rivalries, and they are urged to act reciprocally with justice and equity
(al-muqsin).
253
05/07/2013 15:21
It is vital to appreciate that this notion of ul & il in Quranic

usage is conceptually opposed to both fasd (corruption, depravity
or stirring up dissensioni.e. insecurity); as well as to isrf (wasteful
extravagance, sinful excess), for the peacemaker muli is the opposite
of the musrif profligate and of the mufsid depraved.356 The mufsid is
one who instigates fasd among others by seeking to spread insecurity,
disorder, corruption and injustice, and thereby exceeds proper bounds
(musrif & isrf). Such iniquity is always paired with ilwholesome
order, self-reformation and righteous conduct which God intends
humans to exhibit: Create not disorder in the land after it was set in
order/wa l tufsid f l-ari bada ilih (Al-Arf, 7:56), which may
also be rendered Create not insecurity in the land after it was made
secure.357
Prophetic utterances amplify and emphasise the centrality of this
practice of conciliation and peacemaking. A well-known hadith narrated
by the Companion Abu Ayyub al-Ansari states: The most meritorious
act-of-charity (afalu l-adaqah) is peacemaking between conflicting
parties.358 The Prophet is also reported to have instructed him: O Ab
Ayyb, truly let me tell you that by means of which God exalts ones
reward and effaces sins: to walk in the cause of peacemaking between
people when they are mutually hating and stirring up dissension; it
is an act of charity God loves being implemented. In an oft-repeated
tradition, Abu l-Dard reports the Prophet stating: Truly, let me tell
you what is better than fasting and prayer and alms-giving: peacemaking between conflicting parties (alu dht al-bayn); while stirringup-dissension between conflicting parties (fasdu dht al-bayn) is
severing.359 The Prophet also strongly warned against backbiting and
malicious gossip (al-iah and al-nammah) which provokes dissension and conflict between people, especially between wife and husband;
while he affirmed that a lie may only be tolerated in three circumstances:
in war, between husband and wife in order to effect reconciliation, and
for peacemaking between conflicting parties.360
AMN : amn and amn and amnah, safety security assurance of peace; also mn faith, secure belief (safeguarding from perdition). Verb amina (and itamanahu) denotes providing assurance of
safety and security to a person, and conveys protection from harm and
254
05/07/2013 15:21
injury. Exhibiting security is a mark of reliable trustworthiness, itself

viewed as a distinguishing characteristic of faith mn. The utterance of
the Prophet confirms this association: There is no faith for one who is
untrustworthy/l mna li-man l amnata lahu. In Srat Al-Anm,
6:812, the term amn is used twice by Abraham to denote security
and peace, where true faith is free of injustice (ulm). While the legal
application of amn or public security in the external political sphere
is well known, the extension of islm into the interior domain of faith
mn is a crucial pairing all too often overlooked.
There were differing views among the legal and the theological
schools on whether mn was distinct from, or higher in value than,
islm. The theological debate over conflating islm and mn derives
from the old Murjiite position in the early doctrinal disputes over the
status of the sinner, and the status of works for faith; yet the doctrinal
consensus remains the necessity of works for mn.361 For the jurists,
islm generally denotes the double confession of faith (al-shahdatayn),
being annexed to and complementary with faith (mn). Islm is what
is manifested by word or deed, and by means of which ones blood
becomes secure from being shed. All Muslims agree that by embracing
islm one departs from unfaith (al-kufr), and that it is the necessary
precondition for applying laws of inheritance, validating marriage,
legitimating prayer, alms tax, fasting, and pilgrimage.362 In specific legal
contexts juristic employment of the term al-islm echoed several archaic
associations of related terms: aslama amrahu ilayhi (delegate, entrust);
aslama f l-bay and tamala bi-l-salmi (gave a down payment or
security); and the transaction procedure termed forward payment
salam
which involves paying a security deposit to ensure future
goods or services. Here the notion of security (safely securing delivery)
is quite
apparent. Legal usage also made definite equivalences between
key terms: al-al = al-salmah min al-aybi; al-taslum = al-talu;
and al-ul
= al-silm (ending the state of war).
BR : abr long-suffering patienceendurance of suffering for a
higher
cause. This fundamental virtue has a strong link with jihad (total
striving), opening out on the pursuit of external security, conveying the
sense of conscious sacrifice and suffering for a higher cause (which is
the essence of non-violent action).
255

05/07/2013 15:21
In numerous verses it is strongly emphasised that those who repent

and act rightly by undertaking peacemaking (ala) shall be rewarded
and receive Gods Compassionate forgiveness: e.g. Al-Baqarah, 2:160,
2:224; Al-Anm, 6:48 (cf. Al-Baqarah, 2:62 & 69; Al-Midah, 5:69);
Al-Anfl, 8:1; Al-Shr, 42:40, as well as Al-Azb, 33:701).
All these closely related concepts amplify the meanings of safety
securityfaith/salvation flowing from inward and outward resignation,
or submission (islm). The total context requires one to align all such
terms together for the full range of meaning to manifest, disclosing
the comprehensive quality of the understanding of peace. Islm is
inextricably bound up with the experience of safety and security at the
individual moral level, and at the communal level of society and polity.
A famous utterance of the Prophet confirms this most fundamental
aspect of its meaning: The muslim is one from whom the Muslims
are securely-safe from (harmful effects of) his tongue and his hand/
al-muslimu man salima l-muslimna min lisnihi wa yadih.363 The core
meaning safety from harm and security from evil is evident.
The Greeting of Peace (al-salmu alaykum)

A distinctive characteristic of Muslims is the exchange of greetings, saluting one another with al-Salmu alaykum! along with the response
wa alaykum al-salm!usually translated as Peace be upon you! and
And upon you Peace! (actually a shortened form of the complete phrase,
see below.) Here salm is normally understood today as peace, while its
sense might better be rendered: greetings of security-peace.364 This greeting is known as tayat al-islm, the salutation of Islam,conveying
the hope for another person that God grant them a long successful life of
peace secure from harm. A closer examination of this important phrase so
frequently expressed on the lips of Muslims, confirms how inseparable the
conceptions of security and peace are in Islamic experience.
Greetings in Prayer
A parallel use of this famous greeting occurs at the very conclusion of
Islams ritual prayer with the double salutation of taslm,365 first to ones
right and then to the left, marking the completion of the formal alt. The
act of taslm involves dual repetition of the full phrase: al-salmu alaykum
256
05/07/2013 15:21
wa ramatu Allahi wa baraktuhu/Peace-Security be upon you, and

Gods Mercy and His Blessing. The frequently uttered eulogy praising Gods Messenger MuhammadMay God bless him and give him
peace/all llhu alayhi wa sallamaconveys sincere benedictions
and hopes that our Prophet enjoy the highest reward and beatitude
in the Hereafter, namely in Paradise. Recall that Dr al-Salm (The
Abode of Peace-Security) refers to paradiseYnus, 10:25 states:
wa Allhu yad il dri l-salmi wa yahd man yashu il ir
mustaqm/God invites to the Abode of Peace-Security and He guides
whom He wills upon a straight path. The faithful who gain entry to
paradise by working good deeds attain to friendship with God, as
Srat Al-Anm, 6:127 states: For them is the Abode of Peace with
their Lord, and He is their Friend on account of what they performed.
The taslm is always preceded by the benediction of salutations, al-tayt,366 forming an integral part of the ritual prayers,
in which greetings and praises are pronounced upon God, while
salutations of peace are declared upon the Prophet and upon the
righteous worshippers of God. In its fullest form at the end of the
cycle of prostrations (two at dawn; three at sunset; or four at noon,
mid-afternoon and eve),367 it includes the portion of benedictions
termed al-tashahhudwhere the witnessing to Gods Oneness and
His Messenger is declared. It is noteworthy that these tayt voice
salutations of peace (both al-salmu valayka, and al-salmu alayn)
upon the Prophet and ones fellow worshippersbut not specifically
salutations upon God.
There remains another frequently repeated utterance closely associated with the Taslm which completes the daily prayers, namely the
supplication offered by the individual upon consummating each of
the five daily prayers, affirming God as the ultimate source and origin
of all peace. This beautiful invocation is not obligatory yet highly
recommended, being known in Islamic tradition as the personal
practice of Gods Messenger and recorded in authoritative hadith:
O God, You are Peace-Security (al-Salm), You are the
Source of Peace, and Peace properly belongs to You.368
So greet us Lord with the salutation Peace! [fa-ayyin
rabban bi-l-salmi], and admit us into the Paradise Gar-
257
05/07/2013 15:21

den the Abode of Peace. Blessed and Exalted are You our
Lord, Possessor of Splendour and Reverence. (Text in the
version reported by al-Tirmidhi and al-Nasai.)
The Muslim aspiration for peaceful security in this world and

ultimate salvation and security in the hereafter is echoed in this prophetic
supplication. This supports the reality that peace and security together
involve both material and spiritual factors in the most inclusive sense.
We may observe that here again, salutations of peace are not uttered
specifically upon God, although the word salm occurs five times. Here
the phrase so greet us Lord with the salutation Peace! intends our
beseeching God to include us among the faithful admitted to paradise,
and to whom He extends His glorious salutation of peace-security.
This meaning is clearly established by related verses in the Quran
affirming that the greatest boon the inhabitants of paradise may receive
from God is His saluting them by the salutation of Peace!: (Y Sn,
36:58), (They will be greeted with:) Peace!a word (of greeting) from the
Merciful Lord; and Ynus, 10:910 portrays the faithful who perform
good works as guided by God to Paradise, where: Their supplication
therein shall be, Glory be to Thee O God! and their salute to one another
therein shall be Peace!. The highest degree of the faithful in paradise are
the foremost, al-sbiqn, who merit the outstanding grace described
in Al-Wqiah 56:256 whereby They will hear therein no vain or sinful
speech, only the word of salutationPeace, Peace!. Our highest hope
and aspiration should be to reach the place where only the greetings
and declarations of peace are uttered. Muslims are bidden to strive to
achieve peace, just as they implore God to grant them peace.
Safety and Security

The Arab Jewish rabbi Abdallah Ibn Salam, who embraced Islam soon
after the Prophet Muhammad U migrated to Medina, described his very
first encounter with Gods Messenger in this way:369
When the Prophet U arrived people crowded around him
and I was among them. When his face became clearly
visible, I knew that his face was not that of a liar. The first
thing I heard him say was: Spread (the salutations of)
Peace, and feed the hungry food, and observe the bonds
258
05/07/2013 15:21
of kinship, and pray (night-vigils) while people are asleep!

Thereby may you enter paradise with peaceful/security.
[The final phrase could also be rendered: enter Paradise
greeted by (Gods salutation of:) Peace!370]
This unique utterance captures with beautiful concision several

essential ethical values at the heart of Islam taught by the Prophet, and
it is striking that in such an extremely brief catechism the term salm
occurs twice. This reinforces the essential relevance of the term for
Islam and requires little comment, save to recall that the phrase Dr alSalm (Abode of Peace/Security) refers to paradise: wa Allahu yad
il dri l-salmi wa yahd man yashu il ir mustaqm (Ynus, 10:25,
and compare Al-Anm, 6:127).
Arabic morphologiclinguistic sources emphasise that islm as the
name for the religious polity established by the Prophet Muhammad U
is etymologically derived from al-salmah, safety/security from harm/
evil and avoidance of defects/vices.371 This conjunction with al-salmah
is very close to, or perhaps even coincides with, the notion of providing assurance of safety and security from harm conveyed by the greeting
salutations of security/peaceconveying the assurance and guarantee of
peaceful intent and security from ultimate harm and evil. The authoritative eighth century Iraqi philologist Khalil b. Amad (d. 179 AH) who
authored the first etymological dictionary in Arabic, clarifies the link with
the salutation al-salmu alaykum instituted by Islam:
Al-salm conveys the meaning of al-salmah, so the saying by the people al-salmu alaykum denotes al-salmah
from God be upon you. It is further stated that al-Salm is a
name among Gods Names; and it is said that (al-Salm) is
God.372 Thus if one says al-salmu alaykum it may mean
God is above you The term al-islm denotes seeking
conformity al-istislm to Gods command, denoting submission to His obedience and acceptance of His bidding/
al-inqiyd li-atihi wa l-qabl li-amrih.
Khalil was among the first to employ inqiyd (submission or selfresignation) as a main synonym for al-islm, something frequently
repeated until the present day. Verbal sallama (as in sallama amrahu
il llhi/to resign oneself [ones cause or affair] to God), and verbal
aslama (as in aslama nafsahu [amrahu] il llhi/commit oneself, resign
259
05/07/2013 15:21
oneself to Gods bidding), came by extension to signify to enter into

the religion-polity of al-Islm or enter into peace/security al-salm.
Furthermore, the nouns from the base form silm as well as salm were
taken to be homonyms for islm: the religious polity and salvational
faith-ethic originated by Gods Messenger Muhammad.
This archaic linguistic analysis tracing the name of the faith al-Islm
to the notion al-salmah, safety/security from harm/evil, (understood
as synonymous with al-salm salutations of security/peace) was indirectly supported by exegetes of the Quran who often asserted that God
is named al-Salm on account of being free of defects and faults.373 They
observed that in the tongue of revelation God is not denominated salm
nor slim, but only al-Salm. Nevertheless, a cogent critique of this earlier
linguistic and exegetical consensus was offered by the twelfth century
CE Andalusian scholar al-Suhayli (d. 581 AH) in his Al-Raw al-Unf
regarding the tayah (salutations of safety/security) and
al-Salm as a
Divine Name.374 Suhayli based his interpretation squarely upon utterances of the majority of companions and early Muslim
authorities,
pointing to an alternative understanding
overlooked
in
most contem
porary discussion.

Suhayl asserts: al-salm
denotes one from whom others
are safe/secure (man sulima min-hu),
while al-slim
denotes one
who is safe/secure from others
(man salima min ghayrihi). He argues
that Quranic commentators have displaced
the former with the latters
meaning, thereby contradicting
the utterances of the pious forebears
(salaf) who taught that al-salmah
is one quality
among the
characteristic-traits of al-salm. The presence of the t marbah
on salmah points to a greater conceptual
endowing this
difference
term with far more encompassing significance (just as with al-jall and

to God as
al-jallah). Therefore, in the tashahhud (the bearing witness
source of peace, pronounced after
closing taslm of ritual prayer) one

does not utter: al-salmu al llhi min ibdihi/salutations of safety/

Yet al-salm is sought for and
security upon God from His servants.
beseeched from God by His servants,
as petition through prayer and
gratitude for bounty; and this
explains the form of this term in the

tayah or salute which man renders
towards Godwa min-hu
al-salm/and from Him (we seek bounty of) safety/security.

260
05/07/2013 15:21
Now Suhayli invokes an interesting proof text to support his view:

the report in Ibn Hishams Srah regarding the very early incident of
prophetic revelation when Gabriel the Angel of revelation instructed
Gods Messenger Muhammad to convey to his wife Khadjah the salute
or greeting from Godal-salmu min rabbi-h/salutations of safety/
security from her Lord.375
The Prophet said: O Khadjah, this is Gabriel, he extends
salutations-of-peace from your Lord! So Khadjah replied:
God is Peaceand from Him comes safety/security
and may salutations of safety/security be upon Gabriel/Allahu l-Salmu wa min-hu l-salmu wa al Jibrli l-salm.
As Suhayli observes,376 Khadjah rightly uttered: God is al-salm

Peacebecause the term al-salm on the tongue of the creature is a
petition for safety/security from the source of all security and safety;
it cannot be an assertion of Gods need for security from any harm.
Therefore, states Suhayli, the meaning of her utterance God is alsalm was her wisely thinking: How can I respond to the divine
salutation by my saying: Upon Him peace [alayhi l-salm/may
security-safety be upon God], since safety/security comes from Him,
and is beseeched of Him, and it is bestowed by Him?! But upon Gabriel
[a created being] may there be safety/security.
Indeed, Suhayli strongly emphasises that God, as al-Salm (Peace),
must not be burdened with any defect or any fear of harm or injury,
nor any variation or shortcomingrather God bestows His care
enclosing the entire creation (all creatures) within safety and security
from harm or defect, due to His providential wise order. Thus God
may be called Peace on account of His being the ultimate source and
goal of safety/security. One may conclude from this insightful passage
by observing that islm primally mediates the notion of affording
security from harm/injury to another, as well as resignation affording
safety and peace/security to oneself.
Peacemaking
One should pay closer attention to salm which is both masculine
and feminine, and may be taken as either singular or plural. It was
generally held that al-silm is equivalent or closely parallels al-salm. In
261
05/07/2013 15:21
the Qurans second chapter Al-Baqarah, 2:208, y ayyuh l-lladhna

man adkhul f l-silmi kffat/O you who believe, enter ye into silm
all-together, it is clear that silm (peace/reconciliation) is employed
either as an attribute of faith mn, and/or as synonymous with the
religious polity of islm. Exegetes recognised the possibility of both
readings in 2:208: either as silm (= al-islm), or as salm (= al-ul, with
confirmatory reference to Al-ujart, 49:9).377 Tabaris treatment of
this marked difference of interpretation is quite informative, citing the
authorities among Companions and Successors for both views. Those
who read al-silm to denote the religious polity islm included Ibn
Abbas, Mujahid, al-Dahhak and al-Suddi as well as the majority of
Kufan Quran reciters. Yet some understood al-silm here in the sense
of al-ul, peaceful-reconciliation. However most of the Hijazi reciters read it with fatah as al-salm, construing its meaning as al-ul,
and/or al-muslamah [verbal noun of III], connoting abstention from
war-making accompanied by payment of the poll tax (jizyah). Tabari
argues for the preponderant reading al-silm as signifying the religious
polity al-islm with an eye for its occasion of revelation. Addressing
the believers (muminn), it makes no sense for God to bid them
enter into ul or muslamah since faithful Muslims obedient to
the Prophet Muhammad U would not be in a state of war or enmity
against God. This verse must therefore be addressing those faithful
who believed in previous prophets, and whom God expressly bid to
recognize and acknowledge Muhammad as Gods Messengergiven
that faith in God is inseparable from acceptance of His Messenger and
the message the Prophet Muhammad U conveys.
Tabari then provides plausible reasons for understanding Srat
Al-Baqarah, 2:208 to have been sent down with reference to a party
of the Ahl al-Kitb who were being persuaded to embrace the totality
of religious practice imposed by Islm. Even here there were different
views among early authorities. Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, and al-Dahhak
upheld a general meaning covering the People of the Book urging
them to accept all obligatory practices imposed by God through His
Messenger. However Ikrimah (a mawl of Ibn Abbas) asserted that
this verse was sent down regarding leading Medinan Jews who had
embraced Islam,378 and who nevertheless requested of the Prophet
262
05/07/2013 15:21
permission to observe the Sabbath as a night of prayer vigil (in addition to the Islamic Friday) being a day sanctified by the Torah. Tabari
concludes that Al-Baqarah, 2:208 applies to both the Muslim faithful
who followed Gods Messenger Muhammad U, as well as believing
converts from among the People of the Book, all urged to observe
the totality of obligatory practices and limits enjoined by God in
His revelation to the Prophet. The tawl attributed to Mujahid (
adkhul f l-amli kffat)379 serves to confirm Tabaris consensus
judgement, a model of his critical method of al-tafsr bi-l-mathr.
Nevertheless, in Srat Al-Anfl, 8:61 the term salm clearly denotes
peace/making as the antonym of war/bloodshed:
wa in jana li-l-salmi fa-ajna la-h wa tawakkal al
llhi innahu huwa l-samu l-almu/yet if they then incline
toward peace, then do you likewise incline, and rely utterly
on God [O Muhammad] for He is All-Hearing All-Knowing.
Here in Al-Anfl, 8:61, al-salm peace/making may best be
construed in the sense of al-ul.380 This directive for al-ul is
conditioned upon the best interests of the Muslims: that al-Islm
be manifested over unbelief. The unspoken directive implied at the
beginning of this verse is explicitly supplied by Tabar: when you
suspect deceit and duplicity, then deal with them in the same manner by
announcing hostilities. Otherwise, there is no divine bidding to initiate
peacemaking, but only to respond in kind when the opposing party
itself initiates peacemaking overtures. Likewise in Srat Muammad,
47:35 (wa tad il l-salmi), where God in fact bids His Messenger
to refrain from peacemaking with those of unbelief. Tabari had earlier
remarked: As for initiating the inviting them to peaceful/reconciliation/
al-ul, this is not found in the Quran.381 Therefore, the initiative for
peacemaking in the conflict with those of unbelief (Arab pagans) is
entirely dependent upon their intentions and actions, an eminently
practical and soberly cautious position. If the opposing party freely
inclines to peaceful-reconciliation (negotiating a treaty), or accepts to
render jizyah and/or subjugation, then al-salm peacemaking (i.e., alul) is divinely bidden. There must always be a peaceful response in
response to a peacemaking initiative offered by the opposing party.
Tabari next raises a very important point of dissension among early
263
05/07/2013 15:21
commentators over whether Al-Anfl, 8:61 bidding al-ul had been

abrogated by one or another of the fighting verses bidding the faithful
to combat the pagans (al-mushrikn) unequivocally without respite
namely Srat Al-Tawbah, 9:5, 29, 36.382 According to many reputable
early authorities among the successors including Qatadah, Ikrimah,
al-Suddi, Ibn Zayd and al-Hasan al-Basri, after the sending down of the
barah verse terminating pagan observances sometime in year 8 AH
the earlier divine bidding to respond peacefully to peacemaking initiatives had been cancelled or abrogated (nasakhah), and divine bidding
now enjoined unmitigated fighting against them until they made
submission and proclaimed There is no divinity save The Divinity!. In
other words, these great successors maintained that Al-Anfl, 8:61 was
abrogated by a universal call upon the Muslims to pursue jihad. Now
Tabari explicitly asserts that such an interpretation: has no evidence
in Revelation, nor in Prophetic practice, nor in the innate human
constitution of reason!383 This is indeed a very strong statement seemingly contravening a semi-consensus of the second generation Muslim
scholars, and it must be heeded with full appreciation of Tabaris deep
knowledge of all three factors he mentioned.384 He strongly denies the
widespread allegation that the divine bidding to respond to peaceful
initiatives of peacemaking with corresponding peaceful conciliation was
ever actually cancelled. The reason again is securely based on his expert
knowledge of the occasions of revelation: the revealed verse Al-Anfl,
8:61: yet if they then incline toward peace, then do you likewise incline,
was sent down with regard to the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayzah385
(who thus belonged to the People of the Book). Whereas the verse in
Al-Tawbah, 9:5 so fight the idolaters wherever you come across them,
was sent down regarding the pagan Arabs who served idols and fiercely
resisted Muhammads missionfrom whom acceptance of jizyah was
not permitted! Therefore, neither of these two verses could conceivably
cancel the other, for both actually continued to be in full force given that
they refer to two different groups in conflict or rivalry with the Medinan
Muslim community, and who were treated with distinctly dissimilar
policies. Similarly, a tawl attributed to Mujahid is cited to confirm this
interpretation, along with a supporting statement from Ibn Ishaq.386
264
05/07/2013 15:21
Submit! You shall be Secure

These limited samples drawn from the wealth of exegetical literature alert
us to lessons to be drawn for proper understanding of al-salm as the
chief Islamic term for peacemaking. Such materials must be coordinated
with corresponding insights drawn from early historical and literary
sources, including the letters dispatched by the Prophet to neighbouring
rulers and chiefs, as well as significant utterances by leading companions
defining islm in relation to mnparticularly several proclamations
by the fourth Caliph Al b. Abi Talib which deserve extended attention.
We will quickly draw attention to the Muslim historical tradition that
dates the dispatching by the Prophet Muhammad of emissaries bearing
letters to the great powers of his era (il mulk al-ajam) late in year 6
AH (or possibly early in year 7). This was after the pact of Hudaybiyah
during the interval of the hudnah or truce between the pagan Meccans
and Muslims. These documents have not been properly scrutinised by
occidental scholars for the historical data they shed on the initial spread
of Islam, nor for the Prophet Muhammads geostrategic policy. Generally
they are dismissed in western Islamic studies as obvious forgeries of
the Umayyad era. These documents actually demand careful scrutiny,
and have been unjustly maligned and neglected by non-Muslim scholars.
Nevertheless, recent research on the linguistic, epigraphic and epistolary
reality of the Near East and Arabia during the fourth to the seventh centuries CE may open the door to a fresh evaluation of these documents.387
The relevant letters occur in early sources (Ibn Sad, Abu Ubayd al-Qasim
b. Sallam, etc.) and were later gathered in more extensive compilations
such as the fourteenth century CE Ibn Hudaydahs al-Mib al-Mu
(vol. II muktabt pp. 3323).388
The texts of the letters alleged to have been sent to the four great
rulers of Abyssinia, Egypt, Byzantium and Sasanian Iran (as well as to a
number of lesser authorities in the Arabian peninsula and Near East), all
repeat in closely parallel form a similar phrase, usually at the start of the
Prophets actual message after the introductory address:
Aslim! Taslam/ Submit!You shall be secure. Or: Enter into
Islm! [Be at peace!]You shall achieve peace/security (from
injury/harm and threat of conflict).
265
05/07/2013 15:21
Is it possible to understand by this terse pregnant phrase reference

to both the external political relation, and at the same time the interior
religious condition of acceptance of the authority of Gods Messenger
mediating divine guidance inducing assurance of salvation? If these
powerful rulers chose to recognise the authority and power of the Prophet
heading the religious polity of al-Islm (centered in the Medinan ummah)
and the dominion of the One God, they join the salvific community and
gain worldly and other-worldly security.
Captive of Divinity
Before completing this concise review of the primary significance of salm
we may draw attention to a little-noted connotation reflecting an archaic
reality with direct bearing on the religion al-Islm. In ancient Semitic
usage one finds a prevalence of theophorous names where the human
is designated the client or devotee [lit. captive] of the god. Cognate
employment in Hebrew and Phoenician of names denoting the client of
El (gr/c.f. Arabic jr) are frequent, as with the parallel term taym devotee or lover (Arabic taym allh). This has a particularly striking parallel
in Palmyrene with the proper name Salm. It is worth citing the great
Scottish Arabist W. Robertson Smith on this convergence, perhaps the
first scholar to point explicitly to its bearing on Arabic Islamic usage.389
In Arabic proper, where the relation of protector and protected had a great development, and whole clans were wont
to attach themselves as dependants to a more powerful tribe,
the conception of god and worshipper as patron and client
appears to have been specially predominant . To the same
conception may be assigned the proper name salm, submission, shortened from such theophorous forms as the Palymyrene salm al-Lt, submission to Lt, and corresponding
to the religious use of the verb istalama, he made his peace,
to designate the ceremony of kissing, stroking, or embracing
the sacred stone at the Caaba .
(According to the authority of Professor Ihsan Abbas, the name salm
[or perhaps salm?] occurred in pre-Islamic poetry as the designation of
a particular divinity; regrettably we have not been able to pursue his hint
further.390) One may invoke the common appellation abd Allh servant
of God [captive of the Divinity?], signifying the status of dependence
266
05/07/2013 15:21
and obligation involved in worship and service of the divine (ibdah).

In other words, it is advisable to avoid some common associations
evoked by the English submission or surrender when apprehending
the proper meaning for islm. The supreme divinity conceived as King,
Lord or Master naturally provoked the notion of the human subject as
servant, resigned captive or submissive worshipper. The submission
involved is voluntary and freely rendered, while simultaneously bearing
a communal political import.
A fundamental consideration to be kept in mind: The parallelism in ancient society between religious and political institutions is
complete, for both spheres are conceived as being parts of one whole
of social custom.391 This observation is a truism for the early Islamic
reality, yet is often overlooked by contemporary Euro-American
thinkers who frequently lapse into the assumption projected by
Enlightenment modernity of the necessary or preferred separation of
the religious from the political realm. The idea of a religion being
accepted by voluntary submission, expressed by the name al-Islm,
may not be divorced from the strategic political and cultural conditions through which it emerged in history. Religion was in that era
accompanied by political rights and unfolded historically against the
background of political power.392
Was the primordial religious polity of Islm centered primarily on
the search for dominion and authority in this world? If the argument
that Islm embraces simultaneously a religious polity and a salvational
faith is valid, then what of its inner salvific dimension nurtured in the
heart and mind of the individual believer? More investigation into the
nexus of islm as both a religious polity and sociopolitical community
born in historical context, and the deeply lived experience of individuals who have their presence and world view moulded by that historical
community, has to be accomplished if we are to bring clarity to the
quest for an authentic understanding of peace. The dual components
of establishing a polity and nurturing a living faith coexist at a very
deep level.
The relevance of religious ideals to human security appears to
find a particularly compelling example in Islam. This invites more
intensive exploration, and should be integrated with current concerns
267
05/07/2013 15:21
about deepening the understanding of security to include spiritual and

ethical components. Complementing the emphasis on just polity and
an equitable social order, Islamic teachings offer specific ideals and
practices for active reconciliation between individuals and groups.
Islam thereby sought a balance between the political dictates of justice
and equity, and those of human clemency, harmony, and selfless love
embraced by the notion of al-isn surpassing goodness:
Surely God enjoins justice and the doing-good-to-others [aladl wa l-isn], and giving (to others) like unto (ones own)
kin, and forbids indecency and manifest evil and unjust oppression. (Al-Nal, 16:90)
268
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter ten
HUMAN DIGNITY FROM AN ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE
Dignity is a composite concept that can embrace a variety of objective
values and those which may be relative and subjective in the context
of particular legal and cultural traditions. The values that dignity
subsumes are also liable to change with new developments in science
and technology, as well as with the mobility and interaction of peoples
and cultures. Broadly speaking, from a legal perspective, human
dignity connotes inviolability of the human person, recognition of a
set of rights and obligations and guarantee of safe conduct by others,
including the society and state. Juristic positions and human dignity
also tend to have implications on a global scale as to whether the
world communities and cultures accord dignity and inviolability to
the other concerning Islam and Muslims are divided. Islam recognises
dignity as an inherent right to all human beings regardless of colour
and creed. This being the basic position, a certain level of internal
disagreement in the Islamic juristic thought itself does not exist, just
as negative trends in Muslim-non-Muslim relations have been on the
increase in recent years that have altogether added to apprehension
and scepticism on both sides.
This text explores human dignity through a study of the Quran
and Hadith (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad), the two most
authoritative sources of Islam that profoundly influence the Muslim
psyche and conduct in almost all Muslim communities. Then follows
a brief review of the juristic positions of the leading schools of Islamic
law on the subject, and then concluding remarks on the effect of these
guidelines on the realities of Muslim life.
269
05/07/2013 15:21
Since the subject before us occupies a substantial number of

Quranic passages and Hadith reports, I shall divide them into a few
clusters around the following themes:
1) Direct scriptural evidence on human dignity.
2) Passages in the Quran and Hadith that characterise the
God-Man relationship.
3) Evidence of concern to relations of human beings among
themselves, within and outside the fold of Islam.
4) A brief review of the position of leading schools of Islamic
jurisprudence.
5) The impact of these guidelines on the realities of Muslim life.
Textual Evidence on Human Dignity

The most explicit affirmation of human dignity (karmah) is found in
Gods illustrious speech in the Quran, in a general and unqualified
declaration: We have bestowed dignity on the children of Adam (laqad
karramn ban Adama) and conferred upon them special favours
above the greater part of Our creation (Al-Isr, 17:70).
The reference to the greater part of Our creation in this verse is
explained elsewhere in parts of the Quran where the text elaborates
the manifestations of human dignity by declaring, for instance, the
spiritual ranking of human beings above those of the angels on one
hand and the devil (Iblis) on the other. In one such passage (Al-Arf,
7:11), the angels and Iblis were asked to bow down to Adam but only
the angels bowed down, not so Iblis. Iblis asserted its own superiority,
as the text recounts: You created Adam from [humble] clay and created
me from fire! Gods displeasure with this response was then conveyed
in a question to Iblis: what prevents thee from prostrating thyself to one
whom I created with My Own Hand ? (d, 38:756).
The subject is then taken up again in another context where God
declared His intention to the angels that I am about to appoint a vicegerent in the earth. The angels protested, as the text goes, and said: we
extol and glorify Thee, whereas Man is prone to corruption and bloodshed. Then the angels were told: surely I know what you know not.
This is immediately followed by the affirmation: And God taught Adam
the names of all things (Al-Baqarah, 2:302), which would seem to
270
05/07/2013 15:21
suggest that knowledge and the capacity to learn are relevant to the
dignity and nobility of humans. A level of intimacy and closeness is also
shown in Gods affirmation that I created (Adam) with My own Hand.
For in most other places where a reference occurs to Gods creation, it
is often said that God commands or wills so and so and it becomes. But
even more explicitly, this intimacy is shown in Gods illustrious affirmation: And I breathed into him (Adam) of My Own spirit (d,38:72).
The spiritual superiority of humankind in the foregoing verses is
then further supplemented by references to their physical constitution
in places, for example, where it is declared: Indeed, We created humankind in the best of forms; and We fashioned you in the best of images
(Al-Tn, 95:12; Al-Taghbun, 64:3). It is reported in a hadith that the
Prophet stood one day in front of the Kabah, the holiest of all places
known to Islam, and said in a symbolic language:
You are most pure and most dignified, but the One in whose
hands Muhammads life reposes, the sanctity and honour of
a believer, his life and his property, is far greater in the eyes
of God.393
The Quranic vision of dignity for the human race as depicted in
these passages has been upheld, more specifically, in its references to the
Muslim community, whom God has ranked in honour (al-izzah) next
to His own illustrious Self and that of His Messenger, Muhammad (AlMunfiqn, 63:8). The Quranic designation of the Muslim community
is also that of a community of moderation (ummatan wasatan, AlBaqarah, 2:143), committed to the promotion of good and rejection of
evil (l Imrn, 3:110), dedicated to the vindication of truth and justice
(l Imrn, 3:103). To quote the Holy Book: The believers, both men and
women, are friends and protectors of one another; they enjoin good and
they forbid evil. (Al-Tawbah, 9:71) This is translated more pragmatically
in the following hadith: If any of you sees something evil, he should set
it right with his hand; if he is unable to do so, then with his tongue, and if
he is unable to do even that, then (let him denounce it) in his heart. But
this is the weakest form of faith. We may add here the point that there
is no evidence anywhere in the sources to say that non-Muslims may
not participate in the promotion of good or prevention and rejection of
evil. In two of his other sayings, the Prophet U is also quoted to have
271
05/07/2013 15:21
said: the best part of faith is to have beautiful manners; and that: I
have been sent in order to perfect moral virtues (among you).
The overall picture that emerges is summed up in the Quran
commentator al-Alusis observation that everyone and all members
of the human race, including the pious and the sinner, are endowed
with dignity. Twentieth century Muslim jurists and commentators
have also gone on record to note that dignity is not earned by meritorious conduct; it is established as an expression of Gods grace; and
also that dignity is a natural and absolute right which inheres in every
human person as of the moment of birth. It is God-given and natural;
hence no individual nor state may take it away from anyone. As for the
question whether dignity also remains intact of a criminal, the general
answer provided is in the affirmative with the proviso, however, that it
is partially compromised to the extent that a court decision on punishment may be enforced, even if punishment involves some erosion of
dignity, but beyond that the personal dignity of prisoners must also be
protected and observed. It follows then that prisoners should not be
subjected to arbitrary and humiliating treatment nor to deprivation of
their basic needs.
Rights and obligations are a manifestation of human dignity in
all major legal traditions and the shariah is no exception. There may
be some differences of orientation among legal systems, but as far as
Islamic law is concerned the emphasis is not so much on rights and
obligations as it is on justice. A balanced approach to rights and duties
should thus be realised through impartial justice. Yet for reasons that
orated, Islamic law tends to be more emphatic on duties than rights.
I have advanced the view that human dignity provides a more objective basis of a modern doctrine of human rights in Islam, in preference
perhaps, to the rights-based approach of the contemporary human rights
discourse that places a much greater emphasis on rights compared to
obligations. My research further indicates, however, that a duty-based
approach to human rights is also not in total harmony with the Quranic
conception of justice.
Critics have voiced the view that dignity is a moral rather than a
legal concept, and that violation of human dignity is not the same as
violation of an entrenched right. Thus according to one observer, To
272
05/07/2013 15:21
violate a right goes well beyond merely falling short of some high moral
standard. A partial response to this is that the five universals objectives of the shariah, known as al-darriyyt (to which a sixth, namely
personal honour (al-ir) was subsequently added), do take human
dignity into a rights-based concept. I shall have more to say on this in
my examination of juristic positions below.
God-Man Relationship
The Quran is expressive, in a variety of places and contexts, of Gods love
for humanity, so much so that it becomes a characteristic feature of this
relationship. This aspect of the God-Man relationship has not, however,
received a balanced treatment in many of the Orientalist works I have seen,
which are preoccupied with themes such as Gods absolute power, God as
an unrelenting judge, man as the servant of God and so forth. A similar
tendency is noted even among the Muslim commentators of the Quran,
especially in the tafsr bil-mathr (precedent-based interpretation) genre
of tafsr, such as those of Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d.923), Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti
(d. 1505) and the works also of many shariah jurists who envision a somewhat distant and impersonal God that accentuates His majesty, imperium
and justice much more than His intimacy and love for human beings.
This tendency in tafsr and fiqh works has not remained unnoticed and
has invoked criticism from many a leading Sufi and mystic of Islam. The
Sufis have taken the jurists and even the Quran commentators to task
for their preoccupation with a rule-based religion, for downsizing Gods
love (maabbah) for humankind, and for the latters devotion to Him, that
so unmistakeably feature in the Quran and Hadith. The Sufis are wellknown for their rich and effusive expression of a profound devotion (ishq)
through which God and humankind relate to one another. We believe love
(mahabbah) and mercy (ramah) animate all aspects of Gods relations
with humankind and that God conferred dignity (karmah) on human
beings as a manifestation of His unbounded love.
Gods love is manifested in His oft repeated expression of mercy
for humanity in the Quran, in His expression of trust in the nobility
of Man, endowing mankind with the faculty of reason and bestowing
on them immense capacity for knowledge and understanding. Gods
expression of trust is also manifested in His appointment of humankind
273
05/07/2013 15:21
as His vicegerent in the earth (Al-Baqarah, 2:302), and His recurrent

affirmation on the subjugation of the heavens and the earth for human
benefit. Other manifestations of favour are found in the Divine providence of availing to humankind the enjoyments of this life and its adornments, espoused with reminders that they should not neglect their fair
share in them. In an address to the Prophet Muhammad, God speaks
in such terms: When My servants ask you about Me, say that I am indeed
close to them and I listen to the prayer of every supplicant when he calls
on Me; and Surely We have created Man; We know the promptings of his
heart, and We are nearer to him even than his jugular vein (Al-Baqarah,
2:186; Qf, 50:16). In a long Qudsi hadith (a variety of hadith wherein God
speaks directly without the Prophets intermediation) that al-Bukhari has
recorded from Abu Hurayrah, God the Most High said:
One who offends any of My friends is like declaring war
against Me and My servant gets closer to Me through good
deeds until I love him, and when I love him, I become like his
ear by which he hears, and like the eye by which he sees, like
his hand by which he reaches out, and I walk with him; when
he asks Me, I give, and when he seeks protection through Me,
I protect him.410
These and other similar pronouncements may be seen as Gods
unconditional expressions of love and grace for humanity, which may
be distinguished from other expressions that contemplate certain
behaviour patterns, as are reviewed below.
In numerous places the Quran is expressive of Gods love, in its
typical phrase, inn Allh yuibbu (God loves) those who are good to
others (inna Allh yuibbu al-musinn, (Al-Baqarah, 2:195)); those
who are just in their dealings with others (al-muqsitn, Al-Midah, 5:42),
those who remain patient in the face of adversity (al-birn, (l Imrn,
3:146)), those who are conscious of Him (al-muttaqin, (Al-Tawbah, 9:4)),
those who observe purity and cleanliness (al-mutaahhirn, (Al-Baqarah,
2:222)), those who repent and return to Him (al-tawwabn, (Al-Baqarah,
2:222)), those who place their trust in Him (al-mutawakkiln, (l Imrn,
3:159)) and so forth. In an unusually candid language, God has elsewhere
addressed His beloved Prophet Moses in these terms: And I cast My love
over you in order that you may be reared under My eye ( H, 20:39).
274
05/07/2013 15:21
This theme is pursued further in other places where Gods love is denied
in the typical phrase inna Allha l yuibbu (God loves not) to the
aggressors, to the unjust, to those who spread corruption, to the arrogant
and the boastful, the deniers of faith in Him, the treacherous, the prodigals and so forth. Yet the Quranic dictum is varied in its expressions
when it declares, for example, in another verse: O My servants who have
transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the mercy of God, for God
forgives all sins. He is most forgiving, most merciful. (Al-Zumar, 39:53).
Other manifestations of God-Man relations in the Quran are
found in the affirmation and grant of freedom and moral autonomy
for human beings (Al-Rm, 30:30); in its declaration that there shall be
no compulsion in religion (Al-Baqarah, 2:256); and again: Let whosoever wills, believe, and whosoever wills, disbelieve (Al-Kahf, 18:29). The
Quran also declared in an address to the Prophet: anyone who accepts
guidance does so for his own good, but one who wantonly goes astray,
then tell him that I am only a warner. (Al-Naml, 27:92)
Relations among Fellow Humans

The Quranic vision of humankind is that of a single fraternity which is
endorsed by the affirmation of the unity and equality of all of its members.
Thus in a reference to the creation of humankind it is provided: God created
you from a single soul (khalaqakum min nafsin widatin) and created its
mate of the same (kind) and created from them multitudes of men and
women. Then they are all enjoined, in the same verse, to observe the ties
of kinship (al-arm) among yourselves (Al-Nis, 4:1).
It is significant that the text accentuates the bonds of fraternity
among humans with the expression al-arm (ties of kinship), a term
usually employed in the Quran in the context of family relations and
inheritance. Another point of note in this passage is its phrase He
created you form a single soul, which also occurs identically elsewhere in
the text (Al-Zumar, 39:6), both implying that Eve was, not as it is sometimes erroneously claimed, created from Adams rib, but created in a
like manner of the essence of that single soul. This single soul emanates,
it seems, in Gods own illustrious spirit, hence its dignified origin of the
highest order. What is in common between Adam and Eve is this soul,
implied by the reference to it in the female singular (i.e. minhin
275
05/07/2013 15:21
the phrase wa khalaqa minh zawjahand created from it its pair),

which could not be a reference to Adam, but to that single soul. The
Prophet Muhammad has endorsed this message of unity and equality
in the following hadith: O people! Your Creator is one; you are from
the same ancestor; all of you are from Adam, and Adam was created
from earth. In the matter of reward and punishment, the Quran
declares men and women absolutely equal, and there is no notion of
an original sin in the Quran either. In sum, since Islam subscribes to
a broad human fraternity of equals, there could be no affront to the
human dignity of any single person without there being an affront to
the dignity of all. Since dignity is God-given, no human person or
has the authority to deny it to anyone nor to deprive another human
being of his or her dignity.
The Quran views marriage as a basis of friendship and compassion
(muwaddah wa ramah) where spouses find tranquillity and companionship and they are a protective garment to each others dignity and
honour. Parents are elevated to a position almost of divinity, and
offspring is enjoined to treat them, in words and in deeds, with utmost
dignity, in the spirit of benevolence (isn) and submission (Al-Isr,
17:23). The text places special emphasis on being grateful to ones
mother (Luqmn, 31:14). Parents are also enjoined to observe the natural ties of love and affection with their children, who are the adornments
of life and a litmus test also of failure and success. The most meritorious
legacy anyone can leave behind is a virtuous offspring (Al-Kahf, 18:46).
As for the dignified encounter and treatment of ones fellow
humans, the Quran in numerous places enjoins affection and fraternity with everyone, within and outside the family, especially to ones
neighbours. The believers are declared as brethren to one another
(Al-ujurt, 49:15) and enjoined, in unqualified language, to speak
to everyone with courtesy and tact (Al-Baqarah, 2:83); and then again
when you speak, speak with justice; and in pursuit of righteousness
(Al-Anm, 6:52; Al-Azb, 33:70). In numerous places, the text warns
the believer, indeed all people, to avoid harbouring ill-feeling, rancour,
suspicion, backbiting and espionage against one another.
In their dealing with non-Muslims and followers of other faiths,
Muslims are enjoined to do justice and be good to them so long as
276
05/07/2013 15:21
they do not resort to acts of hostility and oppression against them

(Al-Mumtaanah, 60:8). In the matter of engaging in disputation and
discourse with non-Muslims, the believers are further directed to reason
with them in the best manner possible; and argue not with the followers
of Scripture except in the fairest manner (Al-Nal, 16:125, Al-Ankabt,
29:46).The general guideline that applies to everyone is also set in
such terms that there shall be no hostility except against the oppressors
(Al-Baqarah, 2:193). An act of aggression may be punished with its
equivalent but no more than that (Al-Baqarah, 2:194). The text, moreover, enjoins everyone to avoid aggression, for God loves not the aggressors
(Al-Baqarah, 2:190), but those who exercise patience and forgiveness
will have their rewards from God (Al-Nal, 16:126). The Prophet has
added his voice in confirmation to say: people are Gods children and
those dearest to Him are the ones who treat His children kindly.
He also said: whoever believes in God and the Last Day, let him speak
when he has something good to say, or else remain silent. In another
hadith, the Prophet has been quoted to have said: God will punish (in
the hereafter) those who punish people in this world.
Another manifestation of human dignity in Islam is the grant
of moral autonomy to the people, as in the renowned hadith: There
is no obedience in transgression; obedience is due only in righteous
conduct. The Prophet is reported to have declared further that: The
best form of jihad is to tell a word of truth to a tyrannical ruler.
Juristic Positions
Three interrelated concepts of Islamic law of relevance to human
dignity that are featured in the scholastic jurisprudence of the leading
schools (madhhib) are imah (inviolability), humanity and personhood (damiyyah) and the five (or six) universals collectively known as
al-arriyyt, as previously mentioned. These are life, intellect, religion,
family, property, and honour, which constitute the overriding goals
and values of Islam that must be protected as a matter of priority by all
concerned. The two basic positions that are taken on these objectives
and principles may be labelled respectively as universalist and communalist. The universalist camp is spearheaded by the Hanafi school of law,
whereas the preponderant view of the other leading schools tends to take
277
05/07/2013 15:21
communalist postures on these concepts. The Hanafi school commands

the widest following in present day Muslim countries, compared to any
of the other leading schools, namely the Shafii, Maliki, Hanbali and the
Shiah: About fifty percent of the worlds Muslims are followers of the
Hanafi school. The universalists take an affirmative stance on the recognition of imah for all humans regardless of religion, gender, race and the
like. Human dignity is thus a natural endowment that everyone obtains by
the mere fact of being human. Everyones dignity, life, property and other
rights are sacrosanct and inviolable, without any discrimination. Full and
equal protection is therefore extended to all alike.
The communalist position maintains, on the other hand, that
imah is established not by the fact of ones being a human, but by
being a believer in Islam. Non-Muslims are consequently not qualified
for imah unless they make a treaty with the Muslim state and secure
their protection by virtue of a commitment (dhimmah). This view is
spearheaded by the Imam al-Shafii (d. 820 CE) and has also found
support with the other leading imams, namely Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (d.
855), Malik (d. 795) Daud al-Zahiri (d. 885) and the Shiite scholars
such as al-Tusi (d. 1274) and his contemporary Allamah al-Hilli. They
advanced the argument that the injunction on fighting the disbelievers in the Quran and Hadith is couched in a general language which
supersedes the grant of imah to them. Recep Senturk has drawn
the conclusion from his research that the category of universal human
rights that exists in the Hanafi concept of adamiyyah does not hold in
the legal thought of the advocates of the communalist position, who
have generally relied on the religiously defined categories of Muslims
and non-Muslims.
Imam Abu Hanifah (d. 767), the leading advocate of the universalist
position, established a nexus between damiyyah and imah and
maintained that being a progeny of Adam, whether Muslim or not,
creates the legal basis for possession of both. His position is summarised
in the phrase, al-ismah bil-damiyyahinviolability inherent in being
human. Abu Hanifahs understanding of the Quran and hadith on
fighting the disbelievers maintains that they are on the whole contextual,
often referring to warlike situations and active military engagement
between the pagans of Mecca and the nascent Muslim community of
278
05/07/2013 15:21
the time. A humans religious choice must also be honoured, wrote

al-Sarakhsi (d.1090), even if it is contrary to Islamic teaching. Sarakhsi
further observed that everyones life must be protected because only a
living person can respond to the Divine call of religion, and his faculty of
reason must be protected too, as this too is the only means by which he can
understand and determine values. Everyones mind must be honoured
and protected even if they oppose the way we think. Al-Sarakhsi went
on to add that freedom and the right to own property are endowed in
humans from the moment of birth. The insane child and the sane adult
stand on the same footing, in so far as these rights are concerned. This
is how personhood is established in a human being, to create in him the
capacity to bear rights and obligations.
Another prominent Hanafi jurist, al-Marghinani, criticised the
communalist view and wrote that the argument of al-Shafii to take religion
as the criterion of imah is unacceptable. This is because protection is
attached, not to Islam, but to the person, as it is the person who is the
audience of religion and the carrier of obligations imposed by the law.
People would be unable to receive the message and give a meaningful
response to it unless they were immune from aggression in the first place.
The person is, therefore, the original locus of protection, which means
that imah inheres in all human beings.
Ibn Abidin (d. 1834 CE), another leading voice in the Hanafi school,
confirmed the universalist position of the school of his following and wrote
that a human being is honoured, even if he is a non-Muslim (al-dam
mukarram wa law kfiran). We are required to protect the sanctity of
all humanity. Muslims must therefore defend the imah and the human
rights of non-Muslims. Hence, each individual, community and state
bears the responsibility to protect the imah of all human beings.
The universalist position crossed the boundaries of the Hanafi school
of jurisprudence and gained followers from other schools. Many leading figures, including Abu Hamid al-Ghazali from the Shafii school, Ibn
Rushd al-Qurtubi, Ibrahim al-Shatibi, and Ibn Ashur from the Maliki
school, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah from the Hanbali,
and Javad Mughniyyeh from the Jafari Shiite school have supported
the universalist position on human dignity and imah.
The Hanafi school remained influential until early the twentieth
279
05/07/2013 15:21
century, but European colonialism and the role it played in the fall of
the Ottoman state, as well as the subsequent rise of the contemporary
Islamic states have negatively impacted the universalist doctrine. The
communalist position consequently found renewed support in the views
of many prominent scholars in the Arabian Peninsula, Egypt, North
Africa and Iran. The universalist position suffered a steady decline and it
remains conspicuously absent in the modern discourse of human rights
in the Muslim world. Muslim jurists and commentators of recent times
tend to be supportive of the universality of human rights, which they
tend to assert, however, not through the scholastic approaches reviewed
above but through direct recourse to the sources evidence of the Quran
and Sunnah.
Concluding Remarks
If one were to broadly characterise Islamic and Western cultures one might
say Islam, generally, accentuates human dignity whereas Western culture
tends to emphasise liberty. It is a question obviously of relative emphasis,
as Western culture also puts a high premium on dignity. Bedouin culture
in the history of the Arabs had a highly developed sense of personal
honour and customary methodology that revolved around the preservation of dignity. Manliness and nobility of character (murah), hospitality
and honouring ones guest, and also a greater stress on ones obligation to
others than on ones own rights, characterised Arab culture, and to a large
extent also the teachings of Islam. These dignitarian concepts also penetrated other Muslim communities and cultures outside the Arabian peninsula and had enormous consequences on the gender question and issues of
war and peace. In cases where Muslims were in rebellion against the status
quo, a substantial cultural reason for the rebellion has been a perceived
collective dignity. Ali Mazrui has rightly alluded, in a 2002 interview, to the
relevance of this factor in the rebellion of Muslims in Chechnya, Palestine,
Macedonia, Kashmir, Kosovo and even Nigeria.
Without wishing to embrace Huntingtons articulation of the clash
of civilisations in a broad sweep, a clash of cultures did occur, in my view,
when, addressing the Taliban, then President Bush used the language
of ultimatum when he said: Just hand over Osama bin Laden and his
thugs. There is nothing to talk about. He did not give the Taliban a line
280
05/07/2013 15:21
of dignified retreat, and the rest is a chronology of escalating violence

in so many places as we have seen.
The Muslim public is also anxious to know whether the West
accepts the dignity and inviolability of the different other. The course
of post 9/11 events and divergent voices emerging in the United States
and Europe have not helped provide the needed assurance. What seems
certain, however, is that neither side can give that assurance unilaterally.
Yet a sense of realism over the configuration of economic and military
power would suggest that the initiative, and the burden of rectifying the
deficit in understanding, fall more heavily on the West. There is a need
for wider recognition of the best values of each culture and religion to
give fresh impetus to the prospects of a more peaceful world, and for
the Muslims to give reality to the Quranic address (Al-ujurt, 49:13),
from where diversity and pluralism of peoples and nations should be
used as bases of better understanding and recognition, among themselves and the wider reaches of human fraternity.
281
05/07/2013 15:21
chapter twelve
DHIMM AND MUSTAMIN: A JURISTIC AND
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
Executive Summary
This chapter begins with a brief explanation of the meaning and concept of
dhimm and mustamin and continues with a review of the source evidence
and fiqh provisions on the subject. Then follows a historical analysis of
events and developments that impacted the fiqh discourse on the position
of dhimmis. The chapter continues with a critical examination of the fiqh
rules in an attempt to renegotiate the impact of historical changes on them:
the rules of fiqh were a construct of a certain era that no longer obtained,
and that, in turn, raised the question as to whether these rules should also
be revised. The post-colonial period and independence movement in the
Muslim world brought about momentous changes, which were reflected,
for the most part, in the ensuing constitutions and laws of nationality
and citizenship. A certain disparity arose, as a result, between these and
their counterparts in fiqh. The chapter draws attention to some of these
developments, and advances reform proposals that address the position
of dhimmis as equal citizens. The proposed reforms also seek to close the
gap between the fiqh provisions and the applied laws of Muslim countries.
A Review of Fiqh Provisions

Non-Muslim residents of a Muslim majority state are divided into two
categories, namely those who have taken permanent residence and the
Muslim state is committed to their protection (i.e. the dhimmis), and the
mustamins, those who come to the Islamic lands for temporary residence.
Dhimm is a derivative of dhimmah, which means commitment, and it
304
05/07/2013 15:21
Dhimm and Mustamin: A Juristic and Historical Perspective
applies to those who enter a contract, known as aqd al-dhimmah, which

entails mutual commitment on their part and on the part of the Islamic
government. This is why the dhimms are also known as al-muhidn, or
covenantees. They commit themselves to loyalty and the state is in return
committed to their protection and support. The contract of dhimmah
basically entitles non-Muslim citizens to equal rights and obligations
to those of their Muslim compatriots. It is a permanent contract which
can only be concluded by the head of state or his representative, and
once concluded, it cannot be revoked, but the law provides for certain
eventualities whereby the contract may be terminated.
Dhimmah is binding and permanent as far as Muslims are concerned,
but it is revocable as far as the non-Muslim party is concerned. The Hanafi
school of law has, however, confined the grounds of revocation to three,
namely when the dhimm embraces Islam; when he joins the enemies; and
when he or she acts in consort and jointly declares war on the Muslims.
Outside these three situations the contract of dhimmah is not revocable
even when the dhimm commits blasphemy, refuses to pay the poll-tax
(jizyah) or commits murder, adultery and theft. This is the Hanafi viewpoint, but the majority of Sunni and Shii jurists have held refusal to pay
the jizyah as a ground for revocation of the contract of dhimmah.
All non-Muslim residents, whether temporary or permanent, are
required to submit to the authority of the Islamic government and
observance of its laws, except for personal and customary matters such
as marriage, divorce, and inheritance, where the shariah allows them to
practice their own customary laws and traditions.524 The dhimmis are
entitled to retain and practice their own religion without any hindrance,
and should they choose, at any point in time, to embrace Islam, their
status of dhimmah is automatically terminated and they become fullfledged citizens as of that time. Notwithstanding some juristic rulings
to the contrary, the position has prevailed that the status of dhimmah
may be conferred not only on Christians and Jews, known as the Ahl
al-Kitb, but on all non-Muslims, indeed anyone who applies for it
regardless of religious following.525
The basic requirement of acquiring the dhimm status is to take
domicile in the Muslim territory and pay a poll tax. I shall presently
attempt to address some jizyah-related issues in the context especially of
305
05/07/2013 15:21
contemporary conditions. Suffice it to note at this point that the lawful

government and the l al-amr (those in charge of community affairs)
may specify the requirements of conferring citizenship on non-Muslim
applicants in the light of prevailing conditions, considerations of fairness and considerations of public interest (marabaah)all within the
framework of a sharah-oriented policy (siysah shariyyah).526 The
Muslim state is authorised to enact appropriate rules and procedures
that apply to the various modes of conferment of citizenship. It can be
conferred, under the applied laws of the present-day Muslim countries,
through birth, naturalisation, marriage, domicile, grant on application,
reintegration, subjugation, acquisition of territory and so forth.527
The mustaminn (lit. those who enjoy safe conduct) are aliens who
are granted safe conduct to facilitate their entry and temporary stay
in Muslim territories. They are admitted by permission and passport
on the basis of contract, known as aqd al-amn, or contract of safe
conduct. The mustamin thus enjoys the same rights that are recognised for the dhimm, except that he or she is not required to pay the
jizyah if the period of stay is less than one year. The contract of amn
guarantees safe conduct to the person and property of the mustamin
and to his family. The mustamin enjoys total freedom of movement
within Muslim territories and that includes, according to the Hanafi,
but not the Shafii and Hanbali schools, freedom to visit and enter the
mosques, and also residence in the vicinity of Kabah in Mecca for three
days without any prior permission. The mustamins are under similar
obligations, as are the dhimms, to observe the laws of the land. Unlike
the contract of dhimmah, which is permanent, amn is temporary and
revocable by the authorities. Again, unlike dhimmah, which is only
offered by the state authorities, amn can be offered and concluded
both by the state authorities and any Muslim citizen, men and women
alike.528 The procedure of giving amn is very simple and there is no
disagreement among the Muslim jurists on it. Once the intention of the
person requesting amn is known, regardless of the language spoken,
any word or sign of approval is enough to confer the status of amn.529
With the exception of the Hanafis, who are of the view that safe
conduct to aliens may be granted by both the Muslim and non-Muslim
citizens (the latter with permission of the authorities), the majority
306
05/07/2013 15:21
have confined this right to Muslim citizens only.530 This is yet another
instance perhaps where the more egalitarian position of the Hanafi
school is preferable and could be adopted by a simple permission that
the head of state might extend to non-Muslim citizens.
Basic authority for amn is found in the Quranic verse which
provides in an address to the believers: If one of the idolaters seeks your
protection, protect him so that he hears the word of God, then convey him
to his place of safety (Al-Tawbah, 9:6).
The general (amm) declaration of this text is then confirmed and
endorsed in a renowned hadith which provides:
The lives of Muslims are equal (in respect of retaliation and
diyyah) and they are a unity against their opponents. When
the least among them offers safe conduct to someone, it becomes a commitment on all of them.531
Muslim women are equally entitled to grant amn to aliens who
enter the Muslim territory for non-hostile purposes. This is confirmed
in a clear hadith where the Prophet U endorsed the amn that Umm
Hn, the daughter of Abu Talib, had granted to one of the pagan Arabs
on the day of the conquest of Mecca. Umm Hns brother had wanted to
kill this man, at which time she went to the Prophet and informed him
about it, and the Prophet addressed her by saying we protect the one to
whom you have offered protection O Umm Hn.532
The status of amn might be repudiated by the head of state or his
representative at any time if it is discovered that the mustamin has used
it for harmful purposes, or when termination is deemed to be in the
best interest of the community. The amn normally terminates when
its period is expired or when the mustamin leaves the Muslim territory
(i.e. Dr al-Islmas was known before the advent of nation state). If he
or she wanted to return to Dr al-Islm, he or she would need to obtain
another amn.533 The dhimmis and mustamins lose all claim to protection and their status is revoked in the following two situations: 1) when
they leave the Muslim state and go over to the enemies, and 2) when they
openly revolt against the Muslim government and try to sabotage it.534
The majority of Muslim jurists have held that it is not permissible to
compel a dhimm or a mustamin to profess Islam. As for the belligerent
(arb) who is actively at war with the Muslims, although the majority
307
05/07/2013 15:21
have held forced conversion permissible in their case, the preferred view
is that of a minority group of jurists who considered it impermissible
to compel anyone into Islam. Wahbah al-Zuhayli and Abd al-Wahhab
Khallaf, who discussed both these views also considered the latter as
preferable. For there is clearly a difference between the permissibility of
fighting the arbs to repel their aggression and mischief, and compelling or subjugating any of them to embrace Islam. This would be unreasonable as it cannot lead to a valid outcome.535
The wife, under the fiqh rules, automatically acquires the citizenship of the country of her husband. Thus if a non-Muslim alien woman
marries a Muslim or even a non-Muslim citizen of the Muslim state,
she becomes the citizen of that state. The husband on the other hand
does not acquire the status of his wife. This would mean that when a
non-Muslim alien marries a woman who is the subject of a Muslim
state, he does not automatically become the subject of that state. But
the husband may apply for naturalisation which the authorities may
grant. Muslim jurists have not suggested a probationary period, but it
is a discretionary matter for the government to determine whether the
applicant should reside for a certain period and have a clean record of
upright conduct during that time as a prerequisite for conferment of
citizenship status.536 Having discussed the fiqh position on dhimmis, I
now briefly discuss the impact of historical developments and the extent
to which they affect the legal status of the ahl al-dhimmah.
From Dhimm to Muwtin

. (Compatriot):
An Historical Sketch
As already noted, dhimm is a derivative of dhimmah, a contract that is
concluded between two parties. It is not an enactment or ukm of sharah
of permanent standing, and has no independent existence unless it is
created by the contracting parties. Dhimmah comes into existence when
the parties to it are in existence. In historical terms the dhimmah came to
an end, as Salim el-Awa has rightly observed, with the onset of colonial rule
in the Muslim lands, because the original parties who entered the covenant
of dhimmah no longer existed, hence in juristic terms neither the dhimmah
nor its bearer, the dhimm, existed any longer. This was because the western
colonial state did not apply the regime of dhimmah and no dhimm status
308
05/07/2013 15:21
could therefore be said to exist as of that time. The whole concept of dhimmah has therefore been replaced and substituted by the new legal regime of
muwanah (citizenship) that came into being under the laws and constitutions of the newly independent Muslim state.537 Although Muslim jurists
have identified dhimmah as a permanent contract, that provision takes
for granted its valid conclusion in the first place; it cannot exist, in other
words, unless it is concluded in the first place, and it comes to an end and
is dissolved under certain conditions which the jurists have also specified.
Muwanah, on the other hand, is not a contract, rather it is a
permanent status consisting of a relationship between a person and
a place that gives rise to certain rights and obligations. Muwanah
inheres in a person by the fact of birth and residence which need not
be created through an agreement with another party. It comes into
being, in other words, when its grounds are present, without which
it would not exist. Muwanah in the sense of a legal relationship is
not a new concept as its origins can be traced back to the time of the
Prophet Muhammad U when it was for the first time created under the
Constitution of Medina. The Prophet signed this document with the
residents of Medina and those who migrated from Mecca to Medina.
The non-Muslim parties who ratified this document consisted of Jews
and pagans, and the document that was signed as a result was a constitutional instrument that articulated the rights and responsibilities of
the citizens, or the muwinn, of Medina. The Constitution of Medina
regulated the relations between the newly created Islamic government
under the Prophets leadership and the citizens of that state, both
Muslim and non-Muslim. The muwanah that was created as a result
was not based in any particular religion.538 For this was a constitution
and not a bilateral contract which articulated the structure of relations
in the Medinan society under its new government.
The contract of dhimmah that Muslim jurists later formalised was
neither uniform nor well defined. The dhimmah contract that was defined
and articulated in fiqh manuals was basically a creation of necessity of the
times of conquest. Each time the Muslim rulers conquered a territory,
they had to deal with two groups of people, one of whom accepted the
new religion and acquired the same rights and duties as the Muslims
enjoyed themselves. The second group was those who chose to retain
309
05/07/2013 15:21
their religion; the Muslim rulers acquired responsibility to adjudicate

their disputes and protect their rights and properties. It was in response
to this need that Muslim jurists constructed the contract of dhimmah in
line, more or less, with the agreement that the Prophet had concluded
with the Christians of Najran and the people of Bahrain.539 To these
prototypes the Muslim rulers added provisions as they deemed necessary in the light of circumstances in each particular locality and case.
Basically the Muslim rulers entered provisions that recognised the religious freedom of the conquered people and a certain protection of their
rights. But they also imposed a poll tax which was payable once a year at a
rate similar to that of zakh (poor tax). Non-Muslims were exempt from
payment of zakh, but were instead required to jizyah at an equivalent
rate. But even these basic provisions were adjusted at times when such
seemed appropriate under the circumstancesas discussed below.
Early Muslim rulers have at times entered dhimmah agreements
which eliminated the jizyah altogetheras in the agreement entered
during the time of the second caliph Umar with the Turkish tribe of
Jarajimah which welcomed the Muslim forces and declared its dislike
of the Romans, but stipulated that its members be allowed to remain
Christian; this was agreed. The tribe also agreed to help the Muslims in
the event of any military engagement with the Romans. The Muslim
party agreed in return to protect the tribe and also relieved its members
from payment of jizyah.
A similar example of a variant dhimmah arrangement was the peace
agreement that the Muslims signed with the people of Cyprus, who
did not offer resistance. In return the Muslim party agreed not to levy
the jizyah on them. Another example of this was the agreement that
Amr b. al-s, Caliph Umars governor, signed with the Copts of Egypt
when his forces besieged and eventually conquered Egypt. There was no
mention of jizyah in the treaty that was subsequently signed.540
When the Muslim forces entered Jerusalem in the time of the caliph
Umar, its Christian residents refused to surrender the key to its fortress
except to the caliph himself, on the condition that no Jewish settlers
would be allowed to reside in their area. The caliph wrote them a letter
and agreed to their proposed conditions and also granted them safe
conduct without imposing any jizyah.541
310
05/07/2013 15:21
It is worth mentioning that dhimmah provided a formula by which

the Muslim conquerors established a pattern of relations with the people
they ruled, but there was considerable variation in the terms of the particular agreements that were subsequently negotiated and concluded.542
Dhimmis as Equal Citizens

Then came the era of struggle for independence from western colonialism
and the many long years of confrontation that followed. The anti-colonialist campaign was conducted with the participation of all the muwinn in
the former colonies; Muslims and non-Muslims struggled side by side and
all made sacrifices. When they won that campaign and gained independence for their homelands, they sought to regulate their national life through
a national charter and constitution. One of the major gains of this struggle
that was articulated in many of their constitutions was equality before the
law for all citizens. This development was not dissimilar perhaps to what
led to the signing of the Constitution of Medina during the Prophets lifetime, under which , as earlier noted, all the signatories, including the Jews
of course, were accorded equal status.
The dhimmah as a contract and a legal instrument came to an end
with the colonial domination of Muslim lands. After the collapse of
colonialism a new state was formed which was not a successor to any
of the previous regimesneither to the colonial state, nor to the Islamic
state that might have existed preceding it. The dhimm status also terminated as a result. The non-Muslims that live in Muslim communities
today are people who have fought for their country and continue to
defend it through participation in the army and security forces. There
is consequently no dhimmah in the Muslim state of today, as it has to
all intents and purposes been replaced by muwanah (citizenship) and
the entitlement as a result of all to equal rights and obligations without
any discrimination. Under its concept of ratiocination (tall), which
is concerned with the ratio decidendi and effective cause (illah) of the
rules (akm) of shariah, a rational ukm collapses when the illah on
which it stands also collapses and the ukm in question may then be
substituted with another as the new situation may indicate.543
With reference to Egypt, Tariq al-Bishri has underscored the common
cause of the Egyptian nation by recounting the events of the liberation
311
05/07/2013 15:21
movement in the late nineteenth century. Slogans such as Egypt for

the Egyptians and brotherhood of compatriots came from the pens
of al-ahtawi and others. When the National Homeland Party (al-izb
al-waan al-ahl) was formed on the eve of the Urbiyyah revolution in
1879, it was stipulated in section five of its manifesto that Christians and
Jews and everyone who protects Egypt and speaks its language may join
this party, which shall not look at their differences of creed, knowing that
they are all brethren and have equal rights in politics and legislation.544
This was an eminently egalitarian call, one that united all Egyptians
for the defence and liberation of their homeland, charting out the
formation of a national society based on the historical experience of its
people. This was not a sudden development but an historical pattern
which was put to the test once again by developments in post-World
War One years where two types of identity for Egypt were commonly
debated. People talked of an Islamic community within the framework
of the Ottoman Caliphate, just as they talked about the Egyptian society and nation as a smaller unit in its own right. The question typically
posed was whether the one took priority over the other. The answer
clearly emerged in favour of the Egyptian nation and society, due in
large measure to the national campaign against British colonialism.545
Situations in Egypt and elsewhere in the Muslim world were also
influenced by developments in the Ottoman Empire. Legal reforms
under the Ottomans were first introduced under the Tanzimat, which
culminated in the two imperial edicts of 1839 and 1856 as discussed
earlier. Promulgated under European pressure, they established equality before the law for all the sultans subjects. In Egypt, the jizyah was
abolished by the Khedive Said in 1855, followed in 1856 by a large
scale recruitment of Copts into military service. Fifty years later, the
Revolution of 1919 seemed to signal the victory of equality and national
unity over religious segregation and communalism.
The principle of equality was soon after enshrined in the Egyptian
Constitution of 1923 which proclaimed Islam as the official religion, but
which stopped short of establishing the rule of sharah as the applied
law of the land. Nor did this constitution provide for a system of proportional representation for non-Muslim minorities. This was the opposite
of the Lebanese experience where the administrative system was based
312
05/07/2013 15:21
on proportional representation, which had the negative effect, however,

of boosting communalism (ifiyyah) that led to a civil war in the 1950s.
Although right up to the time of Egypts formal independence in 1922,
Copts continued to fulfil important functions in the administration and
economy as well as in the cultural sphere, they had either been discredited because of their association with the occupying power, or else
brought into controversy with the new Egyptian Islamic middle class.546
Conclusion
I may bring this essay to a close by quoting Muhammad al-Talibi, who
criticised the late Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeinis treatise, al-ukmah
al-Islmiyyah (Islamic government), which advocated the return of dhimmah and kharj (land tax based on differentiation between Muslims and
non-Muslims) to be imposed on non-Muslims. Talibi posed the question:
which dhimmah is it that one can talk about in todays conditions? What
about the forty percent of the worlds Muslims who live under the rule of
non-Islamic governments? Should they also be given a reciprocal treatment and considered as dhimmis under non-Muslim rule? And then the
question over the factual determination of this statusas to who is under
whose protectionarises in countries such as Lebanon and Israel. It is an
irony of our time that in todays world and in the context of the prevailing balance of economic and military power that the Muslims are the real
dhimmis.547 To talk therefore of dhimmah, jizyah and kharj is to turn
away from reality. We now live in the era of human rights and it is in this
context that the Muslims should see themselves in their own societies and
regulate their relations with the non-Muslims on precisely the same basis.
Although al-Talibi has not said it, a fiqhi justification for this view
can be sought under the reciprocal treatment formula. Relations with
foreign powers and non-Muslim-majority countries are thus to be
conducted under the Islamic law guideline of mumalah bil-mithl (lit.
like for like treatment) provided it does not entail engagement in any
unlawful activities.
The vast majority of present-day Muslim countries have introduced
new constitutions in the post-colonial period, which generally uphold
the principles of equality and government under the rule of law. The
structure of relations among Muslim and non-Muslim citizens in these
313
05/07/2013 15:21
countries are now governed by their existing constitutional guidelines,

which on the whole, prescribe equal rights and duties for all citizens.
Hence those parts of the fiqh rules that differentiated among citizens
based on the religion of their following would be hard to justify under
the new constitutions. Thus it is proposed that human dignity, equality
and justice should now replace those differentiations, as these principles have, in any case, a stronger grounding in the broader structure of
Islamic values and textual injunctions of the Quran and Sunnah.
314
05/07/2013 15:21
hypocrites were those who pretended to be Muslims but were

in fact not and were just waiting for an opportunity to hurt the
Muslims from withinsee Srat Al-Munfiqn (63)) without being
declarations of war as such;
I) in fact condemning or at least eschewing combat in that context;
and/or
J) specifically urging forbearance and patience, and not war.
There are also verses that do not relate to war as such and are in fact:
K) prescribing capital punishment for murder or other capital offences.
In what follows, we systematically go through all the passages in
the Quran that seem to enjoin or permit war, and show that these
verses are all in fact conditioned by the principles of self-defence, of
justice, of proportionality, of preferring peace to war and above all by
mercyeven whilst enjoining Muslims to win the wars they have no
choice but to fight.
(The capital letters in the Notes column relate to the explanations above.)
War Verses
Verses With
Conditions
2: 54
2: 54
F; K.
2: 856
2: 84
F; I.
2: 178
2: 1789
2:191; 1934
2: 190; 1923
2: 2168
2: 217
A; B.
2: 2446
2: 246
A; F.
Notes
K: Lex Talionis: this verse does

not relate to war but to murder.
A; C; D.
410
05/07/2013 15:21
APPENDIX
THE CONDITIONS NECESSARY FOR JUST WAR
IN THE HOLY QURAN
War and combat require specific conditions in the Holy Quran, without
which they are completely forbidden and illegitimate. Indeed, every single
passage in the Quran which contains an injunction or permission for
Muslims to wage a war or combat is immediately preceded or followed by
a Quranic verse that:
A) explains that the war is defensive;
B) explains that without war there would be greater death and suffering,
hence implying a just war is the lesser of two evils;
C) enjoins mercy and shows how to fight the war as mercifully as
possible; and/or:
D) urges an end to the war when possible.
Moreover, there are a number of passages that seem to be sanctioning
war but are actually:
E) informing Muslims of the reality, meaning and lessons of what
happened in battles they had already fought (such as Badr, Uhud,
the Trench or Hunayn) without this in itself necessarily constituting
a legal injunction as such to fight in the future;
F) merely relating the stories of previous nations (usually the Children
of Israel) and their wars, whichsince they do not have the same
sacred laws as Islamdo not apply to Muslims except by way of
parable;
G) merely enjoining a struggle (this is the actual meaning of jihad
in Arabic) against unbelief and hypocrisy without this meaning
physical combat as such;
H) warnings or predictions to the unbelievers or hypocrites (the
409
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
2: 2501; 253
2: 251
B; F: This passage follows on

from the last one and thus A
applies here as well.
3: 123
3: 12
H.
3: 111
3: 111
A.
3: 1289; 134
E: These verses refer to the Battle

of Badr (2 AH/ 624 CE). In addition, verses 3:1289 hold out the
promise of Gods forgiveness. J:
v.134 commends forgiving and
restraining oneself from anger.
3: 13980
3: 149
B; E: It is to be noted also that

this long passage in Srat l
Imrn refers A: mostly to a
defensive battle that has already
occurredthe Battle of Uhud (3
AH/625 CE)and that whilst it
encourages Muslims to keep up
the fight (vv. 13948; 1501;
15663), and explains that it is
to be viewed as a trial from God
(vv. 1403; 1667; 179), it should
be borne in mind that this battle
was a defensive one.
4: 66
4: 66
G.
3: 12134
4: 71104
4: 75; 86; 90; 94
This long passage touches on

many important subjects, not
merely war. A: The defensive
justification for war is in verse 4:
75. C: in verse 4: 90; D: in verses
4: 86 and 94.
411
05/07/2013 15:21
War Verses
Verses With
Conditions
4: 141
4: 141
Notes
E.
5: 2
I: verse 5:2 commands Muslims

not to commit aggression even
though their religious freedom
has been prohibited.
5: 89
5: 89
I; C: 5: 8 commands Muslims
to be just to their enemies even
when they have cause to hate
them.
5: 11
5: 11
B; E.
5: 216
5: 216
F.
5: 334
5: 334
C; K: verse 5:33 prescribes capital punishment for war crimes;

5: 34 offers amnesty.
5: 2
412
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
5: 45
8: 119; 3949;
5675
5: 45
F: K: Lex Talionis, but this

verse merely states that it was
prescribed in the Torah.
8: 26; 30; 39; 61;

70-71.
The name of this surah is

Al-Anfl (The Spoils of War)
and it is largely about the Battle
of Badr. E: in verses: 713; 17;
414; 6771. The surah contains
at least four injunctions to
fight (12; 15; 16; 39), and also a
commandment to prepare for
war (60) and to undertake war
even against superior numbers
(656).
A: All of the above is mitigated
by verses 26 and 30, which make
it clear that the war in question
is a defensive war. Furthermore,
A and D: Verses 19 and 39 make
it clear that war will end when
Muslims are no longer religiously persecuted. D: Verse 61
commands Muslims to make
peace if they are offered it. Most
remarkable of all, verse 45 spiritualises war and makes its very
prosecution dependent on the
remembrance of God. C: Verses
701 hold out the promise of
amnesty for prisoners of war.
413
05/07/2013 15:21
War Verses
9: 129
Verses With
Conditions
Notes
9: 2; 4; 6; 13
This surah (Al-Tawbah, Repentance) is the only surah in the

whole Quran which does not
start with the Divine Names of
Mercy (al-Ramn, al-Ram)
and perhaps the most warlike.
Verse 5 is commonly thought
of as the Sword Verse declaring
jihad. Verses 1112 also reiterate
the commandment to fight. D:
However, verse 5like verse
11also offers peace for those
who repent from waging war on
Muslims, and verse 29 implies
an end to war after surrender
of the enemy. C: verses 15 give
fair warning of the beginning of
hostilities and offer temporary
truces. A: It is above all verse
13 which makes clear that the
war is in self-defence and that
after the enemy not only started
the war, but also broke a truce
thereafter. E: Verses 245 are
about the Battle of Hunayn (in
Taif, 8AH/630 CE).
414
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
9: 3847
9: 734
9: 8896
9: 1112
9: 40
These verses call for war, but A:

Verse 40 makes it clear that the
unbelievers had started hostilities by attempting to kill the
Prophet U and by forcing him
(and the Muslim community)
out of Mecca.
9: 74
These verses contain a

commandment to fight the
unbelievers and the hypocrites,
but the verses which follow
(75-87) show K: that the fight
was against treason and betrayal
within Medina. C: Verse 74 also
holds out the promise of forgiveness for repentance.
9: 95
Verses 8892 encourage and

praise those who fight in Gods
way. E: Verses 936 relate what
happened to Muslims in their
recent struggles. D: Verse 95
allows for a cessation in the
fighting.
9: 112
Verse 111 promises paradise for

those who are martyred. C: verse
112 shows that there are limits
in warfare.
415
05/07/2013 15:21
Verses With
Conditions
Notes
9: 11723
9: 123
E: Verses 1178 relate to past

fighting. Verses 11921 promise
reward for fighting in Gods way.
Verse 122 is another remarkable
verse because it values learning above fighting even during
wartime. A: Verse 123 orders
fighting against those enemies
who are close (only).
16: 126
16: 126
J; C.
17: 58
17: 58
F.
17: 33
17: 33
I.
18: 745
Explained by 18:
65; 802.
F; K.
18: 868
18: 868
F; K.
War Verses
416
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
22: 3840
These verses are the most

important verses in the Quran
related to war because they are
the first verses that allowed the
Muslims to fight (according to
all the commentariessee Tafsr
al-abar and Tafsr al-Qurub).
They must be cited in full: Indeed
God protects those who believe.
Indeed God does not love the
treacherous, the ungrateful. /
Permission [to fight] is granted
to those who have been attacked
because they have been wronged.
And God is truly able to help them;
/ those who were expelled from
their homes without right, only
because they said: Our Lord is
God. Were it not for Gods causing
some people to drive back others,
destruction would have befallen
the monasteries, and churches,
and synagogues, and mosques in
which Gods Name is mentioned
greatly. Assuredly God will help
those who help Him. God is truly
Strong, Mighty (Al-ajj, 22:38
40). After ten years of religious
persecution, torture, murder and
banishment, and an assassination
attempt on the Prophet U himself
in Mecca, in 622 CE the Prophet
U and the Muslim community
emigrated one by one to the city
of Yathrib (Medina).
22: 3940
417
05/07/2013 15:21
War Verses
22: 3840
Verses With
Conditions
Notes
22: 3940
(This event marks the start of

the Islamic calendar). From
Medina, the Muslims were
finally allowed by God to defend
themselves. The first Caliph Abu
Bakr Al-Siddiq W said: [When
I first heard this verse {v.39}] I
knew there would be combat,
and it was the first to be revealed
[about combat] (Tabari). These
verses are remarkable because
they show that a just war in Islam
depends on: (1) being attacked
first; (2) being wronged (and
having been patient); (3) being
expelled from ones homes
and land; (4) being religiously
persecuted merely for belief in
God; and (5) having ones holy
places (or the holy places of
Jews and Christians) destroyed.
Also, the fact that God grants
permissionand does not
merely give a commandment to
fightshows that fighting is an
exceptional state which requires
a Divine exemption or special
permission, and is thus not the
preferred state of affairs. Hence
this also shows that war may
only be declared by the legitimate authority and ruler.
418
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
22: 5860
22: 60
D; C.
22: 78; see also

25:52
G: This verse calls for real jihad,

but the commentators (see
Tabari) on this verse are split as
to whether the jihad in question
is a moral jihad (as suggested by
the previous verse and by verse
25:52 where the great jihad is
teaching the Quran) or physical
war. The context and remainder
of the verse suggest the former.
25: 52
25: 52
G: This is the verse of the great

jihad: So do not obey the disbelievers, but struggle against them
(jhidhum) therewith with a
great jihad. (Al-Furqn, 25:52).
However, the great jihad is not
physical combat but the moral
jihad using the Quran. Thus
the Prophet U said: We have
returned from the Lesser Holy
War (al-Jihad al-Aghar) to the
Greater Holy War (al-Jihad
al-Akbar). When asked what
the Greater Holy War was, he
replied: [It is] the war against the
ego [nafs]. (Ahmad bin Hussein
Al-Bayhaqi, Kitb al-Zuhd, vol.
2, p. 165, no. 373).
26: 226
26: 226
A.
27: 1828
27: 1828
F.
22: 78
419
05/07/2013 15:21
War Verses
Verses With
Conditions
Notes
29: 6
29: 6
G: This verse mentions jihad (for

the soul), but like verse 25: 52, it
is a peaceful jihad that is meant.
29: 8
29: 8
I; G: This verse mentions a

peaceful jihad (struggle) but
against Muslims, which they are
to resist peacefully.
29: 10
29: 10
F.
29: 69
29: 69
I: This verse mentions a peaceful jihad (struggle) but against

Muslims which they are to resist
peacefully, like 29: 69.
30: 26
30: 26
F.
31: 5
I: This verse mentions a peaceful jihad (struggle) but against

Muslims which they are to resist
peacefully, like 29: 69.
33: 927
33: 927
E: These verses are about what

happened in the Battle of the
Trench (Al-Khandaq) in 5
AH/627 CE.
33: 601
33: 601
H.
31: 5
420
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
42: 3943
47: 4; 7
47: 203
42: 3943
A: verse 39; verses 412. C and

D: verse 40. J: verse 43. These
verses summarise the Qurans
attitude to war, and it is significant that they are from the
Meccan periodthat is to say,
after war had already started
(they are cited at the end of this
text).
47: 1; 32; 34
This whole surah (Srat

Muammad) has work or
deeds (amal) as its central
theme, and indeed the word and
its derivatives are mentioned at
least nine times in the surah (the
surah has 38 verses in total). Part
of work (amal) can be combat
and verses 4, and 7 call for this.
However, A: verses 47: 1, 32, 34
make it clear that combat occurs
only after religious persecution.
Verse 4, C: orders humane treatment of prisoners of war and
either ransom or amnesty after
war.
47: 1; 32; 34
These verses (47: 20-23) are

about reactions to the Qurans
orders to fight but again they
relate to A: verses 47: 1, 32, 34.
421
05/07/2013 15:21
Verses With
Conditions
Notes
47: 1; 32; 34
These verses (47:25; 315)

encourage combat, and verse
35 calls on the believers not to
slacken or be fainthearted in war
and cry for peace whilst they are
winning, but again they relate to
A: verses 47: 1, 32, 34.
48: 17
48: 17
E: These verses (48: 17) refer to

the Pact of Hudaybiyyah (6 AH/
628 CE), when the Prophet U
and the Muslims went unarmed
to Mecca and were turned back
by their enemies, but made a
pact with them so that they could
return on pilgrimage the following year. God refers to this as a
clear triumph in verse 1, and it
is this triumph that is referred to
in the name of this Surah (Srat
Al-Fat).
48: 157
48: 157
H: These verses warn the hypocrites amongst the Bedouins.
48: 1828
48: 1828
E: These verses refer to the events

around Hudaybiyyah, and (vv.
1821; 27) predict future victory
and the fall of Mecca (which
happened in 10 AH/630 CE).
49: 910
49: 910.
C: verse 9. D: verse 10.
War Verses
47: 25; 315
422
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
54: 445
54: 44
H. At the Battle of Badr the

Prophet U recalled verse 45.
58: 5
58: 5
A.
58: 20-21
58: 22
A.
58: 22
E. Al-Razi mentions in his

Great Commentary (Maft
al-Ghayb) that that Ibn Abbas
W said that this verse commends
Abu Ubaydah W at the Battle of
Uhud, and Ali W, Abu Bakr W
and Umar ibn al-Khattab W at
the Battle of Badr.
59: 27
E: verses 27; C: 3. These verses

describe the struggle (in 4 AH/
626 CE) with the Jewish tribe
of Banu Nadir in Medina who
betrayed the Muslims and tried
to kill the Prophet U. Verse 5
is sometimes misinterpreted to
permit the cutting down of palm
trees (and thus scorched earth
tactics), but in fact it permits
only the cutting of the date stalks
(lnah)that is to say, of the
dates themselves, without ruining future crops.
58: 22
59: 27
423
05/07/2013 15:21
Verses With
Conditions
Notes
59: 115
59: 115
H: verses114; E: verse15. These

verses describe the struggle (in
4 AH/626 CE) with Banu Nadir
of Medina who betrayed the
Muslims and tried to kill the
Prophet U.
60: 18
60: 78
A.
War Verses
61: 4
61: 4
H: This verse commends a

manner of fighting in solid lines
once there is a war, but does not
itself call for war.
61: 813
60: 8
A: 60: 8
63: 8
63: 8
A; H.
66: 9
66: 9
G.
73: 20
73: 20
H.
100: 15
100: 15
H: These verses merely mention

charging horses and imply their
awesomeness.
105: 15
105: 15
F; I.
424
05/07/2013 15:21
Appendix
n.b.: There are a total of 114 surahs (chapters) in the Quran (of
uneven length) with 6236 verses in total.

In addition to all these conditions forand limitations ofwar
in the Quran, there are also a number of other verses in the Quran
that condemn murder and violence. These include the following: l
Imrn, 3:212; Al-Nis, 4:2930 (hell is promised for murder); 4:923
(hell is promised for murder); 4:155; Al-Midah, 5:71; 5:2732 (5:32
mentions that God decreed in the Torah that murder of one soul is like
killing all souls, and saving one soul is like saving all souls); Al-Anm,
6:137; 6:140; 6:152 (6:1512 resemble the Ten Commandments);
Al-Isr, 17:33; Al-Mumtaanah, 60:12; Al-Burj, 85:10 et al.
Thus, as will clearly be seen from all the above, the Quran categorically:
1) condemns all forms of murder;
2) does not enjoin or permit war except in self-defence (and selfdefence is conditional upon [A] being attacked first; [B] being
wronged (and having been patient); [C] being expelled from
ones homes and land; [D] being religiously persecuted merely
for belief in God; and [E] having ones holy placesor the
holy places of Jews and Christiansdestroyed);
3) gives fair warning before hostilities;
4) respects agreements and truces and protects those who have
made agreements and truces;
5) does not permit or enjoin war on other religious communities
simply because they have different religious beliefs and
6) does not force opponents to convert to Islam;
7) protects non-Muslim holy sites (and hence also their
occupants);
8) does not enjoin or permit total war or scorched earth tactics
or the destruction of livestock and the environment;
9) does not allow killing of civilians or non-combatants, and
especially protects clergy, women, children, the elderly or the
infirm;
10) wages legitimate war as mercifully as possible and forbids
all unwarranted brutality, even whilst aiming for a military
victory;
425
05/07/2013 15:21
11) orders humane treatment of prisoners of war, including

meeting their essential needs, and their ransoming or exchange
or being set free (if they teach ten Muslims to read or write or
convert to Islam);
12) encourages peace and cessation of hostilities whenever
possible during conflict;
13) regards war as the last option; and
14) makes it clear that only a legitimate ruler of the entire Muslim
community may declare war.
In summary, war sanctioned by God in the Quranthe lesser
jihadis a just and humane war, and it is waged only for morally
justified self-defence and not for religious or ideological conquest.
God says in the Quran:
[A]nd those who, when they suffer aggression defend
themselves: / For the requital of an evil deed is an evil deed
like it. But whoever pardons and reconciles, his reward will
be with God. Truly He does not like wrongdoers. / And whoever defends himself after he has been wronged, for such,
there will be no course [of action] against them. / A course
[of action] is only [open] against those who wrong people
and seek [to commit] in the earth what is not right. For such
there will be a painful chastisement. / But verily he who
is patient and forgivessurely that is [true] constancy in
[such] affairs. (Al-Shr, 3943).
HRH Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, 2013
426
05/07/2013 15:21
NOTES
contents
1
Originally published by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought
as a separate booklet in 2007.
2
Reproduced with the permission of the author and World Wisdom Press.
3
Originally published in Seasons: Semi-annual Journal of Zaytuna Institute,
Spring-Summer Reflections, 2005, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 45-68.
4
Originally published as Body Count by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for
Islamic Thought as a booklet in 2009.
5
Reproduced (and adjusted) from Love in the Holy Quran (Chapters 4, 5,
and 7) by H.R.H. Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad.
6
Reproduced (and adjusted) from Love in the Holy Quran (Ch.17) by H.R.H.
Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad.
7
Originally published by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought
as a booklet entitled Forty Hadith on Divine Mercy in 2007.
introduction
8
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Heart of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity
(New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers Paperback Edition, 2004), p. 256.
9
There are a number of English translations of the Quran; authors in this
volume have not specified which they have used, and indeed in some cases may
have provided their own translations. Some have translated the Divine Name
Allah as God, and some have left it as Allahwe have respected this. The
chapter and verse numbers refer to the original Arabic. We have also kept the
authors own preferences as regards modern or archaic English (in translating
the Quran).
10
The Arabic version reads al-mujhidu man jhada nafsahu. See Abd
al-Rahman al-Mubarakfuri, Tufat al-Awazi bi-Shar Jmi al-Tirmidh,
edited by Abd al-Rahman Uthman (Cairo: Maktabaat al-Marifah, n.d), hadith
no. 1671.
11
Ibn Majah, Sunan Ibn Mjah, Kitb al-fitan, bb al-amr bil-marf, hadith
no. 4011.
12
Muslim, Mukhtaar a Muslim, edited by Nasir al-Din al-Albani
(Kuwait (several editions)), p. 469, hadith no. 1756.
427
05/07/2013 15:21

13
Bukhari, a al-Bukhr, hadith no. 2957.

The second and the third categories, namely of jihad against the unbeliever and the hypocrites refer primarily to the idolaters (mushrikn) of
Mecca, and the hypocrites (munfiqn) of Medina respectively. There is
ample evidence in the sources, as the book before us expounds, to the effect
that no jihad may be waged to compel anyone into embracing Islam.
15
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Zd al-Maad min Huda Khayr al-Ibad, as
quoted in Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, Principles of leadership in War and
peace (2004) at www.islamicsupremecouncil.org/legal_rulings/Jihad/jihadwithadditions.pdf. A similar classification of jihad has been advanced by Ibn
Rushd al-Kabir in al-Muqaddimat al-Mumahhidt.
16
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Heart Of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity,
p.262.
17
Ali A Mazrui, The Ethics of War and Rhetorics of Politics: the West and
the Rest, 2 Islamic millennium Journal (2002), p.1.
18
Quoted by Anicee Van Engeland-Nourai, The Challenge of Fragmentation
of International Humanitarian Law in Bassiouni, ed., Jihad and its Challenges,
p. 147; see also Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Heart of Islam, p. 263.
19
Quoted by Anicee Nourai, The Challenge of Fragmentation, p. 148.
20
Nasr, The Heart of Islam, p. 263.
21
Nikkie R. Kiddie, The Revolt of Islam1700 to 1993 in Bryan S.
Turner, ed., Islam: Critical Concepts in Sociology (Oxford: Routledge, 2003),
vol. 2, p. 89.
14
chapter
22
What is meant by manifest coercion is coercion through physical force

such as iron and fire; what is meant by surreptitious coercion is perceptible
miracles to which one submits.
23
This is different from his responsibility, and that of the caliphs who
followed him, to carry out Gods shariah within the Ummah (Muslim
community).
24
The jizyah is not, as some think, a sum paid in exchange for life or
the right to refuse conversion to Islam. It is, as we have said, a symbol that
signifies yielding, the desistance from warfare and impeding the dawah and
a token of participation in the affairs of the state in return for the protection
of life and property. On page 35 of Kitb al-Kharj, Abu Yusuf writes: After
Abu Ubaydah concluded a peace treaty with the people of Syria and had
collected from them the jizyah and the tax for agrarian land (kharj), he was
informed that the Romans were readying for battle against him and that the
situation had become critical for him and the Muslims. Abu Ubaydah then
wrote to the governors of the cities with whom pacts had been concluded
428
05/07/2013 15:21
Notes
that they must return the sums collected from jizyah and kharj and say to
their subjects: We return to you your money because we have been informed
that troops are being raised against us. In our agreement you stipulated that
we protect you, but we are unable to do so. Therefore, we now return to you
what we have taken from you, and we will abide by the stipulation and what
has been written down, if God grants us victory over them.
25
Some people whose intent is to disparage Islam do not go beyond a
superficial interpretation of the verse: ... fight those of the disbelievers who are
near to you .... They claim that Islam orders Muslims to fight unbelievers in
general until they convert to Islam whether they commit aggression or not.
They also claim that Islamic law (shariah) decrees this. The truth is that what
is meant by the word disbelievers in this verse and others is the warring
polytheists who fought the Muslims, aggressed against them, expelled them
from their homes, took their property and spread sedition among people
regarding their faith. The morals of these polytheists have been described in
the opening verses of Srat Al-Tawbah.
Further, what is meant by the word people in the hadith: I have been
ordered to fight the people should be understood in the same manner. For
according to consensus (ijm) on this hadith, warfare must cease if the enemies
are Arab polytheists. As for other enemies, the war against them must cease on
the condition that they pay the jizyah tribute, readily being subdued. Thus,
these verses are in agreement and there is no contradiction between the Holy
Quran and the Hadith and the aforementioned false allegation is dropped.
26
These verses warn against violating treaties or conducting them in a
manner in which one or both parties are not left feeling secure. The verses
also warn against remaining under the mercy of a power that does not know
peace or justice. They also warn against using treaties as an artful means to
take advantage of the weak, who are compelled by circumstances to consent
to them. History has proven that treaties conducted under these circumstances
are ultimately corrupt and end badly. God says in the Holy Quran: And do
not make your oaths a [means of] deceit between you lest a foot should slip after
being steady, and [lest] you should taste evil, forasmuch as you barred [people]
from the way of God, and there be a tremendous chastisement for you. (Al-Nal:
16:94). Compare then the teachings of these verses with the treaties conducted
by modem nations which have ended up being disastrous to the world.
chapter
27
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/
terror02_05. Scroll to the bottom for a chronological list commencing in
1980. Access date: 1 April 2011.
28
Muslims make up 23 percent of the worlds 6.8 billion humans. See the
429
05/07/2013 15:22

Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, Mapping the Global Muslim Population:
A Report on the Size and Distribution of the Worlds Muslim Population
(Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, October 2009), p. 1. Cf.:
http://pewforum.org/Mapping-the-Global-Muslim-Population.aspx. Access
date: 1 April 2011.
29
The King James Version of the Holy Bible contains 788,280 words: 609,269
in the Old Testament and 179,011 in the New Testament. Cf.: http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.htm
30
Mapping the Global Muslim Population.
31
The very first word revealed to Muhammad was Iqr, which means recite
and the word Qurn itself originates from the root word Qaraa, which means
to read out or to recite.
32
The title of Mr Spencers most controversial bestseller is: The Truth about
Muhammad, Founder of the Worlds Most Intolerant Religion (Washington, DC:
Regnery Press, 2006). Spencers other books include: Islam Unveiled: Disturbing
Questions about the Worlds Fastest Growing Faith (New York: Encounter Books,
2002); The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law treats Non-Muslims
(New York: Prometheus Books, 2005); The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam
(And the Crusades) (Regnery, 2005); Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and
Islam Isnt (Regnery, 2007).
33
Cf. the published works, journalism and Internet articles of Daniel Pipes,
Benny Morris, David Horowitz, Bernard Lewis, Sam Harris, David Bukay and
David Pryce-Jones, among others. I need to make my position clear. As a liberal
and an academic I strongly support the liberal arts education model and the
enhanced societal contributions made by critically educated minds. At the heart
of my philosophy lies a passionate belief in the value of dialogue and debate. I
therefore do not challenge the right of these scholars and pundits publicly to
express their concerns about Islam, even though I do not share them.
34
There are numerous English-language translations of the Quran which give
slightly different wordings, but the translation that I consider most reliable, easiest to read and closest to the meaning of the Arabic text is: Shaykh-ul-Islam Dr
Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri, The Holy Quran (English Translation / Irfan-ulQuran), 2009 edn (Lahore: Minhaj-ul-Quran International, 2006). Ialso recommend the readability and reliability of Maulana Wahiduddin Khans translation, The Quran (New Delhi: Goodword, 2009). Another very popular modern
translation is the so-called Wahhabi translation: Dr Muhammad Muhsin Khn
and Dr Muhammad Taq-ud-Din Al-Hill, Interpretation of the Meanings of
the Noble Qurn in the English Language: A Summarised Version of At-Tabar,
Al-Qurtub and Ibn Kathr with Comments from Sahh Al-Bukhr: Summarised
in One Volume (Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996. Revised edition 2001). It must be
pointed out, however, that this easy-to-read translation has not been immune
from criticism, particularly with regard to many interpolations that seem to
430
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
provide a deliberately negative portrayal of Christians and Jews. For that reason
I do not use it, and I believe others should read it, should they wish, with this
caveat in mind. Cf. Khaleel Mohammed, Assessing English Translations of the
Quran, Middle East Quarterly, vol. 12 no. 2 (Spring 2005), pp. 5972.
35
Jizyah was a tax levied by the Islamic state on non-Muslims. In return they
gained exemption from military service and guarantees of safety within the state.
This taxation arrangement, essentially a type of tribute, was a pre-Islamic practice
merely continued by the Muslims. Cf. Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the
Law of Islam (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1955), p. 178.
36
Cf. Ibid., pp. 96, 163; Majid Khadduri, The Islamic Conception of Justice
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984), p. 165. Spencer, ed., The
Myth of Islamic Tolerance, pp. 434.
37
Cf. Spencer, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam, p. 28. After negatively
quoting a statement praising Muhammad as a hard fighter and a skillful military
commander, Samuel P. Huntington writes that no one would say this about
Christ or Buddha. He adds that Islamic doctrines dictate war against unbelievers The Koran and other statements of Muslim beliefs contain few prohibitions on violence, and a concept of non-violence is absent from Muslim doctrine
and practice. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World
Order (London: Simon & Schuster, 1996), p. 263.
38
Deuteronomy 7: 13 and 20: 167.
39
Polybius, Histories, XXXVIII.21.
40
Sohail H. Hashmi, ed., Islamic Political Ethics: Civil Society, Pluralism, and
Conflict (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002), p. 196.
41
Srat Sab, 34:28; Al-Zumar, 39:41; and Al-Tawkr, 81:27.
42
Spencer, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam, pp. 246. Cf. also:http://
www.answering-islam.org/Bailey/jihad.html
43
Cf. David Bukay, Peace or Jihad: Abrogation in Islam, in Middle East
Quarterly (Fall 2007), pp. 311, available online at:
http://www.meforum.org/1754/peace-or-jihad-abrogation-in-islam. Access
date: 1 April 2011.
44
Zakaria Bashier, War and Peace in the Life of the Prophet Muhammad
(Markfield: The Islamic Foundation, 2006), pp. viiviii; Khadduri, War and
Peace, p. 105.
45
Bukay, Peace or Jihad, cited above.
46
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html.
Access date: 1 April 2011.
47
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1998.html.
Access date: 1 April 2011.
48
This is clearly the judgement of prominent intellectual Tariq Ramadan. Cf.
his biography, The Messenger: The Meanings of the Life of Muhammad (London:
Penguin, 2007), p. 91.
431
05/07/2013 15:22

49
Bashier, War and Peace, p. 284. An interesting introductory book for

anyone unfamiliar with Islam is Sohaib Nazeer Sultans amusingly titled The
Koran for Dummies (Hoboken: Wiley, 2004). Sultan makes the same point (pp.
278, 281) that the martial verse and the sword and those like it do not abrogate
the more numerous peaceful, tolerant and inclusive verses.
50
Bashier, War and Peace, p. 288.
51
Louay Fatoohi, Jihad in the Quran: The Truth from the Source (Birmingham:
Luna Plena, 2009). Email from Dr Louay Fatoohi to Dr Joel Hayward, 23 August
2010.
52
Muhammad Abu Zahra, Concept of War in Islam (Cairo: Ministry of Waqf,
1961), p. 18, quoted in Hashmi, ed., Islamic Political Ethics, p. 208.
53
Michael Fishbein, trans.,The History of al-Tabar (Trkh al-rusl walmulk): vol. VIII: The Victory of Islam (State University of New York Press,
1997), pp. 1625; Bashier, War and Peace, pp. 2246.
54
Tafsr Ibn Kathr, vol. 4 (Srat Al-Arf to the end of Srat Ynus), (Riyadh:
Darussalam, 2003.), pp. 3715; Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, The Sealed
Nectar: Biography of the Noble Prophet, 2002 edn (Riyadh: Darussalam, 1979),
pp. 3513; Lt. Gen. A. I. Akram, The Sword of Allah: Khalid bin al-Waleed, His
Life and Campaigns (New Delhi: Adam, 2009), pp. 978; Bashier, War and
Peace, pp. 2378, 241.
55
Tafsr Ibn Kathr, vol. 4, p. 371.
56
W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina, 2004 edn (Oxford
University Press, 1956), p. 311; Ibn Kathir, The Life of Muhammad (Karachi:
Darul-Ishaat, 2004), pp. 516, 522; Shaykh Muhammad al-Ghazl, A Thematic
Commentary on the Quran (Herndon: International Institute of Islamic
Thought, 2000), p. 182.
57
Al-Tawbah, 9:6.
58
Tafsr Ibn Kathr, vol. 4, pp. 369ff.; Sayyid Ameenul Hasan Rizvi, Battles
by the Prophet in Light of the Quran (Jeddah: Abul-Qasim, 2002), pp. 12630.
59
Ibn Kathir, Life of Muhammad, pp. 516, 522.
60
Spencer, Religion of Peace?, p. 78.
61
Although Ad-Dahhk bin Muzhim, as quoted by Ismail ibn Kathr (Tafsr
Ibn Kathr, vol. 4, p. 377), sees this as a repudiation of Muhammads pilgrimage
agreements with all pagans, other early sources insist that this was not the case
and that it would have reflected intolerance that Muhammad was not known
to possess. Rizwi Faizer, Expeditions and Battles in Jane Dammen McAuliffe,
ed., Encyclopaedia of the Quran (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2002), vol. II, p. 151.
62
Fatoohi, Jihad in the Quran, p. 34.
63
Hashmi, ed., Islamic Political Ethics, p. 201.
64
Armstrong, Islam, p. 17.
65
This is certainly the view of the influential eighth-century biographer, Ibn
Ishaq: Alfred Guillaume trans., The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn
432
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
Ishaqs Srat Rasl Allh, 1967 edn (Oxford University Press, 1955), p. 212.
For modern writers who agree, see: Fatoohi, Jihad in the Quran, p. 31; Karen
Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet (London: Phoenix, 1991.
2001 edition), p. 168; Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life based on the Earliest
Sources, Islamic Texts Society 2009 edn (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983),
p. 135; Al-Mubarakpuri, The Sealed Nectar, p. 183; Sohail H. Hashmi, Sunni
Islam, in Gabriel Palmer-Fernandez, ed., Encyclopedia of Religion and War
(London: Routledge, 2004), p. 217. Hashmi, ed., Islamic Political Ethics, p. 198.
66
Tafsr Ibn Kathr, vol. 1 (Parts 1 and 2 (Srat Al-Ftihah to verse 252 of
Srat Al-Baqarah)), p. 528.
67
Srat Al-Baqarah, 2:193.
68
Hashmi, ed., Islamic Political Ethics, p. 204.
69
Bukhari, a, 3025, trans. Dr Muhammad Muhsin Khan, vol. 4, 2738
to 3648 (Riyadh: Darussalam, 1997), p. 164; Rizwi Faizer, ed., The Life of
Muhammad: Al-Wqids Kitb al-Maghz (London: Routledge Studies in
Classical Islam, 2010), p. 546.
70
Srat Al-Baqarah, 2:216 and see Al-Shr, 42:41.
71
Al-Baqarah, 2: 217, 2:191 and Al-Nis, 4:758.
72
Bashier, War and Peace, pp. 22933.
73
Ibn Ishaq, p. 553; The History of al-Tabar, vol. VIII, p. 182.
74
75
76
Srat Al-Midah, 5:45.
77
Cf. Al-Baqarah, 2:194.
78
Cf. Al-Shr, 42:403.
79
Cf. Khadduri, War and Peace, pp. 968.
80
Ibid., p. 98.
81
Imam Muhammad Shirazi, War, Peace and Non-violence: An Islamic
Perspective (London: Fountain Books, 2003 ed.), pp. 289.
82
It even applied to the quarrels that the Quran criticises most: those between
different Muslim groups. If one side aggressively transgressed beyond bounds,
the other side was permitted to fight back in self-defence, but only until the
aggressor desisted, at which point war was to end and reconciliation was to
occur. Cf. Al-ujurt, 49:910.
83
Tafsr Ibn Kathr, Volume 1, p. 528.
84
Shirazi, War, Peace and Non-violence, p. 29.
85
Hashmi, ed., Islamic Political Ethics, p. 211; Fred M. Donner, trans.,The
History of al-Tabar (Tarkh al-rusul wal-mulk): vol. X: The Conquest of
Arabia (State University of New York Press, 1993), p. 16.
86
Al-Anm, 6:151; Al-Isr, 17:33; Al-Furqn,25:68.
87
Al-Midah, 5:334.
88
l Imrn, 3:134.
433
05/07/2013 15:22

89

Mathnawi I: 3721ff. published online at: http://www.dar-al-masnavi.org/nI-3721.html
91
Al-ujurt, 49:13. The clause in parentheses is a contextual explanation
by the translator.
92
Fatoohi, Jihad in the Quran, pp. 256.
93
94
This hadith is found in the book Kitb al-Durar al-Muntathira f al-Ahdith
al-Mushtahira by Jalal al-Deen al-Suyuti.
95
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/learn/speeches/speeches-of-winstonchurchill/1940-finest-hour/128-we-shall-fight-on-the-beaches
96
Cf. Chapter V in Khadduri, War and Peace.
97
Karen Armstrong, The True, Peaceful Face of Islam, Time, 23 September
2001, available online at:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101011001-175987,00.html. Access date: 1 April 2011.
90
chapter
98
An archival search of the New York Times for holy war or jihad shows
that this term is still a standard translation of jihad, very often taking the form
jihad, or holy war. Or one can enter the term holy war into a search on Google
News and see that it is still a widespread translation of jihad. Even sympathetic
and responsible authors perpetuate the equation between the two, such as Juan
Cole, Sacred Space and Holy War (I. B. Tauris, 2002). The publishing world is
full of provocative titles such as Peter Bergens Holy War, Inc.: Inside the Secret
World of Osama bin Laden (Free Press, 2002).
99
This phrase even found its way into a speech by the Pope in September
2006, albeit in the form of a quotation from a Byzantine emperor. Though the
Pope said he regretted the reaction, he never disavowed the statement nor did
he apologise for it.
100
This term was even used by President George W. Bush (in a speech before
the National Endowment for Democracy in October 2005), and for a time
became popular with certain right-wing intellectuals and media talking heads,
though it fell out of favour after significant criticism as an empty propaganda
term, having been used to describe people and groups as disparate as Al-Qaeda,
the government of Iran, and Syria. The first is a stateless terrorist group who hate
Shiites, the second is a Shia religious state, and the third is a secular state run
by an Alawite elite ruling over a Sunni majority. The fact that one term means
all these things signifies that it is devoid of any real content. The word fascism
evokes the idea of a malevolent global movement, wherein lies its power as a
buzzword. Writing as far back as 1944, George Orwell, writing for the British
434
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
public, pointed out that the word fascist had become so nebulous and overused
it lacked any precise meaning: Except for the relatively small number of Fascist
sympathisers, almost any English person would accept bully as a synonym for
Fascist. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has
come. Little has changed in the use of this word. It is obvious that the vigilante
rebels of Al-Qaeda have little in common with the military-industrial-state
apparatus that was the core of twentieth century European fascism, possessing
neither a military, industry, or state.
101
Infidel comes from the Latin infidelis meaning unfaithful. As a technical term in the Catholic Church it denoted those who were not baptised, such
as Muslims or Jews. The word kfir literally means to cover and originally
signified a kind of ingratitude, meaning that one covered over the gifts or
blessings one was given. It thus has the sense of denial and rejection. Practically
speaking, it is used in a way similar to infidel, but with one crucial difference:
by and large Muslims did not call non-Muslims kfir unless they were pagan
or atheist. It would be contradictory to call a Jew or Christian a kfir, since
the Quran often calls upon them to follow their own religion more faithfully
(5:66, 5:68). Infidel goes back at least as far as the eleventh century The Song of
Roland (Chanson de Roland), where the infidels are the Muslims in the Holy
Land. It also appears in the King James Version in 2 Corinthians 6:15, And
what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath he that believeth with
an infidel? and 2 Corinthians 6:146 But if any provide not for his own, and
specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than
an infidel. This term is noteworthy because Muslims themselves almost never
use the word infidel to translate kafir (preferring unbeliever, disbeliever,
denier), yet critics of Islam regularly accuse Muslims of this or that view in
relation to infidels. For example, a contemporary convert to Christianity from
Islam, Nonie Darwish, has written a book, Now They Call Me Infidel (Sentinel
HC, 2006). Has anyone actually called her that specific word, or is it her own
translation? The word infidel effectively conjures the emotional impact of this
term as a part of the Wests collective memory, disregarding the fact that the
term has no resonance for a Western Muslim, and means something significantly different from kafir. Another book by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, another former
Muslim, bears the title Infidel (Free Press, 2007), implying that this is the label
she now bears from some undefined group of Muslims. Actually, as an atheist
the Latin-based word infidel more strongly demarks her relationship with
Christianity than with Islam.
102
Often misunderstandings about the Quran can be easily cleared up
by referring to the classical and recognised Quranic commentaries, such as
those of al-Tabari (Jmi al-bayn an tawl yat al-Qurn), Fakhr al-Din
Razi (Maftih al-Ghayb, or al-Tafsr al-Kabr), Ibn Kathir (Tafsir Ibn Kathir),
al-Qur-tubi (al-Jmi li-ahkm al-Qurn), al-Baydawi (Tafsr al-Baydawi),
435
05/07/2013 15:22

al-Zamakhshari (al-Kashshf an aqiq al-Tanzl), and many others who
are well known to the scholarly tradition, and which are our starting point.
Though simply referring to such works is not sufficient in itself to arrive at a
conclusive and binding knowledge of a particular issue, it is worth noting that
many of those who speak about jihad and war never bother to make reference
to the classical commentaries at all.
103
Al-Nasai, Sunan, Kitb al-Bayah, with similar hadith in Ibn Majahs
Sunan, Kitb al-Fitan and in the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Kitb al-Mulhim.
104
Narrated by Daylami, with a similar hadith narrated by Tirmidhi in
his Sunan, Kitb Fail al-Jihad. See Muhammad Said Ramadan al-Buti,
Al-Jihad fl-Islm (Damascus: Dar al- Fikr, 2005) p. 21.
105
Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitb al-Adab.
106
Ibn Kathir relates that many famous early figures of Islam such as Ibn
Abbas, Mujahid, Muqatil ibn Hayyan, Qataadah and others said that this
is the first verse revealed concerning jihad. Tafsir al-Qurn al-Am, vol.3,
(Riyadh: Dar al-Salam, 1998), p.103.
107
Ibid.
108
Ibid.
109
Ibid.
110
The second caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab, had a Christian servant named
Asbaq. When Umar invited him to Islam, the servant refused, to which
Umar replied, quoting the Quran, There is no compulsion in religion, and
then said, Asbaq, if you were to accept Islam I would have entrusted you
with some of the Muslims affairs. In another incident, Umar said to an old
woman who had not accepted Islam, Become Muslim, old woman, become
Muslim. God sent Muhammad with the truth. She replied, I am an old
woman who is close to death. Umar said, Dear God, bear witness! and he
recited: There is no compulsion in religion. (Buti, p. 52)
111
Once a polytheist asked Ali if they would be killed if one of them were
to come to the Prophet with some need or to hear the Word of God. Ali
replied in the negative, and quoted 9:6 on asylum for the polytheists. (Buti,
p. 57 quoting from al-Jmi li-akm al-Qurn, 8:76)
112
Ibn Kathir, Tafsr al-Qurn al-Am (Riyadh, 1998) pp.3089. Many
of the selections and translations of this section are taken from David
Dakake, The Myth of a Militant Islam. In Joseph Lumbard, ed., Islam,
Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal of Tradition, (Bloomington, Indiana:
World Wisdom, 2004), pp.337.
113
See Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Siysa al-Sharyyah f Islh al-Ra wal-Raiyyah,
quoted in Peters, p.49. For a similar hadith see Bukhari 3052, Kitb al-Jihad.
114
The Sunan of Abu Dawud, Kitb al-Jihad.
115
Maliks Muwatta, Kitb al-jihad.
116
Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol.1, p.308.
436
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
117
Baladhuri, Futh al-buldn, trans. P. Hitti as Origins of the Islamic State

(New York: AMS Press) vol.1, p.100.
118
Ibid. p. 187.
119
Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. XII: The Battle of al-Qadissiyyah
and the Conquest of Syria and Palestine, trans. Y. Friedmann (Albany: SUNY
Press, 1985), p.191.
120
Baladhuri, vol.1, p.314.
121
Rawdat al-alibn, 10:315-16 (see Buti, p.133).
122
Al-Mughni, 4:250 (see Buti, p.133).
123
See Buti, p.134.
124
From Nawawis commentary upon the a of Muslim, 12:229 (see Buti,
p.149).
125
Muslim, a , Kitb al-Imrah.
126
Ibid., Kitb al-Imrah
chapter
127
As regards women, for example, there are hadith that declare that the
jihad of women is making the pilgrimage (ajj) to Mecca. See Bukhari, a
al-Bukhr (Medina: Dr al-Fikr, n.d.), vol. 4, pp. 36, 834 (Kitb al-jihad,
hadith no. 43, 127, 128). There are also hadith concerning the various types of
death that qualify one as a martyr (shahd), i.e., as having died like a fighter in
jihad. One such type of death is said to be the death of a woman in childbirth.
Other traditions in a al-Bukhr imply that women can fulfil the duty of
jihad by attending to the wounded on the battlefield (see a, vol. 4, pp. 867,
adth no. 1314). See also Muslim, a Muslim, (printed with commentaries) (Beirut: Dr al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1978), vol. 5, pp. 153, 157.
128
These are: 1) testifying that there is only one true God and that Muhammad
is His messenger, 2) praying five times a day, 3) paying a charity tax every year,
4) fasting during the month of Ramadan, and 5) making a pilgrimage to Mecca
once in ones life, if one has the means and the health to do so.
129
See Aljun, Kashf al-khaf (Beirut: Dr Iy al-Turth al-Arab, 1968),
hadith no. 1362.
130
It should be noted that outward jihad is by no means only military
in nature. The arena of outward jihad is the level of human action. It is not
concerned with inner attitudes of the soul, such as sincerity and love (which
constitute the realm of the inner jihad) but with proper outward action alone,
as defined by the religious law (shariah).
131
The word translated here as themselves, anfusihim in Arabic, may
be more literally translated as their souls. This demonstrates an essential
Quranic perspective: the inner struggle (i.e., until they change their souls) takes
precedence over the outer struggle (i.e., the particular state in which a people
437
05/07/2013 15:22

exist at a given moment) and furthermore, that no amount of purely outward
actions can overcome hypocrisy of soul.
132
There are a few important exceptions to this categorisation. Among them
are the articles of Khaled Abou El Fadl, The Place of Tolerance in Islam, in the
book by the same title, J. Cohen and I. Lague, eds (Beacon Press, 2002); The
Rules of Killing at War: An Inquiry into the Classical Sources, Muslim World
89, no. 2 (April 1999), and Sherman Jackson, Jihad and the Modern World,
The Journal of Islamic Law and Culture (Spring/Summer 2002).
133
For examples of how these traditional teachings were followed in later
generations see Reza Shah-Kazemis From the Spirituality of Jihad to the
Ideology of Jihadism in this volume.
134
Although it is incorrect in this context, the six major translations of the
Quran available in English, those of A. J. Arberry, Marmaduke Pickthall, N.
J. Dawood, Yusuf Ali, Ahmad Ali, and El-Hilali/Khan, all translate the word
awliy as friends.
135
We owe this image to Dr Seyyed Hossein Nasr.
136
Quran 2:125-129.
137
Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn an tawl y al-qurn (Beirut: Dr al-Fikr,
1995), vol. 4, pp. 3723.
138
Ibid., vol. 14, pp. 834.
139
We will look more closely at verse Al-Tawbah 9:5 when we examine the
fatwa of the World Islamic Front later in this essay.
140
Al-Tabari, vol. 14, p. 84.
141
Ibid., vol. 2, p. 258. It should be noted that there is another group of
verses, 22:3940 which is also considered to have been the first verses to speak
about the military jihad. We shall have occasion to speak about this later in
the essay.
142
Ibid., vol. 2, p. 258.
143
Ibid., vol. 2, p. 258.
144
Ibid., vol. 2, p. 259.
145
In addition, al-Tabari reports a second narration of these words of Umar
ibn Abd al-Aziz with only slight changes in phrasing, Ibid., vol. 2, p. 259.
146 See Malik ibn Anas, Muwatta, trans. M. Rahimuddin (New Delhi: Tj,
1985), p. 200 (Kitb al-jihad, adth no. 957). See also Bukhari, a, vol. 4,
pp. 15960 (Kitb al-jihad, adth no. 2578), Abu Dawud, Sunan Ab Dwd
(Beirut: Dr al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1996), vol. 2, p. 258 (Kitb al-jihad, adth
no. 2668), and Muslim, a, vol. 5, p. 56 (Kitb al-jihad).
147
Mlik, Muwatta, p. 200 (Kitb al-jihad, adth no. 958). Other similar
instructions are given to the Muslim armies prohibiting the killing of children and the mutilating of bodies, see Muslim, a, vol. 5, pp. 4650 (Kitb
al-jihad).
148
Mlik, Muwatta, p. 201 (Kitb al-jihad, adth no. 959). A similar version
438
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
of this hadith in the Sunan of Abu Dawud mentions not killing the elderly, in
addition to the categories of women and children, see Abu Dawud, Sunan, vol.
2, p. 243 (Kitb al-jihad, adth no. 2614).
149
Khalid ibn al-Walid (d. 22 AH/ 642 CE) was a companion of the Prophet
and one of the famous early commanders of Muslim forces.
150
Quoted from Ibn Rushd, Bidyat al-mujtahid wa nihyat al-muqtaid,
trans. Rudolph Peters in Jihad in Mediaeval and Modern Islam (Leiden: E. J.
Brill, 1977), p. 17. For a similar version of this hadith see Abu Dawud, Sunan,
vol. 2, p. 258 (Kitb al-jihad, adth no. 2669).
151
See Ibn Ishaq, Srah Rasl Allh, trans. A. Guillaume in The Life of
Muhammad (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978), pp. 6023.
152
Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 6, pp. 2334; and Ibn Kathir, Tafsr
al-Qurn al-am, vol. 2 (Riyadh: Dar al-Salam, 1998), pp. 4889.
153 Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 11, p. 30; Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol. 3, p. 429.
154
See for example R. Bulliet, The Patricians of Nishapur (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1972) and Islam: The View from the Edge (New
York: Columbia University Press, 1994) where he speaks about the case of the
conversion of the Persian plateau. Bulliet has carried out demographic studies
showing that for three centuries following the Muslims political conquest of
the region the land of Iran still had a majority Zoroastrian population, in direct
contradiction to any notions of forced conversion.
155
It was only the polytheistic Arab tribes in the Arabian Peninsula who
were compelled to enter Islam. Those Arab tribes who were already People of
the Book were not forced to accept the religion. Numerous examples of this can
be found in the histories, particularly in regard to the Christian Arabs. See the
accounts of the Arabs of Najran (al-Tabari, Trkh al-rusul wa al-mulk, vol.
1, edited by M. J. de Goeje (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1964), pp. 19878 and p. 2162);
the Banu Namir, Banu Iyad, and Banu Taghlib (al-abar, Tarkh, I, p. 2482
and pp. 250910), the Banu Ghassan (Baladhuris Fut al-buldn, trans. P.
Hitti as The Origins of the Islamic State, vol. 1 (New York: AMS Press), p. 209);
the Banu Salih ibn Hulwan (Baldhur, Origins, vol. 1, p. 223); the Banu Tayyi
and the Arabs of the settlement of Hadir Halab (Baldhur, Origins, vol. 1, p.
224); and the Arabs of Baalbek (Baladhuri, Origins, vol. 1, p. 198).
156
Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 3, p. 21; Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol. 1, p. 417.
157
We shall speak of this alliance known as the Constitution of Medina later
in this essay.
158
Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 3, p. 22. See also Wahidi, Asbb al-nuzl
(Beirut: lam al-Kutub, 1970), p. 58 and Abu Dawud, Sunan, vol. 2, pp. 2623
(Kitb al-jihad, adth no. 2682).
159
See al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 3, p. 23.
160
Al-Tabar, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 3, p. 220; Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol. 1, p. 417;
Wahidi, Asbb al-nuzl, pp. 589.
439
05/07/2013 15:22

161
It should also be noted that in the case of one version of this story
(see al-Tabar, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 3, p. 22 and Wahidi, Asbb al-nuzl, pp.
589), the Prophet, after pronouncing the Quranic verse, says, God banish
them! They are the first ones to disbelieve (abadahum Allh, hum awwal
man kafara). This statement requires some explanation and needs to be
understood in the context of the time. It can be said from the Islamic point of
view that the actions of Abul-Husayns sons represent a grave error, because
they were rejecting a prophet within his own lifetime, a prophet whom they
knew personally. The actions of Abul-Husayns sons represent a denial of the
immediate presence of the truth, and this is very different than, for instance,
someone choosing not to accept the message of Islam today; one who never
had the chance to actually see the Prophet, who was the living embodiment of
submission to God. Like the words of Christ, He who has seen me has seen
the truth, the Prophet said, He who has seen me has seen his Lord, thereby
placing great responsibility on the shoulders of those who were privileged to
encounter him. The strident words of the Prophet about the sons of AbulHusayn need to be understood in this context.
162
Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol. 1, p. 416.
163
164
Moreover this injunction is reflected elsewhere in the Quran, such as in
the verse, For each we have given a law and a way, and had God willed He could
have made you one people, but that He might put you to the test in what He has
given you [He has made you as you are]. So vie with one another in good works.
To God will you all be brought back, and He will inform you about that wherein
you differed (Al-Midah, 5:48). The universality and indeed acceptance of
other ways and laws evident in this verse is to be seen even more directly
in verse 2:62: Those who say We are Jews and We are Christians and We
are Sabians, all who believe in God and the Last Day and do good works,
they have their reward with their Lord and neither shall they fear nor grieve
(Al-Baqarah, 2:62). The word Sabians may be a reference to the remnants of
a group of followers of St John the Baptist, but in any case the message of this
verse is very far from the fallacious notion that Islam denies the truth of other
faiths. Indeed, the Quran demands that Jews and Christians judge according
to what God has given them in the Torah and the Gospel. This is evident in
the Quranic statement, Truly, We revealed the Torah. In it is a guidance and
light. By it the prophets who submitted [to God] judged the Jews with what
they were entrusted of the Book of God, and they were witnesses to it. Therefore,
fear not men, but fear Me. Sell not My signs for little gain. Whoever does not
judge by that which God has revealed, those are the unbelievers. We ordained
therein [within the Torah]: a life for a life, an eye for an eye, nose for a nose,
an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and wounds for retaliation. But if any
one remits it then it is a penance for him, and whosoever does not judge by that
440
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
which God has revealed, they are wrongdoers (Al-Midah, 5:445). In relation
to the followers of the Gospel, the Quran says, We sent him [Jesus] the Gospel.
Therein is a guidance and a light. Let the People of the Gospel judge by that
which God has revealed therein. Whosoever does not judge by that which God
has revealed, those are the corrupt (Al-Midah, 5: 467). Therefore, not only
are the People of the Torah and of the Gospel not to be compelled to accept
Islam, but they must, according to the Quran, be free to make their own
decisions based upon what their scriptures reveal to them. Moreover, for them
not to do so is displeasing to God.
165
Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 10, p. 2278; Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol. 3,
p. 303.
166
Al-Tabar, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 10, p. 226; Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol. 3, p. 302.
167
168
Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 10, p. 229.
169
170
Mahmoud Shaltut (d. 1963), the former Shaykh al-Azhar, arguably the
most important exoteric authority in the Islamic world, commented upon
these verses in his book Al-Quran wa al-qitl, trans. Peters, The Quran and
Fighting in Jihad, p. 43, as follows: These verses are, as we have said, the first
verses of fighting. They are clear and do not contain even the slightest evidence
of religious compulsion. On the contrary, they confirm that the practice that
the people ward off each other is one of Gods principles in creation, inevitable
for the preservation of order and for the continuation of righteousness and
civilisation. Were it not for this principle, the earth would have been ruined
and all different places of worship would have been destroyed. This would have
happened if powerful tyrants would have held sway over religions, free to abuse
them without restraint and to force people to conversion, without anyone to
interfere. These verses are not only concerned with Muslims, but have clearly
a general impact.
171
Baladhuri, Origins, vol. 1, p. 100.
172
Ibid., vol. 1, p. 227.
173
Ibid., vol. 1, p. 229.
174
Ibid., vol. 1, p. 187.
175
Ibid., vol. 1, p. 223.
176
Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 198-199.
The poll tax or jizyah was required to be paid by the People of the Book
to the Islamic state according to verse Al-Tawbah, 9:29 of the Quran and
certain hadith. This tax, unlike feudal taxation in Europe, did not constitute
an economic hardship for non-Muslims living under Muslim rule. The tax
was seen as the legitimate right of the Islamic state, given that all peoples
Muslim and non-Muslimbenefited from the military protection of the state,
the freedom of the roads, and trade, etc. Although the jizyah was paid by non-
441
05/07/2013 15:22

Muslims, Muslims were also taxed through the zakt, a required religious tax
not levied on other communities. Since we have just mentioned verse 9:29 it is
perhaps best to deal with it more thoroughly here, for it has been a source of
great controversy and is often quoted by militant Muslims as well as Western
detractors of Islam and not only for its mention of the issue of the jizyah. In
full, verse 9:29 reads: Fight against those who do not believe in God and Last
Day (of Judgment) and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden and are not obedient to the Religion of Truth, (even) among those who have
been given the Book, until they pay the jizyah out of hand and are humbled
(Al-Tawbah, 9:29). There is no doubt that most of the classical Muslim exegetes
understood 9:29 as sanctioning the continuation of jihad beyond the conflict
with the pre-Islamic Arab idolaters to include the ahl al-kitb, and just as
the early Israelites did not see the use of offensive military force by Moses or
Joshua as something which negated the moral veracity of their religion, so too
the early Muslims did not find the institutionalisation of jihad for the sake of
obtaining the political hegemony of Islam to be a moral dilemma either. The
Muslims in jihad, like the armies of the Israelites entering the Promised Land,
saw themselves as engaged in a holy mission, not of a purely inward, spiritual nature, but a mission which also entailed bringing about a new society
on Earth. In the case of the Israelites the new society was to be created in a
specific place, the Promised Land, and participation in that society would be
generally limited to a specific group of people, the Chosen People. Whereas
in the case of the early Muslims, the society that was to be created would not
be confined to a specific place or to a specific people. In fact, the specificity
of the new Islamic polity would be precisely its universality; its general lack
of ethnic and religious boundaries. This is not to say that the situation for
religious minorities in the Islamic world was perfect by any means, but it was
substantially better than the social climate that prevailed for Muslims and Jews
within the lands of Christendom for example. For the sake of achieving this
new society, bringing to mankind the best and, up to that moment, the most
inclusive form of social order on Earth, the Muslims were willing to fight and
die, just as the Jews were willing to do so for a new kind of life in the Promised
Land. This willingness to do violence to establish certain kinds of social orders
has certainly not come to an end even among nations today, but it should be
understood that in both the Israelite and Islamic contexts spreading political
control through violent means was something almost to be expected given
the social conditions prevailing then in the ancient world. When Islam spread
out of Arabia in the seventh century (and similarly in the time of Moses and
Joshua), warfare and conflict were the normal state of affairs between nations
and peoples. The state of nearly constant warfare was simply the way of the
world and peace was the extraordinary and occasional exception to the rule.
Today, in the modern world, the situation is somewhat reversed: we might say
442
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
that peace is generally the norm and warfare, although not exactly extraordinary, is somewhat less of a constant than it was in ancient times. This fact
has led the vast majority of Muslim scholars today to declare that continual,
offensive jihad is no longer applicable to the contemporary situation and that
jihad today is primarily difi or defensive, because the world is itself is in a
different state from what it was in the seventh century. Therefore, just as the
militant acts of Moses and Joshua portrayed in the Hebrew Bible no longer play
a direct role in how Jews actually practice Judaism today and these scriptural
stories are relegated to ancient history, with largely symbolic and no longer
literal significance in the lives of contemporary Jews, so too for the vast majority of Muslims verse 9:29 and other Quranic verses related to jihad are simply
not of primary concern when they think about what it means to be a good
Muslim today. While Al-Tawbah, 9:29 is without doubt extremely significant
in the formation of the early Islamic view of military jihad, the idea that it
represents the final word on Muslim attitudes toward Jews, Christians and the
uses of violence is like declaring that Medieval Papal pronouncements about
the Crusades are the key to understanding Catholic feelings about Muslims and
Jews today or like saying that Deuteronomy 20:108 exposes the true, inner
attitude of Jews toward the presence of gentiles in the land of Israel. To even
suggest such things would be absurd, but while we are aware of the complexities and nuances of our own Western cultural history, which enable us to reject
out of hand the absurd, totalising claims just mentioned, when it comes to
Islamic culture similar totalising proof-texting of the Quran and verses like
9:29 is somehow seen as a legitimate encapsulation of the real truth about
Islam and Muslims. As regards those Muslim fundamentalists who quote 9:29
as their proof text for an eternal jihad commanded by God against the ahl
al-kitb, it is remarkable with what ferocity they cling to any Quranic verses
that deal with fighting and with what cavalierism they dismiss verses that speak
positively of Jews and Christians (Al-Baqarah, 2:62; 2:1112; 2:139; l Imrn,
3:1135; 3:199; Al-Midah, 5:44; 5:467; 5:69), as if they are able to determine
with certainty which of Gods words in the Quran He actually meant eternally
and which of His words need to be understood as just nice Arabic words in
the Quran devoid of contemporary relevance. To put it another way, many
of these militant jihadis seem to wish to reduce all 114 chapters of the Quran
to one, namely chapter 9 (Al-Tawbah), which possesses a major share of the
verses regarding fighting.
178
179
Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, v. XII: The Battle of al-Qadisiyya and
the Conquest of Syria and Palestine, trans. Y. Friedmann (Albany: SUNY Press,
1985), p. 191. The use of the word Byzantines here should not be conflated with
Christians. Byzantines refers to those people who were the administrators of
Byzantine authority in the lands that were now conquered by the Muslims. The
443
05/07/2013 15:22

very fact that the word Byzantines is used, and not Christians, is significant.
This shows that it was not Christianity but rather the political and military
opposition of Byzantium that was at issue. It was because of this opposition
that the Byzantines needed to be expelled. Byzantine administrators and officials, like the robbers also mentioned in the quotation, were a possible source
of social unrest and political chaos. Just as there cannot be two kings ruling a
single kingdom, the Muslims needed to remove any vestiges of Byzantine political authority in the lands they now controlled. This did not mean the removal
of the vestiges of Christianity from those lands, for the quotation itself also
mentions preserving the rights of Christians to practice their faith and maintain
their churches, crosses, etc., under the new Islamic government.
180
Ibid., pp. 1912. Al-Tabari indicates that similar letters were written to
all the provinces around Jerusalem as well as to the people of Lydda and all
the people of Palestine.
181
Al-Tabari, Jmi al-bayn, vol. 3, pp. 245; Ibn Kathir, Tafsr, vol. 2, pp.
4578. This position has been generally agreed upon by most of the early scholars of Islamic law; see for instance the comments of Ibn Rushd in his Bidyat
al-mujtahid, in Peters, Jihad, p. 24.
182
183
Al-Tabari, The History of al-abar, v. XIV: The Conquest of Iran, trans.
G. Rex Smith (Albany: SUNY Press, 1994), pp. 368.
184
Baladhuri, Origins, vol. 2, p. 4
185
Ibid., p. 20.
186
Al-Tabari, The History of al-abar, v. XIV: The Conquest of Iran, p. 28.
187
Ibid., p. 29.
188
Ibid., p. 33.
189
Al-Tabari, The History of al-abar, v. XIII: The Conquest of Iraq,
Southwestern Persia, and Egypt, trans. G. H. A. Juynboll (Albany: SUNY Press,
1985), pp. 1645.
190
Ibid., pp. 1678.
191
Ibid., pp. 170-171.
192
The issue as to whether the Muslims may accept the jizyah from the
mushrikn or polytheists, thereby granting them protected (dhimm) status
under the Islamic state, like the status of the People of the Book, has been
debated by scholars of Islamic law. For various opinions on this issue see Ibn
Rushd, Bidyat al-mujtahid, in Peters, Jihad, pp. 245.
193
These terms may need some explanation. The people of the city of Mecca
were almost all members of an Arabic tribe known as Quraysh, and the Prophet
and the vast majority of his early followers in Mecca were also members of this
tribe. When the Prophet left Mecca for the city of Medina, an event known as
the Hijrah or migration, those members of his community who journeyed with
him were given the title of muhjirn or emigrants. As for the term anr, it
444
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
refers to those people of Medina who accepted the Islamic message and invited
the Prophet and the emigrants to the city, giving them refuge from their situation of persecution in Mecca. For this reason these residents of Medina were
given the title of anr or helpers, due to the fact that they gave safe haven to
the Prophet and the emigrants.
194
W. M. Watt, Muhammad at Medina (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956),
p. 221.
195
The term Yathrib actually refers to the city of Medina. Before the time of
Islam, Medina was called Yathrib. The name Medina came to be used later as
a result of the fact that the city was eventually renamed Madnat al-Nab (The
City of the Prophet). Today the city is simply referred to by the first part of this
title, Medina, or The City.
196
Watt, Muhammad, p. 221.
197
It may be asked if this pact of mutual protection does not contradict
the point made earlier concerning verse Al-Midah, 5:51. We stated that 5:51
essentially tells the Muslims not to take Jews (or Christians) as their protectors
in a military sense, and yet the Constitution seems to be doing just that by stating that between Muslims and Jews is help against whoever wars against the
people of this document. Is this not then taking Jews as protectors? In answer
to this question it needs to be said that the specific context of 5:51 is that of
individual Muslims taking alliances with those outside the ummah in order to
save their own individual lives and thereby endangering the unity and internal
strength of the Muslims. It does not refer to a context in which the Muslims,
as an ummah, agree to a treaty for the benefit and safety of the ummah as a
whole. This issue points out the necessity of clearly understanding the asbb
al-nuzl of Quranic passages. Without such understanding a mistake could
be made such that all agreements of help or assistance between Muslims and
non-Muslims would be seen as compromising Islam; but this is simply not the
context of 5:51. Indeed if it were, it would compromise practically the entire
early history of the jihad effort which is filled with agreements of protection
and assistance, as we see with the constitution and as we shall see in other parts
of this essay.
198
Watt, Muhammad, p. 222.
199
Ibid., p. 224.
200
The Umayyad Dynasty ruled the Islamic world immediately following
the end of the Rightly-guided caliphate (40 AH/ 661 CE) until they were overthrown by the Abbasids in 132 AH/ 750 CE, who established their own dynasty,
which ruled over all Muslim lands (in a nominal way from the fourth century
AH/ tenth century CE onwards) until the Mongol conquest of their capital at
Baghdad in the seventh century AH/ thirteenth century CE, at which time the
last Abbasid caliph was killed.
201
Such comments criticising the tribe of Quraysh would have been construed
445
05/07/2013 15:22

by the Umayyads (see note 67) as a critique of their legitimacy, given that the
Umayyads drew their legitimacy from their status as descendants of one of the
prominent clans of Quraysh. The importance that they placed upon this Qurayshi
lineage was as a result of the fact that, within the tribe of Quraysh, they were not
descendants of the immediate clan of the Prophet, i.e., the clan of Hashim, but of
another clan within Quraysh, the clan of Abd Shams. Thus, it was not through
their immediate clan but through their more distant Qurayshi heritage that they
could claim a relation to the Prophetic substance of Muhammad.
202
Although the Quran discusses both muminn and muslimn in referring
to those who followed the message of Muhammad, most early theological and
sectarian documents refer to members of the Islamic community as muminn
or believers, rather than muslimn specifically. For example, the early sectarian
writings of the Kharijites and Murjiites always discussed issues of membership
in the Islamic community in terms of believers and non-believers, not in terms
of Muslims and non-Muslims.
203
Watt, Muhammad, pp. 2257.
204
Fred M. Donner, The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1981), p. 200.
205
Al-Tabari, The History of al-abar, v. XIV, p. 36. The text of the treaty is:
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. This is the safe-conduct
Suraqah b. Amr, governor of the Commander of the Faithful, Umar b. al-Khattb,
has granted to Shahrbaraz, the inhabitants of Armenia, and the Armenians [in
al-Bab]. [He grants] them safe-conduct for their persons, their possessions, and
their religion lest they be harmed and so that nothing be taken from them. [The
following is imposed] upon the people of Armenia and al-Abwab, those coming
from distant parts and those who are local and those around them who have
joined them: that they should participate in any military expedition, and carry
out any task, actual or potential, that the governor considers to be for the good,
providing that those who agree to this are exempt from tribute but [perform]
military service. Military service shall be instead of their paying tribute. But those
of them who are not needed for military service and who remain inactive have
similar tribute obligations to the people of Azerbaijan [in general]. If they
perform military service, they are exempt from [all] this.
206
Jurjumah was located in the border region between modern-day Syria and
Turkey.
207
208
Ibid., p. 249.
209
For a full explanation of the traditional Islamic teachings on innovation
(bida) see T. J. Winters The Poverty of Fanaticism in this volume.
210
Al-Nawawi, An-Nawawis Forty Hadith, trans. by E. Ibrahim and D.
Johnson Davies (Malaysia: Polygraphic Press Sdn. Bhd., 1982), p. 94 (adth no.
28). This hadith is also to be found in the Sunan of Abu Dawud and the Jmi
446
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
of Tirmidhi. Other hadith related by al-Nawawi concerning the issue of innovation are: He who establishes (adatha) something in this matter of ours that is
not from it, it is rejected (radd)! and The one who acts [in a way that is] not in
agreement with our matter, it is rejected! (see p. 40).
211
We should not have the impression that modern fundamentalists represent
the first time that the traditional Islamic limits of warfare have been disregarded.
The Kharijite movement, whose roots go back to a religio-political dispute in the
first Islamic century, represent one of the most famous examples of just such
transgression. The Kharijites were perfectly willing to attack civilians, although
their dispute was essentially with other members of the Muslim community
rather than with non-Muslims. They declared a sentence of excommunication
(bara) upon anyone who did not accept their perspective on Islam. According
to the Kharijites, such excommunicated peoplemen, women, and children
were afforded no protection under the laws of religion for their lives or property.
Therefore, the Kharijites considered it perfectly legal to kill such persons. It is
important to mention that throughout the early history of Islam the Kharijite
position was condemned and even physically opposed by every major Muslim
group, Sunni and Shiite.
212
The choice of this word is a calculated political manoeuvre to co-opt the
authority of the 1400-year Islamic legal tradition. Within the science of Islamic
jurisprudence (fiqh), a fatwa refers to a religious opinion issued by a scholar of
law (sharah). Most fundamentalists have had no formal training in the study
of Islamic law.
213
For an examination of the relationship between modernism and fundamentalism, see Joseph E. B. Lumbards The Decline of Knowledge and the Rise
of Ideology in the Modern Islamic World in Islam, Fundamentalism, and the
Betrayal of Tradition: Essays by Western Muslim Scholars, World Wisdom,
2004).
214
215
The command here in Arabic, l tatad, means not to act brutally, but it
can also mean not to commit excess, outrage, unlawful action, or violate women.
216
Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, vol. 1, pp. 3089.
217
218
See Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, pp 6078.
chapter
219
This is an expanded version of an article first published in the journal

Sacred Web, no.8, 2001.
220
This statement was made in a letter written by the emir in 1860. Quoted in
Charles Henry Churchill, The Life of Abdel Kader (London: Chapman and Hall,
1867), p.323.
447
05/07/2013 15:22

221
One of the best answers to this question is contained in the series of

essays on jihad by S.A. Schleifer. He mounts an excellent critique of the political reduction of jihad, using as his basis traditional Islamic consciousness,
and including, as a case study of jihad conducted according to this consciousness, the little known mujhid in the struggle against the colonisation of
Palestine in the 1920s and 1930s, Izz al-Din al-Qassam. This case study forms
part 1 of the series, which was published in the journal Islamic Quarterly, vol.
XXIII, no.2 (1979); part 2, Jihad and Traditional Islamic Consciousness is
in vol. XXVII, no.4 (1983)_; part 3, is in vol.XXVIII, no.1 (1984); part 4, in
vol.XXVIII, no.2 (1984); and part 5, in vol.XXVIII, no.3 (1984).
222
Quoted in Stanley Lane-Poole, Saladin and the Fall of the Kingdom
of Jerusalem (Beirut: Khayats Oriental Reprints, 1964), p.2323. (Originally
published in London, 1898.) It is not irrelevant to note here that, as Titus
Burckhardt says, the Christian knightly attitude towards women is Islamic
in origin (Moorish Culture in Spain (London: Allen & Unwin, 1972), p.93).
Simonde de Sismondi, writing in the early nineteenth century, asserts that
Arabic literature was the source of that tenderness and delicacy of sentiment
and that reverential awe of women which have operated so powerfully on
our chivalrous feelings. (Histoire de la littrature du Midi de lEurope, quoted
in R. Boase, The Origin and Meaning of Courtly Love (Manchester University
Press, 1977), p.20.
223
Lane-Poole, op. cit., p.2334.
224
Quoted in Thomas Arnold, The Preaching of Islam (London: Luzak,
1935), p.889.
225
Martin Lings, MuhammadHis Life According to the Earliest Sources
(London: ITS and George Allen & Unwin, 1983), p.2978.
226
The Preaching of Islam, op. cit., p.812.
227
A copy of the document is displayed to this day in the monastery, which
is the oldest continually inhabited monastery in Christendom. See J. Bentley,
Secrets of Mount Sinai (London: Orbis, 1985), pp.189.
228
Bernard Lewis, The Jews of Islam (Princeton University Press, 1984),
p.8.
229
S.A. Schleifer, Jews and MuslimsA Hidden History, in The Spirit of
Palestine (Barcelona: Zed, 1994), p.2.
230
Quoted in Schleifer, op.cit., p.5.
231
T. Burckhardt, Moorish Culture in Spain (London: George Allen and
Unwin, 1972, pp.278.
232
Despite the fact that Maimonides suffered at the hands of the
al-Mohhads, during a rare episode of persecution in Muslim Spain, the next
stage of his careeras physician to Saladdinmanifested his continuing
loyalty to Muslim rule.
233
Quoted in Schleifer, op.cit., p.8.
448
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
234
Mark Cohen, Islam and the Jews: Myth, Counter-Myth, History, in

Jerusalem Quarterly, no.38, 1986, p.135.
235
Ibid.
236
See Mohamed Chrif Sahli, AbdelkaderLe Chevalier de la Foi (Algiers:
Entreprise algrienne de presse, 1967), p.1312.
237
Cited in Michel Chodkiewicz, The Spiritual Writings of Amir Abd
al-Kader (Albany: State University of New York, 1995), p.2. This selection of
texts from the emirs Mawqif reveals well the other side of the emir: his inner
spiritual life, lived out as a master of Sufism. In this work the emir comments
on Quranic verses and hadith, as well as upon Ibn Arabis writings, doing
so from a rigorously esoteric perspective. Indeed, the emir was designated
as the writh al-ulm al-akbariyyah, inheritor of the Akbari sciences, those
sciences pertaining to the Shaykh al-Akbar (the greatest master), Ibn Arabi.
See pp.204 for this little known aspect of the emirs function.
238
See Churchill, op. cit., p.295.
239
See the important treatise by the late Shaykh of al-Azhar, Mahmud
Shaltut (see Ch.1 in this volume), in which jihad in Islam is defined in entirely
defensive terms. The treatise, al-Qurn wal-Qitl, was first published in
Cairo in 1948, and presented in translation by Peters under the title A
Modernist Interpretation of Jihad: Mahmud Shaltuts Treatise, Koran and
Fighting in his book, Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam (Leiden: Brill,
1977), pp.59101.
240
Churchill, op. cit., p.314.
241
Ibid., p.318.
242
Like the emir, Imam Shamil was regarded with awe not only by his
own followers, but also by the Russians; when he was finally defeated and
taken to Russia, he was fted as a hero. Although occasionally embroidered
with romanticism, Lesley Blanchs Sabres of Paradise (New York, Caroll
and Graf, 1960) conveys well the heroic aspect of Shamils resistance. For
a more scholarly account, see Moshe Gammer, Muslim Resistance to the
Tsar: Shamil and the Conquest of Chechnia and Daghestan (London: Frank
Cass, 1994); Chechnya. Our own Crisis in ChechniaRussian Imperialism,
Chechen Nationalism and Militant Sufism (London: Islamic World Report,
1995) offers an overview of the Chechen quest for independence from the
eighteenth century through to the war of the mid-1990s, with a particular
stress on the role of the Sufi brotherhoods in this quest.
243
That is, a dhimm, a non-Muslim who enjoys the dhimmah, or protection of the Muslim state.
244
Quoted in Churchill, op. cit., p.3212.
245
Abu Bakr Siraj ad-Din, The Book of Certainty (Cambridge: Islamic Texts
Society, 1992), p.80. See also the essay by S.H. Nasr, The Spiritual Significance
of Jihad, ch.1 of Traditional Islam in the Modern World (London: KPI, 1987);
449
05/07/2013 15:22

and also Traditional Islam and Modernism, which remains one of the most
important principal critiques of modernist and extremist thought in Islam.
246
Quoted by the Shaykh al-Arabi al-Darqawi, founder of the Darqawi
branch of the Shadhiliyya Sufi order. See Letters of a Sufi Master, trans. Titus
Burckhardt (Bedfont, Middlesex: Perennial Books, 1969), p.9.
247
See the essay by Omar Benaissa Sufism in the Colonial Period in Algeria:
Revolution Revisited, ed. R. Shah-Kazemi (London: Islamic World Report, 1996),
for details of this religious influence of the tariqa of the Shaykh on Algerian
society; and our own essay, From Sufism to Terrorism: The Distortion of Islam
in the Political Culture of Algeria, in which several points made in the present
article are amplified.
248
Alexis de Tocqueville bitterly criticised the assimilationist policy of his
government in Algeria. In a parliamentary report of 1847 he wrote that We
should not at present push them along the path of our own European civilisation,
but in their own We have cut down the number of charities [i.e. religious waqf
institutions], let schools fall into ruin, closed the colleges [i.e. madrasas] the
recruitment of the men of religion and of the [shariah] law has ceased. We have,
in other words, made Muslim society far more miserable, disorganised, barbaric
and ignorant than ever it was before it knew us. Quoted in Charles-Robert
Ageron, Modern Algeria, trans. Michael Brett (London: Hurst, 1991), p.21.
249
Lon Roche, Dix Ans travers lIslam (Paris, 1904), p.1401. Cited in M.
Chodkiewicz, op. cit., p.4.
250
Cited in Churchill, op. cit., p.1378.
251
Frithjof Schuon, Islam and the Perennial Philosophy (London: World of
Islam Festival, 1976), p.101. Schuon also referred to Ali as the representative par
excellence of Islamic esotericism. The Transcendent Unity of Religions (London:
Faber and Faber, 1953), p.59.
252
Cf. the following verse in the Bhagavad-Gita: Who thinks that he can be
a slayer, who thinks that he is slain, both these have no [right] knowledge: He
slays not, is not slain. Hindu Scriptures, trans. R.C. Zaehner (London: Dent,
1966), p.256.
253
The Mathnawi of Jalaluddin Rumi, trans. R.A. Nicholson (London: Luzac,
1926), Book 1, p.205, lines 378794. The parentheses are inserted by Nicholson.
See Schleifers comments on Rumis account of this episode in Jihad and
Traditional Islamic Consciousness op. cit., pp.1979.
254
As Rumi says, continuing Alis discourse; see line 3800, p.207.
255
We follow Muhammad Asads translation of these elliptical verses. See his
The Message of the Quran, Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus, 1984, p.942.
chapter
256
The editors have edited this text slightly.
450
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
chapter
257
Rene Girard, Violence and the Sacred,trans. by Patrick Gregory (Baltimore:

The Johns Hopkins University, 1979).
258
This is the gist of Bernard Lewis attacks on Islamic fundamentalism in
a number of highly publicised essays including The Roots of Muslim Rage,
The Atlantic Monthly (September 1990), pp. 4760 and Islam and Liberal
Democracy, The Atlantic Monthly (February, 1993). Lewis considers Islamic
fundamentalism, which he equates occasionally with terrorism, as arising out of
the overtly religious and intolerant traditions of Islam. I have dealt with Lewis
arguments in my Roots of Misconception: Euro-American Perceptions of Islam
Before and After 9/11 in Joseph Lumbard, ed., Islam, Fundamentalism, and the
Betrayal of Tradition (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom, 2004), pp. 14387.
259
Cf. Mark Juergensmeyer, Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of
Religious Violence (Berkeley and New York): Univeristy of California Press,
2000).
260
One such exception to the rule is Richard Martins essay The Religious
Foundations of War, Peace, and Statecraft in Islam in John Kelsay and James
Turner Johnson, eds, Just War and Jihad: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives
on War and Peace in Western and Islamic Traditions (New York: Greenwood
Press, 1991), pp. 91117.
261
Cf. Steven Lee, A Positive Concept of Peace in Peter Caws, ed., The
Causes of Quarrel: Essays on Peace, War, and Thomas Hobbes (Boston: Beacon
Press, 1989), pp. 1834.
262
Gray Cox, The Light at the End of the Tunnel and the Light in Which We
May Walk: Two Concepts of Peace in Caws, ibid., pp. 1623.
263
The celebrated adth jibrl confirms the same Quranic usage: Isn is
to worship God as if you were to see Him; even if you see Him not, he sees
you. For an extensive analysis of isn as articulated in the Islamic tradition,
see Sachiko Murata and William Chittick, The Vision of Islam ,Paragon House,
1998), pp. 265317.
264
R. G. Collingwood, The New Leviathan (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell,
1971), p. 334.
265
Ibn Manzur, Lisn al-arab, XIII, pp. 4578 and al-Tahanawi, Kashshf
iilt al-funn (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1998), III, pp. 2889.
266
Cf. Muhammad Asad, The Message of the Quran, p. 179, no. 46 commenting on the Quran Al-Anm, 6:54: And when those who believe in Our messages
come unto thee, say: Peace be upon you. Your Sustainer has willed upon
Himself the law of grace and mercy so that if any of you does a bad deed out
of ignorance, and thereafter repents and lives righteously, He shall be [found]
much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.
267
On the basis of this verse, the tenth century philologist Abu Hilal al-Askari
451
05/07/2013 15:22

considers justice and isn as synonyms. Cf. his al-Furq al-lughawiyyah, p.
194, quoted in Franz Rosenthal, Political Justice and the Just Ruler in Joel
Kraemer and Ilai Alon, eds, Religion and Government in the World of Islam
(Tel-Aviv: Tel-Aviv University, 1983), p. 97, no. 20.
268
Like other Sufis, Ghazali subscribes to the notion of what Ibn al-Arabi
would later call the possessor of the two eyes (dhl-aynayn), viz., seeing
God with the two eyes of transcendence (tanzh) and immanence (tashbh).
Cf. Fadlou Shehadi, Ghazalis Unique Unknowable God (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1964), pp. 810 and 515. For Ibn al-Arabis expression of the possessor of
the two eyes, see William Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge (Albany, State
University of New York Press, 1989), pp. 3612. The Mutazilite and Asharite
theologians have a long history of controversy over the three major views of
Divine names and qualities, i.e., tanzh, tashbh, and tatl (suspension). Cf.
Michel Allard, Le problme des attributes divins dans la doctrine dal-Aari et
des ses premiers grands disciples (Beirut: Editions De LImpirimerie Catholique,
1965), pp. 35464.
269
Ali b. Sultan Muhammad al-Harawi al-Qari, al-Man f Marifat
al-adth al-Maw (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Rushd, 1404 AH), 1:141.
270
Quoted in William Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God: Principles of Ibn
al-Arabis Cosmology (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998), p. 22.
271
Dawud al-Qaysari, Rislah f marifat al-maabbah al-aqqiyyah
in al-Rasil, edited by Mehmet Bayraktar (Kayseri: Kayseri Metropolitan
Municipality, 1997), p. 138.
272
The term has first been used by Mircea Eliade and adopted by Tu Weiming
to describe the philosophical outlook of the Chinese traditions. For an application of the term to Islamic thought, see William Chittick, The Anthropocosmic
Vision in Islamic Thought in Ted Peters, Muzaffar Iqbal, Syed Nomanul Haq,
eds, God, Life, and the Cosmos (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002). pp. 12552.
273
Cf. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Religion and the Order of Nature (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 603.
274
The classical Quran commentaries are almost unanimous on interpreting this khalifah as Adam, i.e., humans in the generic sense. Cf. Jalal al-Din
al-Mahalli and Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, Tafsr al-Jalalayn (Beirut: Muassasat
al-Risalah, 1995), p. 6 and Ibn al-Arabi, al-Futt al-makkiyyah, edited by
M. Abd al-Rahman al-Marashli, (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, 1997),
vol. I, p. 169.
275
Another formulation is laysa fl-imkn abd mimm kn. Loosely translated, it states that there is nothing in the world of possibility more beautiful
and perfect than what is in actuality. This sentence, attributed to Ghazali, has
led to a long controversy in Islamic thought. For an excellent survey of this
debate in Islamic theology, see Eric L. Ormsby, Theodicy in Islamic Thought:
The Dispute over al-Ghazalis Best of All Possible Worlds (Princeton, NJ:
452
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
Princeton University Press, 1984). Cf. Also Ghazali, Ihy ulm al-dn, (Cairo:
1968), vol. IV, p. 321. The earliest formulation of the problem, however, can be
traced back to Ibn Sina. See my Why Do Animals Eat Other Animals: Mulla
Sadra on Theodicy (forthcoming).
276
Plantingas free will defence is based on this premise. Cf. Alvin Plantinga,
The Free Will Defence in Philosophy in America, Max Black, ed., reprinted in
Baruch A. Broody, ed., Readings in the Philosophy of Religion: An Analytical
Approach (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1974), p. 187. See also his God, Evil, and
the Metaphysics of Freedom in Marilyn M. Adams and Robert M. Adams,
eds, The Problem of Evil (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), pp. 83109.
277
Mulla Sadra, al-ikmah al-mutaliyah fl-asfr al-aqliyyah al-arbaah,
(cited hereafter as Asfr) (Tehran, 1383, A. H.), II, 3, p. 72.
278
Ibid., p. 78.
279
Frithjof Schuon, In the face of the Absolute (Bloomington: World Wisdom
Books, 1989), p. 39.
280
This is the main reason why a good number of Sufis, philosophers, and
some theologians believe that hellfire will be terminated whereas paradise will
remain eternal. For the debate between the Mutazilites and the Asharites
on this issue, see Sad al-Din al-Taftazani, Shar al-maqid (Beirut: Alam
al-Kutub, 1989), vol. 5, pp. 13140.
281
Cf. the following verse: Man never tires of asking for the good [things of
life]; and if evil fortune touches him, he abandons all hope, giving himself up to
despair. Yet whenever We let him taste some of Our grace after hardship has
visited him, he is sure to say, This is but my due!and, I do not think that the
Last Hour will ever come: but if [it should come, and] I should indeed be brought
back unto my Sustainer, then, behold, the ultimate good awaits me with Him
(Fuilat,41:4950; trans. M. Asad).
282
Sadra, Asfr, II, 3, pp. 923; also p. 77.
283
Cf. Plotinus, The Enneads, V, IX, 5, p. 248, and Mulla Sadra, Asfr, I, 3, pp.
3434. Baqillani considers the potential (bil-quwwah) as non-existent. See his
Kitb al-tawd, p. 3444, quoted in Franz Rosenthal, Knowledge Triumphant:
The Concept of Knowledge in Medieval Islam (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970), p. 216.
284
As the leader of the sceptics (imm al-mushakkikn), Fakhr al-Din
al-Razi disagrees. His objection, however, clarifies another aspect of the discussion of theodicy in Islam. As Razi points out, there is no dispute over the fact
that some actions are good and some others bad. The question is whether this
is because of an attribute that belongs [essentially] to the action itself or this is
not the case and it is solely as an injunction of the shariah [that actions and
things are good or bad]. Razi hastens to add that the Mutazilites opt the first
view and our path, i.e., the Asharites believe in the second. Cf. Fakhr al-Din
al-Razi, al-Arban f usl al-dn (Cairo: Maktabat al-Kulliyat al-Azhariyyah,
1986), vol. I, p. 346. For a defence of the same Asharite position, see Taftazani,
453
05/07/2013 15:22

Shar al-maqid, vol. 4, p. 282 where it is asserted that human reason is in no
place to judge what is good (al-usn) and what is evil (al-qub). For Sabziwaris
defence of the Mutazilites, the philosophers, and the Imamiyyah on the rationality of good and evil, see his gloss on Sadras Asfr, II, 3, pp. 834.
285
Ibn Sina, Kitb al-najh, edited by Majid Fakhry (Beirut: Dar al-Afaq
al-Jadidah, 1985), p. 265; cf. also Ibn Sina, al-Mubatht, edited by Muhsin
Bidarfar (Qom: Intisharat-i Bidar, 1413 AH), p. 301.
286
Sadra, Asfar, II, 1, p. 113.
287
Asfr, II, 3, p. 76. The intrinsic goodness of things in their natural-ontological state has given rise to a number of popular formulations of the problem,
the most celebrated one being Merkez Efendi, the famous Ottoman scholar.
When asked if he would change anything were he to have the centre of the
world at his hands, he replied that he would leave everything as it is, hence the
name merkez (centre).
288
Sadra, Asfr, III, 2, pp. 114. See also ibid. II, 2, p. 114, III, 1, p. 256, III, 2,
pp. 106134. Sadra employs two arguments to defend the best of all possible
worlds argument, which he calls the ontological (inn) and causal (limm)
methods (manhaj).
289
This is what Tibi claims in his essentialist generalisations and oversimplifications about the Islamic pathos of peace and war. Cf. Bassam Tibi, War and
Peace in Islam in Terry Nardin, ed., The Ethics of War and Peace: Religious and
Secular Perspectives (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 128145.
290
Concerning the Zoroastrians and Sabeans and their being part of the
People of the Book, Abu Yusuf narrates a number of traditions of the Prophet
to show that they should be treated with justice and equality as the other dhimmis. The inclusion of the Zoroastrians among the dhimmis is inferred from the
fact that the Prophet had collected jizyah from the Majus of Hajar. Cf. Taxation
in Islam: Abu Yusufs Kitab al-kharj, trans. A. Ben Shemesh (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1969), pp. 889.
291
Some of these stipulations can be followed from Shaybanis Siyar;
English translation by Majid Khadduri, The Islamic Law of Nations: Shaybanis
Siyar (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1966), pp. 7594; also
Muhammad Hamidullah, The Muslim Conduct of State (Lahore: S. Ashraf,
1961), pp. 2058.
292
Cf. ul, Encyclopedia of Islam (EI2), IX, 845a.
293
As a representative text of the Asharite kalam, see Sad al-Din al-Taftazani,
Shar al-maqid, vol. 5, pp. 232320 where the long discussion of the imamate
contains no references to jihad as conquering non-Muslim territories. See also
Ibn Khaldun, Muqaddimah, trans. Franz Rosenthal, abridged by N. J. Dawood
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), pp. 158160 and Fakhr al-Din
al-Razi, al-Arban f usl al-dn, vol. 2, pp. 25570. The Muslim philosophers,
especially al-Farabi, define jihad as just war and stress the virtues of the city
454
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
(madinah) or the human habitat. Cf. Joel L. Kraemer, The Jihad of the Falasifa,
Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 10 (1987), p. 293 and 312. Butterworth
holds the same view about al-Farabis notion of warfare in his Al-Farabis
Statecraft: War and the Well-Ordered Regime in James Turner Johnson and
John Kelsay, eds, Cross, Crescent, and Sword: The Justification and Limitation
of War in Western and Islamic Tradition (New York: Greenwood Press, 1990),
pp. 79100.
294
Cf. Dar al-ul, EI2, II, 131a.
295
Shaybani, Siyar, pp. 158194; also Amn, EI2, I, 429a.
296
Philip K. Hitti, History of the Arabs (New York, St. Martins Press, 1970),
p. 145. Dozy makes a similar point when he says that the holy war is never
imposed except only when the enemies of Islam are the aggressors. Otherwise, if
we take into account the injunctions of the Quran, it is nothing but an interpretation of some theologians. R. Dozy, Essai sur lhistoire de lIslamisme (Leiden:
Brill, 1879), p. 152.
297
Cf. Richard Bulliet, Conversion to Islam and the Emergence of a Muslim
Society in Iran in Nehemia Levtzion, ed., Conversion to Islam (New York:
Holmes and Meier Publishers, Inc., 1979), pp. 3051. See also the introduction
by the editor, p. 9.
298
Cf. Daniel J. Sahas, John of Damascus on Islam: The Heresy of the
Ishmaelites (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1972).
299
T. W. Arnold, The Preaching of Islam (Delhi: Renaissance Publishing
House, 1984; originally published in 1913), pp. 634.
300
Cf. Lord Kinross, The Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish
Empire (New York: Morrow Quill, 1977), p. 259.
301
Abdulaziz A. Sachedina, The Development of Jihad in Islamic Revelation
and History, in Cross, Crescent, and Sword, p. 36.
302
On the question of rebellion and irregular warfare (akm al-bughat) in
Islamic law, see Khaled Abou el Fadl, Rebellion and Violence in Islamic Law
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001). For a shorter synoptic account,
see ibid., Ahkam al-Bughat: Irregular Warfare and the Law of Rebellion in
Islam in Johnson and Kelsay, eds, Cross, Crescent, and Sword, pp. 149176.
303
Imam Shawkani, Fat al-qadr, abridged by Sulayman Abd Allah
al-Ashqar (Kuwait: Shirkat Dhat al-Salasal, 1988), p. 37; Le Coran: Voila le
Livre, French translation and commentary by Yahya Alawi and Javad Hadidi
(Qom: Centre pour la traduction du Saint Coran, 2000), pp. 3189; Muhamad
Asad, The Message of the Quran (Maktaba Jawahar ul uloom: Lahore, n.d.),
p.41; Shaykh Muhammad al-Ghazali, A Thematic Commentary on the Quran,
trans. by A. Shamis (Herndon: International Institute of Islamic Thought,
2000), pp. 189.
304
In his War and Peace in the Law of Islam (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1955) Majid Khadduri goes so far as to translate jihad as
455
05/07/2013 15:22

warfare (p. 55) and permanent war (p. 62), and claims that the universalism
of Islam, in its all-embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous
process of warfare, psychological and political if not strictly military (p. 64).
This belligerent view of jihad is hard to justify in the light of both the legal and
cultural traditions of Islam discussed below.
305
Ibn Taymiyyah, Qidah f qitl al-kuffr, from Majm t rasil, p. 123,
quoted in Majid Khadduri, The Islamic Law of Nations, p. 59.
306
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Akm ahl al-dhimmah, edited by Subhi
al-Salih (Beirut: Dar al-Ilm lil-alamin, 1983, 3rd edn), vol. I, p. 17.
307
Cf. John Voll, Renewal and Reform in John Esposito, ed., The Oxford
History of Islam (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
308
Rudolph Peters, Islam and Colonialism: The Doctrine of Jihad in Modern
History (The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1979), p. 86. Peters work presents an
excellent survey of how jihad was reformulated as an anti-colonialist resistance
idea in the modern period. See also Allan Christelow, Muslim Law Courts and
the French Colonial State in Algeria (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1985) for the struggle of Muslim jurists to continue the tradition of Islamic law
under the French colonial system.
309
Al-Jabartis Chronicle of the French Occupation, trans. by Shmuel Moreh
(Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers, 1997), p. 26.
310
Farajs treatise has been translated by Johannes J. G. Jansen, The Neglected
Duty: The Creed of Sadats Assassins and Islamic Resurgence in the Middle East
(New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986), pp. 160230.
311
There is a consensus on this point among the Hanafi and Maliki schools
of law as well as some Hanbali scholars. For references in Arabic, see Yohanan
Friedmann, Tolerance and Coercion in Islam: Interfaith Relations in the Muslim
Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 856. For the
inclusion of Zoroastrians among the People of the Book, see Friedmann,
Tolerance and Coercion, pp. 726. Shafii considers the Sabeans, a community
mentioned in the Quran, as a Christian group. Cf. Ibn Qayyim, Akm, vol.
I, p. 92.
312
The incident is recorded in Baladhuris Fut al-buldn. Cf. Friedmann,
Tolerance and Coercion, p. 85.
313
The text of the Medinan treatise is preserved in Ibn Hishams Srah. It
is also published in Muhammad Hamidullah, Documents sur la Diplomatie
lEpoque du Prophte et des Khalifes Orthodoxes (Paris, 1935), pp. 914. For an
English translation, see Khadduri, War and Peace, pp. 2069.
314
Quoted in Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, p. 179. The
original text of the Najran treatise is quoted in Abu Yusuf, Kitb al-kharj and
Baladhuri, Fut al-buldn.
315
Ibn Qayyim, Akm ahl al-dhimmah, vol. I, p. 24.
316
Ibn Qayyim, Akm ahl al-dhimmah, vol. I, p. 26.
456
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
317
Abu Yusuf, Kitb al-kharj, p. 84. Cf. Shaybani, Siyar, in Khadduri, War
and Peace, p. 143.
318
Ibn Qayyim, Akm ahl al-dhimmah, vol. I., p. 32ff.
319
Ibn Qayyim, Akm ahl al-dhimmah, p. 42 and 49.
320
This is not to deny that there were examples to the contrary. When one
of the governors of Umar Abd al-Aziz asked permission to collect huge
amounts of jizyah owed by Jews, Christians and Majus of al-Hira before they
accepted Islam, Abd al-Aziz responded by saying that God has sent the
Prophet Muhammad to invite people to Islam and not as a tax collector. This
letter is quoted in Abu Yusuf, Kitb al-kharj, p. 90.
321
Cf. Aziz Ahmad, Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964), pp. 801.
322
Abu Yusuf mentions the case of Abu Ubaydah returning the jizyah to the
dhimmis of Homs when he was not able to provide protection for them against
the Roman emperor Heraclius. Cf. the letter by Abu Ubayadah mentioned by
Abu Yusuf, Kitb al-kharj, p. 150.
323
Cf. Khadduri, War and Peace, pp. 1889.
324
These include some restrictive rulings on what the People of the Book
could wear and what religious symbols they could display. Cf. A. S. Tritton,
The Caliphs and Their Non-Muslim Subjects (London: Oxford University
Press, 1930), chapters VII and VIII. As Tritton notes, however, such rulings
were not implemented strictly and displayed considerable variety across the
Islamic world. A case in point, which Tritton mentions (p. 121), is Salah al-Din
al-Ayyubi who had some Christian officers working for him without following
any strict dress code.
325
Khadduri, War and Peace, p. 85.
326
Quoted in Friedmann, Tolerance and Coercion, p. 40.
327
The major and minor religions that the Islamic world encountered
throughout its history make up a long list: the religious traditions of the preIslamic (jhiliyyah) Arabs, Mazdeans in Mesopotamia, Iran, and Transoxania,
Christians (of different communions like Nestorians in Mesopotamia and
Iran, Monophysites in Syria, Egypt and Armenia, Orthodox Melkites in
Syria, Orthodox Latins in North Africa), Jews in various places, Samaritans
in Palastine, Mandaeans in south Mesopotamia, Harranians in north
Mesopotamia, Manichaeans in Mesopotamia and Egypt, Buddhists and
Hindus in Sind, tribal religions in Africa, pre-Islamic Turkic tribes, Buddhists
in Sind and the Panjab, Hindus in the Punjab. Cf. J. Waardenburg, World
Religions as seen in the Light of Islam in A. T. Welch and P. Cachia, eds, Islam
Past Influence and Present Challenge (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,
1979), pp. 2489. See also J. Waardenburg, Muslims and Others: Relations in
Context (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2003).
328
The six cultural zones of the Islamic world comprise Arabic, Persian,
457
05/07/2013 15:22

Turkish/Turkic, Indian, Malay-Indonesian, and African spheres of culture
where the expression of Islam as a religious and cultural identity has been more
heterogeneous and complex than the Christian, Hindu or Chinese worlds. For
a discussion of these zones, see S. H. Nasr, The Heart of Islam, (San Francisco:
HarperCollins, 2003), pp. 87100.
329
See for details, M. Hinds, Mihna in Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn, 7:26.
330
See Semiramis Cavusoglu, The Kadizadeli Movement: An Attempt at
Seriat-Minded Reform in the Ottoman Empire (Unpublished Dissertation;
Princeton University, 1990). Also see Madeline C Zilfi, Vaizan and Ulema in
the Kadizadeli Era Proceedings of the tenth Congress of the Turkish Historical
Society (Ankara, 1994), pp.2493500.
331
Marshall Hodgsons suggestion of the term Islamicate to express the
hybrid and multifaceted nature of Islamic civilization is not completely without
justification as many previously non-Islamic elements were incorporated into
Islamic civilisation in a relatively short period of time. Cf. his The Venture of
Islam (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1974).
332
See Al-Rabi b. Habib al-Basari, Musnad al-Imm al-Rab, Bb f al-Ilm wa
alabih wa Falih. This is also narrated by Abu Bakr Aamad b. Amre al-Bazzar
in his al-Bar al-Zukhkhar also known as Musnad al-Bazzar (Beirut: Muassasat
Ulum al-Quran, 1409 AH), 1:1775, where he claims that there is no foundation
(al) for this hadith.
333
Abu Isa Muhammad Tirmidhi, Sunan al-Tirmidh, Kitb al-Ilm an Rasl
Allh, Bb m Ja f Fal al-Fiqh al al-Ibdah; Ibn Majah, Sunan Ibn Mjah,
Kitb al-Zuhd, Bb al-ikmah. This hadith has been transmitted in many hadith
collections with some variations.
334
Ignaz Goldziher, The Attitude of Orthodox Islam Toward the Ancient
Sciences in Studies on Islam, trans. and edited by M. L. Swartz, Oxford, 1981,
pp. 185215. For an important criticism of Goldzihers conceptualisation, see
Dimitri Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture (London: Routledge, 1998), pp.
166171.
335
Yaqub b. Ishaq Al-Kindi, Rasil, I, p. 97, quoted in Majid Fakhry, A History
of Islamic Philosophy (New York: Columbia University Press, 1983), p. 70.
336
Saib b. Ahmad al-Andalusi, Science in the Medieval World Book of the
Categories of Nations (Tabaqt al-umam) trans. S. I. Salem and A. Kumar,
(Austin: The University of Texas Press, 1991), p. 6.
337
Cf. Franz Rosenthal, The Classical Heritage in Islam (London: Routledge,
1975), pp. 2551.
338
The Arabic text of al-Mukhtar has been edited by A. Badawi (Beirut: The
Arab Institute for Research and Publishing, 1980, 2nd edn) and see the original
English translation by Curt F. Buhler (London: Oxford University Press, 1941).
339
Quoted in Abu Sulayman al-Sijistani, Muntakhab iwan al-ikmah, edited
by D. M. Dunlop (The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1979), p. 3.
458
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
340
Shihab al-Din Yahya b. Habash al-Suhrawardi, ikmat al-Ishrq (The

Philosophy of Illumination), edited and translated by John Walbridge and
Hossein Ziai (Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 1999), p. 2.
341
For Andalusia, see Anwar Chejne, Muslim Spain: Its History and Culture
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1974) and Salma Khadra Jayyusi
and Manuela Marin, eds, The Legacy of Muslim Spain (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1992).
For the concept of convivencia and the Jewish contributions to Andalusian civilization, see V. B. Mann, T. F. Glick, and J. D. Dodds, eds., Convivencia: Jews,
Muslims, and Christians in Medieval Spain (New York: The Jewish Museum,
1992).
342
See, among others, Arthur Hyman, Jewish Philosophy in the Islamic
World in S. H. Nasr and Oliver Leaman, eds, History of Islamic Philosophy
(London: Routledge,), vol. I, pp. 67795 and Paul B. Fenton, Judaism and
Sufism, ibid., pp. 75568.
343
Cf. Aziz Ahmad, Studies, pp. 1916; Annemarie Schimmel, Islam in the
Indian Subcontinent (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1980), pp. 99100.
344
From the Introduction to Sirr-i akbar quoted in Majm-ul-barayn or
the Mingling of the Two Oceans by Prince Muhammad Dara Shikuh, translated
by M. Mahfuz-ul-Haq (Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1929), p. 13.
345
Majm-ul-barayn, p. 38.
346
Fathullaj Mujtabai, Hindu Muslim Cultural Relations (New Delhi, 1978),
p. 82; Edward G. Browne, A Literary History of Persia vol. IV, pp. 2578.
chapter
347
UNDP, Human Development Report 1994New Dimensions of Human

Security ( New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).
348
Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now: Final Report
(New York: CHS, 2003).
349
See in particular David Baldwin, The Concept of Security, Review of
International Studies 23/1 (1997) pp. 526; and John Baylis, International
Security and Global Security in the Post-Cold War Era, in John Baylis & Steve
Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics. An Introduction to International
Relations (3rd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005) pp. 297324.
350
Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh, Human Security: Concepts, Application and
Implication, Etudes du CERI, No.1178, Paris, CERI (September 2005). See
further: What is Human Security? Comments by 21 Authors, Security
Dialogue 35/3 (2004) pp. 34787.
351
Al-Khalil b. Ahmad, Kitb al-Ayn, s.v. S-L-M : al-salmu iddu l-arb,
wa yuql: al-salmu wa l-silmu wid/peacemaking is the antonym of war;
also s.v. -R-B : al-arbu naqu l-salm/war is the opposite of peacemaking.
352
At conclusion of ritual prayer, the taslm is the double salutation to
459
05/07/2013 15:22

right and left. See Srat Al-Azb, 33:56 all alayhi wa sallim taslm.
353
But note the current Arabic term for pacifism: ubb al-silm. Classical
Juridical usage also equated al-ul with al-silm ending the state of war.
354
We rely for what follows on the Quran, and classic lexicons s.v.
S-L-M, including al-Khalil b. Ahmad, al-Ayn; al-Jawhar, i; Ibn
Duray, al-Ishtiqq; Ibn Fris, Maqys al-Lughah; and Murta al-Zabd,
Lisn al-Arab. Relevant linguistic material may also be gleaned from major
Exegetical/Tafsr and Prophetic Biographical/Srah genres. Here we are very
concise, it being understood that important details might be developed at
greater depth.
355
See Srat al-Anfl, 8:1; Al-Nis; 4:35, 4:114; Al-ujurt, 49:910, etc.
356
Indeed, the significance of the nexus of these fundamental opposing
conceptual pairs demands a separate study in greater detail, linking this notion
with the cluster of ideas derived from amn and minn, as opposed to ulm
(manifest injustice). The richness and centrality of the ul notion displays
its true centre of gravity when the verses wherein it occurs are explored in the
light of exegetical data preserved in the tafsr and asbb al-nuzl literatures.
357
The Quran presents this important teaching as the message of the
previous prophets to their peoples; consult e.g. Srat Al-Baqarah, 2:220;
Al-Arf, 7:85 and 142; and Al-Naml, 27:48 where the plotters against the
Prophet Salih are portrayed as those who spread corruption in the land and
who would not reform / yufsidna f l-ari wa l yulina.
358
See al-Hafiz Ahmad b. al-Husayn al-Bayhaqi, Shuab al-mn [Branches
of Faith], edited by M. S. Basyn Zaghll (Beirut: 1990) vol.VII pp. 48797,
for materials on peacemaking; this utterance is no. 11092, and the immediately following one no.11093.
359
Ibid, no.11088 (as cited in Muslim, a, via Abd al-Razzq Abu
Hurayrah); an alternative transmission (no. 11089) gives bighah hatred in
place of fasdu dht al-bayn, through al-ZuhriAbu Idris al-Khawlani
as an utterance by Abu l-Dard. / This famous Prophetic utterance also
frequently occurs cited by Ali b. Ab Talib in his deathbed testament to his
two sons (the grandsons of Muhammad).
360
Ibid,, nos110968; and pp. 4917.
361
Consult Toshihiko Izutsu, The Concept of Belief in Islamic Theology:
A Semantic Analysis of mn and Islm (Keio University, 1965; rpr. Kuala
Lumpur: Islamic Book Trust, 2006) on pp. 71103 and 196237.
362
For the variety of juridical employment consult e.g. the juridical lexicon
by Sadi Abu Jayb, al-Qms al-Fiqhyah lughat wa iil (2nd pr., Damascus:
Dr al-Fikr, 1988) pp.1802.
363
The great Kufan jurist Abu Hanifah (d. 150/767 CE) included this
Prophetic utterance among his choice of five weightiest Prophetic adth
crucial for faith.
460
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
364
When the Prophets paternal cousin Jafar b. Abi Talib in 615 CE (seven
years before the migration of the Prophet to Madinah in 622) described the
essence of Islamic guidance to the Ethiopian Emperor al-Najsh at his court
in Axum, Jafar emphasised this salutation of Islam as a new practice specific
to their religion taught them by Muammad.
365
This word taslm from verbal form II sallama (to make or render salutations of peace-security), most often refers to the formula of praise and blessing invariably invoked upon mentioning the Prophet Muhammadsee Srat
Al-Azb, 33:56: God and His angels make blessings upon the Prophet; O you who
believe, do you also bless him and render him salutations of peace-security /all
alayhi wa sallim taslm.
366
Singular tayah (verbal-noun form II ayy or ayyiya) denotes salutation, greeting [i.e. salm alayka]; as well as security from death and evils, or
everlasting existence. Compare the familiar salute ayyka llhu: May God
make thee secure from harm-evilor simply May God prolong thy life.
367
The al-tayt are uttered in short form after every second prostration,
and in prolonged complete form (tashahhud) after the third or the fourth cycle
of prostrations; except of course for the dawn prayer which consists of only
two cycles.
368
Allhumma Anta l-salm wa min-Ka l-salm wa ilay-Ka yadu
l-salm . See what follows for a parallel tradition involving the Prophets
wife Khadijah.
369
Ibn Hanbal, Musnad (Cairo: 1313) V p. 451 [no. 23272 in the recent
edition]. This adth is only found in this source as far as I am aware. However,
it should be observed that similar statements occur in Imm sources as an
utterance assigned to Ali b. Abi Talib, as well as to Salman al-Farisi.
370
Ifsh l-salma wa ima l-ama wa il l-arm wa all wa l-ns
niym, tadkhul l-jannata bi-salm! The alternative rendering greeted by
Gods salutation Peace! has much to recommend it. / Recall that salm is often
a synonym of al-amn (surety) as well as al-ul (peace-making).
371
For this and the following etymological data, consult sources specified in
note 354 above; and also Ibn Abil-Hadid, Shar Nahj al-Balghah (old edition
of Cairo) II p. 445.
372
Compare the eulogy of divine names in Srat Al-ashr, 59:23 al-Maliku
l-Quddsu l-Salmu l-Mumin; further see our examination below of Salm as
an archaic theomorphic name.
373
Al-salmah min al-s wa l-ikhtill. See the treatment of the Divine Name
al-Salm in the genre of writings on Gods Most Beautiful Names (Asm Allh
al-usn). This valuable genre has to be integrated into what we are briefly
sketching here.
374
Abd al-Rahman b. Abdullah al-Suhayli, al-Raw al-Unf, edited by
Majd b. Manr b. Sayyid al-Shr (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyah, n.d.) I
461
05/07/2013 15:22

pp. 4189. / Raw is an important commentary upon the Prophets Biography
or Srah compiled by Ibn Hishm (d. 213 AH), who drew upon the famous
early work by Ibn Isq (d. 151 AH).
375
Cited by Ibn Hisham on an unnamed authority; this adth on the phrase
Allhu l-Salm is also cited in al-Bukhr, a IV p. 136; and in Muslim,
fail al-abah no. 91 (through Aishah).
376
al-Suhayli, al-Raw al-Unf I pp. 419420.
377
See e.g. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Jmi al-Bayn f Tawl al-Qurn, edited by
Hani al-Hajj et al. (Cairo: al-Maktabat al-Tawfiqiyah, n.d.) II pp. 3636. And
al-Maturidi, Tawlt al-Qurn (Istanbul: 2005) I p. 412. We also signal here,
without discussion, the occurrence of the term al-salama in Srat Al-Nis
4:8691.
378
Namely: Thalabah, Abdallah Ibn Salam, Ibn Yamin, Asad and Usayd
ibnay Kab, Shubah b. Umar, and Qays b. Zaydall prominent Medinan
Jews who accepted Islam and Muhammads prophethood. Tabaris isnd for
this statement by Ikramah is through Ibn Jurayj (another leading tradent from
the circle of Ibn Abbas); this is a singular tradition not supported by complementary reports, and might not inspire much confidence, which may explain
why Tabari does not appear to place much weight on it. Nevertheless, it is of
definite interest and cannot be dismissed out of hand, perhaps reflecting a
Jewish reaction to the Muslim Friday day of rest being an explicit divergence
from Israelite tradition. Keep in mind that the believers in Medina under the
Prophet included Jews and several Christians, as well as Arab Muslims.
379
Tabari, Jmi al-Bayn II p. 365.
380
Tabari, Jmi al-Bayn X pp. 357.
381
Tabari, Jmi al-Bayn II p. 364: amm dauhum il l-uli ibtid
fa-ghayr mawjd f l-Qurn. He is correct in this assertion.
382
The famed sword verses permitting combat against pagan idolaters are
most often given as Al-Baqarah, 2:190, and/or Al-ajj, 22:39.
383
Tabari, Jmi al-Bayn X p. 36: m qlahu Qatdah wa man qla mithla
qawlihi min an hdhihi l-yah manskhah, fa-qawlu l dallata alayhi min
kitb wa l sunnat wa l firata aql! This appeal to inborn reason is not surprising coming from Tabari, whose juridical law rite the Jariri madhhab was noted
for its rational orientation and thus condemned by Traditionalist anbals.
384
Current scholarship on jihad has highlighted this divergence over the
claimed abrogation of Meccan verses by later Medinan revelations. See e.g.,
Muhammad Said Ramadan al-Buti, al-Jihad f l-Islm: kayfa nafhamuhu wa
kayfa numrisuhu?, 2nd revised ed., (Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 1995).
385
For the siege and subsequent execution of adult males of the Qurayzah
tribe in upper Medina in year 5 AH, see concise overview with full list of
sources given in Karim Crow, Facing One Qiblah (Singapore: Pustaka Nasional,
2005)Appendix Jewish Tribes in Madnah.
462
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
386
Jmi al-Bayn X p. 37.

Consult e.g. Robert G. Hoyland, Arab kings, Arab tribes and the beginnings of Arab historical memory in late Roman epigraphy, in Hannah M
Cotton et al., eds, From Hellenism to Islam. Cultural and Linguistic Change
in the Roman Near East (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009)
pp.374400; R. G. Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs (London: 2001), on pp.
96103; and Hoyland, Epigraphy and the Emergence of Arab Identity, in
P. Sijpesteign et al., eds, From Andalusia to Khurasan: Documents from the
Medieval Islamic World (Leiden: Brill, 2007) pp. 21942.
388
See this invaluable compilation by the erudite Andalusian scholar
Muhammad b. Ali b. Ahmad b. udaydah al-Ansari (d. 783 AH/ 1381 CE),
al-Mib al-Mu f Kuttb al-Nab al-Umm wa Rusulihi il Mulk al-Ar
min Arab wa Ajam, edited by al-Shaykh Muhammad Azim al-Din (2nd
revised edn, Beirut: Alam al-Kutub, 1985; in 2 vols). The learned editor made
use of Professor M. Hamidullahs fundamental study Majmat al-Wathiq
al-Siysyah, and supplemented significant references and relevant documentation drawn from the wealth of Hadith literature, with excellent indices. Certain textual details concerning these letters are to be found only in
al-Mib al-Mu.
389
W. Robertson Smith, The Religion of the Semites [1889] (2nd edn 1894;
rpr. New York: Meridan, 1956) pp. 7980. Observe the archaic meaning still
reflected in classical Muslim legal usage of the term al-salam = al-istislm a
prisoner captured apart from war. / Palmyrene was one branch of old Arabic
along with Nabataean, as well as the dialect of the Hijazthe basis of Quranic
Arabic.
390
Personal communication in 1999, from my respected teacher Professor
Abbas in the year before his death in Amman; may God show him mercy.
391
W. Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites p. 20.
392
Consult e.g. Subhash C. Inamdar, Muhammad and the Rise of Islam: The
Creation of Group Identity (Madison. CT: Psychosocial Press, 2001), which
provides a psycho-social model for the moulding of groups and their sociohistorical impact on individuals and society.
387
chapter
393
Abd Allah al-Khatib al-Tabrizi, Mishkt al-Mab, edited by

Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, 2nd edn (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami,
1399/1979), vol. 2, hadith no. 2724.
394
Muslim b. Hajjaj al-Nishapuri, Mukhtasar a Muslim, edited by M
Nasir al-Din al-Albani, 2nd edn (Beirut: Dar al-Maktab al-Islami, 1404/1984),
p.11, hadith no. 34.
395
For further detail on the principle of isbah (promotion of good and
463
05/07/2013 15:22

prevention of evil) and the manner in which it is conducted see M. H. Kamali,
Freedom of Expression in Islam (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1997), pp.
2834.
396
Tabrizi, Mishkat, vol.1, hadith no. 46.
397
Ibid., vol.3, hadith no. 5097.
398
Shihab al-Din al-Alusi, Rh al-Mn f Tafsr al-Qurn al-Am (Beirut:
Dar al-Turath al-Arabi, nd.), vol. XV, no. 117.
399
For a roundup of opinion and references to Sayyid Qutb, Mustafa
al-Sibai, Abd al-Hakim Hasan al-Ili, Ahmad Yusri, and Wahbah al-Zuhaili
see Mohammad Hashim Kamali, The Dignity of Man: an Islamic Perspective,
(Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 2002), pp. 12.
400
For details on the subject of rights and duties in Islamic law, see M.H.
Kamali, An Analysis of Rights in Islamic Law, The American Journal of Islamic
Social Sciences 10 (1993), pp. 178201. A summary of this examination can also
be found in idem. Freedom of Expression in Islam, pp. 1624.
401
See my views on this and other aspects of the human rights discourse in
Kamali, The Dignity of Man, pp. xv-xvi.
402
Jack Donolly, Human Rights and Human Dignity: An Analytic Critique
of non-Western Conceptions of Human Rights, The American Political Science
Review 76 (June 1982), p. 304.
403
I shall not engage into details here but merely point out that textbook
writers number the arriyyt into five, hence the phrase al- arriyyt
al-khamsah, to which the seventh century jurist Shihab al-Din al-Qarafi added
a sixth, namely al-ir (honour). Since this is a valid addition and has a Quranic
basis, I refer to them as the six universals, namely of life, intellect, religion,
family, property, and honour. See for details M.H. Kamali, An Introduction to
Shariah (Kuala Lumpur: Ilmiah Publishers, 2006), ch. 6 Goals and Purposes
(maqid) of Shariah: History and Methodology, pp. 11533, at 118. A
revised and enhanced edition of this book is due to be published by Oneworld
Publication, Oxford, U.K.
404
Cf. Dirk Bakker, Man in the Quran (Amsterdam: Drukkerij, 1965), p. 127
and passim. Bakker also quotes in support C. Snouk Hurgronje and Richard
Bell. He has on the other hand discussed Montgomery Watt, H. Berkeland and
others that variously characterised God-man relationship with mercy, guidance, creative power, and dominion etc.
405
Cf. Muddathir Abd al-Rahim, Anmat al-ubb fl-Qurn al-Karm:
Narah Ijmliyyah, conference paper presented to the International
Conference on al-ubb fl-Qurn al-Karm, (Manifestations of Love in the
Noble Quran), organised by the Royal Academy of Jordan, 46 September
2007, p.6f.
406
Cf., Srat Al-Baqarah, 2:263; Al-Arf, 7:156; Al-ijr, 15:56; Al-Zumar,
39: 53 and passim.
464
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
407
Al-Baqarah 2:164; l Imrn, 3:18; Al-Nis, 4:162; Al-ajj, 22:54; Al-Rm,

30:28; Al-Mujdilah, 58:11; Fir, 35:88; d, 38:43; Al-Zumar, 39:9,18.
408
Cf., Luqmn, 31:20; Fir, 35:13; Al-Mulk, 67:15.
409
Al-Arf, 7:10, 30; Ibrhm, 14:34 and Al-Qaa, 28:77.
410
Muhammad b. Ismail al-Bukhari, a al-Bukhari, Kitb al-Riqq,
hadith no.6502.
411
The Arabic terms used in the Quran are al-mutadn, al-alimn,
al-mufsidn, al-mustakbirn, al- fakhr, al-kfirn, al-khainn, al-musrifn
(Al-Baqarah, 2:195; Al-Shra, 42:40; Al-Baqarah, 2:205; Al-Nal, 16:23; Al-Nis,
4:36; Al-Arf, 7:32; Al-Anfl, 8:58; and Al-Anm, 6:141 respectively).
412
Al-Qaradawis discussion of this and other related verses in the Quran
leads him to the conclusion that Islam recognises two levels of fraternity, namely
human fraternity (al-ikh al-insni) and fraternity in faith (al-ikh al-dn).
The latter does not weaken the former, rather it substantiates and endorses the
wider fraternity of humankind: Yusuf al-Qaradawi, al-Khasis al-Ammah lilIslm (Cairo: Maktabah Wahbah, 1409/1989), p. 84.
413
From the Prophets Farewell Sermon, Muslim, Mukhtasar a Muslim,
p.186, hadith no. 707.
414
l Imrn, 3:195; Al-Nal, 16:97.
415
J. Weeramantry, Islamic Jurisprudence: an International Perspective
(Basingstoke, U.K: Macmillan, 1988), p. 64.
416
Al-Anbiy, 21:20; Al-Baqarah, 2:187.
417
Al-Tabrizi, Mishkt, vol.2, hadith no.4998.
418
Muslim, Mukhtasar a Muslim, p. 476, hadith no.1794.
419
Muslim, Mukhtasar a Muslim, p. 484, hadith no.1833.
420
Al-Tabrizi, Mishkt, vol.2, hadith no. 3665.
421
Muhammad ibn Yazid al-Qazwini ibn Maja, Sunan ibn Mjah (Istanbul:
Cagri Yayinlari, 1401/1981), kitb al-fitn; bb amr bil-marf wa nah an
al-munkar.
422
For further detail on arriyyat also see M. H. Kamali Maqasid al-Shariah,
the Objectives of Islamic Law, Islamic Studies 38 (1999), pp. 193209. On the
concept of imah see Baber Johansen, Contingency in a Sacred Law: Legal and
Ethical Norms in the Muslim Fiqh (Leiden: Brill, 1999). For the emergence and
development of concepts see also Recep Senturk, damiyyah and Imah: The
Contested Relationship between Humanity and Human Rights in the Classical
Islamic Law, Turkish J. of Islamic Studies, 8(2002), pp. 3970.
423
Al-Tawbah, 9:5 (a likely reference to the pagans of Mecca), and Al-Anfl,
8:39 (permits fighting to end mischief and oppression).
424
Recep Senturk, Sociology of Rights, (see the next footnote), p. 16.
425
Cf. Abu al-Hassan Burhan al-Din al-Marghinani (d. 593 H/1296C.E),
al-Hidyah Shar Bidyat al-Mubtad, edited by Muhammad Tamir et al. (Cairo:
Dar al-Salam, 1420/2000), vol. II, no. 852; see also Recep Senturk, Sociology
465
05/07/2013 15:22

of Rights: I Am Therefore I Have Rights: Human Rights in Islam Between
Universalistic and Communalistic Perspectives, produced by the Berkeley
Electronic Press, 2005: http:www.bepress.com/mwjhr/vol.12/iss1/art11.
426
Abi Bakr Muammad b. Ahmad al-Sarakhsi, Usl al-Sarakhsi, edited by
Abul-Wafa al-Afghani (Istanbul: Kahraman Yay, 1984, 86).
427
Ibid., 3334.
428
Abu al-Hassan Burhan al-Din al-Marghinani, The Hedaya or Guide: a
commentary on the Mussulman laws, trans. Charles Hamilton (Karachi: DarulIshaat, 1989), II, 221.
429
Muhammad Amin ibn Abidin, Hashyah ibn Abidin (Cairo: Mustafa
al-Babi al-Halabi, 1386/1966), vol. V, 58.
430
Cf. Senturk, The Sociology of Rights, p. 16.
431
The present writer has written extensively on the fundamental rights of
the individual in Islam. See for details Mohammad Hashim Kamali, The Right
to Life, Security, Privacy and Ownership in Islam, 2008, pp. xi+318, Idem, The
Right to Education, Work and Welfare in Islam, 2010, pp, x and 294 and Idem,
Citizenship and Accountability of Government: An Islamic Perspective, 2011, pp.
x and 321. All three books published by Cambridge: Islamic Text Society.
chapter
432
Srat Al-Baqarah, 2:101, 144, 145; l Imrn, 3:19, 20, 100, 186, 187;
Al-Nis, 4:47, 131; Al-Midah, 5:5, 57; Al-add, 57:16; Al-Muddaththir, 74:31;
Al-Bayyinah, 98:4.
433
Al-Baqarah, 2: 121, 146; Al-Anm, 6:20, 89, 114; Al-Rad, 13:36; Al-Naml,
27:52; Al-Ankabt, 29:47; Al-Jthiyah, 45:16.
434
l Imrn, 3:23; Al-Nis, 4: 44, 51.
435
Fir, 35:32; Al-Shr, 42:14.
436
Al-Rad, 13:43.
437
Ynus, 10:94.
438
Al-Nal, 16:43; Al-Anbiy, 21:7. Though al-dhikr is one of the names of
the Quran, the pre-modern exegetes have generally identified ahl al-dhikr with
either ahl al-tawrah or ahl al-injl or both. See Ismail b. Umar Ibn Kathir, Tafsr
al-Qurn al-Am (Cairo: Matbaah al-Istiqamah, 1375/1956), l Imrn, 3:
174, comments on Al-Anbiy, 21:7.
439
This occurs nine times in the Quran only in the Medinan surahs
(Al-Baqarah, 2:113 (twice), 120; l Imrn, 3: 67; Al-Midah, 5: 18, 51, 64, 82;
Al-Tawbah, 9:30).
440
This occurs three times in Srat Al-Baqarah (Al-Baqarah, 2:111, 135, 140).
441
This occurs ten times, mostly in the Medinan surahs (Al-Baqarah, 2: 62;
Al-Nis, 4: 46, 160; Al-Midah, 5: 41, 44, 69; Al-Anm, 6: 146; Al-Nal, 16:118;
Al-ajj, 22:17; Al-Jumuah, 62:6).
466
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
442
The phrase ban/ban Isrl (the Children of Israel) is mentioned in the

Quran forty times. The usage of this phrase is quite different from that of the
above mentioned terms. The phrase ban Isrl seems to indicate the Jewish
race, whereas the term yahd and its derivatives are generally used to address
people of Jewish faith. These latter terms seem to have a pejorative connotation.
See for further discussion, Omer Faruk Harman, Tefsir Geleneginde Yahudilere
Bakij in his Muslumanlar ve Diger Din Mensuplari (Ankara: Turkiye Dinler
Tarihi Dernegi Yayinlar, 2004), pp. 11920. It is also interesting to note that
the title of one of the Quranic surahs in the late Meccan period is Ban Isrl
(surah 17).
443
Almost all of them occur in the Medinan surahs (Al-Baqarah, 2:62, 111,
113 (twice), 120, 135, 140; Al-Midah, 5: 14, 18, 51, 69, 82; Al-Tawbah, 9:30;
Al-ajj, 22:17). In one place the term narni is mentioned (l Imrn, 3: 67).
444
Muammad, 47: Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has
revealed therein...
445
l Imrn, 3:52; Al-Midah, 5:111, 112; Al-aff, 61:14 (twice).
446
Sabeans: Al-Baqarah, 2:62; Al-Midah, 5:69; Al-ajj, 22:17. And
Zoroastrians: Al-ajj, 22:17.
447
Malik b. Anas, al-Muwatta (Istanbul: agri, 1992), 1: 244. Only the Zahiri
school of thought holds the view that marriage with a Zoroastrian woman
is legitimate. See Abu Muhammad All b. Ahmad Ibn Hazm, al-Muhalla bi
l-Athar (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, n.d.), 5: 4134. Although the Hanafi jurist Abu
Yusuf Yaqub b. Ibrahim (d. 182/798) includes the Zoroastrians among ahl
al-dhimmah, he does not see marrying their women to be legitimate. See his
Kitb al-Kharaj (Cairo: n.p., 1990), pp. 122, 12830.
448
Al-Anm, 6:156: Lest you should say: The Book was sent down only upon
two parties (ifatayn) before us, and we have indeed been heedless of their study.
449
Tawrah is mentioned eighteen times in the Quran; almost all occurring
in the Medinan surahs (the single exception is the verse Al-Arf, 7:157 in the
late Meccan Surat Al-Arf).
450
Zabr is mentioned three times, two of which are related to the Prophet
David U. The plural form of the term zabr (pl. zubur) occurs in seven places.
Interestingly, most of these surahs are Meccan. Moreover, the late Dr Hamidullah
thinks that the statements zubur al-awwaln in Al-Shuar, 26:196 and al-uuf
al-l in Al-Al, 87:18 refer to the Hindus sacred texts. See Muhammad
Hamidullah, Le Saint Coran (Beirut: Muassasat al-Risalah, n.d.), 2: 492, 804.
However, this does not seem very plausible.
451
Injl is mentioned twelve times in the Quran; almost all occurring in
the Medinan surahs (again, the single exception is in the late Meccan surah,
Al-Arf, 7:157). It is also important to note that the Quran does not use the
plural form Gospels.
452
Al-Al, 87:18. There are also some Prophetic traditions which say that
467
05/07/2013 15:22

God sent suhuf (sheets) to the Prophets Adam (Adam) and to Shith who was
a son of the Prophet Adam and Prophet Enoch (Idris) X. See Abu Hatim
Muhammad b. Hibban al-Taymi, a Ibn ibbn bi Tartb Ibn Balbn, edited
by Shuayb al-Arnaut (Beirut: Muasasat al-Risalah, 1414/1993), 2: 76. See also,
Abu Jafar Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari, Tarkh al-Rusul wa al-Mulk (Beirut:
Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, 1407 ah), 1: 96, 102.
453
Al-Al, 87:19.
454
Harman, Tafsir Geleneginde Yahudilere Bakis, p. 119.
455
It is narrated that the Prophet Muhammad U met three of them, namely
Yaish and Jabr from Banu Hadrami, and Balam whom he taught the Quran.
Abu Jafar Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari, Jamal-Bayn an Tawl Ayy
al-Qurn (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr 1988), 8: 1778; 16:103.
456
The majority of Christians lived in the tribes of Bakr b. Wail, Tayy,
Khatham, Kalb, Taghlib, etc. See Levent Ozturk, Islam Toplumunda Birarada
Yaama Tecrubesi (Istanbul: insan Pub., 1995), p. 25.
457
Not only foreign Christians but also a few native (converted) Christians
were warned by the Meccans not to interfere in the local peoples religious life.
For example, Abu Sufyan advised Umayyah b. Abi l-Salt not to lead laymen
away from their forefathers beliefs. It is also noted that when Zayd b. Amr b.
Nufayl refused to accept idolatry, his brothers tortured him and sent him away
from Mecca. See Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham, al- Srah al-Nabawiyyah (Cairo:
n.p., 1971), I: 246; Muhammad Rashid Rida, al-Way al-Muammadi (Cairo:
n.p., 1960), p. 75. It is also narrated that Amrah, the daughter of Muawiyah b.
Mughirah b. Abi al-As, married a Christian, Abu Najdah. Consequently, she
was severely criticised by the Meccans. See Ahmad b Yahya b. Jabir al-Baladhuri, Ansb al-Ashrf edited by M. Schloessinger (Jerusalem: n.p., 1938), IV
B: 169-170.
458
According to historians, when the Prophet U came to Medina, the
number of Jews there was around four thousand. See Muhammed Hamidullah,
Medinede Kurulan ilk Islam Devletinin Esas Tejkilat Yapisi ve Hz. Peygamber
in Vecdi Akyuz, ed., Vazettigi Yeryuzundeki ilk Yazili Anayasa, Islam Anayasa
Hukuku, (Istanbul: Beyan Publishing House, 1995), p. 95.
459
See Muhammed Hamidullah, Islam Peygamberi, trans. Salih Tug
(Istanbul: Irfan Publishing House, 1990), 1: 187.
460
See for example, Maryam, 19:1-72.
461
Is he (to be accounted equal with him) who relies on a clear proof from his
Lord, and a witness from Him recites it, and before it was the Book of Moses, an
example and a mercy?... Hd, 11:17.
462
See Muammad, 47:579.
463
This verse is the only explicit Biblical quotation (Psalms, 37:29) in the
Quran.
464
See Al-Anm, 6: 43; Al-Anbiy, 21:7.
468
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
465
See Maryam, 19:94.

See al-Tabari, Jam al-Bayn, 11: 1620.
467
Ismail b. Umar Ibn Kathir, Tafsr al-Qurn al-Am, 2: 221, comments
on Al-Rad, 13:39.
468
See Srat Fir, 35:31; Al-Arf, 7:157. See Al-Naml, 27:76.
469
There is another verse, kffatan (Sab, 34:28), which shows that the
message of the Quran and the Prophethood of Muhammad U are universal; his message is neither time-bound nor confined to any particular cultural
milieu.
470
See Ibn Kathir, Tafsr al-Qurn al-Am, 3: 4156, comments on
Al-Ankabt, 29:46.
471
Dr Muhammad Hamidullah (d. 2002) and some Western scholars have
called this pact the Medinan Constitution. The articles of the pact do not occur
in toto in Hadith collections. According to Hamidullah, there are 52 articles,
whereas Julius Wellhausen (d. 1918) believes that there are 47 articles. In addition to this, Hamidullah says that the Jews participated in this pact after the
Muslims. Although there is some disagreement about the exact number of articles and content of the pact, it is generally accepted as an authentic document
by a vast body of scholars. Unfortunately, however, the pact did not endure.
See Hamidullah, Medinede Kurulan ilk Islam Devletinin Esas Tejkilat ve Hz
Peygamberin Vazettigi Yeryuzundeki ilk Yazili Anayasa, pp. 1004; Ahmet
Bostanci, Hz. Peygamberin Gayri Muslimlerle Ilikileri (Istanbul: Ragbet
Publishing House, 2001), pp. 316.
472
It is narrated that the Prophet U preferred to follow the People of the
Book instead of Meccan pagans in matters where there were no specific religious commandments. See Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad Amad, Bidyatu
Musnad Abd Allah b. Abbas.
473
Muhammad b. Ismail al-Bukhari, a al-Bukhr, Kitb al-iym, Bb
iym Yawm Ashra.
474
Srat Al-Midah, 5:5. See also for a detailed analysis Davut Ayduz, Tarih
Boyunca Dinlerarasi Diyalog (Istanbul: Ijik Pub., 2004), pp. 1058.
475
Muhammad b. Ismail al-Bukhari, a al-Bukhr, Kitb al-Anbiy,
Bb m Dhukira an Ban Isrl. It is also mentioned in Abd al-Razzaqs
Muannaf. There are various legal implications of this statement. According
to some scholars, this hadith indicates a neutral status (neither forbidden nor
recommended). However, many other scholars explain this hadith as there
is no need to narrate from the Children of Israel. Ali b. Muhammad Ibn
Hajar al-Asqalani, Fat al-Br Shar a al-Bukhr (Cairo: Dar al-Fikr
1988), 10: 261. Regarding the belief in the existence of authentic words of God
in the Torah and Gospels, it can be gauged from the fact that some Muslim
scholars have discussed whether one should perform ablution before touching them. Abu al-Qasim Abd al-Karim b. Muhammad al-Rafii, Fat al-Azz
466
469
05/07/2013 15:22

Shar al-Wjiz (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, n.d.), 2: 108; Muhammad b. Salih b.
Yusuf, al-Inf, Bb Nawqid al-Wud, I: 364, <http://www.al-islam.com >.
Furthermore, the notion of shar man qablan is worth mentioning. According
to this rule, if the Quran and the Prophetic traditions (adith) are silent on
an issue, and this issue is explained in the scriptures of the Jews or Christians,
Muslims should take them into consideration. Abd al-Wahhab al-Khallaf, Ilm
Usl al-Fiqh (Istanbul: Eda Pub., 1991), pp. 923.
476
Muslim b. al-Hajjaj, a Muslim, Kitb al-Fail, Bb Fail Isa
alayh al-salm.
477
Ibid.
478
Muhammad b. Ismail al-Bukhari, a al-Bukhr, Kitb al-Jizyah
wa l-Muwadaah, Bb Ikhrj al-Yahd min Jazrat al-Arab, there are many
reports in Hadith literature concerning the Prophets visit to Bayt al-Midras.
479
See Srat Al-Baqarah, 2:75, 79; Al-Nis, 4: 46, 48; Al-Midah, 5:13, 16,
41, 45.
480
Muslims are commanded to direct their faces to Mecca (Kabah) during
their prayer, to fast in the month of Ramadan, to recite the adhn (call for
prayer) to inform people about the time of prayer, and to start to attend regularly a Friday prayer. But these should not be seen merely as a tactic used by
the Prophet U in order to achieve what he wanted.
481
Such as their claim to be chosen by God, their love of life and their
cowardice when called on to fight, their mocking Gods rule and their frequent
collaboration with hypocrites and idolaters against the Muslims.
482
See Srat Al-Nis, 4:1712; Al-Midah, 5:17, 725, 77, 116. See
Al-Tawbah, 9:31.
483
See Al-Baqarah, 2:213.
484
In his interpretation of this verse (Al-ajj, 22:17) Mahmud b. Umar
al-Zamakhshari is extremely exclusivist: There are five religions, four of which
belong to Satan and the one to the Compassionate. He did not consider idolaters to be a religious community. See Jar Allah Mahmud b. Umar al-Zamakhshari, al-Kashshf an Haqiq Ghawmi al-Tanzl wa Oyoon al-Aqawl fi
Wujooh al-Tawl (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, 1997), 3: 149.
485
The names of these individuals are: Abd Allah b. Salam, Najashi
(Negus of Abyssinia), Thalabah b. Shubah, Asad and Usayd, the two sons
of Kab, Sayah b. Amr, Asad b. Ubayd. See al-Tabari, Jam al-Bayn, 3:52,
comments on Al-Baqarah, 2:62. Concerning the occasion of revelation of this
verse (Al-Baqarah, 2:62), Ibn Kathir notes that it was revealed due to Salman
al-Farisis inquiry about his pious Christian friends. According to Ibn Kathir,
from the time of Moses X to that of Jesus X Judaism prevailed; from the time
of Jesus X to that of Muhammad U, Christianity prevailed, from the time of
Muhammad U to the end of the world Islam will prevail. See Ibn Kathir, Tafsr
al-Qurn al-Am, 1:712, comments on Al-Baqarah, 2:62.
470
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
486
Ibid., 1: 171.
See al-Tabari, Jam al-Bayn, 2: 155.
488
See al-Tabari, Jam al-Bayn and Ibn Kathir, Tafsr al-Qurn al-Am,
comments on Al-Baqarah, 2:62; Al-Midah, 5:69 and l Imrn, 3:113.
489
See al-Tabari, Jam al-Bayn, comments on Al-Baqarah, 2:62; Al-Midah,
5:69 and l Imrn, 3:113.
490
l Imrn, 3: 75 also offers an interesting example: Among the People of
the Book there is he who, if you trust him with a weight of treasure, will return
it to you. And among them there is he who, if you trust him with a piece of gold
(dnr), he will not return it to you unless you keep standing over him.
491
Nasir al-Din Abd Allah b. Umar al-Baydawi, Anwr al-Tanzl wa Asrr
al-Tawl (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, 1988), 1: 274, comments on
Al-Midah, 5: 66.
492
See Fakhr al-Din Muhammad b. Umar al-Razi, Maftih al-Ghayb (Beirut:
Dar al-Fikr 1981), 12: 11, commenting on Al-Midah, 5: 437.
493
Ibn Kathir, Tafsr al-Qurn al-Am, comments on Al-Midah, 5:437.
Interestingly, the Quran also makes a fine distinction between the Jews and
the Christians in Al-Midah, 5:82: You will find the most vehement of mankind
in hostility to those who believe (to be) the Jews and the idolaters. And you
will find the nearest of them in affection to those who believe (to be) those who
say: Lo! We are Christians. That is because there are among them priests and
monks, and because they are not proud. On the basis of this verse, al-Zamakhshari says: Since the Jews are mentioned before idolaters, this shows that they
go even farther. Al-Zamakhshari, in al-Kashshf, comments on Al-Midah,
5:82. Gods characterisation of the Christians as tender-hearted people who are
moved to tears when they hear the Quran, however, is in accordance with what
is reported concerning the Negus of Abyssinia or the envoy of Abyssinia who
converted to Islam. Al-Tabari, on the other hand, says that this verse would
be applicable to all those who bear these characteristics. See al-Tabari, JamalBayn, comments on Al-Midah, 5: 82.
494
See Ibn Kathir, Tafsr al-Qurn al-Am, comments on Al-Baqarah, 2:68.
They generally think that faith in God necessarily entails belief in Muhammad
U because God has made this incumbent upon mankind.
495
Al-Tabari, Jamal-Bayn, comments on l Imrn, 3:4.
496
Ibid., comments on Al-Midah, 5:19. al-Baydawi, Anwr al-Tanzl,
Al-Baqarah, 2:472, comments on Al-Midah, 5:19.
497
In line with this verse, l Imrn, 3:110 describes Muslims as the best
community.
498
There is another verse (l Imrn, 3: 61) in this surah which is called the
verse of mubhalah (trial by prayer). On the occasion of a dispute between
the Prophet U and a deputation of the Christians of Najran who maintained
that Jesus X was the Son of God and therefore God incarnate, the Prophet U
487
471
05/07/2013 15:22

summoned them together with their families to participate in and then invoke
Gods curse on those who lie. Although they refused to invoke Gods curse on
the liars proposed by the Prophet U, he concluded with them a treaty guaranteeing all their civic and religious freedoms. See al-Baydawi, Anwr al-Tanzl,
1: 263, comments on l Imrn, 3:61; Muhammad Asad, The Message of the
Quran (Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus, 1980), p. 76, comments on l Imrn, 3:61.
499
See Tabari, Jamal-Bayn, 6: 484, comments on l Imrn, 3:61.
500
Abu Abd Allah Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Qurtubi, al-Jam li Akm
al-Qurn (Beirut: n. p., 1985), 4: 105, comments on l Imrn, 3:64.
501
See l Imrn, 3:67.
502
O ye who believe take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and
protectors: they are but allies and protectors to each other. And he amongst you
that turns to them (for protector) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people
unjust. (Al-Midah, 5:51).
503
Al-Baydawi, Anwr al-Tanzl, 1: 270, comments on Al-Midah, 5:51. It
should be noted that this did not prevent the Muslim rulers from appointing
both Jews and Christians to important positions in their realm.
504
See for instance, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, Munazarat (Istanbul: Yeni
Asya, 1993), p. 32.
505
Ibid., p. 71.
506
Jizyah is no more and no less than an exemption tax in lieu of military
service and in compensation for a covenant of protection accorded to such citizens by the Islamic state. See Asad, The Message of the Quran, p. 262.
507
Al-Zumar, 39:53: Say: O My slaves (ibd), who have been prodigal to
their own hurt! Despair not of the mercy of Allah, Who forgives all sins. Lo! He is
the Forgiving, the Merciful. It will be noted that this goes way beyond the view
that there are some minimal requirements for salvation: belief in God, in the
Last Day, and acting righteously. This seems to suggest salvation for all, even
for those who do not believe in God and the Last Day and do not care to act
righteously.
508
Quoted from Adnan Arslan Dini ogulculuk Problemine ozurn
Onerisi, in Muslumanlar ve Diger Din Mensuplari (Ankara: Turkiye Dinler
Tarihi Dernegi Pub. 2004), p. 348. The other verses on which Jar Allah frequently
places great emphasis are: Al-Midah, 5:1178; Al-Shr, 42:5; Qf, 50:29.
Furthermore, he argues that hellfire is not eternal. See ibid., passim. Jalal al-Din
Muhammad al-Rumi (d. 672/1273), Muhyi l-Din Muhammad b. Ali Ibn Arabi
(d. 638/1240), Abu Said Abu l-Khayr (d. 440/1049), Qutb al-Din Abd al-Haqq
b. Ibrahim Ibn Sabin (d. 669/1270), Abd al-Karim b. Hawazin al-Qushayri (d.
465/1072) are most frequently cited in this context.
509
See Muhammad Rashid Rida, Tafsr al-Manr (Beirut: Dar al-Marifah,
n.d.), 4: 7174 commenting on l Imrn, 3:113.
510
Kate Zebiri, Muslims and Christians: Face to Face (Oxford: Oneworld,
472
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
1997), p. 163. Some Muslim and non-Muslim intellectuals prefer to use some
Sufis arguments to support religious pluralism. Jalal al-Din Muhammad al-Rumi
(d. 672/1273), Muhyi l-Din Muhammad b. Ali Ibn Arabi (d. 638/1240), Abu
Said Abu l-Khayr (d. 440/1049), Qutb al-Din Abd al-Haqq b. Ibrahim Ibn
Sabin (d. 669/1270), Abd al-Karim b. Hawazin al-Qushayri (d. 465/1072) are
most frequently cited in this context. However, Kellers recent work proves the
contrary. See Carl A. Keller, Perception of Other Religions in Sufism in Jacques
Waardenburg, ed., Muslim Perceptions of Other Religions: A Historical Survey
(New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 1814.
511
See Fazlur Rahman, Major Themes of the Quran (Minneapolis: Bibliotheca
Islamica, 1991), pp. 1657.
512
See Suleyman Atej, Cennet Kimsenin Tekelinde Degildir in Islami
Aratirmalar Dergisi, 3 (1989), pp. 724; Mehmet Okuyan-Mustafa Ozturk,
Kuran Verilerine Gore Otekinin Konumu in Cafer Sadik Yaren, ed., Islam ve
Oteki (Istanbul: Kaknus, 2001), pp. 163216.
513
Said Nursi, Emirdag Lahikasi - I (Istanbul: Envar, 1992), p. 206.
514
See Said Nursi, ualar (Istanbul: Envar, 1993), p. 587; There are some
reports which say that at the end of time, Jesus (X will come and act in accordance with the holy law of Islam or that Jesus Xwill come and perform prayer
(salh) behind the Mahdi. See Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitb al-Fitan, Bb Fitnat
al-Dajjl wa Khurj Isa ibn Maryam. Nonetheless, Nursi does not talk about
the Christians complete conversion to Islam; rather, he thinks that the current
Christianity will be purified in the face of reality, it will cast off its superstitions
and unite with the truths of Islam. According to Nursi, this will be a transformation into a sort of Islam. See Said Nursi, ualar, p. 587.
515
See Said Nursi, Sozler (Istanbul: Sozler, 1993), p. 396.
516
Thomas, Michel, Bediuzzaman Said Nursinin Dujuncesinde MuslumanHiristiyan Diyalogu ve Ijbirligi, International Bediuzzaman Said Nursi
Conference, Istanbul (September 1998).
517
See Zeki Saritoprak and Sidney Griffith, Fethullah Gulen and the People
of the Book: A Voice from Turkey for Interfaith Dialogue in The Muslim
World, vol. 95, no. 3 (2005), p. 333.
518
See ibid., p. 334.
519
See Selfuk Camci-Kudret Unal, Hogoru ve Diyalog Iklimi (Izmir: Merkur,
1999), p. 156.
520
See Zebiri, Muslims and Christians: Face to Face, p. 166.
521
See ibid., pp. 1179.
522
Muhammad Ibn Ishaq (d. 151/768), Abu Uthman Amr b. Bahr al-Jahiz
(d. 255/868), Abd Allah b. Muslim Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276/889), Muhammad b.
al-Tayyib al-Baqillani (d. 403/1013), Ali b. Ahmad Ibn Hazm (d. 456/1064),
Imam al-Haramayn Abd al-Malik b. Abd Allah al- Juwayni (d. 478/1085), Abd
al-Rahman b. Muhammad Ibn Khaldun (d. 808/1406) are exceptions.
473
05/07/2013 15:22

523
Concerning the occasion of revelation of this verse, it is mentioned that

when the Medinan Arabs had no children, they vowed that if God gave them
children they would give them to the Jews who would educate them religiously.
And when they had children, they did this and gave their children to the Jews.
Then the Prophet U came to Medina and a few years later, when the Jews left
the city, they wanted to take these children with them. However, the childrens
parents tried to prevent this. The dispute was brought to the Prophet U, who
decided that if the children adopted Judaism and wanted to go with their religious fellows they could go. See al-Tabari, Jam al-Bayn, 3: 1418, comments
on Al-Baqarah, 2:256.
chapter
524
Abd Allah Basyuni, Naariyyat al-Dawlah fil-Islm (Beirut: al-Dar

al-Jamiiyyah, 1986),p. 28; Said Ramadan, Islamic Law, Its Scope and Equity,
2nd edn (Kuala Lumpur: Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia, 1992), p. 165;
Wahbah Zuhayli, Al-Fiqh al-Islm wa-Adillatuhuh, 3rd edn (Damascus: Dr
al-Fikr, 1409/1989), 8 vols, vol. iv, p. 435.
525
Abd al-Karim Zaydan, Akm Ahl al-Dimmah wal-Mustaminn f Dr
al-Islm (Baghdad: Maktabat al-Quds, 1963), p. 27; Rashid al-Ghannushi,
uquq al-Muwanah, uquq Ghayr al-Muslim fl-Mujtamaa al-Islm, 2nd
edn (Herndon, VA & Tunis: Al-Mahad al-Ulam lil-Fikr al-Islm, 1413/1993),
p. 57; Muhammad Hamidullah, Muslim Conduct of State, 3rd edn (Lahore: Shah
Muhammad Ashraf, 1953), p. 118.
526
See for details on siysah shariyyah, article by Mohammad Hashim
Kamali, Siysah shariyyah or the Policies of Islamic Government in American
Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, 6 (1989), pp. 5981.
527
Ramadan, Islamic Law, 1656.
528
Cf. Basyuni, Naariyyat al-Dawlah, 289; Hamidullah, Muslim Conduct
of State, p. 202; Zuhayli, Al-Fiqh al-Islm, vol. iv, p. 435.
529
Zuayl, Al-Fiqh al-Islm, vol. vi, p. 434; Abd al-Qadir Awdah, Al-Tashr
al-Jin al-Islm Muqranan bil-Qnun al-W (Cairo: Maktabah Wahbah,
1401/1981), 2 vols, vol. I, p. 277; Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of
Islam (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955), p.164.
530
Cf. Al-Ghannushi, uquq al-Muwanah, p. 61; Muhammad Fathi
Uthman, Al-Fikr al-Qnun al-Islm: Bayn Ul al-Sharah wa-Turth al-Fiqh
(Cairo: Maktabat Wahbah, n.d.), p. 270.
531
Muhammad b Isml Bukhr, a al-Bukhr, trans. Muhammad
Muhsin Khan, (Lahore: Qazi Publications, 1979) 9 vols, iv, 102; Abu Dwud,
Mukhtasar Sunan Abu Dwud, edited by Ahmad Muhammad Shakir and
Hamid Muhammad al-Faqi. Beirut: Dar al-Marifah, hadith no. 195; Zuhayli,
al-Fiqh al-Islm, vol. vi, p. 432.
474
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
532
Yaqub b Ibrhm Abu Yusuf, Kitb al-Kharj, 5th edn (Cairo: al-Mabaah
al-Salafiyyah, 1396 AH), p. 244; Zuhayli, al-Fiqh al-Islm, vol. vi, p. 432.
533
Cf. Zuhayli, al-Fiqh al-Islm, vol. vi, p. 433; Khadduri, War and Peace,
p. 168.
534
Cf. S. Abu l-Ala Mawdudi, Islamic Law and Constitution, trans. and edited
by Khurshid Ahmad, (Lahore: Islamic Publications (Pvt.) Ltd., 1960), p.181.
535
Cf. Zuhayli, aqq al-urriyyah, p. 147; See also Abd al-Wahhab Khallaf,
Al-Siysah Al-Shariyyah (Cairo: al-Matbaah al-Salafiyyah, 1350 AH), p. 35.
536
Al-Sarakhs, Shams al-Dn, Shar al-Siyar al-Kabr, vol. iv, p. 115;
Hamidullah, Muslim Conduct of State, p. 119.
537
This was the subject of a lecture delivered in London by M Salim el-Awa,
al-Muwanah Hiya Ass alIlqah Bayn al-Muslimn wa-Ghayrihim, Islam 21,
no. 20 (Dec 1999), p. 11.
538
Idem.
539
Cf. Abu al-Hasan Al-Baladhuri, Fuu al-Buldn, edited by Riwn
Muhammad Riwn (Beirut: Dr al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, 1412/1991); cf. Zuhayli,
aqq al-urriyyah, p. 146.
540
Ibid., p.12; Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari, Trkh al-Umam
wal-Muluk (Cairo: al-Matbaah al-Tijariyyah, 1358/1939), vol. iv, p. 229.
541
Ibid., p. 12; Baladhuri, Fuu al-Buldn, p. 136.
542
Ibid., p.12.
543
See for details on tall Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Principles of Islamic
Jurisprudence (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 3rd edn, 2003),pp. 279f.
544
Quoted in Tariq al-Bishri, Bayn al-Islm wal-Urubah (Cairo: Dr
al-Shuruq, 1418/1998), p. 92.
545
Ibid., p. 95.
546
Cf. Gudrun Kramer, Dhimmi or Citizen, in Jorgan Nielsen, ed., The
Christian-Muslim Frontier (London: IB Tauris, 1998), pp. 378.
547
Muslim, ah Muslim, hadith no. 2054.
chapter
548
Final Declaration of the first Seminar of the Catholic-Muslim Forum,

Rome, 46 November, 2008, p. 3.
549
Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to Participants in the Seminar
organised by the Catholic Muslim Forum, Vatican City, Clementine Hall, 6
November, 2008.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/november/
documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20081106_cath-islamic-leaders_en.html.
550
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, We And YouLet us Meet in Gods Love, 1st
Catholic-Muslim Forum Seminar, Vatican City, 6 November, 2008, p. 1.
551
The nature of these responses merits a study in and of itself. To see the
475
05/07/2013 15:22

seventy different responses go to:
http://acommonword.com/index.php?lang=en&page=responses.
552
See http://worldinterfaithharmonyweek.com/.
553
http://worldinterfaithharmonyweek.com/newspost/h-r-h-prince-ghazibin-muhammad-delivers-kings-world-interfaith-harmony-week-proposalat-un/.
554
H. Con Res. 374. For an outline of the history of the resolution see http://
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HC00374:@@@L&summ2=m&.
555
The most important of these have been: Miroslav Volf, Ghazi bin Muhammad
and Melissa Yarrington, eds, A Common Word: Muslims and Christians on
Loving God and Neighbor (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009); and Waleed
El-Ansary and David Linnan, eds, Muslim and Christian Understanding: Theory
and Application of A Common Word (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).
556
This is the analysis offered by Samir Khalil Samir, SJ in Pope Benedict
XVI and Dialogue with Muslims, Annals Australasia (January/February 2008),
pp. 205.
557
The entire Regensburg Lecture can be found on the Vatican website, http://
www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html. The polemical passage is as follows:
I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor
Theodore Khoury (Mnster) of part of the dialogue carried onperhaps in 1391
in the winter barracks near Ankara by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel
II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam,
and the truth of both. It was probably the emperor himself who set down this
dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this
would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than the responses
of the learned Persian.
The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible
and in the Quran, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while
necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship of the three Laws: the Old
Testament, the New Testament, and the Quran. In this lecture I would like to
discuss only one pointitself rather marginal to the dialogue itselfwhich, in
the context of the issue of faith and reason, I found interesting and which can
serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.
In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches
on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that surah 2,
256 reads: There is no compulsion in religion. It is one of the surahs of the early
period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat.
But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and
recorded in the Quran, concerning holy war. Without descending to details,
such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the Book and
476
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
the infidels, he turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central
question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these
words:
Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will
find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword
the faith he preached.
The emperor goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith
through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the
nature of God and the nature of the soul.
God is not pleased by blood, and not acting reasonably is contrary to Gods
nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone
to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence
and threats ... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or
weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death....
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this:
not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to Gods nature. The editor,
Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek
philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even
that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R.
Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn [sic] went so far as to state that God is
not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal
the truth to us. Were it Gods will, we would even have to practice idolatry.
558
As quoted in Cardinal Praises Muslims for Eloquent Letter, 19 October,
2007. http://www.zenit.org/article-20787?l=english.
559
Tom Heneghan, Vatican says Pope cannot sign collective response to
Muslims, Reuters Blogs, 23 October, 2007.
http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2007/10/23/vatican-says-pope-cannotsign-response-to-muslims/.
560
Michael Gonyea, Islams Transcendent Challenge, American Thinker,
12 October 2008. http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/islams_transcendent_challenge.html.
561
Fareed Zakaria, New hope: Defeating terror requires Muslim help and
much more than force of arms, Newsweek, 18 July, 2005, US Edition.
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/newsweek/071805.html. Now things
are changing. The day before the London bombs, a conference of 180 top Muslim
sheiks and imams, brought together under the auspices of Jordans King Abdullah,
issued a statement forbidding that any Muslim be declared takfian apostate
[sic]. This is a frontal attack on Al Qaedas theological methods. Declaring
someone takfirand thus sanctioning his or her deathis a favorite tactic
of bin Laden and his ally in Iraq, Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi. The conferences
statement was endorsed by ten fatwas from such big conservative scholars as
477
05/07/2013 15:22

Tantawi; Iraqs Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani; Egypts mufti, Ali Jumaa, and the
influential Al-Jazeera TV-shaykh, Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Signed by adherents of
all schools of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), it also allows only qualified Muslim
scholars to issue edicts. The Islamic Conferences statement, the first of its kind,
is a rare show of unity among the religious establishment against terrorists and
their scholarly allies.
562
For examples of the pseudo-fatwas issued by extremist elements see
Bruce Lawrence, ed., Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin
Laden (London & New York: Verso, 2005). One is most struck by the lack of
questions; for a traditional fatwa is always an answer to a question. But in Bin
Ladens instance proclamations are presented as fatwas.
563
For the full text of the Final Declaration go to: http://ammanmessage.
com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=34
564
http://www.acommonword.com/
565
A Common Word Between Us and You (Amman, The Royal Aal al-Bayt
Institute For Islamic Thought, 2007), p. 2. For access to the original document
see: http://www.acommonword.com/index.php?lang=en&page=downloads.
566
Ibid., p. 2.
567
Ibid., p. 12.
568
Ibid., p. 16.
569
Ibid., p. 16.
570
Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, A Common Word Between Us and You:
Theological Motives and Expectations, Acceptance Speech for the Eugen Biser
Award Ceremony, 2 November, 2008, pp. 56.
571
Loving God and Neighbor Together: A Christian Response to A Common
Word Between Us and You, New York Times, 17 November, 2007.
572
Ibid.
573
Miroslav Volf, Ghazi bin Muhammad and Melissa Yarrington, eds, A
Common Word: Muslims and Christians on Loving God and Neighbor (Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009).
574
From personal discussion with Reza Shah-Kazemi and Ibrahim Kalin,
spokesperson for A Common Word, 26 July, 2008.
575
Final Declaration of the Yale Common Word Conference, July 2008,
p. 1.
576
Ibid., p. 1.
577
Ibid., p. 1.
578
For John Pipers response to A Common Word see, http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/1032_a_common_word_between_us/
579
Leith Anderson, Signing the Letter to Islam. http://www.nae.net/index.
cfm?FUSEACTION=editor.page&pageID=500&IDcategory=1
580
See: http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/conference-messages/
evangelicals-and-a-common-word.
478
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
581
Archbishop Rowan Williams, A Common Word for the Common Good

(London: Lambeth Palace, 2008), p.2.
582
Ibid., p. 12.
583
Ibid., p. 12.
584
Ibid., p. 13.
585
Ibid., p. 13.
586
Ibid., p. 14.
587
Ibid., p. 14.
588
Ibid., p. 16.
589
The Most Reverend & Right Honourable Dr Rowan Williams and H.E.
Shaykh Prof. Dr Ali Gomaa Mohamed Abdel Wahab, Communiqu from
A Common Word conference, London, Lambeth Palace, 15 October, 2008.
590
For an introduction to Scriptural Reasoning see :
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/journals/ssr/issues/volume2/number1
591
Insegnamenti, VIII/2, [1985], p. 497, quoted during a general audience
on 5 May, 1999.
592
Open Letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, 13 October, 2006,
p. 4.
593
Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to Participants in the Seminar
organised by the Catholic Muslim Forum, Vatican City, Clementine Hall, 6
November, 2008.
594
Ibid.
595
Ibid.
596
The World Council of Churches, Learning to Explore Love
Together, p. 2: http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wccprogrammes/interreligious-dialogue-and-cooperation/interreligious-trustand-respect/20-03-08-learning-to-explore-love-together.html.
597
Ibid., p. 2.
598
Ibid., p. 3.
599
Ibid., p. 3.
600
Ibid., p. 4.
601
As quoted in an interview with Stryker McGuire, A Small Miracle,
Newsweek, 21 October, 2008.
602
Several scholars have raised this point, but the only thorough study
is that of Gordon Nickel, A Common Word in Context and Commentary,
unpublished conference paper, Annual Meeting of the American Academy
of Religion, Chicago, IL, 3 November, 2008.
603
Mahmud b. Abdallah al-Alusi, R al-man f tafsr al-qurn al-karm
wa-l-saba al-mathn (Beirut: Dar Ehia al-Tourath al-Arabi, 1420/1999), vol.
3, p. 193.
604
Amad ibn Ajiba, al-Bar al-madd f tafsr al-qurn al-majd (Beirut:
Dar al-Kotoob al-Ilmiyyah, 1426/2005), vol. 1, p. 330.
479
05/07/2013 15:22

605
Final Declaration of the Yale Common Word Conference, July 2008, p. 1.

Archbishop Rowan Williams, A Common Word for the Common Good, p. 3.
607
Ibid., p. 2.
608
Ghazi bin Muhammad, A Common Word Between Us and You:
Theological Motives and Expectations, pp. 89.
609
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, We and YouLet us Meet in Gods Love,
(expanded version), Sophia: The Journal of Traditional Studies, vol. 14, no. 2,
(Winter 2009).
610
The World Council of Churches, Learning to Explore Love Together, p. 4.
611
Daniel Madigan, SJ, A Common Word Between Us and You: Some initial
Reflections, p. 7.
606
chapter
612
Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH) says the following about Gods Name
the Loving: The Loving (Al-Wadd) is He who loves goodness for all creation, treats them with kindness and blesses them. It is similar to the meaning
of The Merciful, save that mercy is shown to those who are in dire need of
mercy, and the actions of The Merciful require one who is weak and in need
of mercy, whilst the actions of The Loving do not require this; rather, blessing
in the first place is a fruit of love. (Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Al-Maqad al-asn
f shar maani asm Allh al-usn, p. 122.) And Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606
AH) said about Gods Name the Loving: The Almighty says: And He is the
Forgiving, the Loving, and wudd means love. The word Wadd has two possible meanings: it may be an active participle, meaning He who loves, meaning
that He loves them, as He says: a people whom He loves and who love Him
(Al-Midah, 5:54). When we say that He loves His servant, this means that He
wants to send good things to him. Know that according to this understanding,
love is similar to mercy; the difference between them is that mercy requires
someone who is weak and in need of mercy, whilst love does not; rather, blessing in the first place is a fruit of love. The second possible meaning is that He
is loving in the sense that He causes men to love one another, as He says: for
them the Compassionate One shall appoint love (Maryam, 19:96). A third possibility is that it [Wadd] is a passive participle, morphologically similar to the
words hayb (afraid) or rakb (mounted, as on a horse); in this case, God
Almighty is beloved to the hearts of His friends because of the great favour He
shows them. (Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Shar asm Allh al-usn, pp. 2734).
613
Al-Baqarah, 2:143; Al-Baqarah, 2:207; l Imrn, 3:30; Al-Tawbah, 9:117;
Al-Nahl, 16:7; Al-Nahl, 16:47; Al-Muminn, 23:65; Al-Nr 24:20; Al-add,
57:9; and Al-ashr, 59:10.
614
Al-Tirmidhi, Sunan, adth no. 1907, Kitb al-birr wa al-ilah, Bb m
j f qiat al-ram.
480
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
615
In his book Al-Insn al-kmil, the Muslim scholar Abd al-Karim Jili (d.
805 AH) suggests that Mercy is the origin of Gods Names and Qualities, and
that Gods Names proceed from the Quality of Mercy.
The Mercy from the Divine Essence (Al-Ramaniyyah) is the manifestation
of the realities of the Names and Qualities; it lies between His essential qualities, such as the Names of the Essence, and those qualities which are directed
towards created beings, such as His being the Knower, the Omnipotent, the
All-Hearing, and the other Qualities which have a connection to temporal
beings . The Name which is directly derived from the level of Mercy from
the Divine Essence (Al-Ramaniyyah) is Al-Ramn, the Compassionatea
Name which refers to the Names of His Essence (al-Asm al-Dhtiyyah)
and the Qualities of His Person (al-Awf al-Nafsiyyah), which are seven in
number: life, knowledge, omnipotence, will, speech, hearing and seeing This
level [of Being] has this name because of how this all-enveloping mercy covers
all the levels of Reality and creation; and it was because of its manifestation in
the levels of Reality that the levels of creation came into existence. Thus mercy
became universally present in all beings, from the Merciful Presence. (Abd
Al-Kareem al-Jili, Al-Insn al-Kmil, p. 73).
616
Muslim, Sa, adth no. 810, Kitb alt al-musfirn wa qasraha, Bb
fal srat al-kahf wa yat al-kurs.
617
Gods Names The Compassionate (Al-Ramn) and The Merciful
(Al-Ram): Muslim scholars have said many things about the meaning of
Gods Names The Compassionate and The Merciful. The following are amongst
the most pertinent: Ibn Kathir says:The Compassionate and The Merciful are
two Divine Names derived from the word ramah (mercy); both are intensive morphological forms, but The Compassionate is more intensive than The
Merciful. It is related that Jesus said: The Compassionate is Compassionate in
this life and the next, while the Merciful is Merciful in the next life. Abu Ali
Farisi said: The Compassionate is a universal name which encompasses all the
forms of mercy, and only God may be called by this Name. The Merciful refers
solely to the mercy God shows the believers, as He says: And He is Merciful
to the believers. (Al-Azb, 33:43). Ibn Abbas said that: They are two gentle
Names, one of which is gentler than the other: that is, suggestive of yet more
mercy. Ibn Mubarak said that The Compassionate is the One who gives
when He is asked, whilst The Merciful is the One who becomes wrathful when
He is not asked; this is derived from a hadith The Messenger of God U said:
If one does not ask of God, He becomes angry with one. I heard Azrami
say of the Names The Compassionate, The Merciful that God is Compassionate
with all His creatures, and Merciful to the believers. They say that this is why
God says: Then [He] presided upon the Throne. The Compassionate One
(Al-Furqn, 25:59), and says: The Compassionate One presided upon the Throne
( H, 20:5). God thus links His presiding [over the Throne] to His Name
481
05/07/2013 15:22

The Compassionate to indicate how His mercy envelops all His creation; and He
says: And He is Merciful to the believers. (Al-Azb, 33:43), singling them out
with His Name The Merciful. They say that this implies that The Compassionate
denotes the higher degree of mercy because it applies in both worlds to all His
creatures, whilst The Merciful applies to the believers alone And His Name
The Compassionate (Al-Ramn) is for Him alone, and no one else may be
called this As for The Merciful, He describes another with this attribute when
He says: Verily there has come to you a messenger from among yourselves for
whom it is grievous that you should suffer; who is full of concern for you, to the
believers full of pity, merciful (ram) (Al-Tawbah, 9:128). (Ibn Kathir, Tafsr
al-Qur n al-Am, pp. 656).
Al-Ghazali says: The Compassionate (Al-Ramn) and The Merciful
(Al-Ram) are both derived from the word mercy (ramah), and mercy
requires an object, and the object of mercy must be needy. Someone who meets
a needy persons need unintentionally and without caring about the needy
person is not called merciful. The one who wishes to meet the needy persons
need but does not do so when he is able to do is not called merciful, because if
he really wanted to do it, he would. If he is unable to do so, he might be called
merciful because of his sympathy, but his mercy is incomplete. Perfect mercy
means to shower the needy with goodness having the intention to take care of
them. Universal mercy is that which is given to the deserving and the undeserving alike. Gods mercy is thus both perfect and universal; it is perfect in that He
wishes to meet the needs of the needy, and does so; and it is universal in that it
encompasses both the deserving and the undeservingin this lower world and
in the hereafterand it meets both dire needs and ordinary needs, as well as
additional matters beyond this. He is truly the Absolutely Merciful. (Ghazali,
Al-Maqad al-asn f shar man asm Allh al-hunah, p. 62).
Al-Razi says: Which of them is more intensive: The Compassionate, or The
Merciful? Abu Salih related that Ibn Abbas said: The Compassionate and The
Merciful are two gentle Names, one of which is gentler than the other; yet he
did not state which is the gentlest. But Husayn bin Fadl al-Balkhi said: This
is a mistake on the part of the narrator, for gentleness (riqqah) is not a Divine
Quality. The Prophet said: God is Kind (rafq), and He loves kindness, and He
gives for it that which He does not give for violence. Know that there is no
doubt that both The Compassionate (Al-Ramn) and The Merciful (Al-Ram)
are derived from the word mercy (ramah), and if one were not more intensive than the other they would be exact synonyms in every way without any
distinction between them; and this is unlikely. Therefore we must understand
that one of them is more intensive in meaning than the other. Beyond this,
they differ: most say that The Compassionate implies greater mercy than The
Merciful, and they give several arguments to support this. (Al-Razi, Shar asm
Allh al-usn, p. 162).
482
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
The common elements between all these definitions are:
(1) that The Compassionate (Al-Ramn) can only be used to describe God,
whilst Merciful (Al-Ram) can be used to describe both God and human beings.
(2) that the Name The Compassionate linguistically implies a greater amount
of mercy.
(3) that The Merciful requires an object, whilst The Compassionate does not
require an object.
(4) that The Compassionate always comes before The Merciful whenever the
two Names are mentioned together.
(5) that The Compassionate is virtually a synonym for the Name God (Allh)
for God says: Say: Invoke God or invoke the Compassionate One, whichever you
invoke, to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names (Al-Isr, 17:110)
(6) and, finally, that since He has prescribed for Himself mercy (Al-Anm,
6:12), and since The Compassionate implies greater mercy than The Merciful
and does not require an object, this means that The Compassionate is one of
the Names of Gods Essence, whilst The Merciful is one of the Names of His
Qualities. And God knows best.
618
Al-Razi, Al-Tafsr al-kabr, Maftih al-ghayb, vol. 5, p. 379.
619
Al-Qurtubi, Tafsr al-Qurtubi, vol. 7, p. 261.
620
Al-Razi, Al-Tafsr al-kabr, vol. 6, p. 412.
621
Bukhari, Sa, adth no. 7403; Kitb al-Tawd, Bb: Qawlihi tala Wa
laqad sabaqat kalimatun li-ibdin al-mursaln.
622
We should not neglect to mention here the Hadith Qudsi: I was a hidden
treasure, and I loved to be known, so I created humankind and made Myself
known to them, and they knew Me. The Hadith scholar Ajluni said about this
hadith: Ibn Taymiyah said it is not a saying of the Prophet and that he did not
know any chain or narration for it, whether strong or weak. Zarkashi, Hafiz
Ibn Hajar (in al-Lali), Suyuti and others concurred. Al-Qari said: But its
meaning is correct and can be derived from Gods words: And I did not create
the jinn and humankind except that they may worship Me, that is, that they
may know God, as Ibn Abbas W and others understood it. The way it is generally reported is: I was a hidden treasure and I loved to be known, so I created
men, and through Me they knew Me. It is quoted very often by the Sufis, and
they rely on it and have based some of their fundamental ideas on it. (Ajluni,
Kashf al-khaf, vol. 1, p. 132). However, Ibn Arabi declaredcontroversially
perhapsthe hadith to be authentic according to personal disclosure (a
kashfan); these are his words from Al-Futut al-Makkiyyah: In a adth which
is authentic based on personal disclosure, but lacking an established chain of
narration, the Messenger of God U reported that his Lord says words to the
effect of: I was a hidden treasure, and I loved to be known, so I created humankind and made Myself known to them, and they knew Me. (Muhyi al-Din Ibn
al-Arabi, Al-Futut al-Makkiyyah, vol. 2, p. 393).
483
05/07/2013 15:22

We do not wish to get into a discussion about the authenticity or weakness
of this hadithall the other hadiths that we quote in this work are soundbut
we will say that the meaning of the hadith is sound, as maintained above by the
hadith scholar Ali Al-Qari. And its meaning is that God created Human beings
first of all out of His Love (and I loved to be known), and secondly out of His
Mercy (so I created humankind and made Myself known to them, and they
knew Me). There is no contradiction here between Gods love and Gods mercy,
because as previously discussed, Divine love and Divine Mercy are inseparable.
623
See also: Al-Baqarah, 2:1857; Al-Anm, 6:165; Al-Arf, 7:156; Ynus,
10:5, 14, 67; Ibrhm, 14:324; Al-Hijr, 15:1650; Al-Nal, 16:7881; H,
20:15, 534; Al-Hajj, 22:65; Al-Muminn, 23:7880; Al-Furqn, 25:10; Al-Naml,
27:6064, 86; Al-Qaa, 28:703; Al-Rm, 30:46; Luqmn, 31:1011, 312;
Al-Sajdah, 32:79; Fair, 35:12-13; Y Sn, 36:80; Ghfir, 40:64, 7980; Al-Fat,
48:49; Al-alq, 65:12, 23-4; Nh, 71:1420.
624
In the following chapter on Gods Love for Humanity in General we
explain at length and in detail how and with what God blesses human beings
in general.
625
Bukhari, a, adth no. 1385, Kitb al-Janiz, Bb M qil f awld
al-mushrikn; Muslim, a, adth no. 2658, Kitb al-Qadr, Bb Man kull
mawld yulad ala al-fitrah.
626
Muslim, a, adth no. 2865, Kitb al-Jannah, Bb al-ift allat yuraf
bih f al-duny ahl al-jannah wa Kitb al-Qadr, Bb Man kull mawld ylad
alaal-fitratahl al-nr.
627
It will be noted here that whereas God favours or prefers (faala) each
one of the Prophets above all the worlds (Al-Anm, 6:85), and at one time
preferred the Children of Israel above all the worlds (Al-Jthiyah, 45:1617; see
also: Al-Dukhn, 44:323; Al-Midah, 5:20; Al-Arf, 7:140), He only prefers
humanity above many of those whom We created (Al-Isr, 17:70). God sheds
light on this elsewhere in the Holy Quran, when He asks Iblis (Satan) why he
did not prostrate himself before Adam: He [God] said, O Iblis! What prevents
you from prostrating before that which I have created with My own hands? Are
you being arrogant, or are you of the Exalted (al-ln)? (d, 38:75).
There are thus those who are too exalted to prostrate to Adam (al-ln).
These are perhaps themselves above the world since God refers elsewhere to
the muqarrabnthe angels close to God(Al-Nis, 4:172). This perhaps
explains why God says that He preferred the Children of Adam to many of those
whom We created and not all of those whom He created; and God knows best.
628
See also: Al-rf, 7:1227; Al-Isr, 17:615; Al-Kahf, 18:50; H, 20:115
6; d, 38:7185; Ynus, 10:14; Al-Anm, 6:165; Fir, 35:39; Al-Azb, 33:73.
629
At first glance the inclusion of those who fight for His cause in ranks, as if
they were a solid structure among the kinds of people whom God loves might
seem a little puzzling, especially given the more obvious virtues of the other
484
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
seven kinds. However, this is easily understood if the verses preceding this
verse are remembered. God says: O you who believe, why do you say what you
do not do? / It is greatly loathsome to God that you say what you do not do. /
Indeed God loves those who fight for His cause in ranks, as if they were a solid
structure. (Al-aff, 61:24) Thus fighting in Gods cause in ranks, as if they were
a solid structure is linked to doing what we say we will do. In other words, it is
linked to being completely sincere; having no trace of hypocrisy or hesitation,
and thus being unanimous (literally: of one soul). Hence the ranks and solid
structure are above all in peoples own selves, in their own souls (anfus). God
says: Will you bid others to piety and forget yourselves (anfusakum), while you
recite the Book? Do you not understand? (Al-Baqarah, 2:44).
630
Because of this, God loves thoroughness in acts and work. The Messenger
of God U said: God loves that, when one of you does any work, he does it well.
(Tabarani, Al-Mujam al-awsa, vol. 1, p. 275) Thoroughness is thus the work
of the beautiful soul; and beautiful work comes from a beautiful soul. And
God knows best.
631
Muslim, a, adth no. 99, Kitb al-Imn.
632
Muslim, a, adth no. 1, Kitb al-Imn.
633
Zabidi, Tj al-ars, vol. 18, p. 14.
634
And the eight kinds of people whom God loves are those who follow the
way of the Messenger of God U, and they are all included in the general sense
of this Quranic verse.
635
Raghib Al-Isfahani says: The meaning of I greatly love (ababtu)
so-and-so is I reached the core (abbah) of his heart; there are other expressions [in Arabic] with similar meanings, such as I reached the skin of his
heart, I reached his liver, I reached his inner heart. (Al-Mufradt f gharb
al-Qurn, p. 112).
42 Naturally the fact of Gods being with these categories of people can
be considered a special kind of love, for the Messenger of God U explained
the relationship of love to company when he said: A person is with those
they love. (Bukhari, a, adth no. 6168, Kitb al-adab, Bb Alamt ubb
Allh). And also when he replied to someone who said to him, I have prepared
nothing for the Hour save that I love God and His Messenger: You shall be
with those you love. (Bukhari, a, adth no. 3688, Kitb al-Manqib, Bb
Manqib Umar ibn al-Khattab.)
636
Al-Qushayri says in his Risalah, p. 46: Ibn Shahin asked Junayd what
with [God] means, and he said: With has two meanings; God is with the
prophets in the sense that He gives succour and protection, as God says: He
said, Do not fear, for I shall be with the two of you, hearing and seeing; and
He is with all people in the sense that He has complete knowledge of them, as
God says: No secret conversation of three takes place but He is their fourth. Ibn
Shahin replied, Someone such as you is fit to guide the Community to God!
485
05/07/2013 15:22

637
Perhaps the fact that God says four times in the Holy Quran that He
is with the patient indicates that patience requires perseverance before the
patient person (al-sbir) reaches the level of virtue (isn); God knows best.
638
It is extremely instructive to consider how the three virtues of taqwah,
sabr and isn are depicted in the Holy Quran. In general, we may say that:
(1) taqwah is the very reason for the creation (see Al-Baqarah, 2:21); that it is
the essential message of the Prophets (see Al-Shuar, 26:87, 106, 124, 142, 161,
177; and Al-afft, 37:124) and that the muttaqn (those who have taqwah) are
those who will be in paradise (this is repeated many times in the Holy Quran
see Al-Arf,7:128; Hd, 11:49; Al-ijr, 15:45; Al-Nal, 16:30-31; Maryam,
19:85; Al-Shuar, 26:90; Al-Qaa, 28:31; d, 38:49; Dukhn, 44:51; Qf,
50:31; Al-Dhriyt, 51:17; Al-Tr, 52:17; Al-Qamr, 54:55; Al-Qalam, 68:34;
Al-Mursalt, 77:41; Al-Al, 87:31). As regards: (2) sabr, it is also a virtue of those
who will be in paradise (see Al-Rad, 13:43), but it is more often described as
the virtue of the resolute among the Messengers (see Al-Aqf, 46:35, see also
Al-Nal, 16:2 and Al-Marij, 70:5) and the greatest of the saints (see Al-Kahf,
18:68, 72, 75, 78, 82 and Fuilat, 41:35). Finally, as regards isn, whilst it is also
obviously a virtue of those who will be in paradise (see Al-Midah, 5:85 and
Al-Dhriyt, 51:16), it is more often described as a sublime and unsurpassable
virtue (see Al-Nis, 4:125) for which there is an unfailing Divine reward (see
Al-Ramn, 55:60); that is the firmest handle (urwah wuthqsee Luqmn,
31:22); that is never lost (see Al-Tawbah, 9:120; Ysuf, 12:56; Ysuf, 12:90;
Al-affat, 37:80, 105, 110, 121, 131; Al-Zumar, 39:34; Al-Dhriyt, 51:16); and
that leads to perpetual increase (see Al-Baqarah, 2:58). Because it is the sum
of virtue, it is also the virtue to be exercised towards parents, who in the Holy
Quran are accorded the highest respect and consideration (see Al-Baqarah,
2:83; Al-Anm, 6:151 and Al-Isr, 17:23). One might also say that taqwah is
the sum total of pietyhow a human being should be towards God; isn is
the sum of virtuehow human beings should be before other human beings,
and sabr is how human beings should be in themselveshow they should face
the human condition (although obviously all three virtues necessarily largely
overlap). From a different point of view, one might even say that sabr relates
more to the will and hence to fear (makhfah) of God; taqwah relates more
to the intelligence and hence knowledge (marifah) of God, and isn relates
more to sentiment and hence love (ubb) of God; and God knows best.
639
In his commentary on this verse (in Mafth al-ghayb), Fakhr al-Din
al-Razi relates Gods binding promise (wadan masla) back to the supplication of the believers, and the supplication of the angels: Our Lord, grant us what
You have promised us through Your messengers, and abase us not on the Day
of Resurrection. You will not fail the tryst (l Imrn, 3:194). .Our Lord, You
embrace all things in [Your] mercy and knowledge. So forgive those who repent
and follow Your way and shield them from the chastisement of Hell-fire. / Our
486
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
Lord, and admit them into the Gardens of Eden that which You have promised
them, along with whoever were righteous among their fathers and their wives
and their descendants. Surely You are the One Who is the Mighty, the Wise.
(Ghfir, 40:78). However, the extraordinary forwardness of these prayers
reminding God of His own promise, as it were, and cited by God Himself
in the Holy Quranonly prove how Gods own Essence has made His own
promise binding upon Himself, if one may be permitted to phrase these things
in such a manner; and God knows best.
chapter
640
See: Ghazi bin Muhammad, Love in the Holy Quran (USA: Kazi
Publications, 2011), Chapter 13: The Believers Love for the Messenger of
God U; Chapter 14: Love for the Family and Kin of the Messenger of God U;
Chapter 16: Family Love; Chapter 18: Conjugal and Sexual Love.
641
This also means, naturally, that every human being is essentially Gods
vicegerent on earth, into which God breathed something of His spirit (see the
authors Love in the Holy Quran, Chapter 7: Gods Love for Humanity).
642
See: Ghazi bin Muhammad, Love in the Holy Quran, Chapter 16: Family
Love.
643
That is not to say obviously that the religion of Islam is sympathetic
towards idolatry in any wayit is absolutely against it and refutes it completely
in the very first Testimony of Faith (the Shahdah) that There is no god but God
(L illha illa Allh)but nevertheless, God allows everyone to choose their
own religion freely, whatever it be, for He says:
There is no compulsion in religion. Rectitude has become clear from error; so
whoever disbelieves in the false deity, and believes in God, has laid hold of the
most firm handle, unbreaking; God is Hearing, Knowing. (Al-Baqarah, 2:256)
And say, The truth [that comes] from your Lord; so whoever will, let him
believe, and whoever will, let him disbelieve. (Al-Kahf, 18:29)
Say: O disbelievers! / I do not worship what you worship, / and you do not
worship what I worship, / nor will I worship what you have worshipped, / nor
will you worship what I worship. / You have your religion and I have a religion.
(Al-Kfirn, 109:16)
So leave them to indulge and to play, until they encounter that day of theirs,
which they are promised; (Al-Marij, 70:42).
644
God says: Indeed God protects those who believe. Indeed God does not
love the treacherous, the ungrateful. / Permission is granted to those who fight
because they have been wronged. And God is truly able to help them; / those who
were expelled from their homes without right, only because they said: Our Lord
is God. Were it not for Gods causing some people to drive back others, destruction would have befallen the monasteries, and churches, and synagogues, and
487
05/07/2013 15:22

mosques in which Gods Name is mentioned greatly. Assuredly God will help
those who help Him. God is truly Strong, Mighty. (Al-Hajj, 22:3840)
645
Fakr al-Din al-Razi, Al-Tafsr al-kabr, vol. 10, p. 747.
646
Jalal al-Din Mahalli and Jalal al-Din Suyuti, Tafsr al-Jallayn, p. 106.
647
Al-Qurtubi, Tafsr al-Qurtubi, vol. 5, p. 171.
648
Muslim, a, adth no. 45, (related on the authority of Anas ibn Malik)
Kitb al-mn; Bb al-Dall al anna min khisl al-imn an yuibb li-akhihi
al-Muslim m yuibb li-nafsih min khayr. In another narration on the authority of Anas ibn Malik the Messenger of God said: None of you believes until
he loves for his brother what he loves for himself. (Bukhari, a, adth no.
13, Kitb al-mn; Bb Min al-imn an yuibb li-akhihi m yuibb li-nafsih).
649
Tirmidhi, Sunan, adth no. 1924, (related on the authority of Abdullah
ibn Amr) Kitb al-birr wa al-ilah; Bb M j f ramat al-ns.
650
Bukhari, a, adth no. 7376, (related on the authority of Jarir ibn
Abdullah) Kitb al-Tawd; Bb Qawluhu tala qul udu Allah aw udu
al-Ramn.
651
Bayhaqi, Al-Sunan al-kubr, vol. 9, p. 118.
652
Abu al-Fida Ismail ibn Umar ibn Kathir al-Qurashi al-Dimashqi, Tafsr
al-Qurn al-am, p. 480.
653
Abu al-Fida Ismail ibn Umar ibn Kathir al-Qurashi al-Dimashqi, Tafsr
al-Qurn al-am, p. 480.
654
It is very important to point out here also that God addresses His
Messenger U individually in this verse (You [innaka, which means you in
the second person singular] will truly find), and not the believers in general;
that is to say then, that this hostility does not extend to all Jews and all Muslims,
but rather between certain Jewish tribes and the Messenger of God U during
his own lifetime.
655
Thus God says:
So, for their breaking their covenant and disbelieving in the signs of God, and
slaying the prophets wrongfully, and for their saying, Our hearts are covered
upnay, but God sealed them for their disbelief; so they do not believe, except
for a few. (Al-Nis, 4:155)
And verily you know that there were those among you who transgressed the
Sabbath, and We said to them, Be apes, despised! (Al-Baqarah, 2:65)
See also: Al-Baqarah, 2:78, 91; Al-Midah, 5:60; Al-Arf, 7:166; and others
verses in this regard.
656
Indeed, God says: And let not those who possess dignity and ease among
you swear not to give to the near of kin and to the needy, and to fugitives for the
cause of God. Let them forgive and show indulgence. Yearn ye not that God may
forgive you ? God is Forgiving, Merciful. (Al-Nr, 24: 22).
657
As such, Muslims are not even allowed to morally judge their fellow
believers, much less drive them away. God says (relating the story of Noah X):
488
05/07/2013 15:22
Notes
The council of his people who disbelieved, said: We see you but a mortal like
us, and we see not that any follow you save the vilest among us, [through] rash
opinion. We do not see that you have any merit over us; nay, we deem you liars.
/ He said, O my people, have you considered if I am [acting] upon a clear proof
from my Lord and He has given me mercy from Him, and it has been obscured
from you, can we compel you to it, while you are averse to it? / And O my people,
I do not ask of you any wealth for this. My wage falls only upon God and I will
not drive away those who believe; they shall surely meet their Lord. But I see you
are a people who are ignorant. / And O my people, who would help me against
God if I drive them away? Will you not then remember? / And I do not say to
you, I possess the treasure houses of God nor, I have knowledge of the Unseen;
nor do I say, I am an angel. Nor do I say to those whom your eyes scorn that
God will not give them any goodGod knows best what is in their souls. Lo! then
indeed I would be of the evildoers. (Hd, 11:2731)
They said, Shall we believe in you, when it is the lowliest people who follow
you? / He said, And what do I know of what they may have been doing? /
Their reckoning is only my Lords concern, if only you were aware. / And I am
not about to drive away the believers. / I am just a plain warner. (Al-Shuar,
26:1115).
Accordingly, God tells the Prophet Muhammad U: And do not drive away
those who call upon their Lord at morning and evening desiring His countenance. You are not accountable for them in anything; nor are they accountable
for you in anything, that you should drive them away and be of the evildoers.
(Al-Anm, 6:52).
658
See also the description of intimate friend in the following verses: Ghfir,
40:18; Fuilat, 41:34; Al-aqqah, 69:35; Al-Ma rij, 70:10).
659
This kind of friendship might perhaps also be called a waljahan intimate friendship, or literally a penetrating friendshipwhich is only appropriate between believers. God says: Or did you suppose that you would be left [in
peace] when God does not yet know those of you who have struggled and have
not taken, besides God and His Messenger and the believers, an intimate friend?
And God is aware of what you do. (Al-Tawbah, 9:16).
660
It will be noted that we become friends in accordance with the goodness
and inner beauty people show us, as we understand it at leastthat is, if the
friendship is sincereand in accordance with the time we have spent with our
friends (and thus in accordance with our experience of their inner beauty and
their experience of ours).
489
05/07/2013 15:22
No word in English evokes more fear and misunderstanding than jihad. To

date the books that have appeared on the subject in English by Western scholars have been either openly partisan and polemical or subtly traumatised by so
many acts and images of terrorism in the name of jihad and by the historical
memory of nearly one thousand four hundred years of confrontation between
Islam and Christianity.
War and Peace in Islam: The Uses and Abuses of Jihad aims to change this.
Written by a number of Islamic religious authorities and Muslim scholars, this
work presents the views and teachings of mainstream Sunni and Shii Islam on
the subject of jihad. It authoritatively presents jihad as it is understood by the
majority of the worlds 1.7 billion Muslims in the world today, and supports this
understanding with extensive detail and scholarship.
Though jihad is the central concern of War and Peace in Islam: The Uses and
Abuses of Jihad, the range of the essays is not confined exclusively to the study
of jihad. The work is divided into three parts: War and Its Practice, Peace and
Its Practice, and Beyond Peace: The Practice of Forbearance, Mercy, Compassion and Love.
War and Peace in Islam: The Uses and Abuses of Jihad aims to reveal the real
meaning of jihad and to rectify many of the misunderstandings that surround
both it and Islams relation to the Other.
This is the best book on the subject in English. It will be of inestimable value.
Shaykh Mustafa Ceric, Grand Mufti Emeritus of Bosnia
A dynamic myth-busting clarification of the real position of mainstream
orthodox Islam on the whole question of violence and jihad.
T. J. Winter, University Lecturer in Islamic Studies, Cambridge University
www.mabda.jo

Rat I Mir U Islamu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rat I Mir U Islamu

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rat I Mir U Islamu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WAR AND

The Quran and Combat

Part II: Peace and Its Practice

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 5

Islam and Peace: A Survey of the Sources

Human Dignity from an Islamic Perspective

Part III: Beyond Peace: Forbearance,

The Uncommonality of A Common Word

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 6

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 11

war and peace in islam

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 12

The Quran refers to jihad in twenty-four verses, most of which

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 13

war and peace in islam

organisation has the authority to take up arms in the name of jihad

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 14

allows war for self-defence. Another Shaykh of al-Azhar, Muhammad

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 15

war and peace in islam

of jihad movements cropped up in Algeria, Sudan, the Caucasus, and

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 16

in combat may not be targeted. Killing and harming women and

Mohammad Hashim Kamali

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 17

PART I: WAR AND ITS PRACTICE

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 25

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 1

war and peace in islam

The Ideal Approach to Quranic Exegesis

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 2

The Quran and Combat

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 3

war and peace in islam

ideal approach to Quranic exegesis; particularly if the intent is to spread

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 4

The Quran and Combat

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 5

war and peace in islam

There is absolutely no reason or justification for anyone to believe

The Verses of Combat (yt Al-Qitl)

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 6

The Quran and Combat

The Holy Quran expounds two kinds of combat: the first is

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 7

war and peace in islam

returns to what is righteous, they may not be oppressed or deprived of

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 8

The Quran and Combat

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 9

war and peace in islam

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 10

The Quran and Combat

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 11

war and peace in islam

Consider the following in these verses: maybe God will restrain

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 12

The Quran and Combat

War & Peace Text (greyscale).indd 13