by Silas
On September 11, 2001, Muslims carried out an act of brutal terrorism and murdered some 3000 people in America. They hijacked 4 planes, slit the throats of stewardesses, destroyed the World Trade Center and a part of the Pentagon. America and other nations responded and went after the Muslim terrorist groups in Afghanistan. Elsewhere in the world various governments arrested Muslims associated with Islamic terrorist organizations.
Following September 11th, most Muslims living in the West defended Islam and stated that Islam is a religion of peace, while many Muslims living in the Islamic world and some Muslims in America (living in predominately Muslim communities) and Muslim students on American campuses openly celebrated the deaths and destruction of the WTC. Many in the Islamic world rejoiced and shouted “Death to America”, and “America is the Great Satan”, and called for the continuing destruction of America, while in the West Muslim spokesmen proclaimed that the Muslim terrorists have hijacked their faith and that real Islam is a kind religion, and is not associated with the terrorist events. The two camps completely contradict each other. They both cannot be correct. So, what’s the bottom line according to real Islam?
Since Sept 11, the religion of Islam has made the news and is now frequently discussed. One question commonly asked is “why is this religion so violent?” Trying to secure the support of the Islamic world the American political machine has gone out of its way to stress that America and her allies are not fighting Islam, but rather, they are fighting Muslim terrorists who have perverted the true teachings of Islam. On the other hand, other voices have raised concerns that indeed there is a violent component within the religion of Islam and Islam itself is part of the problem. Thus there has been much discussion around terms like “jihad” these days.
If you’re going to truly understand “jihad” and Islamic violence in today’s time you must examine the Islamic texts. A 30 second sound byte from some “expert” be they Muslim, Christian, Hindu, or otherwise is not sufficient. You will have to investigate the Quran, Hadith, and Sira. And, you will have to understand the context, background, scope, and applicability of the various passages related to jihad and violence in Islam. Otherwise, you will be left with many passages that seemingly contradict each other, and be no closer to truly understanding “jihad”, and the application of Islamic violence today. A mere phrase such as “Islam means peace”, or “jihad is an internal struggle against internal, sinful desires”, or, “Islam is violent” has little support if one does not know the actual teachings of Islam.
Since the death of about 3000 Americans has just occurred at the hands of Muslims, and since these Muslims have vowed to continue to murder Americans, be they men, women, or children, it is incumbent upon us to examine the fundamental teachings of Muhammad, found in these texts, and see how they apply today. Not only are American lives at stake, but actually, the lives of anyone living in a free, or non-Muslim society. Therefore, I want the readers to understand that when I state “America”, or “American”, I am also including Britons, Mexicans, French, Germans, Japanese, Brazilians, Russians, Chinese, Australians, and so forth. All non-Muslim peoples are at risk. For us to not thoroughly investigate what Islam is truly all about would blindly invite the disaster that has been perpetrated upon us to occur yet again and again.
For ourselves, and our future, we need to answer the following three questions:
1) What are the teachings of real Islam found in the Quran, Hadith, and Sira with respect to the use of violence, call it jihad if you like, to aggressively spread it’s power over non-Muslims, and are these teachings valid and applicable today?
2) Is real Islam behind and does it condone the murder of 3000 Americans and the destruction of the WTC, or are these Muslim terrorists doing something well outside Muhammad’s religion?
3) What does the future hold for Islam and America, Britain, China, and so on?
I define “real” Islam as the Islam Muhammad practiced and taught. Real Islam is based upon Muhammad’s final teachings and deeds. These final teachings are recorded in the Quran, Hadith (Hadith are the traditions and sayings of Muhammad), and Sira (sira is biographical material).
These foundational texts of Islam contain Muhammad’s words and deeds over a 23 year period, the Quran being dominant in Islamic theology. Many of his words apply to a specific people for a specific time or event. As Muhammad’s circumstances changed, his words, teachings, commands, and attitudes changed. Thus, as situations changed over time, Islam changed over time. Therefore, to determine what real Islam teaches regarding jihad and violence, we must examine these text’s chronology, context, scope, and applicability. It is either mistaken or dishonest to take one passage out of context and apply it to a set of circumstances for which it was not meant.
What I am going to do is examine a number of Quranic passages related to jihad and violence. In this I will cite from related Islamic texts, i.e., the Hadith and Sira to provide the context and background. Additionally I will reference various early Islamic scholar’s commentary (tafsir). When appropriate, I will also quote from other books written by scholars or experts on Islam be they Muslim, Christian, or secular.
And, I am going to go a step further: I am also going to examine Muhammad’s actions. Actions ever speak louder than words; therefore, let us lend an ear to hear his deeds speak. What do they say? – for they truly portray his heart. A wise sage said, “A man is defined by what he does.” Thus, Muhammad’s works must be thoroughly scrutinized for they show us who he truly was and what he truly believed.
1) NOTES FOR TEXT COLOR BREAKDOWN:
a) I have tried to make all book or article quotations as either medium or dark blue text, sometimes in bold.
b) References to various books and articles are in green.
c) Issues or points that I want to stress are in red.
d) Critical thoughts, statements, or events that bear upon my conclusions will be in orange, and usually bold. These passages in orange are ones that I want you, the reader, to especially take note of.
e) Section headings will be in either black or dark red.
f) Near the end of this article I present several pages of Muhammad’s sayings (Hadith). These are in black text, except for key sentences that I’ve highlighted in red.
Keeping track of all quotes and references is difficult, so, if I miss a few colors, please forgive.
2) Around May of 1999 I wrote an article on Islamic terrorism. I have copied some of the information from that article into this one. I saw no reason to re-create the information. The article can be accessed at [1]
http://answering-islam.org/Silas/terrorism.htm
The article above contains a great deal of relevant information that is not quoted here. If you want to obtain a broader scope in understanding Islam and terrorism, please read that article as well.
We must start with the Quran because the Quran is one of the foundations of Islam. Islam is built upon the Quran and “Sunnah”, or lifestyle of Muhammad. Now many Western readers will be tempted to apply their methods of logic and understanding of Biblical Scriptures to the Quran. They will take various Quranic verses at face value thinking that all the verses in the Quran are applicable today. They may reason that since the Quran says, “there is no compulsion in religion”, it means that Muslims are not to force people into Islam.” This approach is erroneous. One of the odd facets of the Quran is that some verses “abrogate” other verses, i.e. they cancel them, or render them null and void, no longer applicable. “Abrogation” means the canceling or replacement of one Quranic passage by another. Things changed during the 23 year period that Muhammad spoke the Quran. As circumstances changed Muhammad’s precepts found in the Quran changed accordingly. Thus the Quran abrogates or cancels itself in various passages and presents seemingly conflicting statements. These abrogations are not viewed as contradictions by Muslims, but rather, as improvements, to better suit the varying circumstances or needs, of the Muslims, or to fit Muhammad’s religious concepts. For example, many Islamic scholars consider that the verse reference above “there is no compulsion in religion”, found in 2:256, has been abrogated by the passage found in 9:5, (more on this later). [The verse in chapter 2 was spoken about 7 - 8 years earlier than the one spoken in Chapter 9.]
The "Dictionary of Qur'anic Terms and Concepts", pages 5 and 6, [2], state: "Quranic injunctions themselves may be abrogated, as has happened in a few cases. An example of this abrogation is 24:2 which abrogates the punishment of adultery, (q.v.) stated in 4:15-16. A study of the Quran shows first, that only a limited number of Quranic verses have been abrogated, and second, that the abrogation pertains to legal and practical matters only, and not to matters of doctrine and belief."
In “Islam: Muhammad and His Religion”, page 66, [3], the great Islamic scholar Arthur Jeffery wrote: "The Quran is unique among sacred scriptures in teaching a doctrine of abrogation according to which later pronouncements of the Prophet abrogate, i.e.: declare null and void, his earlier pronouncements. The importance of knowing which verses abrogate others has given rise to the Quranic science known as "Nasikh wa Mansukh", i.e.: "the Abrogators and the Abrogated".”
The Encyclopedia of Islam, [4], states on abrogation:
Rather than attempting to explain away the inconsistencies in passages giving regulations for the Muslim community, Kuran scholars and jurists came to acknowledge the differences, while arguing that the latest verse on any subject "abrogated" all earlier verses that contradicted it. A classic example involves the Kuranic teaching or regulation on drinking wine, where V, 90, which has a strong statement against the practice, came to be interpreted as a prohibition, abrogating II, 219, and IV, 43, which appear to allow it.
Consequently, as a result of changing circumstances, various Quranic passages were abrogated and Islam changed over time. The rules that applied at one point in time did not necessarily apply at another.
Therefore, when discussing Islam, jihad, and terrorism, what must be considered are Muhammad’s final teachings and the commands that he wanted obeyed. What were his last wishes and instructions regarding jihad and violence? Which Quranic passages are in force today for the Muslim and the Muslim community? Earlier statements related to peace may or may not have been abrogated by later statements related to violence. We will have to examine the context of the texts to know which are in place today.
Now then, if Muhammad’s calls to violence found within the texts were only for a specific period of time, against a specific people, for an understandable cause such as self defense, or to alleviate the oppression of an oppressed people, then the critics of Islam could not honestly say that Islam is a religion that condones aggressive violence and terrorism. On the other hand, if it can be shown that Muhammad’s final intentions for Islam were to attack, conquer, and rule all other peoples, and that the use of violence, in various forms including terrorism, were justified towards installing Islam as the dominant power, then Islam should be called an evil religion. Accordingly, the actions of the murderous Muslims should be identified as truly Islamic and done in the spirit of real Islam.
I will also briefly review what Muhammad’s closest “companions” understood to be his final wishes, i.e. the commands of God and of His messenger or apostle. I refer to the four “rightly guided” Caliphs: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali. These four hold a special place in Islamic theology and history. If anyone knew what Muhammad truly wanted, they did. Following Muhammad’s death (poisoned by a Jewish woman – see my article “The Death of Muhammad” [5]), they continued to obey his commands and fulfill his wishes. They loved Muhammad, obeyed his commands, and put their lives on the line for him time and again. Hence their actions depict their understanding of what Muhammad wanted, i.e. real Islam.
Below are several classical definitions of jihad. Thereafter we will examine passages from the Quran, Hadith, and Sira related to jihad and violence in Islam. “Jihad” or a form of the word occur in the Quran about 35 times. Additionally throughout the Quran there are other words used for various forms of violence.
From the “Concordance of the Quran”, by Hanna Kassis, published by University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1983, [6]:
JIHAD = JAHADA (verb). To struggle, strive, fight for the faith.
The above definition is the simplest, most straightforward definition I’ve found. Kassis essentially derived it from the Quranic context of the word.
A more detailed definition of jihad from the Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, page 89, [7]:
DJIHAD, holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general. It narrowly escaped being a sixth “rukn”, or fundamental duty, and is indeed still so regarded by the descendants of the Kharidjis. The position was reached gradually but quickly. In the Meccan Suras of the Kur’an patience under attack is taught; no other attitude was possible. But at Madina the right to repel attack appears, and gradually it became a prescribed duty to fight against and subdue the hostile Meccans. Whether Muhammad himself recognized that his position implied steady and unprovoked war against the unbelieving world until it was subdued to Islam may be in doubt. Traditions are explicit on the point; but the Kuranic passages speak always of the unbelievers who are to be subdued as dangerous or faithless. Still, the story of his writing to the powers around him shows that such a universal position was implicit in his mind, and it certainly developed immediately after his death, when the Muslim armies advanced out of Arabia. It is now a “fard ‘ala ‘l-kifaya, a duty in general on all male, free, adult Muslims, sane in mind and body and having means enough to reach the Muslim army, yet not a duty necessarily incumbent on every individual but sufficiently performed when done by a certain number. So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam.”
The “Dictionary of the Quran”, op cit, defines Jihad as,
“The literal meaning of jihad is “to strive”. Technically, jihad is any endeavor that is made to further the cause of God, whether the endeavor is positive (e.g. promoting good) or negative (e.g. eradicating evil) in character, takes the form of social action or private effort, involves monetary expenditure or physical struggle, or is made against the enemy without or the enemy within (i.e. against “the bidding self”). The reduction of jihad to “war” is thus unjustified, though war is an important form of jihad, and a number of Quranic verses about jihad (e.g. 8:74, 75, 9:44) refer primarily to fighting. The comprehensive nature of jihad is evidenced by such verses as 29:69: “Those who strive in Us (= Our way), We guide them to Our ways.” When jihad takes the form of war it is known as qital (“fighting”).
Regarding jihad, the “Tafsir of Ibn Kathir”, volume 2, pages 116, 117 on verse 2:191, [8], states:
As Jihad involves death and the killing of men, Allah draws our attention to the fact that the disbelief and polytheism of the disbelievers, and their avoidance of Allah’s path are far worse than killing. Thus Allah says, “And Fitnah is worse than killing.” This is to say that shirk (Polytheism) is more serious and worse than killing.
The “Reliance of the Traveler, (the Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)”, page 599, [9], is one of the more respected, classical works in Islamic theology. This 1200+ page volume contains fundamentals of Islamic jurisprudence compiled by “the great 13th century hadith scholar and jurisprudent”, Imam Nawawi, and others. This work was not written with a Western audience in mind. Nawawi wanted to produce a book on Islamic law that was precise, and accurate; one that taught true Islamic values. The following is a long quote on jihad:
“Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word “mujahada”, signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self, (nafs), which is why the Prophet said as he was returning from jihad.
The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:
1) Fighting is prescribed for you (2:216)
2) Slay them wherever you find them (4:89)
3) Fight the idolaters utterly (9:36)
and such Hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet said:
“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah.”
And the hadith report by Muslim
“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”
Jihad is communal obligation. When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others. And Allah Most High having said:
Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s path with their property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each Allah has promised great good.” 4:95
Jihad is also obligatory for everyone able to perform it, male or female, old or young when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims.
The Caliph makes war upon the Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax Jizya…in accordance with the word of Allah Most High:
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden – who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book – until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled.” 9:29
The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim ....”
There are additional statements regarding the rules of jihad found in “Reliance of the Traveler”, but I quote only the relevant statements that portray jihad’s scope and application.
Based upon Islamic scholars' writings, violent jihad is permitted in Islam for both offensive and defensive purposes. It was commanded by, and praised by, Muhammad as being one of the greatest forms of true Islamic spirituality. It is to continue until all people are subjected to Islamic rule.
Aggression toward non-Muslims is allowed but prior to attacking, the Muslims are to offer them a choice:
1) Become Muslim
2) Do not become Muslim but pay the extortion (jizya) tax
3) Defend yourselves unto death
As stated earlier, we must explore the context and chronology of the Quran’s passages. This is challenging because the Quran is not arranged chronologically and no one knows its complete chronology. There is no standard chronological agreement among scholars, be they Muslim, Christian, or secular, as to when chapters or even portions of chapters were revealed during Muhammad’s life. Some of Muhammad’s words, spoken as the Quran near the end of his life, were folded into passages he spoke near the beginning of his declared prophethood. Therefore, the Quran is a jumbled chronological hodgepodge. In and of itself, the Quran is practically worthless when it comes to determining its chronology. (Another one of the Quran’s many weaknesses). The only corroborating references that are able to provide us a guide as to when certain passages were spoken are the Sira and Hadith. Sometimes they provide chronological details behind the Quran’s verses. However, as a whole, scholars are unable to completely determine the Quran’s chronology. Consequently, they only offer their best, educated, opinions.
This Quranic chronology is important because what Muhammad said earlier in his life did not necessarily apply to later events (due to “abrogation” mentioned above). He was always prepared to change his mind, vows, and rules. (See the selection of Hadiths from Sahih Muslim, [10], book 15, #s 4044 – 4062). If we are to understand true Islamic jihad then we need to establish his final position with respect to jihad and aggression. Hence the importance of the last few chronological passages of the Quran, and the following actions of his closest companions and followers.
At the end of this article, I have two appendices – 1 and 2, taken from two books that detail various passages related to jihad and violence. Note that from both of these books the majority of passages relative to “jihad” or violence in Islam’s name come from chapter nine. Most scholars agree that chapter nine is from a very late period - near the end of Muhammad’s life. The great Muslim historian Tabari, in volume 8, (who wrote a 39 volume Islamic history and an extensive commentary on the Quran), [11], shows that the conquest of Mecca occurred in 630, and Ibn Ishaq documented in his “Sirat Rasulallah”, page 617, [12], (this work is the most authentic biographical material still extent today), states that the main jihad section of chapter 9 was revealed in AH 9, i.e. 631. Muhammad died in 632. Therefore, chapter 9 was revealed during Muhammad’s last two years, if not in the last year. Chapter 5 is usually thought to be the last chronological chapter, but it does not have many references to jihad.
The following is a quote from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, op cit, with respect to the problems of Quranic chronology. At the end of the quote are its chronological lists taken from several different scholars of Islam.
The Kuran responds constantly and often explicitly to Muhammad's historical situation, giving encouragement in times of persecution, answering questions from his followers and opponents, commenting on current events, etc. Major doctrines and regulations for the Muslim community, which are never stated systematically in the Kuran, are introduced gradually and in stages that are not always clear. There are apparent contradictions and inconsistencies in the presentation of both the beliefs and the regulations, and the latter are sometimes altered to fit new situations. Thus it is essential to know the approximate dates or historical settings of some passages, and at least the chronological order of others, if they are to be understood fully. This problem was recognized by early Muslim scholars who devoted much attention to it in the first few centuries, until a fairly rigid system of dating was established and given the imprimatur of orthodoxy. In modern times the study of the chronology of the Kuran has been almost exclusively a domain of Western scholars, who have not however been able to reach a consensus on a dating system, or even on the possibility of establishing one.
The Egyptian standard edition gives the following chronological order of the suras, with the verses said to date from a different period given in parentheses: XCVI, LXVIII (17-33, 48-50 Med.), LXXIII (10 f., 20 Med.), LXXIV, I, CXI, LXXXI, LXXXVII, XCII, LXXXIX, XCIII, XCIV, CIII, C, CVIII, CII, CVII, CIX, CV, CXIII, CXIV, CXII, LIII, LXXX, XCVII, XCI, LXXXV, CVI, CI, LXXV, CIV, LXXVII (48 Med.), L (38 Med.), XC, LXXXVI, LIV (54-6 Med.), XXXVIII, VII (163-70 Med.), LXXII, XXXVI (45 Med.), XXV (68-70 Med.), XXXV, XIX (58, 71 Med.), XX (130 f. Med.), LVI (71 f. Med.), XXVI (197, 224-7 Med.),XXVII, XXVIII (52-5 Med., 85 during Hijrah), XVII (26, 32 f., 57, 73-80 Med.), X (40, 94-6 Med.), XI (12, 17, 114 Med.), XII (1-3, 7 Med.), XV, VI (20, 23, 91, 114, 141, 151-3 Med.), XXXVII, XXXI (27-9 Med.), XXXIV (6 Med.), XXXIX (52-4 Med.), XL (56 f. Med.), XLI, XLII (23-5, 27 Med.), XLIII (54 Med.), XLIV, XLV (14 Med.), XLVI (10, 15, 35 Med.), LI, LXXXVIII, XVIII (28, 83-101 Med.), XVI (126-8 Med.), LXXI, XIV (28 f. Med.), XXI, XXIII, XXXII (16-20 Med.), LII, LXVII, LXX, LXXVIII, LXXIX, LXXXII, LXXXIV, XXX (17 Med.), XXIX (1-11 Med.), LXXXIII Hijrah II (281 later), VIII (30-6 Mec.), III, XXXIII, LX, IV, XCIX, LVII, XLVII (13 during Hijrah), XIII, LV, LXXVI, LXV, XCVIII, LIX, XXIV, XXII, LXIII, LVIII, XLIX, LXVI, LXIV, LXI, LXII, XLVIII, V, IX (128 f. Mec.), CX.
(NOTE that sura 9, (IX), is the second to last.)
The Encyclopaedia of Islam, op cit, also details three Western Islamic scholars chronology of the Quran. (Noldeke was one of the greatest Quranic scholars from the West). Below is its listing of the last Medinan suras:
Weil: 2, 98, 62, 65, 22, 4, 8, 47, 57, 3, 59, 24, 63,
33, 48, 110, 61, 60, 58, 49, 66, 9, 5.
Noldeke and Blachere: 2, 98, 64, 62, 8, 47, 3, 61, 57, 4, 65, 59, 33, 63, 24,
58, 22, 48, 66, 60, 110, 49, 9, 5.
[NOTE, traditional Western dating breaks the chronological order of the Quran up into 3 or 4 groups. The last group (sometimes called “late Medinan”) is presented above. There are earlier suras in both lists above, however, for space’s sake, and editing time, I only presented the last sura grouping.]
[NOTE that sura 9 is the second to last in these three scholar’s groupings as well.]
Canon Sell in “The Historical Development of the Quran”, page 204, [13], details that Jalalu-d-Din as-Syuti (a great Muslim Quranic scholar) lists chapter 9 second to last, and Sir William Muir (a great Western Islamic scholar) lists chapter 9 as last. All of the above mentioned references also list chapter 5 near the chronological end, if not at the very end.
The Hadith of Sahih Bukhari, volume 4, # 129, [14], the Hadith states that “The last Sura that was revealed was Bara’a…”. Some scholars have questioned exactly how this fits with other texts’ assertions, but, suffice it to say, Sura 9 was considered to be one of the last, if not the last revealed chapters of the Quran.
Therefore:
six top scholar’s, or works of scholars, (3 of them Muslim, 3 Western), all agree that chapter 9 is either the last or second to last chapter to be spoken by Muhammad. Consequently, since this chapter contains the largest amount of violent passages this is our focus. As a result of being one of the last chapters revealed, sura 9 will dominate, or abrogate, conflicting quranic passages from an earlier period. That being said, we will review other relevant passages on Islamic violence and jihad found in the Quran.
Below are some of the many Quranic verses that reference violence and jihad. At the end of each passage of selected verses, I will add my comments and reference material. Quranic passages, unless otherwise noted, are taken from The Noble Quran, [15]. Note that words in parenthesis are added by the translators for clarification.
22:39 Permission to fight is given to those (i.e. believers against disbelievers), who are fighting them, (and) because they (believers) have been wronged, and surely, Allah is Able to give them (believers) victory
22:40 Those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they said: "Our Lord is Allah." - For had it not been that Allah checks one set of people by means of another, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, wherein the Name of Allah is mentioned much would surely have been pulled down. Verily, Allah will help those who help His (Cause). Truly, Allah is All-Strong, All-Mighty.
22:41 Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamat-as-Salat. [i.e. to perform the five compulsory congregational Salat (prayers) (the males in mosques)], to pay the Zakat and they enjoin Al-Ma'ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islam has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur'an as the law of their country in all the spheres of life]. And with Allah rests the end of (all) matters (of creatures).
2:193. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zâlimûn (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)
2:193 from Dawood’s Koran, [16]:
2:193 Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers.
[NOTE: I have grouped these verses together because of Ibn Ishaq’s work - see below.]
COMMENT
The context and background of the above passages can be found in Ibn Ishaq’s and Tabari’s work. What follows is from the biographical work of Ibn Ishaq’s “Sirat Rasulallah”, op cit, pages 212, 213. Words in [ ] type brackets are mine.
"THE APOSTLE RECEIVES THE ORDER TO FIGHT
The apostle had not been given permission to fight or allowed to shed blood before the second Aqaba [a place where a pledge was made between Muhammad and his followers from Medina]. He had simply been ordered to call men to God and to endure insult and forgive the ignorant. The Quraysh [a leading group of Meccans] had persecuted his followers, seducing some from their religion and exiling others from their country. They had to choose whether to give up their religion, be maltreated at home, or to flee the country, some to Abyssinia, others to Medina.
When Quraysh became insolent towards God and rejected His gracious purpose, accused His prophet of lying, and ill treated and exiled those who served Him and proclaimed His unity, believed in His prophet and held fast to His religion, He gave permission to His apostle to fight and to protect himself against those who wronged them and treated them badly.
The first verse which was sent down on this subject from what I have heard from Urwa b. Al-Zubayr and other learned persons was: "Permission is given to those who fight because they have been wronged. God is well able to help them, --- those who have been driven out of their houses without right only because they said God is our Lord. Had not God used some men to keep back others, cloister and churches and oratories and mosques wherein the name of God is constantly mentioned would have been destroyed. Assuredly God will help those who help Him. God is Almighty. Those who if we make them strong in the land will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity. To God belongs the end of matters" [a]. The meaning is "I have allowed them to fight only because they have been unjustly treated while their sole offense against men has been that they worship God. When they are in the ascendant they will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity, i.e., the prophet and his companions all of them." Then God sent down to him: "Fight them so that there be no more seduction," [b] i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. "And the religion is God's,", i.e. Until God alone is worshipped."
When God had given permission to fight and this clan of the Ansar had pledged their support to him in Islam and to help him and his followers, and the Muslims who had taken refuge with them, the apostle commanded his companions, the emigrants of his people and those Muslims who were with him in Mecca, to emigrate to Medina and to link up with their brethren the Ansar. “God will make for you brethren and houses in which you may be safe.” So they went out in companies, and the apostle stayed in Mecca waiting for his Lord’s permission to leave Mecca and migrate to Medina.”
END OF QUOTE
[NOTE: two passages from the Quran are referenced: [a] Sura 22:39-41, and [b] Sura 2:193, that is why I grouped them together].
Ibn Ishaq’s work details the chronological and historical context of the above verses. Generally, Muhammad is now going to fight in self defense. But, if you look closely, you find that Muslims will be allowed to a) “fight them so that there be no more seduction” – i.e., others trying to dissuade Muslims from Islam, and b) “the religion is God’s, i.e. Until God alone is worshipped.” The seeds for future aggression to further Islam by using violence were now planted.
Tabari also documents this event. (Note: Tabari often used Ibn Ishaq’s work as a basis for parts of his history). Below is an except from Tabari, op cit, volume 6, page 137, on the time of the revelation of the above passage.
The seventy representative chiefs of those who had accepted Islam, came to the Messenger of God from al-Madinah, met him during the pilgrimage, and swore an oath of allegiance to him at al-Aqabah. They gave him their pledge in the following words: “We are of you and you are of us; whoever comes to us of your Companions, or you yourself if you come to us, we shall defend you as we would defend ourselves.” After this the Quraysh began to treat them harshly and the Messenger of God commanded his Companions to go to al-Madinah. This was the second trial, during which the Messenger of God told his Companions to emigrate and himself emigrated. It was concerning this that God revealed:
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for God. (218)
NOTE 218 says: This verse (8:39) was probably not revealed until after the battle of Badr. The almost identical verse 2:193 seems not to have been revealed until shortly before the conquest of Mecca.
Tabari adds on page 138:
Those members of the Aws and the Khazraj who took the oath of allegiance at the second al-Aqabah took the pledge of war, when, in contrast to the terms of the first al-Aqabah, God permitted fighting. The first was the pledge of women, as I have mentioned above on the authority of Ubadah al-Samit. The second pledge of al-Aqabah was to wage war against all men (220), as I have mentioned above on the authority of Urwah b. al-Zubayr.
NOTE 220 says: That is, on anyone who injured or killed Muhammad.
[Note: The translator of Ibn Ishaq, A. Guillaume, believes that the last verse referenced above was verse 2:193. However, the translator of Tabari, W. M. Watt, believes that it was actually 8:39. However, in “Muhammad at Mecca”, [17], Watt states that the verse in question is 2:193. So, either Watt changed his mind, or made a mistake. Actually it does not matter. The verses are very similar and the point is that this was the time of the revelation that fighting was allowed].
Regarding 2:193, the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, page 117, 118, states
Then Allah orders Muslims to kill the disbelievers “until there is no more Fitnah.” According to Ibn Abbas and others, “Fitnah” means polytheism, “And religion (worship), is for Allah” meaning Allah’s religion should stand supreme and overshadowing the rest of the religions. In the Sahihayn, it is reported that the Prophet said: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight the people till they say: “None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and whoever says it will save his life and property from me except on breaking the law (rights and conditions for which he will be punished justly), and his accounts will be with Allah””.
Therefore, PASSAGE ONE provides us with the allowance of fighting and the works of history and Sira provide us with their chronology - late during Muhammad's time in Mecca. These verses are primarily defensive, but there is also a component of aggression in
“And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for God.”
Muhammad envisioned that there would come a time when he would no longer be on the defensive, but on the offensive. Thus, his early words depict his later actions.
2:216 Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.
2:217 They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (i.e. 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, "Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the Way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever."
COMMENT
Helmut Gätje in “The Quran and its Exegesis”, page 213, [18], presents a quote from Baidawi’s Tafsir on this verse. Baidawi was one of the greatest early commentators on the Quran. Gatje’s words are in parenthesis.
“They will question thee concerning the holy month”: It is related that, in the month of Jumada l-Akhira, which was two months before (the battle of) Badr, the Prophet sent out his paternal cousin Abd Allah ibn Jahsh with an expeditionary force, in order to be on the look-out for a caravan of (the tribe of) Quraish in which were Amr ibn Abd Allah al-Hadrami and three (other) men. They killed Amr, took two of his men captive, and drove away the caravan, which contained the goods of trade from at-Taif. This happened at the beginning of (the month of) Rajab, while Abd Allah and his people believed it was (still) the (month of) Jumada l-Akhira. Regarding this, the (people of the tribe of) Quraish said: “Muhammad has (unlawfully) regarded the month in which raids and warlike acts are forbidden, so that the fearful can be safe and men can move freely everywhere for the sake of their livelihood, as permissible (for such forbidden acts). This fell hard upon the members of the expeditionary force, and they said: “We will not submit until compensation comes down for us.” At this, Muhammad gave back the caravan along with the captives. According to Ibn Abbas (however it is related) that the Messenger of God accepted the booty when this verse came down. This is supposed to have been the first booty in Islam. Those who question (Muhammad about the holy month) were the unbelievers, who thereby sought to ascribe to him calumny and profanation (of a holy month). Others say (however) that they were the members of the expeditionary force (who asked Muhammad about the holy month)....
“Say: Fighting in it is a heinous thing”: that is, a heinous sin. For the most part, in opposition to Ata, it is held that this statement is abrogated by the following words of God: “If they do not leave you alone and offer you peace and stop hostilities, then take them wherever you find them and slay them” (Sura 4:91/93). In this case the more specific (that is, the prohibition against fighting during the month of Rajab) would be abrogated by the general (that is, the general command to kill the unbelievers). However, there is a contradiction in this. It lies nearest (the truth) to reject (the interpretation that the present verse declares an absolute prohibition against fighting in the holy month. Although (the word) “fighting” is indefinite here, it is fixed in scope; and thus, (the fighting here) not (to be understood as fighting) in general...
This passage displays an item of interest - what Muhammad ordered at the time these verses were revealed. Just after arriving in Medina, he sent his men out to rob and plunder. And they committed murder. Upon Muhammad’s command they attacked and stole other people’s possessions and ended up murdering a man.
This action took place during a period of recognized “peace” within the Arab community. They had an understanding, a code of honor if you will, that all would honor the sacred months and not make war upon others. Muhammad’s men broke this code. And to justify this dishonorable deed, Muhammad received a timely “revelation” justifying the robbery and murder these men committed. Even with these few verses regarding jihad and violence, we see Muhammad’s duplicity: circumstances changed, Islam changed.
Also note how this passage contradicts or “abrogates” passage one. 2:216 and 217 allow offensive attacks but 2:190-194 primarily command defensive actions. Here, Muhammad’s actions were a raid upon some traveling merchants who had goods that were not from the city of Mecca.
4:94 O you who believe! When you go (to fight) in the Cause of Allah, verify (the truth), and say not to anyone who greets you (by embracing Islam): "You are not a believer"; seeking the perishable goods of the worldly life. There are much more profits and booties with Allah. Even as he is now, so were you yourselves before till Allah conferred on you His Favors (i.e. guided you to Islam), therefore, be cautious in discrimination. Allah is Ever Well Aware of what you do.
4:95 Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward;
I presented this passage for two reasons. 1) to show how important jihad and fighting are in Islam. Jihad is highly commendable, and those that fight are rated high in Allah’s eyes, and they will be greatly rewarded, 2) Here we clearly see the aggressive intentions of Jihad. Ali’s Koran starts 4:94 with, “Oh you who believe, when you go abroad in the cause of Allah...”
From our chronological tables we see that this chapter was also revealed during the Medinan period. In Rodwell’s Koran, [19], the notes for chapter 4 state: “Most of the events alluded to in this Sura fall between the end of the third and the close of the fifth year after the flight to Medina.”
Now, let’s look at another Muslim scholar’s commentary. From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, pages 145 – 150, (note, I will not re-quote the verses)
Quoting Ibn Abbas: “Some Muslims chased a man for his booty, who said to them: “Assalamu Alaykum.” They killed him and seized his booty. Consequently, the above verse was revealed. It is mentioned in a biography that his brother Fazzar emigrated to the Prophet in compliance with his father’s command to call on Fazzar people to embrace Islam. On his way, one of the Prophet’s brigades found him at night. He had already informed them that he was a Muslim, but they rejected his admission, and killed him. His father said: “I went to the Prophet and he gave me one thousand dinars and other compensation, and sent me back.” Then, the above verse was revealed.
Al-Bukhari narrated, on the authority of Ibn Abbas: “The Prophet said to Al-Miqdad: “When a believer conceals his Faith among a people who are disbelievers and he has disclosed his Islam, then you have killed him, didn’t you, too, conceal your Islam in Makkah before? (1). Narrated by Al-Bukhari in this way (summarized and Mu’allaq).
Iman Ahmed quoted Ibn Abbas as saying: “A man from Banu Saalim who was herding his sheep, passed by a group of the Prophet’s companions, and greeted them. They said: “He only greeted us in order to seek our protection.” They went to him and killed him. Afterwards, they brought his sheep to the Prophet and the above verse was revealed.”” (2)
Note from Ibn Kathir’s quote. 1) Muslims were allowed to attack non-Muslims and plunder their possessions. See how the poor shepherd was treated? He greeted them, poised no threat, but he was murdered because the Muslims thought he was not a true Muslim. In other words, it was totally permissible to attack non-Muslims at this time in Islam’s history. The murdering Muslims were not reproached for attacking others, they were reproached for attacking a person who greeted them – as a Muslim would do, but who they thought was not a true Muslim. Had the shepherd not greeted them, Muhammad would have justified his murder.
[A SIDE QUESTION: Why did it take a murder of a Muslim for Allah to “reveal” this verse to Muhammad? Wouldn’t it have been better if Allah could have revealed this to Muhammad, and have it incorporated into his teachings, so others would not have had to have been murdered?]
Let’s continue with Ibn Kathir’s commentary. Regarding verse 4:95 it says,
“Al-Bukhari quoted Al-Barra as saying: “When the above verse was revealed, the Prophet called Zaid Ibn Thabit and ordered him to write it down. Ibn Umm Maktum came to the Prophet and explained to him his disability. Then, Allah revealed: “Except those who are disabled.”
Note here that once again, it took human circumstances and predicaments for Allah to complete a revelation! Jihad was ordered for Muslims, but some Muslims were unable to fight – such as a blind man. Consequently, Allah had to modify his prior revelation to Muhammad with another revelation – exempting the disabled from jihad.
Thus far three Quranic passages have been considered. The first was revealed around the time Muhammad fled from Mecca to Medina. The second just a few months after his arrival in Medina. The third from between the 3rd and 5th year of Muhammad’s stay in Medina.
Now let us examine some additional actions that Muhammad ordered from 1 A.H. up to 6 A.H.. Please note, there are more incidents I could reference, but for the sake of time and space I have to limit the amount of information I detail.
While reading these incidents below, ask yourself if real Islam, i.e. Muhammad’s Islam, allows aggressive violence and terrorism.
This occurred around 2 A.H. Muhammad's requested his men to murder an old Jewish man named Abu Afak. Abu Afak was 120 years old. Abu Afak had urged his fellow Medinans to question Muhammad. Below are the details from Muslim sources.
From “The Life of Muhammad, op cit., page 675,
SALIM B. UMAYR'S EXPEDITION TO KILL ABU AFAK
Abu Afak was one of the B. Amr b. Auf of the B. Ubayda clan. He showed his disaffection when the apostle killed al-Harith b. Suwayd b. Samit and said:
"Long have I lived but never have I seen
An assembly or collection of people
More faithful to their undertaking
And their allies when called upon
Than the sons of Qayla when they assembled,
Men who overthrew mountains and never submitted,
A rider who came to them split them in two (saying)
"Permitted", "Forbidden", of all sorts of things.
Had you believed in glory or kingship
You would have followed Tubba
[NOTE: the Tubba was a ruler from Yemen who invaded that part of what is present Saudi Arabia: the Qaylites resisted him]
The apostle said, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the "weepers", went forth and killed him. Umama b. Muzayriya said concerning that:
You gave the lie to God's religion and the man Ahmad! [Muhammad]
By him who was your father, evil is the son he produced!
A "hanif" gave you a thrust in the night saying
"Take that Abu Afak in spite of your age!"
Though I knew whether it was man or jinn
Who slew you in the dead of night (I would say naught).
END OF QUOTE
Additional information is found in the Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, (Book of the Major Classes) by Ibn Sa'd, Volume 2, [20], page 32, words in [ ] are mine.
Then occurred the "sariyyah" [raid] of Salim Ibn Umayr al-Amri against Abu Afak, the Jew, in [the month of] Shawwal in the beginning of the twentieth month from the hijrah [immigration from Mecca to Medina in 622 AD], of the Apostle of Allah. Abu Afak, was from Banu Amr Ibn Awf, and was an old man who had attained the age of one hundred and twenty years. He was a Jew, and used to instigate the people against the Apostle of Allah, and composed (satirical) verses [about Muhammad].
Salim Ibn Umayr who was one of the great weepers and who had participated in Badr, said, "I take a vow that I shall either kill Abu Afak or die before him. He waited for an opportunity until a hot night came, and Abu Afak slept in an open place. Salim Ibn Umayr knew it, so he placed the sword on his liver and pressed it till it reached his bed. The enemy of Allah screamed and the people who were his followers, rushed to him, took him to his house and interred him.
END OF QUOTE
From a contemporary Muslim scholar - Ali Dashti's "23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad", [21], page 100:
"Abu Afak, a man of great age (reputedly 120 years) was killed because he had lampooned Mohammad. The deed was done by Salem b. Omayr at the behest of the Prophet, who had asked, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" The killing of such an old man moved a poetess, Asma b. Marwan, to compose disrespectful verses about the Prophet, and she too was assassinated."
Prior to listing all of the assassinations Muhammad had ordered, Ali Dashti writes on page 97:
"Thus Islam was gradually transformed from a purely spiritual mission into a militant and punitive organization whose progress depended on booty from raids and revenue from the zakat tax."
COMMENT
Here an aged man was murdered upon Muhammad's command. He was no physical threat to Muhammad and he did not urge people to commit violent acts against Muhammad or the Muslims. There was no discussion with Jewish leaders, there was no dialogue with Abu Afak; it was just an outright murder of one of Muhammad's critics. Abu Afak urged the people who lived in Medina to doubt and leave Muhammad. He found that Muhammad's sayings were strange and dictatorial. He chided the Arabs that put their faith in Muhammad. Muhammad heard of this and viewed the 120 year old man as a threat to his credibility, not to his life. Nowhere does it say that Abu Afak urged his fellow Arabs to attack or harm Muhammad. Yet for speaking his mind, for the benefit of his friends, this man was murdered by Muhammad.
The last statement in Umama b. Muzayriya's verse reveals something though:
"Though I knew whether it was man or jinn
Who slew you in the dead of night (I would say naught)."
This statement displays that the Muslims knew exactly what they were doing. They knew it was cold-blooded murder that they were committing upon Muhammad's request. They wanted to keep it secret, they wanted to hide their evil deeds from the populace at large. That's why Umama said he wouldn't reveal who murdered Abu Afak.
This incident immediately followed the murder of Abu Afak around 2 A.H.. The incident involves Muhammad's request for his men to murder a women named Asma b. Marwan.
Quoting from Guillaume, op cit, pages 675, 676,
UMAYR B. ADIYY'S JOURNEY TO KILL ASMA B. MARWAN
"She was of B. Umayyya b. Zayd. When Abu Afak had been killed she displayed disaffection. Abdullah b. al-Harith b. Al-Fudayl from his father said that she was married to a man of B. Khatma called Yazid b. Zayd. Blaming Islam and its followers she said:
"I despise B. Malik and al-Nabit
and Auf and B. al-Khazraj.
You obey a stranger who is none of yours,
One not of Murad or Madhhij. {1}
Do you expect good from him after the killing of your chiefs
Like a hungry man waiting for a cook's broth?
Is there no man of pride who would attack him by surprise
And cut off the hopes of those who expect aught from him?"
Hassan b. Thabit answered her:
"Banu Wa'il and B. Waqif and Khatma
Are inferior to B. al-Khazraj.
When she called for folly woe to her in her weeping,
For death is coming.
She stirred up a man of glorious origin,
Noble in his going out and in his coming in.
Before midnight he dyed her in her blood
And incurred no guilt thereby."
When the apostle heard what she had said he said, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?" Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!" When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her", so Umayr went back to his people.
Now there was a great commotion among B. Khatma that day about the affair of bint [girl] Marwan. She had five sons, and when Umayr went to them from the apostle he said, "I have killed bint Marwan, O sons of Khatma. Withstand me if you can; don't keep me waiting." That was the first day Islam became powerful among B. Khatma; before that those who were Muslims concealed the fact. The first of them to accept Islam was Umayr b. Adiy who was called the "Reader", and Abdullah b. Aus and Khuzayma b. Thabit. The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam."