The Confusion and Pitfalls in the Elucidation of the Quran and Shari’ah for the Principles and Practice of Qitaal for Muslims; Part Two

The Confusion and Pitfalls in the Elucidation of the Quran and Shari’ah
 For the Principles and Practice of Qitaal 
For Muslims; Part Two

ABSTRACT

The article started with “An Ayah” but ended up discussing fifteen of them in two sessions. It therefore gives out a summary as a take home lesson:

We selected ayahs from the Holy Text to get a clear idea of the injunctions on Qitaal in our Sharia. We also looked for Quranic directives on our social and neighborly relations with Jews and Christians.

1. It is clear that the popular views on these subjects are very misleading.
2. The main reason for this misunderstanding is out of context interpretation of these ayahs.
3. Most of the ayahs on Qitaal with apparently harsh and aggressive language are revealed just before a battle or actually during one. The Muslims are getting instructions (from the core commander, as if) for battle maneuvers and strategies. At other times they are directed about preventive and spying methods. They do not apply on the streets and in peace time.
4. None of these ayahs are applicable out of the battle field. The use of these by Al Qaeeda, ISIS and the likes is totally wrong and sinful. 
5. Only and totally defensive Qitaal is admissible; if the enemy gives in, we have to stop. No excess is allowed during and after the fight.
6. The objective of Qitaal is freedom of worship and end of persecution. Forced conversion is totally forbidden.
7. The ayahs in Surah Tauba giving the mushrekeen, Jews and Christians an ultimatum for four months followed by three options viz. accept Islam, leave Hijaz or face the swords of Muslims is NOT part of our Shariah. This is Sunnat-e-Ilahee. It is a very special ordinance fully specific to the Rasools of Allah. After their itmaame Hujjat, (culminaion of argument) if the community still rejects a Rasool, Allah Ta’aala sets up HIS adaalat  (law court) and passes the decree of their destruction. This is achieved by direct orders from God Almighty as in the case of Prophets Nooh, Lut, Hud etc. or by the swords of the believers as was decided for mushrekeen-e-Makkah. This scheme is beautifully worked out by the outstanding Research Scholar and Mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamidi. He does not dish our fatwaas; nor does he give a fancy speech. He teaches and educates you about Islam giving evidence and reasons.
8. Muslims are free to have good social relations with the Jews and Christians if they are not fighting with them.
9. Muslims are allowed to have good relations with their idolatrous relatives. 
10. Muslims are required to show justice, equity and kindness even to their fighting non-believers.
11. The outstanding political activists, orators and Scholars like Maulana Maudoodi, Dr. Israr Ahmed and Sayyid Qutb maintain that non-Muslims have no right to rule in the world because of their false and perverted doctrine and dogma. Muslims have a duty to fight them, establish the Islamic order over them and subdue them as second class citizens. Yes, they are at liberty to observe their own faith. When I first read Maudoodi on this topic as a young man, my immediate gut reaction was: how can that be. It runs against the core values of Islam. It is contrary to universally accepted human rights. It gives an ugly face to our pretty religion. Ghamdi, Islahi and others have flatly rejected this view giving cogent reasons and explanations.
12. Lastly, the secret of interpreting our Holy Text. First and foremost, the Initial and Primary meaning and message to the initial recipients i.e. the sahaabaa should be crystal clear: what was the context, who are addressed, what is the message and why it is being given. To really comprehend the theme of the ayah you must be able to travel back fourteen centuries in time and feel and experience the prevalent environment and life style. Once you have done this convincingly, move on to its application, if any to our times.

January 27, 2018

 Read ONLY,  IF AND WHEN you have time and mood for: 

 “An Ayah of the Quran for 30 Days” -- January 2018

Choose the section you have time, in the next 30 days to read this ayah:-

Prelude:                       Recurrent Primary Message          1st.          Page

Starting Dua, a note & The Ayah                                      2nd.        Page

A Short Summary:     For the Busy Bee                             Two +    Pages

The Main Story:          Recommended                                Six +          Pages

Footnotes:                    For the Perfectionist                      Two        Pages

PRELUDE

From the Pen and Perspective of a self-styled PPK Muslim (Proud, Practicing, Knowledgeable) with a humble submission that Islam totally rejects Blind Following BUT vigorously focusses on the Limitations of Pure Human Reasoning..............and clearly and comprehensively AlLAH knows best.

In the beginning of the seventh century C.E., the folks of Mecca and Medina had a fascinatingly unique window: they had direct access to the Heavens through one of their own. They were blessed with a regular stream of Divine counseling and guidelines. Question and answer sessions were part of the program. Even individual questioner was graced by an answer. In the short Introduction to this scheme they were assured that at the end of this twenty-two year project, Divine Directions and Admonitions will continue through the agency of the PEN. The whole discourse has been preserved and archived till eternity under the guarantee of our Lord and Creator. This record in known as the Quran. 

It should sound unbelievable but factually appears to be true: Many of our prevalent, widespread and important concepts and opinions about religious matters do not have a basis in the Quran and sometimes even appear to be in obvious conflict with the teachings of the Quran. It would be very educative and helpful to discuss an Ayah once a month to see if it supports or rejects our views and actions in our daily life. I wish and hope this generates a fruitful interactive discussion. 

DUAA’

بِسمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحمٰنِ الرَّحيمِ

In the name of Allah, we praise HIM, seek HIS help and ask for HIS forgiveness. Whosoever Allah guideth none can misguide; whosoever HE allows to fall astray, none can guide him right. We bear witness that there is none worthy of worship but Allah alone and we bear witness that Mohammed, SAW is HIS slave-servant and the Seal of HIS Messengers. 

Further, we recall that Allah Ta’aala has declared in HIS Book¹

 “He granteth wisdom to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom wisdom is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message (or remember or receive admonition) but men of understanding (or intellect)”

 and we also recollect that he has warned us about the day of judgement² 

“Then on that day you shall most certainly be questioned about the boons (joy, pleasure).” 

We realise, that there cannot be a greater boon or blessing or benefit than wisdom and we wonder if this should be a timely reminder to very many of us sincere and practicing Muslims who use our critical thinking to enhance the mundane for ourselves and our families but in matters religion we choose to 

resort to blind following -- taqleed, doctrine of classical Sunni Islamic Fiqh. 

(NOTE:  I have filtered out the proofs and details into the Footnotes for those who have the time and interest for them. The main text will then be of reasonable length, hopefully for the busy majority. What follows is not a sermon; I do not feel qualified to give one, anyhow. I wish, it may provide a food for thought. A caveat seems in order: If the ayah selected pertains to issues we face in our daily life with our family, friends, neighbours or peers it may affect us personally and lead to some self analysis and soul searching which in turn could be divisive and distressing. If taken in the right spirit, it can be a humble attempt towards finding the “straight path”.) 

THE AYAH

Surah AL-TAWBAH ( التوبة ) (no. 9), Ayah 33

هُوَ الَّذي أَرسَلَ رَسولَهُ بِالهُدىٰ وَدينِ الحَقِّ لِيُظهِرَهُ عَلَى الدّينِ كُلِّهِ وَلَو كَرِهَ المُشرِكونَ

“It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to prevail it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it)”.

A SHORT VERSION

“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” — Imam Shafa’i

I need to repeat and copy the last paragraph of the previous session to set the rhythm:

Another important and very similar ayah:³ ………………

Once again Muslims are granted permission to fight back the mushrekeen and actively resist their persecution “until man is free to worship God”, adds Dr. Mohammed Asad. It is  stressed that self-defense - in the widest sense of this word - is the only justification of war. The right to fight persecution is ongoing and permanent. However the Messenger and his team of Sahaabaa had another mission at hand: to clear the “sarzameene haram” (the land of Haram, Hejaz) of all infidels and even the ahle kitaab. Hence surah Tauba declares an ultimatum for four months to either accept Islam or leave the land or face the sword. …………….

Another ayah to clarify a common mistake:^{5  …………….}

A very deliberate and significant and apparently strong worded ayah about war, qitaal:⁶  ………………..

This is the fourth ayah of Surah Mohammed. Notice the opining ayah  of the surah:⁷  ………………..

This is the only ayah in the Quran, according the Maulana Maudoodi that lays down rules for POWs. It says, once the enemy is completely subdued the prisoners are freed with or without ransom. 

However there is another  ayah that chastises Muslims at taking prisoners at the Battle of Badr⁸   

How to reconcile these two opposing ayahs?  Which ayah preceded? Is there any abrogation? One point is clear that the enemy should be thoroughly subdued before collecting prisoners. The ultimate fate of the prisoners is subject of a confusing and conflicting debate among the Imams and Mufassirs. It is quite difficult for me to make sense of it. The best I can do is to include all the opinions.  ………………….

Javed Ahmed Ghamdi⁹ …………………….

Imam Amin Ahsan Islaahi¹⁰ ………………….

Maulana Maudoodi states

This points to a very critical step in our understanding of the Holy Text. ………………

Mufti Mohammed Shafi indulges in detail about the controversy ……………..

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein et al in their Study Quran have pointed out …………..

The greater the confusion and uncertainty, more the urge to dig further. So let us go on with few additional ayahs:¹¹     ………………..

Another ayah worth considering:^{12  ………………}

…..this and other such ayahs always “relate to warfare already in progress with people who have become guilty of a breach of treaty, obligations and of aggression”………………

Another very crucial and subject to mis-interpretation are the words of the ayah ……..

This is the general application of the ayah for our times and all times. However for its Initial and Primary application, it is mentioned in Surah Tauba.  ……….

Another ayah that declares the basic and main driving factors for our attitude and behaviour towards non-Muslims¹³ 

“As for such [of the unbelievers] as do not fight against you on account of [your] faith, and neither drive you forth from your homelands, God does not forbid you to show them kindness and to behave towards them with full equity: for, verily, God loves those who act equitably. God only forbids you to turn in friendship towards such as fight against you because of [your] faith, and drive you forth from your homelands, or aid [others] in driving you forth: and as for those [from among you] who turn towards them in friendship; it is they, they who are truly wrongdoers!”

It is a very popular and favorite trend in the minds of Muslims of today to keep a distance from non-Muslim, Jews and Christians included. “I cannot trust Christians” says a good Muslim American doctor. We are supposed to deliberately move away and differ from them. Some of the ayahs in the Quran read in isolation are responsible for this wrong attitude. The hadith literature is very vocal and aggressive about keeping away from the idolators, Jews and Christians. The noble Companions …………..

First, HE promises a rescue  in the near future to them:¹⁴ ……………..

The first of these two ayahs declares very clearly that merely the difference in Faith by itself is no reason for renunciation of relatives and friends. The only reason for turning away from them is their hostility and aggression. As per Maulana Maudoodi: “But as for those who were not partners in persecuting you, you should treat them well and should fulfill the right they have on you because of blood and other relationships”. This attitude is best exemplified by a decision of the beloved Prophet made in the case of Asma, daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr. The incidence runs like this: …………..

Mufti Mohammed Shafi has made very wise and far reaching  remarks: …………

As a corollary he has come out with a ruling important in daily life: ………………

Cheer up,  this is the last ayah I intend to discuss:¹⁵

“Let there be no compulsion1 in religion………”

This is just the first segment of the ayah. This Divine blanket statement is one of the overriding principles, concepts and ideals of Islam and should be treated as such. As it is, religion, faith or deen is not what you profess verbally; it resides in your heart or conscience. Hence it is not available for any threat or coercion. 

“Keeping this verse in view, some people raise objections. ………………

The ayah mentions الدّينِ. What is it? What do we mean by this term. ……………….

Started with “An Ayah” but ended up discussing fifteen of them in two sessions. This, you will admit calls for a summary as a take home lesson:

  1.We selected ayahs from the Holy Text to get a clear idea of the injunctions on Qitaal in our Sharia. We also looked for Quranic directives on our social and neighborly relations with Jews and Christians. 

  2. It is clear that the popular views on these subjects are very misleading.

  3. The main reason for this misunderstanding is out of context interpretation of these ayahs.

  4. Most of the ayahs on Qitaal with apparently harsh and aggressive language are revealed just before a battle or actually during one. The Muslims are getting instructions (from the core commander, as if) for battle maneuvers and strategies. At other times they are directed about preventive and spying methods. They do not apply on the streets and in peace time.

  5. None of these ayahs are applicable out of the battle field. The use of these by Al Qaeeda, ISIS and the likes is totally wrong and sinful. 

  6. Only and totally defensive Qitaal is admissible; if the enemy gives in, we have to stop. No excess is allowed during and after the fight.

  7. The objective of Qitaal is freedom of worship and end of persecution. Forced conversion is totally forbidden.

  8. The ayahs in Surah Tauba giving the mushrekeen, Jews and Christians an ultimatum for four months followed by three options viz. accept Islam, leave Hijaz or face the swords of Muslims is NOT part of our Shariah. This is Sunnat-e-Ilahee. It is a very special ordinance fully specific to the Rasools of Allah. After their itmaame Hujjat, (culminaion of argument) if the community still rejects a Rasool, Allah Ta’aala sets up HIS adaalat  (law court) and passes the decree of their destruction. This is achieved by direct orders from God Almighty as in the case of Prophets Nooh, Lut, Hud etc. or by the swords of the believers as was decided for mushrekeen-e-Makkah. This scheme is beautifully worked out by the outstanding Research Scholar and Mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamidi. He does not dish our fatwaas; nor does he give a fancy speech. He teaches and educates you about Islam giving evidence and reasons.

  9. Muslims are free to have good social relations with the Jews and Christians if they are not fighting with them.

  10. Muslims are allowed to have good relations with their idolatrous relatives. 

  11. Muslims are required to show justice, equity and kindness even to their fighting non-believers.

  12. The outstanding political activists, orators and Scholars like Maulana Maudoodi, Dr. Israr Ahmed and Sayyid Qutb maintain that non-Muslims have no right to rule in the world because of their false and perverted doctrine and dogma. Muslims have a duty to fight them, establish the Islamic order over them and subdue them as second class citizens. Yes, they are at liberty to observe their own faith. When I first read Maudoodi on this topic as a young man, my immediate gut reaction was: how can that be. It runs against the core values of Islam. It is contrary to universally accepted human rights. It gives an ugly face to our pretty religion. Ghamdi, Islahi and others have flatly rejected this view giving cogent reasons and explanations.

  13.  Lastly, the secret of interpreting our Holy Text. First and foremost, the Initial and Primary meaning and message to the initial recipients i.e. the sahaabaa should be crystal clear: what was the context, who are addressed, what is the message and why it is being given. To really comprehend the theme of the ayah you must be able to travel back fourteen centuries in time and feel and experience the prevalent environment and life style. Once you have done this convincingly, move on to its application, if any to our times.

........and Allah knows best. 

May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.

THE MAIN STORY

“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” — Imam Shafa’i

CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS

I need to repeat and copy the last paragraph of the previous session to set the rhythm:

Another important and very similar ayah:³

“And fight against them until there is no more oppression and all worship is devoted to God alone. And if they desist-behold, God sees all that they do”.

With minor difference, it sounds similar to one of the ayahs discussed earlier. Once again Muslims are granted permission to fight back the mushrekeen and actively resist their persecution “until man is free to worship God”, adds Dr. Mohammed Asad. It is  stressed that self-defense - in the widest sense of this word - is the only justification of war. The right to fight persecution is ongoing and permanent. However the Messenger and his team of Sahaabaa had another mission at hand: to clear the “sarzameene haram” (the land of Haram, Hejaz) of all infidels and even the ahle kitaab. Hence surah Tauba declares an ultimatum for four months to either accept Islam or leave the land or face the sword. We are all glad that the final scene was pleasant and gratifying. This right to force others to Islam was special for our Messenger only and restricted to the Arabian Peninsula with its Holy Kaabaa and the Prophets’s masjid. Why is this? This right for forced conversion or occupation is not a demand of our Shari’ah. This was related to the Divine law and practice concerning HIS Messengers. After they have concluded their mission and arguments — itmaame hujjat — Allah Ta’aala sets his tribunal — khuda ki adaalat and decrees for the annihilation of the community if they have rejected the Messenger. The Holy Quran is replete with examples of this Divine justice in the stories of Prophets Noor, Saleh etc. This is labelled as Qiyaamat-e-Sughra (mini qiyaamat) as a demonstration and reminder of the Day of Judgement for mankind for all the time to come.

The explanation of this phenomenon by Javed Ahmed Ghamdi in fluent Urdu sounds more authentic and “religious”:⁴   My Translation of this statement:

Permission for war against persecution and tyranny is still valid. But the permission for war to dislodge the nonbelievers from their land or to beat them down is permanently banned. This is so because this is not related to Shari’ah but to the Divine rule of Itmame Hujjat  (conclusion of rationale) which is always promulgated in this world by HIS direct order and through these communities; whom HE appoints to the office of risaalat. According to this rule, when the argument of Allah is complete on any community then the non-believers get the retribution right here in this world. This retribution may come from the heavens and in certain circumstance from the swords of the believers. As a result the nonbelievers are certainly subdued and the Truth strongly prevails  over their territory.This is what happened after completion of his arguments by Nabee SAW. Hence he and his sahaabaa, just as they were ordered for Qitaal against persecution, similarly they were instructed to use their swords in this case also. This was the intention of Allah which was completed by human hands. This should be perceived as a Divine Sunnah. It has nothing to do with human righteousness. The words of Surah Tauba (9) ayah 14 ’یُعَذِّبْھُمُ اللّٰہُ بِاَیْدِیْکُم’ (Allah will punish them at your hands) describes this fact. Hence they will be rewarded accordingly.

Another ayah to clarify a common mistake:⁵

“The Religion before God is Islam (submission to His Will): Nor did the People of the Book dissent therefrom except through envy of each other1, after knowledge had come to them. But if any deny the Signs of God, God is swift in calling to account.”

Islam here is mentioned in its original connotation: the deen that Allah Ta’aala has revealed to all HIS Nabi and Rasool starting from Adam downwards. Hence Yahood and Nasaaraa were original Ummate Muslimah. As the other part of the ayah explains, the ehle kitaab deviated and adopted their own labels out of envy and obstinacy.

A very deliberate and significant and apparently strong worded ayah about war, qitaal:⁶ 

“Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been God’s Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of God,- He will never let their deeds be lost.”

It cannot be over emphasised that two factors should always come into play to correctly comprehend the Divine message. First the originality and the style of the Quranic Arabic; it tends to ignore the string of the obvious.  Second, the ayahs are usually a response to what is happening or being discussed on the ground; therefore it makes immediate sense to the sahaabaa but the later Muslims had to work and investigate the relevance and context of a certain ayah. We get this  assistance from the Mufassirs in the form of parenthesis or an adjoining note. This ayah starts with the command “ when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks”. Why? Is it because they are non-believers? No. This is the fourth ayah of Surah Mohammed. Notice the opining ayah  of the surah:⁷  

“Those who disbelieve and bar from God's way, God will send their works astray.”

If the unbelievers were content with their disbelief, Muslims  had no problem. But they exceeded this limit and prevented and frustrated Muslims from their religion and from living in accordance with the principles of their faith. This, very justifiably called for retaliation. This lays down “the fundamental condition which alone justifies physical warfare: namely, a defense of the Faith and freedom of worship. “Try to deprive the Muslims of their social and political liberty and thus to make it impossible for them to live in accordance with the principles of their faith, a just war (jihad) becomes allowable and, more than that, a duty” declares Dr.Mohammed Asad. 

Another subtle point. The ayah says “when you meet the unbelievers”. Meet where? In the streets? No. Most of the Mufassirs have added “in the battle or fight or jihad” as the location of the meeting.  It is obvious from the context. As a matter of fact, the whole ayah was revealed during actual battle.

The words in the ayah “smite at the necks” sound rather harsh and hardened. Not so, if you realise that such orders are always given (by the Core Commander, as if) just before a battle and frequently during  a combat. A fight demands utmost vigour and strikes at the most vital parts of the body. “You cannot wage war with kid gloves” adds Yousuf Ali.    

And the dialogue “bind a bond firmly” indicates by consensus taking of prisoners of war. It could also mean sanctions or safeguards enforced as preventive measures. However there are different restrictions applied here. “In the first place there must necessarily be great loss of life; but when the enemy is fairly beaten in a Jihad, that he is not likely to seek again the persecution of Truth, firm arrangements should be made to bring him under control” according to Yousuf Ali. Others have meant, “after the enemy’s numbers are fairly thinned down, prisoners may be taken”.

Lastly the text  “the war may lay down its burdens” means when the war is over. 

This is the only ayah in the Quran, according the Maulana Maudoodi that lays down rules for POWs. It says, once the enemy is completely subdued the prisoners are freed with or without ransom. 

However there is another  ayah that chastises Muslims at taking prisoners at the Battle of Badr⁸   

“IT DOES NOT behove a prophet to keep captives unless he has battled strenuously on earth. You may desire the fleeting gains of this world - but God desires [for you the good of] the life to come: and God is almighty, wise. Had it not been for a decree from God that had already gone forth, there would indeed have befallen you a tremendous chastisement on account of all [the captives] that you took. Enjoy, then, all that is lawful and good among the things which you have gained in war, and remain conscious of God: verily, God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.”

How to reconcile these two opposing ayahs?  Which ayah preceded? Is there any abrogation? One point is clear that the enemy should be thoroughly subdued before collecting prisoners. The ultimate fate of the prisoners is subject of a confusing and conflicting debate among the Imams and Mufassirs. It is quite difficult for me to make sense of it. The best I can do is to include all the opinions.  

Javed Ahmed Ghamdi⁹ outstanding Research Scholar and Mentor accepts the ayah as such without any modifications and declares there are only two options, free the prisoners gracefully or ransom them; prisoner exchange is in fact a form of ransom. They cannot be executed. Slavery is not an option; as a matter of fact this ayah, he claims roots our slavery in Islam. He even rejects a zimmie status for the prisoners. He does allow exceptions for other reasons e.g. a grave criminal may be given appropriate punishment.

Imam Amin Ahsan Islaahi¹⁰  another reputable Scholar agrees with his student Ghamdi about the prisoners: free them or ransom them; cannot enslave them. He  quotes and rejects Imam Abu Hanifa’s opinion that the rule of freeing or ransoming prisoners has been abrogated; instead they have to be killed or enslaved. He also quotes and rejects the view of Imam Shafai who mentions four alternatives: kill, enslave, free or ransom.

Maulana Maudoodi states that  “This is the first verse of the Quran in which preliminary instructions have been given about the laws of war.” He then proceeds to figure out a long list if injunctions for warfare in Islam. He mentions the general law that the prisoners of war should not be put to death. He agrees with most of the other mufasserins that “The general command that has been given about the prisoners of war is: Show them favor, or accept ransom from them.” Almost all the translations consider “favor” as freeing the prisoner. However Maulana has his own explanation:  “Favor includes four things: (a) That they should be treated well as prisoners; (b) that instead of killing them or keeping them in captivity for lifetime, they should be handed over to the individual Muslims as slaves; (c) that they should be put under jizyah and made dhimmis; and (d) that they should be set free without ransom.” “This method was acted upon during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) as well as of the companions, and the jurists of Islam have unanimously upheld it as permissible” he further adds.

This points to a very critical step in our understanding of the Holy Text. The injunctions in the Quran are Divine, part of the Deen and mandatory for we Muslims. Most of us certainly need the help of experts to comprehend the language and text of the Quran to grasp the message Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo is giving us. But the elaboration, alteration, expansion or rationalization of this message by expert Ulema, Fuqahaa and Mufassirs, however great their status are human contributions. Hence these are is NOT mandatory as part of our deen; instead subject to alteration or rejection. As far as the translation of this ayah is concerned all the experts agree that “favor” to the prisoner means freeing them. This is Deen and mandatory. The great Imams like Abu Hanifa and Shafai’ and eminent scholars like Mufti Mohammed Shafi and Maulana Maudoodi have given their own definition to the term “favor”. This is not part of Deen and therefore amenable  to discussion. Equally outstanding scholars like Islahi and Ghamdi do differ from them. One must subject such personal decisions to one’s reasoning and intellect. On the day of Judgment, each individual will be tested and examined on the basis of God given intellectual capacity to that being. The type and level of my interrogation and assessment on that Day will be different from that of Maulana Maudoodi. May Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo guide us to the right path.

Mufti Mohammed Shafi indulges in detail about the controversy on these two ayahs. I will allow him to wind up “In sum, according to the majority of Companions  and jurists, neither of the verses under discussion is abrogated. The wordings of the verses of Surah Al-Anfal and Surah Muhammad leave us with the impression that none of these two can be called the abrogator or the abrogated. In fact, they are two injunctions for different situations. The leader of the Muslims may adopt either of the options depending on the conditions and needs of the Muslims. Qurtubi, on the basis of the Holy Prophet's  practice and that of the Righteous Caliphs, has shown that the prisoners of war were sometimes killed, sometimes enslaved, at other times they were set free against ransom, and yet at other times they were released without compensation.”

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein et al in their Study Quran have pointed out that in special circumstances our Holy Prophet  did act contrary to the provisions of this ayah which suggest but do not command: “According to the present verse, prisoners of war can be set free as a gracious act, ransomed for money, or freed to the other side in an exchange of prisoners. It does not, however, command that prisoners be released. They may thus continue to be held captive as well or in certain cases even executed, alternatives practiced by the Prophet at various times during different battles according to different circumstances.”

The greater the confusion and uncertainty, more the urge to dig further. So let us go on with few additional ayahs:¹¹     

“O you who have attained to faith! Fight against those deniers of the truth who are near you, and let them find you adamant; and know that God is with those who are conscious of Him.”

 Those who are physically near are a cause of immediate and great danger; hence they have been highlighted. The Muslims are encouraged here to be in a state of غِلظَةً ie harshness, hardness, firmness, adamant so that they can fight back strongly. Allah Ta’aala has asserted on multiple occasions in HIS Text that the fight against “the deniers of Faith” is NOT due to  their faith but because of their animosity — psychological and physical — against you.

Another ayah worth considering:¹²

“And so, when the sacred months are over, slay those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God wherever you may come upon them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place! Yet if they repent, and take to prayer, and render the purifying dues, let them go their way: for, behold, God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.”

The months of  Muharram, Rajab, Dhu'l-Qa'dah and Dhu'l-Hijjah  were banned for warfare in Arabian culture for centuries. Islam endorsed this sanctity. Maulana Madoodi has a different reading when he says that here the four months refer to “The respite of four months from the tenth of Zil-Haj (the date of the proclamation) to the tenth of Rabi-uththani was granted to give time to the mushriks so that they should consider their position carefully and decide whether to make preparation for war or to emigrate from the country or to accept Islam.” The superficially dangerously misleading part of the ayah is “ slay….. wherever you may come upon them”. Is this open license to kill in the streets of Makkah and Madinah? NO.  Read along with other relevant ayahs in the Quran and the general temperament and disposition of Islam, this and other such ayahs always “relate to warfare already in progress with people who have become guilty of a breach of treaty, obligations and of aggression”, Dr. Mohammed Asad. This is also a very prominent characteristic of pure Quranic Arabic viz. not to mention the obvious. It was very clear to sahaabaa, the original recipient of the Quran that these injunctions to slay and execute are meant for the battle field. History bears out that there was no instance of blood letting in the streets of Makkah or Madinah. Additionally, many such ayahs were revealed right during a fight. Next the ayah is teaching muslims certain tactics necessary and advisable in warfare. The term “marsad” denotes "any place from which it is possible to perceive the enemy and to observe his movements.” As Yousuf Ali puts it “The fighting may take the form of slaughter, or capture, or siege, or ambush and other stratagems”.

Another very crucial and subject to mis-interpretation are the words of the ayah “ Yet if they repent, and take to prayer, and render the purifying dues”. This certainly means that one or more non-believers accept Islam and start praying and offering zakat. This is highly desirable but certainly not enforceable. Keeping the whole Quran with its several fundamental ordinances in the background and respecting the temperament and style of Islamic message it is inconceivable that Muslims are allowed to force Islam on their vanquished idolators. Dr. Mohammed Asad has elaborated this item thus: “Now the enemy's conversion to Islam - expressed in the words, "if they repent, and take to prayer [lit., "establish prayer"] and render the purifying dues (zakah)"- is no more than one, and by no means the only, way of their "desisting from hostility”. The ayah does not imply an alternative of "conversion or death”.

This is the general application of the ayah for our times and all times. However for its Initial and Primary application, it is mentioned in Surah Tauba. This is the surah wherein God Almighty has delivered HIS Final verdict on the deniers of HIS Rasool Mohammed and HIS Message. The surah announces a warning period of four months to all the non-believers and the Jews and Christians. At the end of this period, they will have three choices: accept Islam, leave Hejaz or face the sword of Muslims. This is the universal and all time response and reporte of our Lord Creator; HE completely annihilates and exterminates the communities that have finally rejected HIS Rasools. Some of such stories of earlier destruction of whole communities  have been described repeatedly in the Quran as a warning and reminder to us e.g.  qaume Nooh, Lut, Hud, Shoeib and Saleh. These were destroyed directly by the word of God Almighty. In the present case Allah Ta’aala decided to punish and destroy the defiers of HIS Messenger by the swords of the Believers themselves. Why this difference? This was the first time that a Rasool had enough strength and power to accomplish such a feat. After the hard labor of nine hundred and fifty years, Prophet Nooh had only a few followers which included some members of his family.. 

Another ayah that declares the basic and main driving factors for our attitude and behaviour towards non-Muslims¹³ 

“As for such [of the unbelievers] as do not fight against you on account of [your] faith, and neither drive you forth from your homelands, God does not forbid you to show them kindness and to behave towards them with full equity: for, verily, God loves those who act equitably. God only forbids you to turn in friendship towards such as fight against you because of [your] faith, and drive you forth from your homelands, or aid [others] in driving you forth: and as for those [from among you] who turn towards them in friendship; it is they, they who are truly wrongdoers!”

It is a very popular and favorite trend in the minds of Muslims of today to keep a distance from non-Muslim, Jews and Christians included. “I cannot trust Christians” says a good Muslim American doctor. We are supposed to deliberately move away and differ from them. Some of the ayahs in the Quran read in isolation are responsible for this wrong attitude. The hadith literature is very vocal and aggressive about keeping away from the idolators, Jews and Christians. The noble Companions obeyed the commands of Allah and His Messenger in letter and spirit. Can you imagine the social difficulties and emotional impact on the Sahaabaa of this restriction? Travel back fourteen centuries and visualize a closely knit small community densely packed in a small village where everybody knows everybody by face and name. Enters Islam cutting across all ties of family, tribe and neighborliness; son detests his father, mother refuses to see her son, brother turns away from his sister etc. No wonder this was a tremendous hardship and exacting challenge for the nascent Muslim Community. Allah Ta’aala Subhanahoo, in his eternal mercy decided to relieve HIS obedient servants of this agony. First, HE promises a rescue  in the near future to them:¹⁴ 

“[But] it may well be that God will bring about [mutual] affection between you [O believers] and some of those whom you [now] face as enemies: for, God is all-powerful - and God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.”

And then explains to them in these ayahs the real meaning and purpose of these restrictions on their relationship with non-Muslims.

Dr. Mohammed Asad suggests on the authority of Zamakhshari that “The expression "God does not forbid you'" implies in this context a positive exhortation.

The first of these two ayahs declares very clearly that merely the difference in Faith by itself is no reason for renunciation of relatives and friends. The only reason for turning away from them is their hostility and aggression. As per Maulana Maudoodi: “But as for those who were not partners in persecuting you, you should treat them well and should fulfill the right they have on you because of blood and other relationships”. This attitude is best exemplified by a decision of the beloved Prophet made in the case of Asma, daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr. The incidence runs like this: “A wife of Abu Bakr was Qutaylah bint Abdul Uzza, who was a disbeliever and had remained behind in Makkah after the migration. Asma had been born of her. After the peace treaty of Hudaibiyah when the traffic opened between Makkah and Madinah, she came to Al-Madinah to see her daughter and also brought some gifts. Asma herself has related that she went to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and asked: Should I see my mother. And can I treat her as a daughter should treat her mother. The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied: Yes, treat her as your mother. (Musnad Ahmad, Bukhari, Muslim). Asma’s son, Abdullah bin Zubair, has given further details of this incident. He says that Asma in the beginning had refused to see her mother. Then, when she received Allah and His Messenger’s permission she met her. (Musnad Ahmad, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim). This by itself leads to the conclusion that a Muslim’s serving his unbelieving parents and his helping his unbelieving brothers and sisters and relatives is permissible when they are not hostile to Islam. Likewise, one can also spend his charities on the indigent among the dhimmis. (Al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Quran; Ruh al-Maani).” This incident is the cause of the revelation of this ayah according to Nasr, Seyyed Hossein et al.

Mufti Mohammed Shafi has made very wise and far reaching  remarks: “The verse directs that justice and good behavior should be maintained with those unbelievers who did not fight the Muslims. As for justice, it is obligatory to maintain with every non-Muslim, whether he is a citizen of an Islamic State, or the Muslims have peace agreement with him, or a citizen of an un-Islamic State, even though he is at war with Muslims. Rather, Islam enjoins upon Muslims to do justice even to animals. We are not allowed to lay a burden on them more than they can bear. We need to take care of their fodder and comfort. The focus of the verse, therefore, is upon the direction that they should be treated, not only with justice, but also in good and courteous manner”. He further maintains that “Intimate and heart-felt friendship is not allowed

with hostile disbelievers, nor with ahludh- dhirnmah [non-Muslim citizens of an Islamic State] and ahlu~- sulh [non-Muslims with whom there is a peace pact]. Intimate and heart-felt friendship is not allowed with them too.

As a corollary he has come out with a ruling important in daily life: 

“This verse proves that optional charities may be spent on non-Muslim citizens of an Islamic State and on non-Muslims with whom the Muslims have a peace pact. It is, however, forbidden to spend on non-believers who are at war with Muslims”.

Cheer up,  this is the last ayah I intend to discuss:¹⁵

“Let there be no compulsion1 in religion………”

This is just the first segment of the ayah. This Divine blanket statement is one of the overriding principles, concepts and ideals of Islam and should be treated as such. As it is, religion, faith or deen is not what you profess verbally; it resides in your heart or conscience. Hence it is not available for any threat or coercion. 

“Keeping this verse in view, some people raise objections. They say this verse tells us that there is no compulsion in faith, although the teaching of jihad and qital (fighting) in Islam appears contrary to this

principle” reports Mufti Mohammed Shafi. The question reveals the common and widespread confusion in us in understanding our deen. The ayah is a clear and specific verdict that you cannot use the sword for conversion. So there is no room or basis for this question. As we have learnt in this session that the only Qitaal permissible is in self defense. Compulsion and coercion in proselytizing is against the basic teaching and message of Islam.

The ayah mentions الدّينِ. What is it? What do we mean by this term. To ensure your confidence in the explanation of this esoteric and specialized term, I will let the scholars speak to you directly. Dr. Mohammed Asad sounds convincing when he says :“The term din denotes both the contents of and the compliance with a morally binding law; consequently, it signifies "religion" in the widest sense of this term, extending over all that pertains to its doctrinal contents and their practical implications, as well as to man's attitude towards the object of his worship, thus comprising also the concept of "faith". The rendering of din as "religion", "faith","religious law" or "moral law" depends on the context in which this term is used. - On the strength of the above categorical prohibition of coercion (ikrah) in anything that pertains to faith or religion, all Islamic jurists (fuqaha), without any exception, hold that forcible conversion is under all circumstances null and void, and that any attempt at coercing a non-believer to accept the faith of Islam is a grievous sin: a verdict which disposes of the widespread fallacy that Islam places before the unbelievers the alternative of "conversion or the sword”. Maulana Moudoodi has his own style: “Din here signifies the belief about God embodied in the above “Verse of the Throne” (ayatal Kursi just precedes this ayah in the Quran) and the entire system of life which rests upon it. The verse means that the system of Islam, embracing belief, morals and practical conduct cannot be imposed by compulsion. These are not things to which people can be yoked forcibly”.

Started with “An Ayah” but ended up discussing fifteen of them in two sessions. This, you will admit calls for a summary as a take home lesson:

1. We selected ayahs from the Holy Text to get a clear idea of the injunctions on Qitaal in our Sharia. We also looked for Quranic directives on our social and neighborly relations with Jews and Christians.
2. It is clear that the popular views on these subjects are very misleading.
3. The main reason for this misunderstanding is out of context interpretation of these ayahs.
4. Most of the ayahs on Qitaal with apparently harsh and aggressive language are revealed just before a battle or actually during one. The Muslims are getting instructions (from the core commander, as if) for battle maneuvers and strategies. At other times they are directed about preventive and spying methods. They do not apply on the streets and in peace time.
5. None of these ayahs are applicable out of the battle field. The use of these by Al Qaeeda, ISIS and the likes is totally wrong and sinful. 
6. Only and totally defensive Qitaal is admissible; if the enemy gives in, we have to stop. No excess is allowed during and after the fight.
7. The objective of Qitaal is freedom of worship and end of persecution. Forced conversion is totally forbidden.
8. The ayahs in Surah Tauba giving the mushrekeen, Jews and Christians an ultimatum for four months followed by three options viz. accept Islam, leave Hijaz or face the swords of Muslims is NOT part of our Shariah. This is Sunnat-e-Ilahee. It is a very special ordinance fully specific to the Rasools of Allah. After their itmaame Hujjat, (culminaion of argument) if the community still rejects a Rasool, Allah Ta’aala sets up HIS adaalat  (law court) and passes the decree of their destruction. This is achieved by direct orders from God Almighty as in the case of Prophets Nooh, Lut, Hud etc. or by the swords of the believers as was decided for mushrekeen-e-Makkah. This scheme is beautifully worked out by the outstanding Research Scholar and Mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamidi. He does not dish our fatwaas; nor does he give a fancy speech. He teaches and educates you about Islam giving evidence and reasons.
9. Muslims are free to have good social relations with the Jews and Christians if they are not fighting with them.
10.  Muslims are allowed to have good relations with their idolatrous relatives. 
11. Muslims are required to show justice, equity and kindness even to their fighting non-believers.
12. The outstanding political activists, orators and Scholars like Maulana Maudoodi, Dr. Israr Ahmed and Sayyid Qutb maintain that non-Muslims have no right to rule in the world because of their false and perverted doctrine and dogma. Muslims have a duty to fight them, establish the Islamic order over them and subdue them as second class citizens. Yes, they are at liberty to observe their own faith. When I first read Maudoodi on this topic as a young man, my immediate gut reaction was: how can that be. It runs against the core values of Islam. It is contrary to universally accepted human rights. It gives an ugly face to our pretty religion. Ghamdi, Islahi and others have flatly rejected this view giving cogent reasons and explanations.
13. Lastly, the secret of interpreting our Holy Text. First and foremost, the Initial and Primary meaning and message to the initial recipients i.e. the sahaabaa should be crystal clear: what was the context, who are addressed, what is the message and why it is being given. To really comprehend the theme of the ayah you must be able to travel back fourteen centuries in time and feel and experience the prevalent environment and life style. Once you have done this convincingly, move on to its application, if any to our times.

........and Allah knows best. 

May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.

Dr. Khalid Mitha

FOOTNOTES

(1) Surah 2/269

يُؤتِي الحِكمَةَ مَن يَشاءُ ۚ وَمَن يُؤتَ الحِكمَةَ فَقَد أوتِيَ خَيرًا كَثيرًا ۗ وَما يَذَّكَّرُ إِلّا أُولُو الأَلبابِ

(2) Surah 102/8

ثُمَّ لَتُسأَلُنَّ يَومَئِذٍ عَنِ النَّعيمِ

(3) Surah 8/39

وَقاتِلوهُم حَتّىٰ لا تَكونَ فِتنَةٌ وَيَكونَ الدّينُ كُلُّهُ لِلَّهِ ۚ فَإِنِ انتَهَوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ بِما يَعمَلونَ بَصيرٌ

(4) Ghamdi:    ظلم و جبر کے خلاف قتال کا حکم تو اب بھی موجود ہے، لیکن کسی سرزمین کو منکرین حق سے پاک کرنے یا اُنھیں زیردست بنا کر رکھنے کے لیے قتال اب ہمیشہ کے لیے ختم ہو چکا ہے۔ اِس کی وجہ یہ ہے کہ اِس کا تعلق شریعت سے نہیں، بلکہ اللہ تعالیٰ کے قانون اتمام حجت سے ہے جو اِس دنیا میں ہمیشہ اُس کے براہ راست حکم اور اُنھی ہستیوں کے ذریعے سے روبہ عمل ہوتا ہے جنھیں وہ رسالت کے منصب پر فائز کرتا ہے۔ اِس قانون کی رو سے اللہ کی حجت جب اِن رسولوں کے ذریعے سے کسی قوم پر پوری ہو جاتی ہے تو اِن کے منکرین پر اِسی دنیا میں عذاب آجاتا ہے۔ یہ عذاب آسمان سے بھی آتا ہے اور بعض حالات میں اہل حق کی تلواروں کے ذریعے سے بھی۔ پھر اِس کے نتیجے میں منکرین لازماً مغلوب ہو جاتے ہیں اور اُن کی سرزمین پر حق کا غلبہ پوری قوت کے ساتھ قائم ہو جاتا ہے۔ نبی صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی طرف سے اتمام حجت کے بعد یہی دوسری صورت پیش آئی۔ چنانچہ آپ اور آپ کے صحابہ کو جس طرح فتنے کے خلاف قتال کا حکم دیا گیا، اِسی طرح اِس مقصد کے لیے بھی تلوار اٹھانے کی ہدایت ہوئی۔ یہ خدا کا کام تھا جو انسانوں کے ہاتھ سے انجام پایا۔ اِسے ایک سنت الٰہی کی حیثیت سے دیکھنا چاہیے۔ انسانی اخلاقیات سے اِس کا کوئی تعلق نہیں ہے۔ سورۂ توبہ (۹) کی آیت ۱۴ کے الفاظ ’یُعَذِّبْھُمُ اللّٰہُ بِاَیْدِیْکُم‘ (اللہ تمھارے ہاتھوں سے اُن کو سزا دے گا) میں یہی حقیقت بیان ہوئی ہے۔ لہٰذا اُس کے لحاظ سے اِن کا اجر بھی اِنھیں عطا فرمائے گا۔ _

(5) Surah 3/19

إِنَّ الدّينَ عِندَ اللَّهِ الإِسلامُ ۗ وَمَا اختَلَفَ الَّذينَ أوتُوا الكِتابَ إِلّا مِن بَعدِ ما جاءَهُمُ العِلمُ بَغيًا بَينَهُم ۗ وَمَن يَكفُر بِآياتِ اللَّهِ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ سَريعُ الحِسابِ

(6) Surah 47/4

فَإِذا لَقيتُمُ الَّذينَ كَفَروا فَضَربَ الرِّقابِ حَتّىٰ إِذا أَثخَنتُموهُم فَشُدُّوا الوَثاقَ فَإِمّا مَنًّا بَعدُ وَإِمّا فِداءً حَتّىٰ تَضَعَ الحَربُ أَوزارَها ۚ ذٰلِكَ وَلَو يَشاءُ اللَّهُ لَانتَصَرَ مِنهُم وَلٰكِن لِيَبلُوَ بَعضَكُم بِبَعضٍ ۗ وَالَّذينَ قُتِلوا في سَبيلِ اللَّهِ فَلَن يُضِلَّ أَعمالَهُم

(7) Surah 47/1

لَّذينَ كَفَروا وَصَدّوا عَن سَبيلِ اللَّهِ أَضَلَّ أَعمالَهُم

(8) Surah 8/67-69

ما كانَ لِنَبِيٍّ أَن يَكونَ لَهُ أَسرىٰ حَتّىٰ يُثخِنَ فِي الأَرضِ ۚ تُريدونَ عَرَضَ الدُّنيا وَاللَّهُ يُريدُ الآخِرَةَ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَزيزٌ حَكيمٌ  — لَولا كِتابٌ مِنَ اللَّهِ سَبَقَ لَمَسَّكُم فيما أَخَذتُم عَذابٌ عَظيمٌ — فَكُلوا مِمّا غَنِمتُم حَلالًا طَيِّبًا ۚ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفورٌ رَحيمٌ

(9) Ghamdi 

یہ اِس لیے فرمایا کہ اِن لوگوں پر خدا کے رسول نے اتمام حجت کیا تھا اور اُس کی تکذیب پر اصرار کے باعث اب یہ اُس سزا کے مستحق ہو چکے تھے جو رسولوں کے مکذبین کو لازماً دی جاتی ہے۔ قرآن نے جگہ جگہ وضاحت کی ہے کہ یہ خدا کی غیرمتبدل سنت ہے جو تمام رسولوں کے معاملے میں اِسی طرح جاری رہی ہے۔

یہاں ’فَإِذَا شَدَدْتُمُ الْوَثَاقَ‘ یا اِس کا ہم معنی فقرہ اصل میں محذوف ہے جس پر ’فَشُدُّوا الْوَثَاقَ‘ کے الفاظ دلالت کر رہے ہیں۔ یہ اِس لیے فرمایا کہ ’ضَرْبَ الرِّقَابِ‘ میں جو ترغیب و تحریض ہے، اُس کی بنا پر لوگ قیدیوں کو قتل بھی کر سکتے تھے، لہٰذا برسرموقع ہدایت فرما دی کہ اِس کے بعد دو ہی صورتیں ہیں: فدیہ لے کر چھوڑ نا یااحسان کرکے۔ مطلب یہ ہے کہ قیدی بنانے کا اقدام اُس وقت ہونا چاہیے، جب تہ تیغ کرنے کا حق ادا ہو چکا ہو، لیکن بنا لو گے تو قتل نہیں کر سکتے اور نہ غلام بنا سکتے ہو۔ اُس کے بعد قانون یہ ہے کہ فدیہ لے کر رہا کیا جائے گا یا بلا معاوضہ احسان کے طور پر چھوڑ دیا جائے گا۔ یہ حکم اگرچہ مشرکین عرب کے حوالے سے بیان ہوا ہے، لیکن ہر لحاظ سے عام ہے۔ اِس کی وجہ یہ ہے کہ قیدی بنا لینے کے بعد جب رسول کے منکرین سے احسان یا فدیے کے سوا کوئی معاملہ نہیں کیا جا سکتا تو دوسروں سے بدرجۂ اولیٰ نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ چنانچہ قرآن کا یہی حکم ہے جس نے قیدیوں کو غلام بنانے کا رواج ہمیشہ کے لیے ختم کر دیا اور اِس طرح غلامی کی جڑ کاٹ دی۔اِس کے بعد صرف وہی مستثنیات باقی رہ گئے جو علم و عقل کے مسلمات کی رو سے ہر قانون، ہر قاعدے اور ہر حکم میں اُس کی ابتدا ہی سے مضمر ہوتے ہیں۔ یعنی مثال کے طور پر، سنگین جرائم کے کسی مرتکب کے ساتھ اُس کے جرائم کی بنا پر اِس سے ہٹ کر کوئی معاملہ کیا جائے۔ اِس سے، ظاہرہے کہ قیدیوں کے بارے میں اِس عام قانون پر کوئی اثر نہیں پڑے گا

(10) Amin Ahsan Ilahi

امام ابوحنیفہؒ جو یہ فرماتے ہیں کہ مشرکین کے قیدیوں کے باب میں احسان اور فدیہ کی اجازت منسوخ ہو گئی، وہ صرف قتل کیے جا سکتے ہیں یا غلام بنائے جا سکتے ہیں، تو اس کا اتنا حصہ صحیح ہے کہ مشرکین عرب کے ساتھ یہ رعایت موقّت تھی جو بالآخر فتح مکہ کے بعد ختم ہو گئی لیکن ان کا یہ فرمانا کہ وہ غلام بنائے جا سکتے ہیں، ہمارے نزدیک یہ صحیح نہیں ہے۔ مشرکین عرب نہ غلام بنائے جا سکتے تھے نہ ذِمّی نہ معاہد۔ امام شافعیؒ کے نزدیک امام کو اختیار ہے کہ وہ اسلام اور مسلمانوں کی مصلحت کو پیش نظر رکھ کر، اس قسم کے قیدیوں کے ساتھ چار باتوں میں سے جو بات بھی مناسب خیال کرے، کر سکتا ہے۔ چاہے قتل کرا دے، چاہے غلام بنا لے، چاہے فدیہ لے کر چھوڑ دے، چاہے احساناً چھوڑ دے۔ ہمارے نزدیک امام شافعیؒ کی یہ رائے عام غیرمسلم قیدیوں کے حد تک تو صحیح ہے لیکن مشرکین عرب کے باب میں یہ کلیہ صحیح نہیں ہے۔ وہ ذمی یا غلام نہیں بنائے جا سکتے تھے۔ یہاں اس مسئلہ کی تفصیلات میں جانے کی گنجائش نہیں ہے۔ تفصیل کے طالب ہماری کتاب ’’اسلامی ریاست‘‘ میں باب ’اسلامی ریاست میں غیر مسلموں کے حقوق‘ کا مطالعہ کریں۔

یعنی اس کے بعد اگر یہ تمہارے ہاتھ سے چھوٹیں تو صرف دو ہی شکلوں سے چھوٹیں۔ یا تو تمہارے احسان کا قلادہ اپنی گردن میں لے کر یا فدیہ دے کر۔ اور تمہارا یہی معاملہ اس وقت تک ان کے ساتھ رہے جب تک ان کے اندر جنگ کا حوصلہ بالکل سرد نہ پڑ جائے اور یہ تمہارے آگے ڈگ نہ ڈال دیں

(11) Surah 9/123

يا أَيُّهَا الَّذينَ آمَنوا قاتِلُوا الَّذينَ يَلونَكُم مِنَ الكُفّارِ وَليَجِدوا فيكُم غِلظَةً ۚ وَاعلَموا أَنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَ المُتَّقينَ

(12) Surah 9/5

فَإِذَا انسَلَخَ الأَشهُرُ الحُرُمُ فَاقتُلُوا المُشرِكينَ حَيثُ وَجَدتُموهُم وَخُذوهُم وَاحصُروهُم وَاقعُدوا لَهُم كُلَّ مَرصَدٍ ۚ فَإِن تابوا وَأَقامُوا الصَّلاةَ وَآتَوُا الزَّكاةَ فَخَلّوا سَبيلَهُم ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفورٌ رَحيمٌ

(13) Surah 60/8-9

لا يَنهاكُمُ اللَّهُ عَنِ الَّذينَ لَم يُقاتِلوكُم فِي الدّينِ وَلَم يُخرِجوكُم مِن دِيارِكُم أَن تَبَرّوهُم وَتُقسِطوا إِلَيهِم ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ المُقسِطينَ— إِنَّما يَنهاكُمُ اللَّهُ عَنِ الَّذينَ قاتَلوكُم فِي الدّينِ وَأَخرَجوكُم مِن دِيارِكُم وَظاهَروا عَلىٰ إِخراجِكُم أَن تَوَلَّوهُم ۚ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُم فَأُولٰئِكَ هُمُ الظّالِمونَ

(14) Surah 60/7

عَسَى اللَّهُ أَن يَجعَلَ بَينَكُم وَبَينَ الَّذينَ عادَيتُم مِنهُم مَوَدَّةً ۚ وَاللَّهُ قَديرٌ ۚ وَاللَّهُ غَفورٌ رَحيمٌ

(15) Surah 2/256 (part of the ayah)

لا إِكراهَ فِي الدّينِ ۖ