The Muslim Conduct of State by Dr. M. Hamidullah

This is an excerpt from The Muslim Conduct of State by Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah

(315) The lawful reasons for Muslims to wage war may fall into several categories based on the practice of the Prophet. But let us first study the theory as propounded and laid down by the Holy Qur'an in its various passages. Perhaps the basic and most important rule is contained in II:190-195, and it dates from the early days of the arrival of the Prophet as [an] immigrant in Medina:

"And fight in the path of God those who fight you, but do not transgress, verily God liketh not the transgressors. And slay them wherever ye find them, and chase them out from where they have chased you out -- seeing that persecution is more serious than slaughter -- yet fight them not near the Sacred Mosque (of the Ka'bah) unless (first) they fight you there. So if they fight you, slay them, such being the reward of the disbelievers. But if they cease, God is all-forgiving, all-Merciful [to the repentant]. And fight them on until there is no more persecution, and that submission (din) is entirely to God. Then if they cease, let there be no hostility except against the oppressors. The sacred month (of truce) for the sacred month, and sanctities are the reciprocal (between you and your enemy); but if anyone transgresseth against you, transgresseth ye also against him equal to his transgression against you. And fear God, and know that God is with the pious. And spend (of your subsistence) in the path of God, and throw not (yourselves) with your own hands (by avarice) in destruction, but do good, verily God liketh those who do good."

This passage envisages a recourse to arms with the following prerequisites, all else being unlawful in Islam.

(a) for the sake and in the path of God.
(b) in [the] case of defence.
(c) without least transgression.
(d) the right of belligerency includes killing wherever the enemy may be found, and may be turned out from places he occupies oppressively.
(e) no bloodshed in the vicinity of the House of God, except in self-defence.
(f) scrupulous observance of treaties and other contractual obligations, with regard to non-Muslims.
(g) avarice may be suicidal, and suicide is prohibited. In other and chronologically later passages of the Qur'an nothing has changed; it is only in a legitimate war that [the] right is given to slay the enemy combatant. No war to compel people to embrace Islam (cf Qur'an, II: 255), and of course no war for the material ambitions such as expansion, search of valueglory and the like. While enumerating in the following the unlawful motives of war, we shall try to see the practice of the Prophet to ascertain how he understood and interpreted the Qur'an, his conduct being the mirror of the Qur'an.

I. The Continuation of Existing War

(316) By this we mean [the] recommencement of a war which has been stopped for some reason or other. The exhaustion of both the parties or separation of them without any treaty of peace and such other instances may be examples thereof. The Qur'an lays down in this conjunction :

"And when the month of immunity [on account of the treaty of peace] has passed, slay the Associators wherever ye find them, and take them (captive) and beseech them, and prepare for them each ambush."

Commenting on this verse, Sarakhsiy says:

"And when the months of immunity have passed, slay the Associators, wherever ye find them. And the meaning of the Quranic expression: "when the month of immunity has passed" is that when the period of truce with someone has ended."

Cases of this kind can be seen, in the life of the Prophet, in the expeditions of Tabuk and Uhud (Abil, this last he sent when on his death-bed and was executed by the Caliph Abu Bakr).

2. Defensive (Including Preventive)

(317) This can be either when the enemy (a) has invaded Muslim territory, or (b) has not actually so invaded, but has behaved in an unbearable manner. The former needs no elaborate discussion. The Qur'an lays down: "fight in the path of God against those who fight against you, but do not transgress. Lo! God loveth not transgressors." Regarding the high-handed behaviour of a foreign country, an interesting quotation will explain [the] Muslim law on this point:

"Sanction is given unto those who are fought against because they have been wronged; and God is indeed able to give them succour."

This referred to the Prophet and other Muslims who had taken refuge in Medina and were still being harassed by the Meccans in many ways. They addressed, for instance, an ultimatum them to a Medinite magnate Abdullah ibn Ubaiy, either to fight and kill or expel the Prophet or they would attack Medina. Many [a] Tradition bear[s] witness to the fact that in the early days after the migration of the Prophet, the Muslim community of Medina lived such a precarious life that they used to sleep in full war-kit. Another instance is provided by the expedition against Dumatul-Jandal in the year 5 H., where the local chieftain, Ukaidar, was molesting the caravans going north to Medina. The attack on Kaibar is an instance of nipping war in the bud. The battles of Uhud and Khandaq were defensive. Hunsin was preventive even as that of Bauu'l-Mustuliq. The attack on Ta'if was the continuation of the battle of Hunsin. Badr was for reprisal.

(318) We may also refer here to the verse of the Qur'an (IX: 12):

"Will ye not fight a folk who broke their solemn pledge and purposed to drive out the Messenger, and did (attack) you first?"

Further, an important and interesting saying of the Prophet enumerates the kinds of defensive wars, and says:

"Whoever fights in defence of his person and is killed, he is a martyr; whoever is killed in defence of his property, is a martyr; and whoever is killed in the cause of God is a martyr." (cf Suyutiy's alphabetical dictionary of traditions, [volume IV] on the authority of Abd-ar-Razzaq and others.)

3. Sympathetic

(319) By this we mean that were the Muslims living in a non-Muslim country, to seek the help of the Muslim State against their (non-Muslim) government, help might be given them. The Qur'an lays down, in this connection, that each case must be decided on its own merits:

(a) "And those who believe but have not left their homes, ye have no duty to protect till they leave their homes; but if they seek help from you in the matter of religion, then it is you your duty to help (them) except against a folk between whom and you there is the treaty: God is the Seer of what you do." (VIII: 72)

(b) "How should ye not fight for the cause of God and of the feeble among men women and children who are crying: Our Lord! Bring us forth out from this town of which the people are oppressors. Oh! Give us from Thy Presence some protecting friends! Oh, give us from Thy Presence some defender. Those who believe do battle for the cause of God and those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of the Devil (LIV: 75-76)

I could not find a case of this kind in the life of the Prophet.

4. Punitive

(320) The following causes constitute lawful reasons for waging war, vis. hypocrisy, apostasy and insisting on the non-binding character of zakat (i.e. refusing to pay taxes) or any other religious duty, rebellion, breaking of a covenant by the other party or becoming a Kharijite, because such people say that the rest of the Muslim community are apostates, and take arms against an established government. The conquest of Mecca is an instance thereof, when the pagans of Mecca had invaded the territory of the Allies of the Islamic government, and so a punitive expedition was organized which was a the masterpiece of organization and execution: occupation without bloodshed and psychological shock under which the whole [of] Mecca was overnight converted to Islam.

5. Idealistic

(321) Every nation has its own ideals which constantly inspire it. The deeperr a nation is convinced of them, the greater is its effort to realise them. As we have seen above, the Islamic conception of life is based on the Unity of God and thereby viceregency of the Godly man on Earth. This implies that all the Faithful are equal, irrespective of race and clime, and also that the Word of God should rule supreme in the world. It is this mission to uproot godlessness and association with God in His Divinity that is referred to in Islamic literature by the expression: "In the Path of God" which we have translated as "idealistic" reasons for waging war. Of the scores of Quranic verses in this connection, a few may be quoted:

(a) "He it is Who hath sent His Messenger (i.e. Muhammad) with the Guidance and the religion of Truth that He may cause it to prevail over all religions, however much the Associators may be averse." (IX: 33, repeated in XLVIII: 28; XLI:9)

(b) "Ye [i.e. the Muslims] are the best community that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency, and the believe in God." (III:110).

(322) That same selfless Divine mission is most vividly described in and oft-quoted saying of the Prophet:

"Whoever from among you sees an indecency, he must modify it by his hand; if he cannot, he must do so by his tongue; if he cannot, he must do so by his heart (through disapproval, etc.), but this last would testify to the extreme weakness of Faith." [That is to say, if one does not even disapprove it in him or herself, one is no[t a] Muslim at all].

(323) Islam has recognized a certain amount of latitude in personal judgment and hence the sharp distinction between the Islamic rule in the Islamic faith. No-one is to be forced to embrace the Islamic faith; as we shall see presently, yet Islamic rule is to be established by all means. It was this basic distinction that no non-Muslims are tolerated in Islamic polity as inhabitants, as we have seen in Part II, Chapter IV (b) --page 215. The only case I can envisage of this kind is that there should be no liberty of conscience in a foreign country. Hearing the murder of the Muslim ambassador on Byzantine territory the Prophet had written to the emperor Heraclius to amend this violation of international law: "either embrace Islam, or become tributary or do not intervene between thy subjects and Islam." The emperor refused each and every one of these demands, which has been responsible for the Islamic-Christian tension for the last 1400 years. (See further my article "The Friendly Relation of Islam with Christianity and How They Deteriorated" in the Journal of the Pakistan Historical Society, Karachi 1953, I:41-45. Some jurists have certainly said that, when the Muslim State is powerful, it may invite the foreigner to the [unrecognized word] alternative of Islam, tribute or war; and they base themselves on a saying of the Prophet which we have mentioned on page 648 infra. But this seems to be a rather careless conjecture or misunderstanding. For the said Hadith concerns, as we have mentioned, the instructions given to the commander of a punitive expedition; the real sense of the Hadith is that even in the case of reprisal, it is preferable to invite again the enemy to peace before opening warlike activities.

(324) Regarding freedom of conscience, we read in the Qur'an:

(a) "There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction has become distinct from the error." (Qur'an II:256)
(b) "Unto you your religion and unto me my religion." (CIX: 6)
(c) "And struggle for God with the struggle which is His right. He hath chosen you and hath not laid upon you in religion any hardship; (this is) the faith of your father Abraham. He hath named you Muslims (submission unto God) of old time and (also) in this (scripture, i.e. the Qur'an) that the Messenger may be a witness against you and that you may be witnesses against mankind. So establish worship, pay the zakat tax, and hold fast to God. He is your Protecting Friend, and what a blessed Friend and a Blessed Helper!" (XXII: 78)

And similar other verses.

(325) it is with this background that we ought to lead the Fiqh books which explain [the] Muslim Law of war. They say: "When a Muslim State is free from internal compulsion and strife, and has sufficient power to hope for [a] Viceroy in [the] case of resistance, then it is its duty to invite the neighbouring non-Muslim sovereigns to accept the Unity of God as an article of Faith and to believe in Muhammad as the Messenger of God, in short, to embrace Islam. If they do, they will retain their power and will secure themselves against hostility on the part of the Muslim State. If the Invitation is rejected, the non-Muslim chief within the Arabian peninsula has no other choice but to face the sword. If, however, his territory is outside Arabia, the alternative is to pay [the] yearly Jizyah or the protection-tax, which will secure his territory against Muslim attack. If both these alternatives are rejected and all peaceful persuasion and reasoning fail, then it is the duty of the Muslim State to declare war in the name of God until it conquers or receives the Jizyah, or has the gratification to know that the other party has at last embraced Islam.

(326) It is well known that the Qur'an formally and repeatedly forbids to coerce or compel anybody to embrace Islam. The whole life of the Prophet shows that he sought liberty to preach his message. In his defensive or punitive wars, when he predominated, he compelled nobody to embrace Islam, but tolerated non-Muslims, Christians, Jews, Parsi’s in particular as subjects of the State. A very characteristic example is his letter to Heraclius; Byzantine emperor of the time. A Muslim ambassador was assassinated, in flagrant violation of international law, in the Byzantine territory. The letter that the Prophet wrote to the emperor is eloquent in this respect. It invites the emperor "to embrace Islam . . . If not to pay the Jizyah, if not then (at least) not to interfere with the (Byzantine) subjects if they embraced Islam or if they pay the Jizyah." When even the liberty of peaceful preaching of Islam is denied, then [unrecognized word] forceful measures are adopted to obtain this human right.

(327) in subsequent chapters we shall see what are the actual laws which Islam has prescribed for the conduct of war regarding different kinds of enemies.