James
Arlandson, Ph.D., is recognized in academic circles as an expert in
philosophy and world religions, especially the religion of Islam and
the history of its founder, Muhammad.
Jihad in the Quran and Early Islam
Part 1
By
James Arlandson
Muslim spokespersons who have access to the news media are
misleading the public about jihad.
The
Council on American Muslim Relations (CAIR) says the following about
jihad at the time this present article was posted:
'Jihad' does not mean 'holy war.' Literally, jihad means to strive,
struggle and exert effort. It is a central and broad Islamic concept
that includes struggle against evil inclinations within oneself,
struggle to improve the quality of life in society, struggle in the
battlefield for self-defense (e.g., having a standing army for
national defense), or fighting against tyranny or oppression.
In
reply, however, while it is true that a Muslim may wage jihad on the
excess in his soul or on unbelief by non-violent means like
argumentation, jihad must also include a military, violent war.
Also,
the clauses that say jihad means the struggle to improve 'the
quality of life' or the fight against 'tyranny and oppression' are
ambiguous. Islam expresses the will of Allah, and jihad battles
anything that stands in its way.
By
any clear reading of the Quran, the hadith (reports of Muhammad's
words and actions outside of the Quran), the histories, the
biographies and the law books on early Islam, jihad cannot exclude
military warfare in the cause of Allah in order to expand Islam.
Here
is how jihad was done in early Islam.
The
Quran
The
Quran is the ultimate source for later legal opinions. It is
considered completely reliable and inerrant. What does it say about
jihad?
What
is the purpose or goal of jihad?
A
complicated policy like jihad can have multiple goals or purposes,
but this one comes late in Muhammad's life in Medina and best
summarizes the goal and purposes. He wants to make Islam prevail
over every religion.
The
following translation is approved and funded by the Saudi Royal
family; the parenthetical explanations are inserted by the
translators:
9:33
It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the
religion of truth, to make it superior over all religions, though
the Mushrik'n (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the
Oneness of Allah) hate (it). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur'an,
Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996, 2002; parenthetical notes are theirs)
This
verse is repeated two more times, word for word, in Suras 61:9 and
48:28. Muhammad means business.
Seekers and the curious about Islam must understand this brute fact
as they read the Quran: in the ten years that Muhammad lived in
Medina (AD 622-632), he either sent out or went out on
seventy-four small assassination hit squads, raids, expeditions,
small battles, or full-scale wars like the Tabuk Crusade in AD 630,
in which Muhammad led 30,000 soldiers north to invade the Byzantine
empire. Sometimes the conflicts did not end in violence, but too
many times they did. All verses (and there are not many) in the
Medinan suras that seem to speak of peace and tolerance must be read
in light of this violent historical context. Not far from the few
tolerant verses the reader will find intolerant and violent verses.
Sura
9:33, simply put, predicts the conquest of Islam over all religions.
Islam must dominate the world through jihad.
For a
more detailed analysis of this verse and Suras 61:9 and 48:28, such
as the literary and historical contexts, please see this
article.
What
are some rules of jihad?
These
rules are numbered for clarity, not priority.
1.
Conquered women and children may be enslaved.
In AD
627 Muhammad and his followers and allies withstood a large army of
Meccans and their allies, without ever slugging it out in pitched
battle. The Meccans attacked Medina because they were fed up with
Muhammad's aggressions against their trade. He dug trenches around
Medina to diminish the advantage that the Meccans had with their
cavalry. After about a month the Meccans withdrew because of a fair
that was about to begin, and this large gathering from all over
brought in money. But Muhammad was not finished. While he was
bathing, the archangel Gabriel allegedly appeared to him and told
him to attack the large Qurayza tribe of Jews. He besieged them in
their fortress, and after some negotiations and a 'trial,' the men
were beheaded and their bodies and heads dragged and tossed into the
trenches, whereas the women and children were sold into slavery.
These
three verses, especially v. 26, in Sura 33 deal with this
indefensible atrocity:
33:25
Allah turned back the unbelievers [Meccans and their allies] in a
state of rage, having not won any good, and Allah spared the
believers battle [q-t-l]. Allah is, indeed, Strong and Mighty. 26
And He brought those of the People of the Book [Qurayza] who
supported them from their fortresses and cast terror into their
hearts, some of them you slew [q-t-l] and some you took captive. 27
And he bequeathed to you their lands, their homes and their
possessions, together with land you have never trodden. Allah has
power over everything. (Majid Fakhry, An Interpretation of the
Quran, NYUP, 2000, 2004)
These
verses seem to celebrate death and conquest. The key root word in
brackets, q-t-l or qital or qatala, means killing,
warring, and slaughtering. This meaning is much more restricted than
jihad, though this latter word can also mean killing, warring, or
slaughtering. Next, Allah permits the enslavement of Qurayza women
and children, so later Muslim familiar with the background of this
verse will follow their prophet in this practice. Finally, Allah
permits Muhammad to take the Jewish clan's property on the basis of
conquest and his possession of all things. This is a dubious
revelation and reasoning. Allah speaks, and this benefits Muhammad
materially. This happens too often in Muhammad's life.
Selling humans into slavery produced a lot of wealth, so the
Allah-inspired prophet never got a revelation that this practice
should stop permanently and forever.
Muslim apologists (defenders of Islam), understandably, are quick to
explain (away) this atrocity, but their standard lines of defense
have been answered
here.
(Scroll down to 'Politics, Warfare, and Conquest,' and point no. 5.)
2.
Women captives are sometimes forced to marry their Muslim masters,
regardless of the marital status of the women. That is, the masters
are allowed to have sex with their enslaved sex objects.
Sayyid Abul A'La Maududi, a highly respected Muslim commentator,
reminds us that the historical context of the next sura finds
Muhammad establishing rules for his community within two to five
years after his Hijrah (Emigration) in AD 622. He lays down laws for
marriage. What happens to slave women who are captured during the
raids that the Muslims go on frequently? Sura 4:24 says:
4:24
And forbidden to you are wedded wives of other people except those
who have fallen in your hands (as prisoners of war) . . . (Sayyid
A'La Abul Maududi, The Meaning of the Quran, vol. 1, p. 319).
Maududi says in his comment on the verse that is it lawful for
Muslims to marry women prisoners of war even when their husbands are
still alive. But what happens if the husbands are captured with
their wives? Maududi cites a school of law that says Muslims may not
marry them, but two other schools, notably one that is analyzed
under 'Classical legal opinions,' in Part Two, say that the
marriage between the captive husbands and wives is broken (note 44).
But
why would a debate over this emerge? The answer is obvious for those
who understand simple justice. No marriage should take place between
prisoners of war and their captors, married or not. No sex should
take place between women captives and their Muslim overlords. But
Islam traffics in injustice too often, as we saw with the Qurayza
tribe.
Islam
allows deep immorality with women who are in their most helpless
condition. This crime is reprehensible, but Allah wills it
nonetheless the Quran says so.
For
more information on this Quran-inspired immorality, see this short
article.
The
hadith, in the next major section, demonstrate that Muslims
jihadists actually have sex with the captured women, whether or not
they are married.
3. A
captured enemy may be killed, ransomed by money or by an exchange,
enslaved, or released freely.
Sura
33:26 speaks of killing captured men and enslaving women and
children (the same may be done to men in other battles, as the
hadith and history demonstrate). A verse that comes earlier in the
same sura says that after the captives are bound firmly, they may be
released by grace or freely or by ransom.
33:4
When you meet the disbelievers in battle, strike them in the neck,
and once they are defeated, bind any captives firmly later you can
release them by grace or by ransom until the toils of war have
ended. That [is the way]. (Haleem)
Imprisonment may be just if the captured enemy may return to fight
against the conqueror at a later time. But selling prisoners of war
was an Arab custom that Allah should have abolished in a revelation
to his prophet. But why should Muhammad receive this just revelation
when money could be made by ransoming prisoners? Allah should have
taken away this option and allowed only free release or
imprisonment.
4.
The conquered are allowed (or forced) to convert.
In
Sura 8, which deals with the Battle of Badr in AD 624, Muhammad
proposes these options to his captives.
8:70
Prophet, tell those you have taken captive, 'If God knows of any
good in your hearts, He will give you something better [Islam] than
what has been taken from you [the caravan], and He will forgive you'
. . . . (Haleem)
Muhammad tells them that if the conquered Meccans had any sense,
they would realize that Allah had a divine plan: expose them to
Islam. This is better than all the material riches they can trade
in. However, it is not difficult to imagine a Meccan muttering under
his breath that he would prefer to takes his money and goods and
return to Mecca, wanting Muhammad to stop harassing the Meccans'
trade.
5. Is
it lawful to kill old men and Christian monks?
One
school of law in the section 'Classical legal opinions,' in Part Two
(appearing tomorrow), says that it is legal to kill old men and
monks. Where may they get this opinion? We should recall that Sura
33:26 says that all the men of the Qurayza tribe were killed, so
that verse alone justifies this atrocity. It is also possible that
the school of law analyzed in the section 'Classical legal opinions'
justifies the death of monks from two passages.
First, Allah says to fight Jews and Christians or People of the Book
in Sura 9, the historical context of which has been discussed above
('What is the purpose or goal of jihad?'):
9:29
Fight [q-t-l] against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the
Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His
Messenger (Muhammad) and those who acknowledge not the religion of
truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and
Christians) until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and
feel themselves subdued. (Hilali and Khan)
Then
Muhammad condemns rabbis and monks who devour the property of people
and bar them from following the path of Allah (read: convert to
Islam) in the same sura:
9:33
O believers [Muslims], many of the rabbis and monks devour the
property of the people unjustly and bar others from the Path of
Allah [Islam]. Those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend them
in Allah's path, announce to them a very painful punishment.
(Fakhry)
It is
true that Muhammad goes on to explain an eternal hellish punishment
for monks (v. 35), but it is not farfetched to believe that a
radical school of law would combine the command to fight People of
the Book (v. 29), with the condemnation of unjust and greedy monks.
Why would these monks not be the first ones to be killed in a
battle? However, it may be the case that the radical school of law
may justify their deaths simply because they are Christian leaders.
6.
Property may be stolen.
Muhammad fought the Battle of Badr in AD 624, in which 320 or so
Muslims won a surprise victory over about 1000 Meccans. Their
caravan was traveling south from Syria back to Mecca, and Muhammad
intended to capture it. The Meccans got word of this raid and sent
their army up to meet their caravan. Sura 8 deals with this
(in)famous battle, and this verse says that Muhammad wanted the
unarmed group (the large caravan), but Allah gave him not only that
one, but also the armed group so that truth may prevail.
8:7
Remember how God promised you [believers] that one of the two enemy
groups [the Meccan trade caravan or their army] would fall to you:
you wanted the unarmed group to be your, but it was God's will to
establish the truth according to His word and to finish off the
disbelievers (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Quran, Oxford UP, 2004)
Muslim apologists assert that the Muslims wanted the caravan,
whereas Muhammad rose above such pettiness. However, historical
facts say the opposite. He was constantly conducting raids to
capture spoils. If not, why did he not return the caravan and preach
at the Meccans only? It is always dubious to connect God's truth
with military victory, but no matter, for Muhammad captured a huge
caravan, and now he was richer than ever before.
Also,
we should not overlook Sura 33:27, quoted above, that promises all
of the property of the Qurayza tribe:
33:27
And he bequeathed to you their lands, their homes and their
possessions, together with land you have never trodden. Allah has
power over everything. (Fakhry)
The
word 'bequeathed' is a euphemism for 'stole' by conquest. As noted,
timely and coincidental revelations that benefit Muhammad materially
come often enough in his life.
7.
Fruit trees may be destroyed.
In AD
625, Muhammad is strong enough to exile the Nadir tribe of Jews,
besieging them in their strongholds for fifteen days until he
started destroying their date palms, their livelihood, so they
capitulated to his first demand for blood-wit money, which
compensates for loss of life. However, he raised the penalty they
must get nothing from their palms. Their livelihood undergoing
destruction and then theft, they departed to the city of Khaybar,
seventy miles to the north, where they had estates. This takeover
helped relieve the ongoing poverty of many Muslims, who took over
their date orchards.
This
verse in Sura 59 justifies his illegal act:
59:5
Whatever you [believers] may have done to [their] palm trees
cutting them down or leaving them standing on their roots was
done by God's leave [permission], so that He might disgrace those
who defied Him. (Haleem)
This
is another coincidental and timely revelation that seeks to justify
the unjustifiable. Later Muslim warriors may use this practice to
destroy other assets that are valuable to civilians.
See
this
article for
more details on the conflict with the Nadir tribe.
8.
Homes may be destroyed.
In
the same sura, Muhammad destroys the homes of the Nadir tribe.
59:2
. . . God came upon them [Jews of the Nadir tribe] from where they
least expected and put panic into their hearts: they brought ruin to
their own homes by their own hands, as well as the hands of the
believers [Muslims] . . . . (Haleem)
A
classical opinion of one school of law (see 'Classical legal
opinions,' Part Two) agrees and also says that homes may be
destroyed. This is also unjust for the revelation-soaked religion of
Islam.
9.
Three options are imposed on the enemy.
It should be recalled that Sura 9:29 lays out some conditions for
the People of the Book, when a Muslim army gathers outside their
city gate, as Muslim interpreters agree:
(1)
Fight and die; (2) convert; (3) keep their religion, but pay a tax,
the jizyah, which Muslim apologists (defenders) argue amounted to
'protection' for the 'privilege' of living under Islam (read: not be
attacked again).
This
is as close as Muhammad can get to forcing the enemy to convert
without technically forcing them. This policy will be worked out and
further imposed after Muhammad dies of a fever in AD 632, and the
policy will not always keep these fine line distinctions.
What
happens to the spoils in jihad?
As
noted in the previous section, Sura 8 deals with the Muslims'
surprise victory over the Meccans at the Battle of Badr in AD 624.
After their victory, Arab custom demanded that the warriors get a
share of the spoils of war. Muhammad says in 8:41,
'Know
that one-fifth of your battle gains belongs to God and the
Messenger' . . . (Haleem).
That
is, Muhammad gets twenty percent for himself and for the needy in
his community, as he distributes it. The warriors were to get eighty
percent.
This
eighty percent distribution is a strong inducement to keep the Arab
custom of raiding alive. Why would Muhammad get a revelation telling
him to follow the way of peace without warfare and raids? Twenty
percent for him and eighty percent for his warriors speak more
loudly than Gabriel.
What
happens to martyrs in jihad?
Martyrs are guaranteed a fast track to Islamic paradise. Their
deaths are depicted in economic terms. If they expend their lives as
a living currency, Allah will exchange them for heavenly Islamic
gardens.
61:10
You who believe, shall I show you a bargain that will save
you from painful punishment? 11 Have faith in God and His Messenger
and struggle [j-h-d] for His cause with your possessions and your
persons that is better for you, if only you knew 12 and He
will forgive your sins, admit you into Gardens graced with
flowing streams, into pleasant dwellings in the Gardens of Eternity.
That is the supreme triumph. (Haleem)
Muslims who struggle (j-h-d) in Allah's cause will either win the
battle and live to see another day, so that they can collect some
spoils of war, or they will die and have their sins forgiven and be
admitted into Islamic heaven.
Sura
9:111 carries on the economic bargain.
9:111
God has purchased the persons and possessions of the
believers for the Garden they fight [q-t-l] in God's way: they
kill [q-t-l] and are killed [q-t-l] this is a true promise given
by Him in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur'an. Who could be more
faithful to his promise than God? So be happy with the bargain
you have made: that is the supreme triumph. (Haleem)
Two
things should be noticed here. First, the root q-t-l is used three
times in this short verse. Qital or qatala, as noted
in the section 'What are some rules of jihad?' means killing,
warring, and slaughtering and is therefore less ambiguous or has a
more restricted meaning than jihad, though this latter word can
mean those same bloody acts.
Thus,
if Muslim apologists (defenders) explain (away) jihad as
non-violent, then they have not factored in qital.
For
the historical and literary contexts and a more thorough analysis of
Suras 61:10 and 9:111, please refer to this
article.
If
the readers would like to see the heavenly 'virgin verses' in the
Quran, they should go
here,
and type in these references: 44:51-56; 52:17-29; 55:46-78.
This
is reason enough for dazed and confused young men to join Islam and
become radicalized.
The
Hadith
The
hadith are the reports of Muhammad's words and actions outside of
the Quran. The three most reliable hadith collectors and editors are
Bukhari (d. 870), Muslim (d. 875), and Abu Dawud (d. 875). The Quran
and the hadith are the foundations for later legal rulings.
What
is the purpose or goal of jihad?
The
hadith follows the Quran in this question. Islam must be made
superior over all other religions.
A man
asked Muhammad what men fight for: war booty, fame, or showing off.
Muhammad replied:
"He
who fights that Allah's word (i.e. Allah's religion of Islamic
monotheism) be superior is in Allah's cause' (Bukhari, Jihad, no.
2810, in Muhammad Muhsin Khan's translation and edition, Riyadh:
Darussallam, 1997; this edition of Bukhari is used throughout this
section).
Allah's religion must become superior over all other religions, a
decree that echoes Suras 61:9 and 9:111, above.
This
tradition says that Muhammad will fight anyone until they confess
that Allah is God and that Muhammad is his messenger.
Allah's Messenger [Muhammad] said: I have been ordered (by Allah) to
fight against people till they say . . . (none has the right to
worshiped but Allah), and whoever said [this] he saved his life and
property from me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be
with Allah . . . . (Bukhari, Jihad, no. 2946, cf. no. 25 and 1399)
It is
the will of Allah that Islam must spread around the world and
dominate it. If people submit to Islam, then their property and
lives will be safe.
What
are some rules of jihad?
The
rules are numbered for clarity, not priority. They cover the same
topics in the previous section on the Quran, with only a few
exceptions.
1.
Besides being enslaved, women are subjected to sex with their new
Muslim masters.
Ali,
Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law, just finished a relaxing bath.
Why?
The
Prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty)
and . . . Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl
from the Khumus).
What
was Muhammad's response to the person who hated Ali for this sexual
act?
'Do
you hate Ali for this? . . . Don't hate him, for he deserves more
than that from Khumus' (Bukhari, War Expeditions, no. 4350).
Khumus
is
onefifth of the war booty, and Muhammad casually believes that
slave women who are part of the one-fifth can be treated like sexual
property. Ali is a Muslim hero. So why would the model prophet for
the world scold his son-in-law who was married to his daughter
Fatima, from his first wife Khadija? After all, slaves are fair
sexual game.
2.
The same sexual abuse happened to women who were part of the
four-fifths of the spoils of war.
Jihadists usually practiced coitus interruptus as they raped
their slave women.
While
on a military campaign and away from their wives, Muslim jihadists
'received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women
and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus
interruptus.' They asked the holy Prophet about this, and it is
important to note what he did not say. He did not scold them or
prohibit the immoral practice, declaring it haram
(prohibited). Rather, he gets lost in theology and the quirky
doctrine of fate:
It is
better for you not to do so. There is no person that is destined to
exist, but will come to existence, till the Day of Resurrection.
That
is, these enquiring Muslims should stop doing coitus interruptus,
but instead go all the way with the enslaved sex objects. Fate
controls who should be born (Bukhari, Military Expeditions,
no. 4138).
It is
one thing for some soldiers in any army to strike out on their own
and rape women. All armies have criminal soldiers who commit this
repugnant act. But it is quite another to codify rape in a sacred
text. Islam codifies and legalizes rape for conquering jihadists.
3. In
one tradition, women and children should not be killed
(Bukhari, Jihad, nos. 3014-3105; Muslim nos. 4319-4320; Abu Dawud,
no. 2662). But this makes economic sense, because the victors could
sell them into slavery or enjoy more sexual license with them.
4.
However, in another tradition, the women and children of polytheists
are permitted to be killed during nighttime raids when visibility is
low.
A
Muslim asked Muhammad: 'about the polytheist whose settlement were
attacked at night when some of their offspring and women were
smitten [killed]. The Prophet . . . said: They are of them' (Abu
Dawud no. 2666; Bukhari, Jihad, no. 3012; Muslim nos. 4321-4323).
That
is, they are all the same they are polytheists, enough said. Ahmad
Hasan, the translator of Abu Dawud, as well as Abdul Hamid Siddiqi,
the translator of Muslim, are quick to add that the killing takes
place at night when the men and the women and children cannot be
distinguished. However, this is small comfort for the women and
children who were killed. It would seem that an Allah-inspired
prophet would be more cautious.
If it
was probable that women and children would get killed in a night
attack, Muhammad should have forbidden these untimely attacks.
5.
The enemy may be killed, enslaved, ransomed, released freely, or
beaten.
Abu
Dawud says that a captured enemy combatant may be killed (no. 2680);
he may be tied with chains as a slave (no. 2671-2674); he is allowed
to be beaten in order to extract information (no. 2675); he may be
released freely (no. 2682-2683), or he may be ransomed; that is, he
may purchase his freedom (nos. 2684-2688).
Ibn
Ishaq (d. 767) is not a collector and editor of hadith, but he is an
early biographer of Muhammad; he lived a century before the three
hadith editors used in this section. His book, The Life of
Muhammad, (trans. A. Guillaume, Oxford UP, 1955), is a primary
source for later reputable historians. He reports an egregious
incident that occurred during the holy Prophet's conquest of the
predominantly Jewish city of Khaybar in AD 628. In order to extract
information on the location of the wealth of the city, Muhammad
tortured a hapless citizen.
See
this short
article for
more details on Muhammad's use of torture.
6.
Men are allowed (or forced) to convert.
It is
true that a non-Muslim could embrace Islam anytime he wished, but
Islam has the messy problem of armies accompanying their preachers.
The
passage in Bukhari, cited under the section 'What is the purpose or
goal of jihad?' says that Muhammad was ordered by Allah to call
people to accept Islam (Jihad, no. 2946; cf. nos. 25 and 1399). If
they convert, then their lives and property will be kept safe from
him. These hadiths from Bukhari make the same offer: Jihad, nos.
2937, 2940, 3010, and 3058).
This
is the entire mission of Muhammad: bring the entire world under
Islam, the best religion that Allah the god of the Arabian
Peninsula has to offer. The problem with this mission is that a
Muslim army lurked in the background or stood in the foreground to
this alleged 'freedom of religion.' Only the strongest of the strong
could resist this offer.
7. In
Islamic war, old men who are polytheists may be killed.
Kill
the old men who are polytheists, but spare their children (Abu
Dawud, no. 2664).
The
translator of this hadith collection says that decrepit old men may
not be killed, but how is a warrior supposed to distinguish them,
except in extreme cases?
8.
Property may be stolen.
In
the section, 'What is the purpose or goal of jihad?' a hadith says
that Muhammad has been ordered by his deity that he should fight
until everyone says Allah is God and Muhammad is his messenger. If
they do, then their property and lives are safe (Bukhari, Jihad, no.
2946; cf. nos. 25 and 1399). It is often claimed that Islam does not
force conversions. But only the strongest of the strong could resist
this threat. If they do not submit to this divine order, then they
lose their property and lives. This actually happened throughout the
many raids and wars that early Muslims embarked on.
The
rule of 'to the victors go the spoils' is unjust for a religious
system.
9.
Fruit trees may be destroyed.
It
should be recalled that Muhammad besieged the Nadir tribe of Jews,
and they finally surrendered when he was in the process of
destroying their date palm orchards and homes. The hadith refers to
this historical event and approves of it (Muslim nos. 4324-4326; Abu
Dawud no. 2609).
This
is also unjust because by analogy jihadists may possibly destroy
other sources of food among the civilians.
10.
Three options are imposed on the conquered.
The
hadith collector and editor Muslim says that Muhammad would exhort
his jihadists to make three offers when their army surrounds a town
or settlement: (1) the surrounded enemy may convert; (2) they may
refuse to accept Islam and pay the jizya or poll tax, which allows
non-Muslims to live under the 'protection' of Islam (read: not be
attacked again); or (3) they must be fought if they refuse the first
two (no. 4294; see Abu Dawud no. 2606). These three options appear
in Muslim's hadith as being granted to polytheists, but history
demonstrates that they were conquered or killed completely. The
second option was taken away from them. But all three were offered
to the People of the Book, or Jews and Christians (Sura 9:29).
What
happens to the spoils in jihad?
In
the hadith collection edited by Bukhari, an entire section is called
'The Book of Obligations of Khumus.' This latter word means
one-fifth of the spoils of war. So twenty percent goes to Muhammad
or the State, and eighty percent goes to the soldiers.
However, this eighty percent can be divided along different lines. A
horseman should get three shares, whereas an infantryman should get
only two (Abu Dawud nos. 2728-2730). Another tradition distributes
the spoils, as follows: two for the horseman, and one for the
footman (Muslim no. 4358).
Islam, led by Allah and Muhammad, allegedly breaks down class
hierarchy, but this uneven distribution keeps it alive in the most
visible way. Horses were expensive, so only the upper classes could
afford them, especially in going out to war. But they get a lot more
than the lowly foot soldier.
What
happens to the martyrs in jihad?
The
hadith, like the Quran, promises the fast track to Islamic paradise
for jihadists.
This
hadith says that no one would wish to return to this earthly world,
except the martyrs, so that they could die again.
The
Prophet said: 'Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah (in the
Hereafter) would wish to come back to this world, even if he were
given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who,
on seeing the superiority of martyrdom, would like to come back to
the world and get killed again in Allah's cause.' (Bukhari, Jihad,
nos. 2795, 2797; cf. nos. 36, 97, 2795, and 2817).
The
martyrs get beautiful dark-eyed houris or virgins in Islamic heaven.
They
are called so [fair or light females with dark eyes] as one's
eyesight is perplexed while looking at them, and also because of the
intense blackness of their irises and intense whiteness of the
sclerotic coat of their eyes . . . . (Bukhari, Jihad, Chapter 6)
This
one says that Islamic paradise has one hundred grades that are
reserved for the mujahadeen or jihadists (note three letter root
j-h-d in mujahideen and jihad).
. . .
. The prophet said, 'Paradise has one hundred grades which Allah has
reserved for the Mujahidun who fight in Allah's Cause, and the
distance between each of two grades is like the distance between
heaven and the earth. So when you ask Allah (for something), ask for
the Al-Firdaus which is the middle (best) and the highest part of
Paradise. (Bukhari, Jihad, no. 2790)
This
is reason enough for a dazed and confused young would-be jihadist to
join the cause of Allah (cause = war).
Before moving on to Part Two, we should take stock of the last two
sections.
The
hadith follows the Quran closely. Both sources permit injustices in
jihad. Muslim soldiers are allowed to rape and enslave captured
women. Male enemies may be executed. In nighttime raids women and
children are permitted to leave this life, provided it is not
deliberate. However, what does this say about Muhammad's capacity to
be rightly guided in life-and-death policies in jihad?
Jihadists are allowed to destroy homes and fruit trees of an entire
tribe, the Nadir, so this means that they are allowed do to this to
the homes and fruit trees of other enemies. The Quran, a pure
revelation from Allah, says so. By analogy, the Muslim soldiers may
do this to other kinds of civilian property if this helps them win
the conflict. Muhammad should have received a revelation that
contradicts this excess.
One
powerful motive for waging jihad is the material benefits. The
conquered territories fall under the control of the jihadists, and
they are permitted to keep it. If anyone is looking for the reason
for the spread of Islam, then this is a solid one, (though other
reasons come into play, like following the will of Allah). The newly
conquered have the option to convert, in which case they pay a
forced 'charity' or zakat tax. Or they are allowed to remain in the
Biblical faith and pay a jizya or poll tax. Granted, it is often
asserted that the jizya is less than the forced 'charity' tax, but
either way, money flows into the Islamic treasury.
Why
would Muhammad receive a revelation that dries up this money flow,
especially when it is connected to military war?
James
M. Arlandson may be reached at
jamesmarlandson@hotmail.com
Jim
Arlandson (Ph.D.) teaches introductory philosophy and world
religions at a college in southern California. He has published a
book, Women, Class, and Society in Early Christianity
(Hendrickson, 1997)
|