In the Shade of the Qur'an by Sayyid Qutb

Like Sūrahs 2-5, discussed in Volumes I—IV, this sūrah was revealed in the Madinah period of the Prophet’s mission, while Sūrahs 6 and 7, discussed in Volumes V and VI, were revealed earlier when the Prophet was still in Makkah. As is already clear, our approach in this commentary is to follow the order adopted in the Qur’ān, in preference to the chronological order of revelation. For one thing, it is not possible to be absolutely certain about the time of revelation of each sūrah, except in general terms indicating that one sūrah is a Makkan revelation and another belongs to the Madinah period, but even then there are some differences of views. To try to determine the exact order of when each verse, passage or sūrah was revealed is practically impossible, despite the fact that in the case of a small number of verses we have confirmed reports concerning the exact time of revelation.

Valuable as the endeavour to trace the chronological order of revelation may be in trying to establish the pattern of progress of the Islamic movement at the time of the Prophet, the lack of clear and firm evidence makes this endeavour both hard and problematic. The conclusions that we may arrive at will always remain uncertain, and could lead to serious or erroneous results. Therefore, I have chosen to present the Qur’ān in the traditional order given in the original copy finalized at the time of `Uthmān, the third Caliph. However, I try to look at the historical events associated with the revelation of each sūrah, knowing that this can only be done in general and tentative terms. In so doing, I am only trying to give a general and tentative idea of the circumstances leading to the revelation of each sūrah.

This sūrah, al-Anfāl, or The Spoils of War, was revealed after Sūrah 2, The Cow, shortly after the Battle of Badr which took place in Ramađān, in the second year of the Islamic calendar, approximately 19 months after the Prophet’s migration to Madinah. However, when we say that it was revealed after Sūrah 2, our statement does not give a complete picture, because Sūrah 2 was not revealed in full on one occasion. Some of its passages were revealed early in the Madinan period, and some towards its end, stretching over a period of nearly nine years. The present sūrah, al- Anfāl, was revealed sometime between these two dates, while Sūrah 2 was still in the process leading to its completion. This meant that a passage would be revealed and placed in its appropriate position, according to divine instruction given through the Prophet. Normally, however, when we say that a particular sūrah was revealed on such and such date, we are simply referring to the beginning of its revelation.

Some reports suggest that verses 30-36 were revealed in Makkah, since they refer to events that took place there before the Prophet’s migration to Madinah. This, however, is not a sufficient reason to draw such a conclusion. Many are the verses revealed in Madinah that refer to past events from the Makkan period. In this sūrah, verse 26 provides such a case. Moreover, verse 36, the last one in the passage claimed to have been revealed in Makkah, speaks of how the idolaters allocated funds to prepare for the Battle of Uĥud, which took place after their defeat at Badr.

The reports that claim that these verses were a Makkan revelation also mention a conversation that is highly improbable. They mention that “Abū Ţālib, the Prophet’s uncle who provided him with protection, asked the Prophet: ‘What are your people plotting against you?’ He answered: ‘They want to cast a magic spell on me, or to banish or kill me.’ He said: ‘Who told you this?’ The Prophet replied: `My Lord.’ Abū Ţālib then said: ‘Your Lord is a good one. Take care of him.’ The Prophet said: ‘I take care of Him! No, it is He who takes good care of me.’ By way of comment on this, verse 26 was revealed, saying: “Remember when you were few and helpless in the land, fearful lest people do away with you: how He sheltered you, strengthened you with His support and provided you with many good things so that you might be grateful.” (Verse 26)

Ibn Kathīr mentions this report and discounts it, saying: “This is highly improbable, because this verse was revealed in Madinah. Besides, the entire event, when the Quraysh convened a meeting of its notables to discuss how they could get rid of the Prophet and the suggestions they made of imprisoning, banishing or killing him, took place on the eve of the Prophet’s migration, about three years after Abū Ţālib’s death. When Abū Ţālib died, the Prophet lost his uncle who had given him full support and protection. The Quraysh were thus able to abuse him and concoct a plot to kill him.” Muĥammad ibn Isĥāq, a very early biographer of the Prophet, transmits a couple of long reports on the authority of Ibn `Abbās, the Prophet’s cousin who was an eminent scholar, concerning these plots by the Quraysh. He concludes by saying:

“God then gave him permission to depart. After he settled in Madinah, He revealed to him the sūrah entitled al-Anfāl, reminding him of His grace: “Remember how the unbelievers were scheming against you, seeking to keep you in chains or have you slain or banished. Thus they plot and plan, but God also plans. God is above all schemers.” (Verse 30)

This report by Ibn `Abbās fits well with the general text of the complete sūrah, and its reminders to the Prophet and his companions of His grace. When they remember these aspects of God’s grace, they are motivated to fulfil their duty, fight the enemies of their faith and stand firm. Hence, to say that the whole sūrah was revealed after the Muslims’ migration to Madinah is more accurate.

This sūrah takes up the Battle of Badr as its subject matter. This battle, its circumstances, results and effects on human history constitute a major landmark in the progress of the Islamic movement. God describes this battle as “the day when the true was distinguished from the false, the day when the two hosts met in battle.” (Verse 41)

He also makes it the parting point not merely in this life or in human history, but also in the life to come. He says in the Qur’ān: “These two adversaries have become engrossed in contention about their Lord. For the unbelievers garments of fire shall be cut out; and scalding water will be poured over their heads, melting all that is in their bellies and their skin. In addition, there will be grips of iron for them. Whenever, in their anguish, they try to get out, they are returned there, and will be told: ‘Taste the torment of fire.’ God will certainly admit those who believe and do righteous deeds into gardens through which running waters flow, wherein they will be adorned with bracelets of gold and pearls, and where silk will be their raiment. For they were guided to the best of words; and so they were guided to the way that leads to the One to whom all praise is due.” (22: 19-24) Some reports suggest that these verses speak of the two hosts that met in battle at Badr. This confirms that this battle provides the criterion by which people shall be distinguished in the life to come. This statement by God Almighty is sufficient to give us a clear idea of the importance of that day of battle. We will try to give an idea of its great value as we discuss the battle, the events leading to it and its outcome.

Exceptionally important as that battle is, its true value cannot be clearly seen unless we understand its nature and realize that it was merely one episode of jihād.

To appreciate it fully we also need to understand the motives and objectives of jihād; and we certainly cannot understand those unless we fully understand the nature of Islam itself.

In his priceless book Zād al-Ma`ād, Imām Ibn al-Qayyim includes a chapter with the title, The Progress of the Prophet’s Guidance on Dealing with the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites from the Start of His Mission to the End of His Life. This is given below in a highly summarized form:

The first revelation given to the Prophet by his Lord — limitless is He in His glory — was his order to him, “Read in the name of your Lord who created man out of a germ-cell.” (96: 1-2) This was the start of his prophethood. The instruction to him was to read within himself. At that point, He did not order him to convey anything to anyone. He subsequently revealed to him: “You who are enfolded, arise and warn!” (74: 1-2) This means that God made him a prophet by telling him to read, and He gave him his mission by saying, “You who are enfolded, arise and warn!” (74: 1-2) God then ordered him to warn his immediate clan. Subsequently, he gave the same warning to his own people, then to the surrounding Arabian tribes, then all Arabs, then mankind generally.

For more than a decade after the start of his prophethood, Muĥammad [peace be upon him] continued to advocate the faith without resorting to fighting or the imposition of any loyalty tax, i.e. jizyah. Throughout this period he was ordered to stay his hand, forbear patiently and overlook all opposition. Later, God gave him permission to migrate [from Makkah to Madinah] and permitted him to fight. He then instructed him to fight those who wage war against him and to maintain peace with those who refrain from fighting him. At a later stage, God ordered him to fight the idolaters until all submission is made to God alone.

After the order was given to the Prophet to strive and fight for God’s cause [i.e. jihād], unbelievers were in three categories with regard to their relations with him: those with whom he was in peace and truce, combatants fighting him, and those under his protection [i.e. ahl al-dhimmah]. God ordered him to honour his treaties with those whom he had a peace treaty, as long as they honoured their commitments. If he feared treachery on their part, he was to revoke the treaty but would not fight them until he had informed them of the termination of their peace treaty. On the other hand, he was to fight those who violated their treaties with him.

When Sūrah 9, al-Tawbah, was revealed, it outlined the policy towards all these three categories. The Prophet is ordered there to fight his enemies from among the people of earlier faiths until they submit to his authority, paying the loyalty tax, jizyah, or embrace Islam. He is also ordered in the same sūrah to strive hard against the unbelievers and the idolaters. He strove against the unbelievers with arms, and against the hypocrites with argument and proof.

A further order to the Prophet in Sūrah 9 was to terminate all treaties with unbelievers, classifying such people into three groups. The first group he was ordered to fight, because these were the ones who violated their treaties with him and who were untrue to their commitments. He fought them and was victorious. The second group consisted of those with whom he had a peace treaty which they had honoured fully, and the treaty was to run for a specific term. They had given no support to any person or group who opposed the Prophet. With these he was to honour the peace treaty until it had run its course. The third group included those with whom the Prophet had no treaty and no previous fighting engagements, as well as those who had an openended agreement. The Prophet was instructed to give these groups four months’ notice, after which he was to fight them. The Prophet acted on these instructions, fought those who violated their treaties, and gave four months notice to those who had no treaty or had one without a specific term. Those who honoured their treaty were to have it honoured by the Prophet until the end of its term. All these embraced Islam before the end of their term. As for those who pledged loyalty to him, they were to pay the loyalty tax, jizyah.

Thus, after the revelation of Sūrah 9, the unbelievers were in three different categories with regard to the Prophet’s relations with them: combatants, or bound by a specified-term treaty, or loyal. The second category embraced Islam shortly thereafter, leaving the other two groups: combatants who feared him, and those who were loyal. Thus, all mankind were divided into three classes: Muslims who believed in the Prophet’s message; those at peace with him who enjoyed security; and those who were hostile and feared him.

As for the hypocrites, he was instructed to accept from them what they professed, leaving the final verdict on them to God. He was to strive against them with informed argument. He was further instructed to turn away from them and to be hard so that he would deliver his message to them in a way that they could not refute. He was forbidden to pray for them when they died, or to visit their graves. He was informed that if he were to pray for them to be forgiven, God would not forgive them.

Such was the Prophet’s policy towards his opponents, both unbelievers and hypocrites.1

This excellent summary of the different stages of the development of jihād, or striving for God’s cause, reveals a number of profound features of the Islamic approach which merit discussion; but we can only present them here very briefly.

The first of these features is the serious realism of the Islamic approach. Islam is a movement confronting a human situation with appropriate means. What it confronts is a state of ignorance, or jāhiliyyah, which prevails over ideas and beliefs, giving rise to practical systems that are supported by political and material authority. Thus, the Islamic approach is to confront all this with vigorous means and suitable resources. It presents its arguments and proofs to correct concepts and beliefs; and it strives with power to remove the systems and authorities that prevent people from adopting the right beliefs, forcing them to follow their errant ways and worship deities other than God Almighty. The Islamic approach does not resort to the use of verbal argument when confronting material power. Nor does it ever resort to compulsion and coercion in order to force its beliefs on people. Both are equally alien to the Islamic approach as it seeks to liberate people from subjugation so that they may serve God alone.

Secondly, Islam is a practical movement that progresses from one stage to the next, utilizing for each stage practically effective and competent means, while at the same time preparing the ground for the next stage. It does not confront practical realities with abstract theories, nor does it use the same old means to face changing realities. Some people ignore this essential feature of the Islamic approach and overlook the nature of the different stages of development of this approach. They cite Qur’ānic statements stating that they represent the Islamic approach, without relating these statements to the stages they addressed. When they do so, they betray their utter confusion and give the Islamic approach a deceptive appearance. They assign to Qur’ānic verses insupportable rules and principles, treating each verse or statement as outlining final Islamic rules. Themselves a product of the sorry and desperate state of contemporary generations who have nothing of Islam other than its label, and defeated both rationally and spiritually, they claim that Islamic jihād is always defensive. They imagine that they are doing Islam a service when they cast away its objective of removing all tyrannical powers from the face of the earth, so that people are freed from serving anyone other than God. Islam does not force people to accept its beliefs; rather, it aims to provide an environment where people enjoy full freedom of belief. It abolishes oppressive political systems depriving people of this freedom, or forces them into submission so that they allow their peoples complete freedom to choose to believe in Islam if they so wish.

Thirdly, such continuous movement and progressive ways and means do not divert Islam from its definitive principles and well-defined objectives. Right from the very first day, when it made its initial address to the Prophet’s immediate clan, then to the Quraysh, and then to the Arabs and finally putting its message to all mankind, its basic theme remained the same, making the same requirement. It wants people to achieve the same objective of worshipping God alone, submitting themselves to none other than Him. There can be no compromise over this essential rule. It then moves towards this single goal according to a well-thought-out plan, with progressive stages, and fitting means.

Finally, we have a clear legal framework governing relations between the Muslim community and other societies, as is evident in the excellent summary quoted from Zād al-Ma`ād. This legal framework is based on the main principle that submission to God alone is a universal message which all mankind must either accept or be at peace with. It must not place any impediment to this message, in the form of a political system or material power. Every individual must remain free to make his or her absolutely free choice to accept or reject it, feeling no pressure or opposition.

Anyone who puts such impediments in the face of the message of complete submission to God, must be resisted and fought by Islam.

Writers with a defeatist and apologetic mentality who try to defend Islamic jihād often confuse two clearly different principles. The first is that Islam comes out clearly against forcing people to accept any particular belief, while the second is its approach that seeks to remove political and material forces that try to prevent it from addressing people, so that they may not submit themselves to God. These are clearly distinct principles that should never be confused. Yet it is because of their defeatism that such writers try to limit jihād to what is called today ‘a defensive war’. But Islamic jihād is a totally different matter that has nothing to do with the wars people fight today, or their motives and presentation. The motives of Islamic jihād can be found within the nature of Islam, its role in human life, the objectives God has set for it and for the achievement of which He has sent His final Messenger with His perfect message.

We may describe the Islamic faith as a declaration of the liberation of mankind from servitude to creatures, including man’s own desires. It also declares that all Godhead and Lordship throughout the universe belong to God alone. This represents a challenge to all systems that assign sovereignty to human beings in any shape or form. It is, in effect, a revolt against any human situation where sovereignty, or indeed Godhead, is given to human beings. A situation that gives ultimate authority to human beings actually elevates those humans to the status of deities, usurping God’s own authority. As a declaration of human liberation, Islam means returning God’s authority to Him, rejecting the usurpers who rule over human communities according to manmade laws. In this way, no human being is placed in a position of Lordship over other people. To proclaim God’s authority and sovereignty means the elimination of all human kingship and to establish the rule of God, the Lord of the universe. In the words of the Qur’ān: “He alone is God in the heavens and God on earth.” (43: 84) “All judgement rests with God alone. He has ordered that you should worship none but Him. That is the true faith, but most people do not know it.” (12: 40) “Say:

‘People of earlier revelations! Let us come to an agreement which is equitable between you and us: that we shall worship none but God, that we shall associate no partners with Him, and that we shall not take one another for lords beside God.’ And if they turn away, then say:

‘Bear witness that we have surrendered ourselves to God.’“ (3: 64)

Establishing the rule of God on earth does not mean that sovereignty is assigned to a particular group of people, as was the case when the Church wielded power in Christian Europe, or that certain men become spokesmen for the gods, as was the case under theocratic rule. God’s rule is established when His law is enforced and all matters are judged according to His revealed law.

Nothing of all this is achieved through verbal advocacy of Islam. The problem is that the people in power who have usurped God’s authority on earth will not relinquish their power at the mere explanation and advocacy of the true faith.

Otherwise, it would have been very simple for God’s messengers to establish the divine faith. History, however, tells us that the reverse was true throughout human life.

This universal declaration of the liberation of man on earth from every authority other than that of God, and the declaration that all sovereignty belongs to God alone as does Lordship over the universe, are not a theoretical, philosophical and passive proclamation. It is a positive, practical and dynamic message which seeks to bring about the implementation of God’s law in human life, freeing people from servitude to anyone other than God alone. This cannot be achieved unless advocacy is complemented with a movement that confronts the existing human situation with adequate and competent means.

In actual life, Islam is always confronted with a host of obstacles placed in its way:

some belong to the realm of beliefs and concepts, others are physical, in addition to political, social, economic, racial obstacles. Deviant beliefs and superstitions add further obstacles trying to impede Islam. All these interact to form a very complex mixture working against Islam and the liberation of man.

Verbal argument and advocacy face up to beliefs and ideas, while the movement confronts material obstacles, particularly political authority that rests on complex yet interrelated ideological, racial, class, social and economic systems. Thus, employing both verbal advocacy and its practical movement, Islam confronts the existing human situation in its totality with adequately effective methods. Both are necessary for the achievement of the liberation of all mankind throughout the world. This is a very important point that merits strong emphasis.

This religion of Islam is not a declaration for the liberation of the Arabs, nor is its message addressed to the Arabs in particular. It addresses itself to all humanity, considering the entire earth its field of work. God is not the Lord of the Arabs alone, nor is His Lordship limited to Muslims only. God is the Lord of all worlds. Hence, Islam wants to bring all mankind back to their true Lord, liberating them from servitude to anyone else. From the Islamic point of view, true servitude or worship, takes the form of people’s submission to laws enacted by other human beings. It is such submission, or servitude, that is due to God alone, as Islam emphasizes.

Anyone that serves anyone other than God in this sense takes himself out of Islam, no matter how strongly he declares himself to be a Muslim. The Prophet clearly states that adherence to laws and authorities was the type of worship which classified the Jews and Christians as unbelievers, disobeying God’s orders to worship Him alone.

Al-Tirmidhī relates on the authority of `Adiy ibn Ĥātim that when the Prophet’s message reached him, he fled to Syria. [He had earlier accepted Christianity.] However, his sister and a number of people from his tribe were taken prisoner by the Muslims. The Prophet [peace be upon him] treated his sister kindly and gave her gifts. She went back to her brother and encouraged him to adopt Islam, and to visit the Prophet. People were speaking about his expected arrival. When he came into the Prophet’s presence, he was wearing a silver cross. As he entered, the Prophet was reciting the verse which says: “They [i.e. the people of earlier revelations] have taken their rabbis and their monks, as well as the Christ, son of Mary, for their lords beside God.” (9: 31)

`Adiy reports: “I said, `They did not worship their priests.’ God’s Messenger replied, ‘Yes they did. Their priests and rabbis forbade them what is lawful, and declared permissible what is unlawful, and they accepted that. This is how they worshipped them.”‘ The explanation given by the Prophet is a clear statement that obedience to manmade laws and judgements constitutes worship that takes people out of Islam. It is indeed how some people take others for their lords. This is the very situation Islam aims to eradicate in order to ensure man’s liberation.

When the realities of human life run contrary to the declaration of general human liberation, it becomes incumbent on Islam to take appropriate action, on both the advocacy and the movement fronts. It strikes hard against political regimes that rule over people according to laws other than that of God, or in other words, force people to serve beings other than God, and prevent them from listening to the message of Islam and accepting it freely if they so desire. Islam will also remove existing powers whether they take a purely political or racial form or operate class distinction within the same race. It then moves to establish a social, economic and political system that allows the liberation of man and man’s unhindered movement.

It is never the intention of Islam to force its beliefs on people, but Islam is not merely a set of beliefs. Islam aims to make mankind free from servitude to other people. Hence, it strives to abolish all systems and regimes that are based on the servitude of one person to another. When Islam has thus freed people from all political pressure and enlightened their minds with its message, it gives them complete freedom to choose the faith they wish. However, this freedom does not mean that they can make their desires their gods, or that they choose to remain in servitude to people like them, or that some of them are elevated to the status of lordship over the rest. The system to be established in the world should be based on complete servitude to God alone, deriving all its laws from Him only. Within this system, every person is free to adopt whatever beliefs he or she wants. This is the practical meaning of the principle that `all religion must be to God alone.’ Religion means submission, obedience, servitude and worship, and all these must be to God.

According to Islam, the term `religion’ is much wider in scope than belief. Religion is actually a way of life, and in Islam this is based on belief. But in an Islamic system, it is possible that different groups live under it even though they may choose not to adopt Islamic beliefs. They will, however, abide by its laws based on the central principle of submission to God alone.

When we understand the nature of Islam, as it has already been explained, we realize the inevitability of jihād, or striving for God’s cause, taking a military form in addition to its advocacy form. We will further recognize that jihād was never defensive, in the narrow sense that the term `defensive war’ generally denotes today.

It is this narrow sense that is emphasized by the defeatists who succumb to the pressure of the present circumstances and to the Orientalists’ wily attacks. Indeed the concept of striving, or jihād, for God’s cause represents a positive movement that aims to liberate man throughout the world, employing appropriate means to face every situation at every stage.

If we must describe Islamic jihād as defensive, then we need to amend the meaning of the term `defence’ so that it means the defending of mankind against all factors that hinder their liberation and restrict their freedom. These may take the form of concepts and beliefs, as well as political regimes that create economic, class and racial distinctions. When Islam first came into existence, this world was full of such hindrances, some forms of which persist in present- day jāhiliyyah.

When we give the term `defence’ such a broader meaning we can appreciate the motives for Islamic jihād all over the world, and we can understand the nature of Islam. Otherwise, any attempt to find defensive justification for jihād, within the contemporary narrow sense of defence, betrays a lack of understanding of the nature of Islam and its role in this world. Such attempts try to find any evidence to prove that early Muslims went on jihād to repel aggression by their neighbours against the Muslim land, which to some people is confined to the Arabian Peninsula. All this betrays stark defeatism.

Had Abū Bakr, `Umar and `Uthmān, the first three Caliphs, felt secure against any attack on Arabia by the Byzantine or the Persian Empires, would they have refrained Al-Anfāl (The Spoils of War) | PROLOGUE 1 1

from carrying the message of Islam to the rest of the world? How could they present Islam to the world when they had all types of material obstacles to contend with:

political regimes, social, racial and class systems, as well as economic systems based on such social discrimination; and all these are guaranteed protection by the state?

Jihād is essential for the Islamic message, if it is to be taken seriously as a declaration of the liberation of man, because it cannot confine itself to theoretical and philosophical arguments. It must confront existing situations with effective means, whether the land of Islam is secure or under threat from neighbouring powers. As Islam works for peace, it is not satisfied with a cheap peace that applies only to the area where people of the Muslim faith happen to live. Islam aims to achieve the sort of peace which ensures that all submission is made to God alone. This means that all people submit themselves to God, and none of them takes others for their lords. We must form our view on the basis of the ultimate stage of the jihād movement, not on the early or middle stages of the Prophet’s mission. All these stages led to the situation described by Imām Ibn al-Qayyim as follows:

Thus, after the revelation of Sūrah 9, the unbelievers were in three different categories with regard to the Prophet’s relations with them: combatants, or bound by a specified-term treaty, or loyal. The second category embraced Islam shortly thereafter, leaving the other two groups: combatants who feared him, and those who were loyal. Thus, all mankind were divided into three classes: Muslims who believed in the Prophet’s message; those at peace with him who enjoyed security; and those who were hostile and feared him.2

Such is the attitude that is consistent with the nature of Islam and its objectives.

When Islam was still confined to Makkah, and in the early period of the Prophet’s settlement in Madinah, God restrained the Muslims from fighting. They were told:

“Hold back your hands [from fighting], and attend regularly to prayer, and pay your zakāt.” (4: 77) They were later permitted to fight, when they were told: “Permission to fight is given to those against whom war is being wrongfully waged. Most certainly, God has the power to grant them victory. These are the ones who have been driven from their homelands against all right for no other reason than their saying, ‘Our Lord is God’ Were it not that God repels some people by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques — in all of which God’s name is abundantly extolled — would surely have been destroyed. God will most certainly succour him who succours God’s cause. God is certainly most Powerful, Almighty. They are those who, if We firmly establish them on earth, attend regularly to their prayers, give in charity, enjoin the doing of what is right and forbid the doing of what is wrong. With God rests the final outcome of all events.” (22: 39-41) They were then required to fight those who fight them, but not other people: “Fight for the cause of God those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression.” (2: 190) But then they were ordered to fight against all idolaters: “fight against the idolaters all together as they fight against you all together.” (9: 36) They were also told: “Fight against those among the people of the scriptures who do not believe in God or the Last Day, and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth until they pay the submission tax with a willing hand and are utterly subdued.” (9: 29) This means, as Ibn al-Qayyim puts it, that “fighting was first forbidden, then permitted, then ordered against those who fight Muslims, and finally against all unbelievers who associate partners with God.” The seriousness that is characteristic of the Qur’ānic texts and the Prophet’s traditions on jihād, and the positive approach that is very clear in all events of jihād in the early Islamic periods and over many centuries make it impossible to accept the explanation concocted by defeatist writers. They have come up with such an explanation under pressure from the present weakness of the Muslim community and the unsavoury attacks on the concept of jihād by Orientalists.

When we listen to God’s words and the Prophet’s traditions on jihād, and follow the events of early Islamic jihād, we cannot imagine how anyone can consider it a temporary measure, subject to circumstances that may or may not come into play, or having the limited objective of securing national borders.

In the very first Qur’ānic verse that gives Muslims permission to fight for His cause, God makes it clear to believers that the normal situation in this present life is that one group of people is checked by another so as to prevent the spread of corruption on earth: “Permission to fight is given to those against whom war is being wrongfully waged. Most certainly, God has the power to grant them victory. These are the ones who have been driven from their homelands against all right for no other reason than their saying, ‘Our Lord is God.’ Were it not that God repels some people by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques — in all of which God’s name is abundantly extolled — would surely have been destroyed.” (22: 39-40) We thus see that it is the permanent state of affairs for truth to be unable to co-exist with falsehood on earth.

Hence, when Islam makes its declaration for the liberation of mankind on earth, so that they may only serve God alone, those who usurp God’s authority try to silence it. They will never tolerate it or leave it in peace. Islam will not sit idle, either. It will move to deprive them of their power so that people can be freed of their shackles.

This is the permanent state of affairs which necessitates the continuity of jihād until all submission is made to God alone.

Holding back from fighting in Makkah, by divine order, was only a stage in a long-term strategy. The same was the case in the early days after the Prophet’s migration to Madinah. However, what made the Muslim community in Madinah take its stance was not merely the need to defend Madinah and make it secure against attack. This was certainly a primary objective, but it was by no means the ultimate one. Achieving this objective provided the means and the secure base from which to remove the obstacles that fettered man and deprived him of his freedom.

Besides, it is perfectly understandable that Muslims should refrain from taking up arms in Makkah. Advocacy of Islam was reasonably free. Assured of protection by his own clan, the Hāshimites, the Prophet was able to declare his message, addressing it to individuals and groups and putting to them its clear principles and beliefs. There was no organized political power to stop him from doing so, or to stop individuals from listening to him. Hence, there was no need at this stage to resort to force. There were other reasons which we outlined in Volume III, pp. 197-198, when commenting on the verse that says: “Are you not aware of those who have been told, ‘Hold back your hands [from fighting], and attend regularly to prayer, and pay your zakāt... ?’” It may be useful to quote here a part of what we stated there:

1. One reason could be that the Makkan period was one of training, educating and preparing a particular group of people under certain conditions. One of the aims of such a programme is to discipline the Arab mind to persevere and endure personal and collective hardship as a means to transcend personal egos. One’s own self and immediate community should no longer be the focus and prime movers in one’s life. People needed to be taught restraint and selfcontrol and how not to react with immediate rage and anger, as was their nature. They needed to learn to behave as members of an organized society with a central leadership to be consulted and obeyed in all matters, regardless of how different that was from their customs and traditions. This was the cornerstone in remodelling the Arab character to establish a civilized, orderly, non-tribal Muslim society that recognizes a governing leadership.

2. Another possible reason is that peaceful action was more effective in that particular Arab society of the Quraysh, which attached much importance to self-image and honour. The use of force in such a situation could only harden attitudes and result in fresh bloody grudges, reminiscent of the famous inter- Arab feuds of Dāĥis and al-Ghabrā’, and of al-Basūs which raged for many years, wiping out complete tribes. Such a new conflict would always be associated in the Arab memory with Islam as the cause of vengeance and bloodshed rather than Islam as a universal Divine mission. The basic essence of Islam would, in that case, be forever obscured and obliterated.

3. There was also the need to avoid a bloodbath within every Arab household in Makkah since there was no organized authority perpetrating the persecution of Muslim converts. The harassment was unsystematic, following no specific order. Every household dealt with their converts as they saw fit. Prescription of armed confrontation in such circumstances would mean battles and massacres in every home for which Islam would be blamed. In fact, the Quraysh propaganda, spread during the pilgrimage and trading seasons, was already blaming Islam for family splits, feuds and divisions among the Arabs even before the use of force was eventually permitted.

4. Another reason for the delay in prescribing jihād by force of arms could be God’s prior knowledge that many of the tormentors and perpetrators of maltreatment against the Muslims would, one day soon, find themselves be converts and ardent defenders, indeed leaders, of Islam. Was not `Umar ibn al-Khaţţāb one such person?

5. Another reason could be that Arab tribal chivalry was known to provoke sympathy with the weak and the oppressed when they persevere in the face of adversity, especially if some of these hailed from the noble sections of society.

This is borne out in several incidents including that whereby Ibn al- Dughunnah tried to persuade Abū Bakr, a noble man, not to leave Makkah and offered him protection, seeing it as a shame on all the Arabs that he should have to emigrate. Another incident was the repeal of the boycott on Hāshim, Muĥammad’s clan, and the ending of their siege in the Hāshimite quarters in Makkah, after an extended period of starvation and hardship. In other ancient civilizations, persecution might have led to the adulation of the oppressor and further humiliation for the oppressed, but not in Arab society.

6. It could have been due to the small number of Muslims at the time and their confinement in Makkah when Islam had not spread widely in Arabia, and the neutral stand that other Arab tribes would take in an internal conflict within Makkah. Confrontation could very well lead to the annihilation of the small band of Muslim converts, even if they were to kill twice as many as their own number, and the infidels would thus prevail. In this case, the religion of Islam, which was meant to be a universal way of life and a practical and realistic system, would no longer exist.

As for the early period in Madinah, the treaty the Prophet agreed with the Jews and the Arab unbelievers in the city and the neighbouring areas was a suitable arrangement at this stage. Besides, there was an open opportunity for delivering God’s message, with no political authority standing in opposition to it. All groups recognized the new Muslim state and the Prophet as its leader who conducted its political affairs. The treaty stipulated that no party or group could wage war against, or make peace or establish any relations with, any outside group without the express permission of the Prophet. Moreover, it was clear that real power in Madinah was wielded by the Muslim leadership. Hence, God’s message could be freely addressed to people and they could choose to accept it if they so wanted.

Moreover, the Prophet wanted to concentrate his efforts at this stage on the struggle against the Quraysh, whose relentless opposition to Islam constituted a hard obstacle preventing its spread to other tribes. Most Arabian tribes adopted a waitand- see attitude to the struggle which they viewed as an internal conflict between the Quraysh and a group of its own members. Hence the Prophet started to send out expeditions, beginning in Ramađān, only seven months after his migration to Madinah when his uncle Ĥamzah ibn `Abd al-Muţţalib was the first commander.

Other expeditions followed, with the second taking place nine months after the Prophet’s migration, and another after 13 months, and a fourth three months later on.

Shortly after that the Prophet sent a small company commanded by `Abdullāh ibn Jaĥsh, 17 months after his migration. It was on this particular expedition that fighting took place for the first time and one man was killed. This was in one of the four sacred months. In a comment on this incident the Qur’ān says: “They ask you about fighting in the sacred month. Say, ‘Fighting in it is a grave offence, but to turn people away from God’s path, to disbelieve in Him and in the Sacred Mosque, and to expel its people from it — [all this] is far more grave in God’s sight.’ Religious persecution is worse than killing.

They shall not cease to fight you until they force you to renounce your faith, if they can.” (2:

217)3

In Ramađān of the same year, the Battle of Badr took place, on which the present sūrah provides detailed commentary.

When we review the situation with all its relevant circumstances, we realize that the argument that jihād is nothing more than a defensive war, in the narrow sense of the term, cannot hold. Those who try to find pure defensive reasons to justify the expansion of Islam find themselves cornered by Orientalists’ attacks at a time when Muslims are powerless. Indeed Muslims today are far removed from Islam, except for a small minority who are determined to implement the Islamic declaration of man’s liberation from all authority except that of God.

The spread of Islam does not need to find any justification other than those stated in the Qur’ān:

Let them fight in God’s cause — all who are willing to barter the life of this world for the life to come. To him who fights in God’s cause, whether he be slain or be victorious, We shall grant a rich reward. And why should you not fight in the cause of God and the utterly helpless men, women and children who are crying, “Our Lord! Deliver us from this land whose people are oppressors, and send forth to us, out of Your grace, a protector, and send us one that will help us.” Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject the faith fight in the cause of evil. Fight, then, against the friends of Satan. Feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan. (4: 74-76)

Say to the unbelievers that if they desist, all that is past shall be forgiven them; but if they persist [in their erring ways], let them remember what happened to the like of them in former times. Fight them until there is no more oppression, and all submission is made to God alone. If they desist, God is certainly aware of all they do.

But if they turn away, know that God is your Lord Supreme. How splendid is this Lord Supreme, and how splendid is this giver of support. (8: 38-40)

Fight against those among the people of earlier revelations who do not believe in God or the Last Day, and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth until they pay the submission tax with a willing hand and are utterly subdued. The Jews say: “Ezra is the son of God”, while the Christians say: “The Christ is the son of God.” Such are the assertions they utter with their mouths, echoing assertions made by the unbelievers of old. May God destroy them! How perverse they are! They make of their rabbis and their monks, and of the Christ, son of Mary, lords besides God. Yet they have been ordered to worship none but the One God, other than whom there is no deity. Exalted be He above those to whom they ascribe divinity. They seek to extinguish God’s light with their mouths, but God will not allow anything to interfere with His will to bring His light to perfection, however hateful this may be to the unbelievers. (9: 29-32)

The justification carried in these verses is that of the need to establish the truth of Godhead on earth, and implement the way of life God has decreed in human life.

Moreover, satanic forces and methods must be chased out and abolished; and the lordship of one man over others must be ended. Human beings are God’s creatures and they serve Him alone. No one may be allowed to hold authority over them so as to make them his servants or enact arbitrary laws for them. This is sufficient justification, not forgetting at the same time the main principle that “there shall be no compulsion in religion.” (2: 256) No one will ever be compelled or pressurized to adopt the Islamic faith after the liberation of all people and the acknowledgement that all submission must be to God alone, and that all authority belongs to Him.

It is sufficient to remember that Islam aims to free all mankind from servitude to creatures so that they may serve God alone to justify Islamic jihād. This was clearly in the minds of the early Muslims when they went out to fight the Byzantine and the Persian Empires. None of them justified their action by saying, ‘We want to defend our country against external threats,’ or, `We want to repel Byzantine or Persian aggression,’ or, ‘We want to annex land and add to our wealth.’ Their representatives, Rib`iy ibn `Āmir, Ĥudhayfah ibn Muĥsin and al-Mughīrah ibn Shu`bah, each met Rustam, the Persian army commander in the Battle of al- Qādisiyyah, alone on three successive days. In response to Rustam’s question about their objectives, they all said the same thing: “It is God who has commanded us so that we may liberate anyone who wishes from servitude to human beings into the service of God alone, from the narrowness of this world into the expanse of this world and the hereafter, and from the injustices of different religions to the justice of Islam. God has sent His Messenger to deliver His message to His creatures. Whoever accepts it from us, we let him be, turn back and give him his land. We fight only those who rebel until we achieve martyrdom or victory.” The justification for jihād is inherent in the nature of this faith, its declaration of man’s liberation, and its confrontation with existing human situations using adequate and effective means, suitably adapted and renewed for every stage. This justification exists in the first place, even though there may be no threat to the Muslim land or the Muslim community. It is of the essence of the Islamic approach and the nature of the practical obstacles that stand in its way in different communities. Islamic jihād cannot be linked merely to some limited and temporary defensive needs.

It is sufficient that a Muslim goes out on jihād laying down his life and sacrificing all his money, for God’s cause, not for any considerations of any personal gain.

Before going out on jihād a Muslim would have won the greater battle within himself, against his own desires, ambitions, personal and national interests and against any motive other than serving God and establishing His authority on earth after winning it back from rebellious usurpers.

People who try to justify Islamic jihād on the grounds of protecting or defending the Islamic homeland underrate the Islamic way of life, placing its importance below that of the homeland. Theirs is a new consideration that is alien to the Islamic outlook. The faith, the way of life based on it and the community that implements it are the considerations valued by Islam. The land in itself has no significance. It acquires its value when the Islamic way of life is implemented in it, so as to become the cradle of the faith, the practical model, the homeland of Islam, and the starting point for the liberation of mankind.

It is true that defending the homeland of Islam means protecting the faith, the way of life and the Muslim community, all at the same time; but this is not the ultimate objective of Islamic jihād. Defending the homeland of Islam is the means to establish God’s authority within it, and to use it as the base from which to address all mankind. Islam is a message to all humanity, and the whole earth is its sphere of action.

As already stated, any effort that tries to spread the Islamic way of life is bound to meet obstacles created by the power of the state, the social system and the general environment. Islam aims to remove all these obstacles so that it can address people freely, appealing to their minds and consciences, after breaking their fetters so that they have genuine freedom of choice.

We must not be intimidated by the Orientalists’ attacks on the concept of Islamic jihād, or allow the pressures of world political powers to weigh heavily on us, so as to seek justifications for jihād that do not fit with the nature of Islam.

When we look at historical events, we must not lose sight of the inherent factors in the nature of Islam, its universal declaration and practical way of life. We must not confuse these with temporary defensive needs. It was inevitable that Islam would defend itself against aggression, because its very existence, general objective, the movement it forms under a new leadership, and the birth of a new community which recognizes only God’s sovereignty — all this is bound to provoke other societies, based on jāhiliyyah, into trying to smash it in order to defend their own interests. It is inevitable that the new Muslim community will also have to defend itself. This is an inescapable situation that arises with the advent of Islam in any society. There is no question that Islam wants to fight such a battle; it is imposed on it, and the struggle that follows is a natural one, between two systems that cannot co-exist for long. All this is undeniable. Hence, Islam has no choice but to defend itself against aggression.

A much more important fact, however, is that, by nature, Islam will take the initiative and move to save humanity and free people throughout the world from servitude to anyone other than God. It is not possible that Islam will confine itself to geographical boundaries, or racial limits, abandoning the rest of mankind and leaving them to suffer from evil, corruption and servitude to lords other than God Almighty.

A time may come when enemies of Islam may find it expedient not to try to suppress Islam if it is willing to leave them alone, practising within their national boundaries their own systems that allow some people to be lords over others. They may offer such a state of coexistence if Islam is willing not to extend its declaration of universal freedom to their people. But Islam will not accept such a truce, unless they are willing to acknowledge its authority in the form of paying the loyalty or submission tax, jizyah, to guarantee that the message of Islam may address their people freely, without putting any material obstacle in its way.

Such is the nature of Islam and its role of liberating all mankind from servitude to anyone other than God. The gulf is wide indeed between this understanding and confining Islam to a local status within national borders or racial limits, acting only to defend itself against outside aggression. To think of Islam in this light is to deprive it of its reasons for action.

The underlying reasons for jihad are clearly identified when we remember that Islam is the way of life God has given to man. It is not a system devised by an individual or a group of people, nor is it the ideology of a certain race. It is only when we begin to lose sight of this fundamental truth of God’s absolute sovereignty and people’s servitude to Him that we try to find external reasons to justify jihad. No one who is fully cognizant of this basic Islamic principle will need to look for any other justification for jihad.

The gulf may not seem too great between thinking that Islam had to fight a war imposed on it by the very fact of its existence alongside jāhiliyyah societies, which were bound to attack it, and the recognition that Islam would have taken the initiative and embarked on its struggle. In both situations, Islam would have had to fight. But at the end the gulf between the two views is very wide indeed. It gives Islamic ideas and concepts a totally different colour. This is very serious indeed.

Islam is a system given by God and it aims to establish the fundamental principle of God’s sovereignty and people’s servitude to Him alone. It gives practical implementation of this principle in the form of a human society where people are totally free from servitude to anyone other than God. Thus, people are governed only by God’s law, demonstrating His authority, or, in other words, His Godhead.

As such, Islam has the right to remove all obstacles in its way and address people freely, without any impediments such as a political system or social customs and traditions. Viewing Islam in this way is far removed from viewing it as a local system of a particular country or nationality, having the right to defend itself within its national borders.

The two views are worlds apart, even though in both cases Islam would have had to fight. However, the reasons, motives, objectives and results of jihad under the two concepts are widely different. Our understanding of these is part of our beliefs, strategies and aims.

It is the right of Islam to take the initiative. It is not the creed of a particular people or the system of a particular country. It is a system given by God for the entire world. As such, it has the right to take action to remove all obstacles that fetter man’s freedom of choice. It is a faith that does not force itself on any individual; it only attacks situations and regimes in order to free individuals from deviant influences that corrupt human nature and restrict man’s freedom.

It is right that Islam should liberate people from servitude to other individuals in order that they serve God alone. It thus puts into practice its universal declaration of God’s Lordship over the entire universe and the liberation of all mankind.

Servitude to God alone cannot be realized, from the Islamic point of view and in practice, except under the Islamic system. It is only under this system that God’s law applies equally and in the same way to all people, rulers and ruled, white and black, rich and poor. Under all other systems, people serve other people who enact laws for them. Legislation is a most fundamental attribute of Godhead. Any human being who claims the right to decree laws of his own for a community of people actually and practically claims Godhead, even though he may not put such a claim in words. Anyone who recognizes such an authority as belonging to a human being admits that Godhead belongs to that human being, whether he calls it as such or not.

Islam is not a mere ideology to be explained to people by normal ways of communication. It is a way of life represented in a social setup that takes the necessary action to liberate mankind. Other communities try to prevent it from addressing their individuals to convince them of adopting its way of life. Therefore, it becomes imperative that Islam should try to remove those regimes that impede the freedom of mankind. As stated earlier, this is the meaning of ensuring that all submission is made to God alone, so that no submission or obedience is given to any human being on account of his own position or status, as is the case with all other systems.

Defeated by the combined pressures of the present situation and Orientalists’ attacks, some contemporary Muslim writers feel too embarrassed to state these facts.

Orientalists have tried to paint a false picture of Islam, showing it to have been spread by the sword. These Orientalists know very well that this is absolutely false, but they deliberately try to distort the underlying reasons for Islamic jihād. In reply, some of our people try to disprove this charge by seeking defensive justifications for jihād, overlooking the nature of Islam, its role in human life and its right to take the initiative to liberate mankind. Such defeatist writers are heavily influenced by the Western outlook and how it views religion as a mere set of beliefs that have nothing to do with day-to-day life. Hence, to fight for a religious cause means fighting to compel people to adopt a particular faith.

But this is not the case with Islam, which is a way of life given by God for all mankind, ascribing Lordship and sovereignty to God alone, and providing a system for the conduct of all life affairs. To fight for Islam is to fight for the implementation of this way of life and its systems. Faith, on the other hand, is a matter for free personal conviction, after the removal of all pressures and obstacles. The whole issue thus appears in a totally different light.

Thus, whenever an Islamic community comes into existence and begins to implement the Islamic way of life, God gives it the right to move, take power and establish that system, guaranteeing total freedom of belief. The fact that God held back the early Muslim community from fighting at a particular stage is only a question of strategy, not a matter of principle.

When we have this fundamental principle clear in our minds, we can easily understand the different Qur’ānic texts, applicable to different historical stages, without being confused as to their overall significance in relation to the constant Islamic approach.

Further explanation of the nature of jihād and the nature of Islam itself is given in a paper written by the great Muslim scholar, Abū’l A`lā Mawdūdī, which we will quote here at length.4 This is very important for anyone who wishes to formulate a clear understanding of this issue which is central to the way of thinking of the Islamic movement.

In common parlance the word jihād’ equates with holy war in English. For a considerable time now unfriendly interpreters have been adding spin to it as if it were nothing but pure zealotry — giving an image of a horde of religious fanatics surging forward, swords in hands, beards tucked under their lips, and chanting Allāhu Akbar (God is great). To intensify this imagery, their eyes are shown as filled with blood. Wherever they see an infidel (non- Muslim)

they lay their hand on him and force him to declare that there is no deity except God or face execution. The spin masters have thus painted us masterly with their tag: “This nation’s history smells of blood.” Ironically, our picture makers are our old well wishers who have themselves been involved in an unholy war for the past many centuries against the poor and the wretched of the earth. History reveals a very ungainly picture of Westerners: equipped with all kinds of deadly weapons, they have thrown themselves on the peoples of the world establishing markets for their goods, searching for raw material resources, looking for lands to colonize, and minerals to exploit so that they can fuel their never-ending lust for other people’s wealth. Their war is not for God but for greed to satisfy the demands of their baser selves. For them, it is enough of a reason for their bloodletting pursuits if others have resources to enrich them. Worse, they have annexed other people’s lands where they have settled their surplus manpower. Some people even qualified themselves for such punitive action if their geographical areas provided access to a territory that they wanted to overpower.

What we, Muslims, have done is now history while the West’s accomplishments are part of the contemporary scene witnessed by humanity every day. Asia, Africa, Europe, America — which part of the world is left unsoiled with the blood of the innocents owing to the West’s unholy war?

Horrible as it is, it redounds to their painting skills that they have brushed us in such exaggerated colours. Ghastly as it may be, they have succeeded in concealing their own ugly face behind ours. And so great is our naivety that when we see our portrait thus made we are so terrified that we forget to see the faces of the painters behind it. Worse, we become apologetic, pleading:

“Your Excellencies, we do not have anything to do with war; we are as peaceful a missionary as the Buddhists and the priests are. All we do is to refute a few beliefs and replace them with some others. Weapons are not our business. We do, however, admit that occasionally when someone comes to beat us we counter him against our will. But now we have discarded even our right to self-defence. To please your Excellencies we have officially proscribed weapon-wielding jihād. Now jihād is an effort waged with our mouths and pens. To fight with weapons is your prerogative.”

Rhetoric aside, when we try to analyze the causes that have made jihād for God’s sake an ungainly proposition for the non-Muslims as well as Muslims, we find two primary misconceptions behind it. The first lies in the fact that Islam has been misconceived as just another religion. The second centres around the fact that the Muslims are being viewed as a nation in the sense that this noun is generally perceived. Thus, two misconceptions have distorted not only the concept of jihād but have also damaged the whole complexion of Islam, giving Muslims a very bad image.

In common parlance, religion is nothing but a combination of a few articles of faith, and a few worship rituals. In this sense religion is doubtless a matter of private concern. One has the right to choose any faith one likes. One can also follow one’s conscience in worshipping any deity one wants. And if one feels comfortable with it, one can even become part of the effort to spread it across the globe engaging others in polemics. This kind of faith does not need a sword for support. The proponents of traditional religion may rightly ask:

“Do you want to beat people into embracing your faith?” This is a valid question that will inevitably be asked if one reduces Islam to a religion, in the common nuance of the word. In fact, once Islam is reduced to just another faith, then jihād invalidates itself in the overall scheme of Islam.

Likewise, what is a nation other than a homogeneous group of people which assumes distinction from other groups on account of its shared belief in some foundational values. In this sense a group having become a nation may rise in arms only for two reasons: when others attempt to deprive it of its legitimate rights or when it invades others to divest them of their rights. In the first situation, it has the moral ground to fight back; but even then some pacifists may disapprove. The second situation lacks moral content to justify armed invasion. None, other than a ruthless dictator, tries to justify such aggression.

Indeed, intellectuals and statesmen of modern-day empires like France and Britain would not try to justify it.

Thus, if Islam is a religion and the Muslims are a nation, then jihād loses its most significant qualities that make it an important part of Islamic worship.

Strictly speaking, Islam is neither a mere religion in the common sense, nor is the denomination “Muslim” the name of a nation.

So what is Islam? Islam is a revolutionary concept and a way of life, which seeks to change the prevalent social order and remould it according to its own vision. Based on this definition, the word `Muslim’ becomes the name of an international revolutionary party that Islam seeks to form in order to put its revolutionary programme into effect. Jihād signifies that revolutionary struggle involving the utmost use of resources that the Islamic party mobilizes in the service of its cause.

Like other revolutionary concepts, Islam avoids common words already in currency and opts for a more precise terminology so that its radical aspects stand distinct. As part of this special terminology, jihād serves a clear purpose. Islam deliberately discards words denoting war. Instead, it uses the word jihād, which is the equivalent of the English word “struggle”. The Arabic word, however, is far more expressive and carries broader connotations, as it stands for exerting one’s utmost endeavour to promote a cause.

One may ask why the old words were discarded and new expressions coined? The answer lies in the fact that the word `war’ has always been used for armed conflict between nations and empires aiming to achieve personal or national interests, devoid of any ideology or higher principles. Since Islam is not concerned with such mundane considerations, it dropped the old vocabulary altogether. Nor does Islam feel itself bound by a national concern.

It has no interest in who occupies a particular piece of land. The only thing that matters for Islam is the well-being of humanity, for which it has its own particular perspective and action plan. Wherever there are governments opposed to its perspective, Islam aims to change them, regardless of where they function and the people they govern. Its ultimate objective is to establish its way of life and to put in place governments that implement its programme. Islam wants space — not a piece of the earth but the whole planet. It has no wish to monopolize resources for the benefit of a particular community; on the contrary, it wants to give all humanity spiritual and moral elevation through the implementation of its unique programme. To make it happen, it marshals every bit of manpower and material resource.

Islam gives the name jihād to such cumulative efforts. This includes efforts to change people through verbal advocacy. It also includes the possible armed struggle to end an oppressive system and establish justice. Spending money for the cause and physical exertion are also jihād.

Islamic jihād is not the mere exertion of effort; it has to be for God alone.

Thus, it is imperative that jihād be undertaken only for God’s cause, or to use the Arabic phrase, `fī sabīlillāh’. This is a special phrase that belongs to the particular repertoire of terminology that I have mentioned. Literally translated, it means `in the way of God.’ True as this translation is, some narrow- minded people imagine that coercing others to accept Islam falls under this heading. Such understanding only betrays their rigidly narrow concepts. The fact remains that in the Islamic lexicon it has much wider connotations and implications.

For example, any work that involves collective well-being with no worldly considerations is for God. That is why a charity dispensed by a person for a moral or material return is not altruistic. If, however, the intention is to please God by helping the poor, it will fall within the purview of fisabīlillāh. Thus, this term is specific to those works that are unsoiled by selfish considerations, solely motivated by the desire to help improve the human situation. And that in doing so will please God the Exalted, who is the end-all of all human endeavours. This is the sole reason for adding the condition of ft sabīlillāh.

Meaning thereby that when a person aims at replacing a system of life with Islam he should have no self-centred considerations. In other words, he should not seek to replace Caesar with another Caesar. Nor should his struggle for the mission bear even a shade of seeking wealth, fame, or honour for himself. Instead, his whole effort and sacrifice should be directed toward establishing a just system for humanity, and to please no one but God.

Says the Qur’ān: “Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject the faith fight in the cause of evil. Fight, then, against the friends of Satan. Feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan.” (4: 76)

The word ţaghūt has its root in ţughyān, which means crossing the limits.

When a river swells outgrowing its banks, we say it is flooded. Likewise, when a person goes beyond his limits and uses power to become god over humanity or garners for himself monetary and other benefits then he follows the way of ţaghūt. Opposed to this is fighting in the way of God to establish His laws of justice, and which calls for a sense of altruism not found elsewhere.

Thus says the Qur’ān: “As for that happy life in the hereafter, We grant it only to those who do not seek to exalt themselves on earth, nor yet to spread corruption. The future belongs to the God- fearing.” (28: 83)

A ĥadīth says that a person asked the Prophet “what does fighting in the way of God mean? One person fights for booty, another fights to prove his bravery; and a third fights for enmity toward someone or because he has a bias for his nation. Among them whose fight is in God’s way?” The Prophet’s reply was as follows: “Nobody’s. The fight fī sabīlillāh is only of a person who has no other considerations but that the word of God prevails.” Another ĥadīth says “if a person fought and had the intention to secure for himself even a camel’s halter, he would lose his reward.” God accepts only that deed which is performed solely for Him without any personal or group considerations. Thus, the conditionality of fī sabīlillāh is crucial from the Islamic viewpoint. For every living being (animal or human) is engaged in the jihād of survival with the full vigour of its existence.

Among the radical concepts of the revolutionary party named “Muslim” the most foundational is to engage every rebellious force that comes in Islam’s way: fight them, muster everything possible to replace them. But make sure that you do not become rebellious instead. Your mandate is contingent on your cleansing the world of rebellion and wickedness and subjecting it to God’s laws of justice and fair play.

After spelling out jihād’s meaning and its link with fī sabīlillāh, I will now deal with Islam’s revolutionary message so that you may understand the reason for waging jihād as a tool for the spread of Islam.

One can summarize the Islamic message as follows: “Mankind, worship your Lord who has created you and those who lived before you, so that you may become God-fearing.” (2: 21) Islam does not address itself to the farm holders and the moneyed class of industrialists, or to the peasants and industrial workers, but rather to the whole of mankind. Its audiences are human beings (not classes):

for if you are subservient to someone other than God, then you should give this up. If you crave to be a deity over humanity, then push this out of your mind for none has the right to exalt himself over others. You must all enter into God’s servitude as equals. Thus, the Islamic call is universal, inviting a total change. It is to God alone that the right to rule belongs, and none else.

Expressed differently, nobody has the authority to become the master of others, dictating to them what he thinks is right and wrong. To acknowledge anyone as such is to attribute Godhead to him, which undoubtedly complicates the human situation.

What causes distortion in the true human self and derails humans from the God-given straight path is that they lose sight of Him in their lives and thus forget their true nature. The result it formulates is equally disastrous. On the one hand, some people, class or group rise with claims to divinity and by virtue of their power reduce others into their servitude. On the other hand, because of this tendency to oust God from our lives and the consequent distortion of our true nature, a large number of people surrender themselves to the divinity of the powerful, accepting their right to decide for them. This, as I said, is the source of oppression in the world: Islam makes its first strike at this apparatus of divinity. It says loudly and clearly: “Pay no heed to the counsel of those who are given to excesses — those who spread corruption on earth instead of setting things to rights.” (26: 151-152) “Contain yourself in patience with those who call on their Lord morning and evening, seeking His countenance. Let not your eyes pass beyond them in quest of the beauties of the life of this world. Pay no heed to any whose heart We have left to be negligent of all remembrance of Us because he had always followed his own desires, and whose case has gone beyond all bounds.” (18: 28) “Those [are the ones] who debar others from the path of God and would have it crooked, and who deny the life to come.” (11: 18)

Islam asks people: do you want to continue with a servitude forced upon you by these small and petty multitude of deities or do you want one God who is all-powerful? If you refuse to return to the worship of one God, you will never liberate yourselves from the slavery of these hordes of self-made gods.

They will overpower you one way or the other and cause disruption throughout human life. “She said: `Whenever kings enter a country, they corrupt it, and turn the noblest of its people into the most abject. This is the way they always behave.’” (27: 34) “Yet, no sooner does he turn his back than he strives to spread corruption in the world, destroying crops and progeny. God does not love corruption.” (2: 205)

Without elaborating upon it further, I will be brief in presenting to you the fact that Islam’s advocacy of God’s oneness was not toward a religion, which invites people to certain articles of belief constituting a faith.

In fact, it was a social revolution that gave a direct blow to the stratified classes, which had institutionalized themselves into a priesthood, a kingship, moneylenders, feudal lords and cartel owners reducing people to bondage.

In some places they had even become gods unto themselves asking people in the name of their birth or class right to surrender themselves to their worship.

In other places, while making use of the masses’ ignorance, the ruling regime had carved for them artificial gods and built temples inducing them to accept their claims to divinity, under the patronage of those gods.

Thus, when Islam, opposed to idol worship and polytheism, invited humanity to worship one true God, the people in power and those who supported them and shared the privileges arising from power felt threatened.

Hence why whenever a prophet raised the call of “My people, worship God alone, for you have no God other than Him,” it triggered opposition towards him. The power elite along with the exploitative classes combined to crush the message, for they knew it was not merely a metaphysical proposition but a call for social change. In its very first reverberation they smelled rebellion of a political nature.

There is not a shadow of doubt that all the prophets were revolutionary leaders. And the most revolutionary among them was Muĥammad (peace be upon him). However, what separated the prophets from the rest of the revolutionaries is their balanced approach towards life, their untainted sense of justice and equality. The non-prophet revolutionaries, despite their being well intentioned, had a tilted sense of justice and equality. [The problem being their relative backgrounds.] Either such revolutionaries came from the oppressed classes or they rose with their support. Small wonder then that they viewed everything from a class perspective. Their vantage was coloured by their class bias and not by humanity considerations or impartiality. They swung between hatred for a particular class and their bias for the class that supported them. Hence why their solution for oppression was reactive, leading them to fall into the same trap and making them a new class of oppressors. For them to formulate a balanced collective system was an impossible proposition. Contrary to this, no matter how much the prophets and their companions were persecuted, their revolutionary movement remained free from resentment and bitterness.

This was possible for they worked under the direct supervision of God, the Exalted, who does not suffer from any human weakness nor does He have a particular relation with any class of people or a grudge against anyone. This is why the prophets viewed things with justice. Their sole desire was to make sure that humanity’s interests were served by bringing about a system in which people could exercise their due rights while living within legitimate means, and by creating a perfect balance between individual and societal interests. This perhaps explains why the prophet-led movements never turned into class warfare. Their reconstruction programme was not designed to impose one class over another. Rather, they followed the course of justice in a manner that people had equal space for their material and spiritual growth.

In this short presentation it is difficult for me to spell out the entire sociopolitical order of Islam. Keeping within the constraints of my subject, I wish to emphasize the point that Islam is not merely the amalgamation of certain dogmas and rituals but rather a comprehensive code of life that seeks to blot out all oppressive modes of life and introduce its own programme for human welfare.

To meet this end, Islam seeks a wider audience by embracing humanity and not just a particular group. In fact, it even goes to the extent of inviting oppressors, including kings and the super rich, to come and live within the legitimate bounds fixed by their Creator. If they accept the truth, it says, they will have peace and security. Here, there is no enmity toward human beings.

If there is hostility, it is towards oppression, social disorder, and immorality.

In other words, it is towards those who by taking what is not theirs, transgress their natural limits.

Besides, whoever embraces this message no matter to what class, race, nation, and state he or she belongs, will have equal rights and status in the Islamic society, creating thus that universal revolutionary party which the Qur’ān describes as “Hizb Allāh” or what is also known as the “Islamic party” or “the Muslim ummah”.

The moment this party comes into being, it takes up jihād to pursue the objectives of its creation. This should not be surprising for it is logical to the demand of its existence — that it will strive to replace paganism in human life with a balanced code of social reconstruction that the Qur’ān alludes to as kalimatullāh, or God’s word.

Thus, sluggishness on its part to any change in the current administrative setup aiming at substituting it with Islamic governance will deny it its justification to continue, for that is the sole purpose of its inception.

Explaining the reason for its birth, the Qur’ān says: “You are the best community that has ever been raised for mankind; you enjoin the doing of what is right and forbid what is wrong, and you believe in God.” (3: 110)

It is not a party of preachers and missionaries but rather of divine enforcers.

Its mission is to blot out, by force if necessary, oppression, moral anarchy, social disorder and exploitation so as to finish the so-called divine role of selfstyled gods and replace evil with good. “Fight them,” the Qur’ān says, “until there is no more oppression, and all submission is made to God alone.” (Verse 39)

“Unless you do likewise, there will be oppression on earth and much corruption.” (Verse 73) “He it is who has sent forth His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to the end that He may cause it to prevail over all religions, however hateful this may be to those who associate partners with God.” (9: 33)

Thus, this Muslim party has no choice but to go for and control the power centres, for the simple reason that an oppressive immoral civilization derives its sustenance from an immoral governmental set-up. Likewise, a righteous state apparatus cannot be implemented unless the reins of government pass from the mischief-makers to the peacemakers.

That being the case, not to talk of reforming the world, this party will not be able to live up to its convictions if the ruling system is tied to some other mode of thought. For example, a person of a socialist bent will not be able to live by the norms of his preferred system if he resides under the capitalist systems of Britain and the United States. Likewise, if a Muslim seeks to live in a non-Islamic ambience, his desire to live a Muslim life will be hard to realize.

This is due to the fact that the laws he considers defective, the taxes he considers wrong, the matters he considers illegitimate, the culture he considers ridden with immorality, the education system he considers horrible will be imposed upon him and his family, and he will not find a way out.

Thus a person or a group who believes in a value system is forced by the logic of its truth to seek its establishment in place of the opposing value system. If he does not become part of the effort to change the situation, he will prove himself to be false in his faith. “May God forgive you (Prophet)! Why did you grant them permission to stay behind before you had come to know who were speaking the truth and who were the liars? Those who believe in God and the Last Day will not ask you to exempt them from striving with their wealth and with their persons. God has full knowledge as to who are the God-fearing. Only those who do not truly believe in God and the Last Day ask for exemption. Their hearts are filled with doubt, and so do they waver.” (9: 43-45)

In the preceding words the Qur’ān gives a clear verdict that an Islamic party must strive to make its value system reign supreme for that is the only touchstone to validate its sincerity. Should it accept the supremacy of the opposite value system, the falsity of its claim starts to unravel itself. That such a group will eventually lose even its alleged faith in Islam is only natural, though this happens in phases. It starts with the tacit acceptance of the reigning value system as a compulsive situation which is hard to change followed by an imperceptible shift of feeling from discomfort to ease with a non-Islamic situation. So much so that you will become part of the auxiliary forces supporting the system. You will give your wealth and your life in the cause of sustaining the reigning value system and opposing the call of Islam.

At this point, there will hardly remain any difference between you and the unbelievers other than some hypocritical claims to belief in Islam. In a ĥadīth, the Prophet clearly describes the consequence of such a state: “By Him who holds my soul in His hand, you will either call for goodness [to the people] and restrain them from evil and hold the hand of the evildoer and turn him toward the truth by force or God’s natural law will move to its inexorable result: the evildoers will affect your hearts as well and like them you will become the accursed ones.”

The discussion so far should clarify the point that Islamic jihād seeks to replace the dominance of non-Islamic systems. This revolution is not territorial but international, though as a starter the members of the Muslim party, wherever they live, should focus on that place. Their eventual goal should, however, be a world revolution for the simple reason that any revolutionary ideology, which is humanity specific and seeking universal welfare, cannot reduce itself to a particular state or nation. It is innate in its nature to embrace the whole world, for the truth refuses to be confined to geography. For it, truth is indivisible: if it is truth on one side of a river, it is the same truth on the other side as well. No segment of humanity should be barred of its compassion. Wherever humans are oppressed, it must come to their rescue. Such is the dictate of its message. The Qur’ān says the same:

“And why should you not fight in the cause of God and the utterly helpless men, women and children who are crying, ‘Our Lord! Deliver us from this land whose people are oppressors, and send forth to us, out of Your grace, a protector, and send us one that will help us.’“ (4: 75)

Besides, split as the peoples are into national confines, human relations are universal by their nature. In fact, no state can live up to its ideological moorings if neighbouring states do not share its vision of humanity. For the spread of the Muslim party’s mission of improving the human situation, it is thus inevitable that the Islamic system should rise above the parochial outlook and embrace the universal. On the one hand, it should seek a global reach for its message inviting everyone to its fold for a better life. On the other hand, depending on its power resource, it should force non-Islamic governments to clean their stables or face the cleansing sweep of Islamic governance.

This was the policy that the Prophet [peace be upon him] and his successors followed. Arabia, the birthplace of the Muslim party, was Islamized first, and this was followed by extending the Islamic call to neighbouring states. It was only when they refused to accept the call and set on a direct course of opposing it that military action was taken against them. The Tabūk Expedition was the beginning of this policy. After the Prophet, his successor Abū Bakr engaged the non-Islamic empires of Rome and Persia. `Umar concluded the conquest. At first, the Egyptians and Syrians took the new event in history as an extension of Arabian imperialism. Looking for its parallel in the past, they thought that like previous nations which annexed other lands to enslave their populations, it wanted to tread the same path. For this very reason the Egyptians and Syrians came out to fight the Muslims under the banners of Caesar and Kisrā. But when they came to know the revolutionary message of the Muslim party they could not believe it: the Muslims were not the bearers of an aggressive nationalism; they were above national interests and had come to deliver them from the inhuman yoke of their tyrant rulers. Those who were exploited thus felt themselves inclined toward the Muslim party and thus began a process of disenchantment in Caesar’s and Kisra’s camps. Where they were forced to fight the Muslims, they fought without any real zest, paving the way for those spectacular strings of victories in the early period of Muslim history. This is also because once the Islamic system was introduced and people saw it functioning they willingly joined the cadres of this international Muslim party and embraced its cause to facilitate its spread elsewhere.

In the light of this exposition of the nature of Islam, the role of jihād and its importance, as well as the way of life Islam seeks to implement and its strategy of jihād and what it involves of progressive stages we can now consider the Battle of Badr and its importance. This was a battle which God describes as the Day of Distinction. We can also look at this sūrah, al Anfāl, which comments on this battle.

As stated earlier, the Battle of Badr was not the first action of Islamic jihād. Prior to it, a number of expeditions were sent out, but fighting took place during only one of these, involving the small company led by `Abdullāh ibn Jaĥsh, 17 months after the Prophet’s migration to Madinah. All of these were in line with the fundamental principle underlying the concept of Islamic jihād, which I have fully discussed in this Prologue. They were all, it is true, directed against the Quraysh which drove the Prophet and his noble companions away from their homes, violating the sanctity of the Inviolable House of worship that was rightly observed under Islam and prior to its advent. But this was not the basis upon which the concept of Islamic jihād is founded. The basis is that Islam wants to liberate all mankind from servitude to any creature, so that they may serve only the Creator. It wants to establish Godhead as belonging to God alone, and remove all tyrannical authority that enslaves human beings. The Quraysh was the immediate tyrannical power which prevented people in Arabia from turning to the worship of God alone and acknowledging only His sovereignty. Hence, in line with its overall strategy, Islam had no option but to fight this tyrannical power. This had the added advantage of removing the injustice suffered by the noble companions of the Prophet in Makkah, and ensuring the security of the Muslim homeland in Madinah against any possible aggression.

However, when we state these immediate or local causes, we must not lose sight of the nature of Islam and its strategy that allows no power to usurp God’s sovereignty, bringing people into servitude to anyone other than God.

We need to give a brief outline of the events of the Battle of Badr5 before discussing this sūrah which comments on it. This will enable us to appreciate the general atmosphere prevailing at the time of its revelation, understand the meaning of its text, its practicality both in dealing with events and in explaining them.

Qur’ānic statements cannot be properly understood on the basis of their linguistic import alone. Their proper understanding requires, first and foremost, that we try to live in their historical atmosphere, appreciate their practical and positive approach to events and circumstances. Although their significance stretches well beyond the historical reality they deal with, Qur’ānic statements do not reveal the full extent of their significance except in the light of such historical reality. Thus, they will continue to have their permanent significance and inspiration for those who work for the implementation of Islam, facing situations and circumstances that are not unlike those faced by the early Muslims. The Qur’ān will never reveal its secrets to those who passively deal with its statements on the basis of their linguistic import alone.

Muĥammad ibn Isĥāq6 reports:

Intelligence was brought to the Prophet (peace be upon him) that a large trade caravan, in which almost every household in the Quraysh had a share, was returning from Syria, led by Abū Sufyān ibn Ĥarb, and travelling with 30

or 40 men from the Quraysh. He suggested to his Companions: “Here is a caravan of the Quraysh, with much of their wealth. If you intercept it, God may reward you with it.” People began to get ready, while others did not. No one thought that the Prophet would have to fight a battle.

In Zād al-Ma`ād and in Imtā` al-Asmā` it is mentioned that the Prophet only ordered those whose mounts were ready to move immediately to march, without giving too much importance to numbers. Ibn al-Qayyim states:

The total number of Muslims to take part in Badr was 317 men, 86 of them were from the Muhājirīn, 61 from the Aws and 170 from the Khazraj. The number of the Aws people was much less than the Khazraj, despite the fact that the Aws were the stronger fighters and more steadfast, because their quarters were further away from the city, and the call to get ready came as a surprise.

The Prophet said that he wanted only those who were ready to move, and had their mounts available. Some people who lived in the outskirts requested him to wait until they got their mounts, but he refused. Indeed, there was no intention to fight a battle, and no preparations were taken for such an eventuality, but God caused them to meet their enemy when they were totally unprepared.7

As Abū Sufyān drew near the Hijaz, he tried to obtain intelligence, seeking information from any traveller he met on his way. He was worried for the safety of people’s property he carried with him. Some travellers told him that Muĥammad had mobilized his followers to intercept his caravan. Abū Sufyān hired Damdam ibn `Amr al Ghifārī, sending him to Makkah to alert its people to the need to defend their property and to tell them that Muĥammad and his Companions were about to intercept the caravan. Damdam moved very fast towards Makkah. Al-Maqrīzī reports:

The people of Makkah were alarmed to hear Damdam shouting: “People of the Quraysh! Descendants of Lu’ayy ibn Ghālib! A tragedy! A disaster! Your property with Abū Sufyān is being intercepted by Muĥammad and his Companions. I doubt whether you can save the caravan. Help! Help!” To indicate the gravity of his message Damdam cut his camel’s ears, and tore his own shirt. The Quraysh immediately started to mobilize all their resources, getting ready in three days, and in only two days according to some reports.

The strong among them helped those who were weak. Suhayl ibn `Amr, Zam`ah ibn al-Aswad, Tu`aymah ibn `Adiy, Ĥanżalah ibn Abī Sufyān and `Amr ibn Abī Sufyān were all urging people to join the Quraysh army. Suhayl said to his people: “Are you going to allow Muĥammad and the apostates from Yathrib to confiscate your property and caravan? Whoever needs money or power, he may have these.” Umayyah ibn Abī al- Şalt praised him in a short poem.

Nawfal ibn Mu`āwiyah al-Dīlī spoke to a number of rich people urging them to make financial contributions so as to provide mounts for people to join the army, who did not have their own. ‘Abdullāh ibn Abī Rabī`ah gave him 500

Dinar [a gold currency] to spend in the way he wished in strengthening the army. He also received 200 Dinars from Ĥuwayţib ibn `Abd al-`Uzzā, and a further 300 Dinars to buy arms and mounts. Tu`aymah ibn `Adiy provided 20

camels and undertook to look after the fighters’ families. Anyone who did not wish to join the army in person sent someone in his place. They spoke to Abū Lahab, but he refused to join or send anyone in his place, but it is also reported that he sent in his place al-`Āşī ibn Hishām ibn al-Mughīrah, who owed money to him, saying to him that he would write off his debt if he went in his place, which he did.

`Addās,8 a Christian slave, tried hard to dissuade his masters, `Utbah and Shaybah, sons of Rabī`ah, as well as al-`Āş ibn Munabbih from joining.

Umayyah ibn Khalaf, on the other hand, decided not to join the army, but `Uqbah ibn Abī Mu`ayţ and Abū Jahl rebuked him severely. He said to them:

“Buy me the best camel in this valley.” They bought him a camel for 300

Dirhams [a silver currency], but it was part of the spoils of war taken by the Muslims.

None was less enthusiastic to go than al-Ĥārith ibn `Āmir. Đamđam ibn `Amr had seen the valley of Makkah with blood running from both of its two ends.

`Ātikah bint `Abd al-Muţţalib, the Prophet’s aunt, had seen in her dream, warning of death and blood in every home. Hence, people known for sound judgement were disinclined to march for war. They began to exchange views.

Among those unwilling to go were al-Ĥārith ibn `Āmir, Umayyah ibn Khalaf, `Utbah ibn Rabī`ah, Shaybah ibn Rabī`ah, Ĥakīm ibn Ĥizām, Abū al-Bakhtarī ibn Hishām, `Alī ibn Umayyah ibn Khalaf, and al-`Āş ibn Munabbih, but Abū Jahl rebuked them all, aided in this task by `Uqbah ibn Abī Mu`ayţ and al- Nađr ibn al-Ĥārith ibn Kildah. Thus the Quraysh settled for marching to meet the Muslims.

The Quraysh army left in a festive mood, with singers and music playing, and feeding themselves well. Their army was 950 men strong, with 100 horses mounted by 100 heavily armoured soldiers, and a large number of body armour for those who were walking. They had 700 camels. They were most aptly described in the Qur’ān: “Do not be like those who left their homes full of self-conceit, seeking to be seen and praised by others. They debar others from the path of God; but God has knowledge of all that they do.” (Verse 47)

As they marched, they were nursing great hatred against the Prophet and his Companions because of their intention to intercept their trade caravan. The Muslims had earlier killed `Amr ibn al-Hađramī and took the small caravan he was leading.9 Abū Sufyān was leading the caravan accompanied by 70

men,10 among whom were Makhramah ibn Nawfal and `Amr ibn al-`Āş. The caravan had no less than 1000 camels, loaded with merchandise. When they were near to Madinah, they were extremely alarmed, particularly because they felt that Damdam ibn `Amr and the help from the Quraysh were slow in coming. As Abū Sufyān arrived in Badr at the head of the caravan, he was worried lest he should be detected. Therefore, he changed route and took his caravan closer to the sea, leaving Badr to his left and marching with speed.

Meanwhile, the Quraysh army was marching at leisure, feeding anyone who caught up with them and slaughtering many camels for food. Then Qays ibn Imri’ al-Qays came to them with a message from Abū Sufyān advising them to go back “so that you do not leave yourselves liable to be killed by the people of Yathrib [i.e. the old name of Madinah]. You have only marched to protect your trade caravan and your property. Now that it is safe by God’s help, you have no further purpose.” He tried to persuade the Quraysh to go back, but they refused. Abū Jahl said: “We will not go back, but we shall march on to Badr, where we shall stay for three days to celebrate. We shall slaughter camels for food, feed whoever cares to come to us, drink wine in abundance and be entertained by singers and dancers. The whole of Arabia shall hear about us and hold us in awe for the rest of time.”11

Qays went back to Abū Sufyān and told him that the Quraysh army marched on.

He said: “Woe to my people! This is all the work of `Amr ibn Hishām [i.e. Abū Jahl].

He does not want to go back because he assumed leadership and went too far. Excess spells a bad omen. If Muĥammad gets the upper hand, we will be humiliated.”12

Muĥammad ibn Isĥāq reports:

Al-Akhnas ibn Sharīq, who was an ally of the Zuhrah clan, said to his people:

“God has saved your property and spared your tribesman, Makhramah ibn Nawfal. You have mobilized to save him and his property. Put the blame on me if you are accused of cowardice, and let us go back. There is no need for you to go on a fighting course for nothing. Do not listen to what this man [meaning Abū Jahl] says.” They accepted his advice and went back home.

Not a single man from Zuhrah took part in the Battle of Badr. The rest of the Quraysh clans succumbed to the pressure and had some of their men participating, except for the clan of `Adiy ibn Ka`b. Moreover, Ţālib ibn Abī Ţālib was with the Quraysh army, but some people said to him: “We know you, the Hāshimites, well. Even though you may come with us, your sympathy is with Muĥammad.” Therefore, he went back home without continuing with the marchers.

Meanwhile, the Prophet marched with his Companions in the month of Ramađān. They had only 70 camels which they rode in turns. The Prophet, `Alī ibn Abī Ţālib and Marthad al-Ghanawī shared one camel. Ĥamzah ibn `Abd al-Muţţalib, Zayd ibn Ĥārithah, and the two servants of the Prophet, Abū Kabshah and Anasah had one camel to share, while Abū Bakr, `Umar and `Abd al-Raĥmān ibn `Awf shared another.13

In Imtā` al-Asmā`, al-Maqrīzī reports:

The Prophet marched on until he approached Badr when he received intelligence of the march of the Quraysh army. He consulted his Companions.

Abū Bakr was the first to speak, and his words were reassuring to the Prophet. `Umar was next, and he spoke in the same vein, before adding:

“Messenger of God! It is indeed the Quraysh defending its honour. They have never been humiliated since they achieved their present honourable position, and they have never believed ever since they sunk into disbelief. By God, they would never compromise their position of honour and they will most certainly fight you. Hence, you had better be prepared.” Al-Miqdād ibn `Amr, the next to speak, said: “Messenger of God! Go ahead and do whatever you feel is best. We will never say to you as the Israelites said to Moses: `Go with your Lord and fight the enemy while we stay behind!’ What we will say is: `Go with your Lord and fight the enemy and we will fight alongside you.’ By Him who has sent you with the message of truth, if you ask us to march with you to Bark al-Ghimād [a remote place in Yemen] we will fight with you anyone who stands in your way until you have got there.” The Prophet thanked him and prayed for him.

But the Prophet continued to say to his Companions: “Give me your advice.” He particularly wanted to hear from the Anşār, because he felt they might think that they were only bound to defend him against those who attacked him in Madinah when they pledged to protect him as they protected their women and children.14 Sa`d ibn Mu`ādh stood up and said: “I will answer for the Anşār. You seem to want to know our opinion, Messenger of God?” When the Prophet indicated that it was so, Sa`d said: “It seems to me that you might have set out for a certain objective and then you received revelations concerning something different! We have declared our faith in you and accepted your message as the message of truth. We have made firm pledges to you that we will always do as you tell us. Go ahead, therefore, Messenger of God, and do whatever you wish, and we go with you. By Him who has sent you with the message of truth, if you take us right to the sea, we will ride with you. None of us shall stay behind. Make peace with whomever you will and cut relations with whomever you will, and take from our wealth and property what you may. Whatever you take is better placed than what you leave. By Him who holds my soul in His hand, I have never come this way, and I do not know it. Yet we have no qualms about encountering our enemy tomorrow. We fight hard and with strong determination when war breaks out. We pray to God to enable us to show you what would please you. You march, then with God’s blessings.” Another report mentions that Sa ‘d said to the Prophet: “We have left behind some of our people who love and obey you as much as we do; but they did not turn up because they thought it was only the trade caravan. Shall we erect for you a shed to stay in, and we will have your mount ready? We will then fight our enemy. If we win by God’s grace, then that is what we want. If it is the other eventuality, then you will ride your horse to join the rest of our people.” The Prophet said some kind words to him and added: “Or God may will something better.” The Prophet then said to his Companions: “March on, with God’s blessings.

God has promised me one of the two hosts. By God, it is as if I can see the place where some of them will be killed.” As they heard these words, the Prophet’s Companions realized that they would be involved in a battle, and that the trade caravan would manage to escape. As they heard the Prophet’s words, they hoped for victory. The Prophet assigned banners to three people, one he gave to Muş`ab ibn `Umayr, and two black ones were given to `Alī and a man from the Anşār, [said to be Sa ‘d ibn Mu`ādh]. He put out the weapons. When the Prophet left Madinah, he had no banner holder.

The Prophet arrived at the bottom of the Badr plain on Friday night, 17

Ramađān. He later sent `Alī, al-Zubayr, Sa ‘d ibn Abī Waqqāş and Basbas ibn `Amr to gather intelligence around water wells. He pointed out a knoll and said: “You may get some news there.” They found there a number of camels for carrying water, belonging to the Quraysh. Most of the men with the camels fled. One of them called `Ujayr shouted to the Quraysh: “Your man [meaning the Prophet] has taken your water carriers. This sent an air of disturbance among them. Rain was pouring over them. That night, they took with them Abū Yasār, a slave belonging to `Ubaydah ibn Sa`īd ibn al-‘Āş, Aslam who belonged to Munabbih ibn al-Hajjāj and Abū Rāfi` who belonged to Umayyah ibn Khalaf. All three were brought to the Prophet when he was praying. They declared that they were responsible for fetching water to the Quraysh, but the Prophet’s Companions disliked that and beat them. So, they said that they were travelling with Abū Sufyān and his caravan. So they left them and waited. As the Prophet finished his prayer, he said to his Companions: “If they tell you the truth, you beat them; and if they lie, you leave them alone!” He then asked the captives about the Quraysh, and they told him that they were beyond the hill, and that they slaughtered nine or ten camels every day for food, and named some of those who were in the army.

The Prophet said: “The host is between 900 and 1,000 strong. Makkah has sent you its dearest children.” The Prophet consulted his Companions about the place to encamp. Al-Ĥubāb ibn al-Mundhir ibn al-Jamūĥ said: “Take us forward, right to the nearest well to the enemy. I know this place and its wells. One of its wells is plentiful in fine water, where we can encamp, make a basin and throw in our containers.

We will thus have water to drink when we fight. We will also close the rest of the wells.” The Prophet said to him: “You have given good counsel.”15 He rose and marched on to encamp at the well indicated by al-Ĥubāb.

The Prophet spent that night, Friday 17 Ramađān, praying with his face turned towards the stem of a felled tree. There was a rainfall, but it was light where the Muslims were, making the ground firm but not difficult to walk on, but the rain was much heavier where the Quraysh were, although the two hosts were not far apart. Indeed the rain was a blessing for the believers and a real adversity for the unbelievers. That night the Muslims experienced deep slumber, so much so that a man might have his head on his chest and not feel it until he fell to one side. A young man, Rifā`ah ibn Rāfi` ibn Mālik had a wet dream and managed to bathe before the night was out. The Prophet sent `Ammār ibn Yāsir and `Abdullāh ibn Mas`ūd to go around the place where the Quraysh encamped. When they came back, they told him that the unbelievers were in fear and it was pouring with rain.

A shed was erected for the Prophet near the well, and Sa`d ibn Mu`ādh stood at the door with his sword in his hand. The Prophet went around the area where the battle was to take place, and pointed out certain places to his Companions, saying this person will be killed here and that person will be killed there. None of the ones he named was killed beyond the place the Prophet indicated. The Prophet marshalled his Companions and went back to the shed with Abū Bakr.16

Ibn Isĥāq reports:

The Quraysh marched on in the morning to draw near to the Muslims. When the Prophet saw them coming into the valley, he said: “My Lord, this is the Quraysh demonstrating all its conceit to contend against You and call Your Messenger a liar. My Lord, grant me the victory You have promised me. My Lord, destroy them today.” The Prophet saw `Utbah ibn Rabī`ah riding a red camel, and said: “If any of these people has some wisdom, it is the man with the red camel. If they obey him, they will follow good counsel.” Khufāf ibn Aymā’ ibn Raĥđah al-Ghifārī, or his father, sent to the Quraysh some slaughtered animals he had prepared for them as a gift as they passed close to his quarters. He also sent them a message that he was ready to support them with men and arms. They sent him a message of thanks, and added: “You have done more than your duty. If we are fighting men like us, we are more than a match for them, but if we are fighting God, as Muĥammad says, then no one can stand up to God.” When the Quraysh encamped, some of their men, including Ĥakīm ibn Ĥizām, came up to the Prophet’s basin and the Prophet ordered his Companions to let them do what they wanted. Every one of them who drank from the basin was killed in Badr, except for Ĥakīm ibn Ĥizām who later became a good Muslim. Subsequently, if he wished to swear very firmly, he would say: “By Him who saved me on Badr day.” When the Quraysh had encamped, they sent `Umayr ibn Wahb of Jumaĥ to make a good guess at the number of Muslim troops. He went around the troops on his horse before returning to his people to say: “They are three hundred, give or take a few. But hold on a while and I will see if they have any hidden support.” He went far into the valley, but found nothing. He came back with this report: “I have found no hidden support, but I can see a catastrophe and much killing. They simply have no protection apart from their swords. I think that we will not kill any one of them without him killing one of us first. Should they be able to kill their number from our side, life would not be worth living. You make your own decision.” When Ĥakīm ibn Ĥizām heard that, he went to `Utbah ibn Rabī`ah and said to him: “You are the honourable man of the Quraysh and its obeyed master.

Shall I tell you something which would bring you high praise for the rest of time?” When `Utbah showed his interest, Ĥakīm said: “Tell the Quraysh to go back and you will pay the indemnity for the death of Ibn al-Ĥadramī, for he was your ally. You also bear the loss of his looted caravan.” Recognizing the great advantages of this course of action `Utbah immediately accepted and asked Ĥakīm to act as his witness. He also said to him: “Go to Ibn alĤanżaliyyah [meaning Abū Jahl], because I fear that he is the only one to oppose that.” `Utbah then stood up and addressed the Quraysh, saying: “Take it from me and do not fight this man [meaning the Prophet] and his Companions. You will gain nothing by fighting them. Should you win, many a man among us will look around and see the killer of his father or brother. This will lead to much enmity and hostility in our ranks. Go back and leave Muĥammad to the rest of the Arabs. If they kill him, they will have done what you want. If they do not, you will meet him without having such barrier of enmity.” Ĥakīm reports: “I went up to Abū Jahl and I found him preparing a spear. I said to him: ‘Abū al-Ĥakam’, `Utbah has sent me with this message to you.’ And I told him what `Utbah said. He said: `His cowardice has surfaced now that he has seen Muĥammad and his Companions. We shall not go back until God has judged between our two parties. `Utbah does not believe what he says. It is simply that having seen that they are few in number and that his son is among them, he fears that his son may be killed.” Abū Jahl also sent a message to `Āmir ibn al-Ĥađramī, saying: “Your ally is trying to take the people back now that you have the chance to get your revenge. Stand up and appeal to the Quraysh by your brother’s blood to get your revenge.” `Āmir did that and shouted, `Woe to `Amr’. Thus, the air was one of war, and people were more determined to fight. Abū Jahl frustrated the good counsel `Utbah had given. When `Utbah was told what Abū Jahl had said, he answered: “This woman-like person will soon know whose cowardice has surfaced: mine or his.” As the army moved, one of its number, al-Aswad ibn `Abd al-Asad of the Makhzūm clan, a vulgar ill-bred man, sprang out from the ranks, saying: “I pledge to God to drink from their reservoir, or I will pull it down, or I will die in my attempt.” Ĥamzah ibn `Abd al-Muţţalib, the Prophet’s uncle struck him with his sword, chopping off his leg. Al-Aswad, however, continued to crawl towards the reservoir and Ĥamzah followed him until he killed him at the reservoir.

`Utbah ibn Rabī`ah, his brother Shaybah and his son al-Walīd came out of the Quraysh army and offered a six-man duel. Three young men from the Anşār, `Awf ibn al-Ĥārith and his brother Mu`awwadh and a third man said to be `Abdullāh ibn Rawāĥah, answered the challenge. The challengers asked them who they were, and when they told them that they were from the Anşār, they said that they had no business with them. It is said that `Utbah said to them:

“You are honourable equals, but we only want some of our own people.” One of them shouted: “Muĥammad, let our equals come out for a duel.” The Prophet sent out three of his own relatives: Ĥamzah, his uncle, and his two cousins `Alī and `Ubaydah ibn al-Ĥārith. `Ubaydah, the eldest of the three fought `Utbah, Ĥamzah fought Shaybah and ‘Ali fought al-Walīd. In no time, Ĥamzah and ‘All succeeded in killing their two opponents, while `Utbah and `Ubaydah struck each other at the same time. Both fell to the ground wounded. Ĥamzah and `Alī then made sure that `Utbah was killed, and carried `Ubaydah with them to the Prophet.

The two armies began to draw near to each other. The Prophet ordered his companions not to move forward until he had given them the order. “When they approach, try to repel them with your arrows.” He then marshalled them and went to his shed with Abū Bakr. His prayers included: “My Lord, I appeal to you for the fulfilment of Your promise to me. Should this company of believers be overrun, You will not be worshipped again on earth.” Abū Bakr said to him: “Messenger of God! Not so hard with your appeal to Your Lord. He will surely grant you what He has promised you.”17

Al-Maqrīzī mentions in Imtā` al-Asmā`:

Abdullāh ibn Rawāĥah said to the Prophet: “Messenger of God! I counsel you — knowing that God’s Messenger is far greater and more knowledgeable than to need counsel — that God is too great in His majesty to be appealed to for the fulfilment of His promise.” The Prophet said to him: “Should I not appeal to God to fulfil His promise? God never fails to fulfil a promise.”18

Ibn Isĥāq continues:

The Prophet was momentarily overtaken by sleep. When he woke up he was markedly cheerful. He said to his companion: “Rejoice, Abū Bakr. Victory is certainly coming from God. This is the Angel Gabriel holding the rein of his horse with dust all over it.” Mahja`, a slave belonging to `Umar ibn al-Khaţţāb, was killed when he was hit by an arrow, and thus he was the first casualty among the Muslims.

Ĥārithah ibn Surāqah, from the Najjār clan was also hit in his neck by an arrow as he was drinking from the reservoir, and he died.

The Prophet went on encouraging his Companions, saying: “By Him who holds Muĥammad’s soul in His hand, anyone who is killed fighting these people, dedicating his life for the cause of God, moving forward not backward, shall be admitted by God into heaven.” On hearing this, `Umayr ibn al-Ĥamām from the Salamah clan, said as he held a few dates in his hand and was eating them: “Well, Well! All that separates me from heaven is that these people should kill me!” `Awf ibn al-Ĥārith asked the Prophet: “What would make God smile at a servant of His?” The Prophet said: “His determined fight without protection.” He took off his body armour and threw it away, picking up his sword and fighting until he was killed.

As the two armies drew closer, Abū Jahl said: “Lord! Let the side which severs relations of kinship, and invents falsehood, be destroyed today.” His was a prayer to ensure his own ruin.

The Prophet took a handful of dust and said: “Let these faces be hung down.” He then blew the dust at the Quraysh. He then ordered his Companions to fight hard, and they did to ensure the defeat of the Quraysh. God caused the killing and capture of so many of the Quraysh’s nobility.

When the Muslims started to take enemy prisoners, the Prophet, who was in his shed with Sa ‘d ibn Mu`ādh and a group of the Anşār standing at the door, swords in hands, guarding him, the Prophet noticed that Sa`d looked displeased. He said to him: “You do not seem to be pleased with what our people are doing?” He said: “Indeed. This is the first defeat God has inflicted on the idolaters. I would have preferred killing their men rather than sparing them.” At one point the Prophet said to his Companions: “I have come to know that a few men from the Hāshim clan and others have been made to join the army against their will. They have no quarrel with us. Any one of you who meets any Hāshimite should not kill him. If you come across Abū al-Bakhtarī ibn Hishām, do not kill him. If you meet al- `Abbās ibn `Abd al-Muţţalib, do not kill him. He came out against his will.” Abū Ĥudhayfah ibn `Utbah ibn Rabī`ah said on hearing this: “Are we to kill our fathers, sons, brothers and tribesmen and let al-`Abbās alone? By God, if I see him, I will certainly hit him with my sword.” The Prophet said to `Umar ibn al-Khaţţāb: “Abū Ĥafş19

Is God’s Messenger’s uncle to be hit with the sword in his face?” `Umar said:

“Messenger of God! Allow me to kill him, for he is a hypocrite.”20 Abū Ĥudhayfah used to say afterwards: “I am always worried about what I said that day, and fear that it may condemn me, unless it is atoned if I gain martyrdom.” He was to die a martyr in the Battle of al-Yamāmah.

The Prophet singled out Abū al-Bakhtarī ibn Hishām, ordering that he should not be killed, because he was the most moderate among the Quraysh in his attitude towards the Prophet. Never did he try to harm the Prophet, or say something against him. Besides, he was one of the five men who successfully mounted the campaign to end the three-year boycott of the Prophet’s clan by the rest of the Quraysh.21

`Abd al-Raĥmān ibn `Awf reports: “Umayyah ibn Khalaf was a friend of mine when we were in Makkah. My name at the time was `Abd `Amr, but when I became a Muslim, I changed my name to `Abd al-Raĥmān. He said to me once when we were still in Makkah: `Abd `Amr! Do you reject a name given to you by your father?’ I confirmed that. He said: `I do not know who is al-Raĥmān. Let us agree on a name I call you by, so that you do not reply to me if I call you by your original name and I do not call you by what I do not know.’ Afterwards, if he called me `Abd `Amr, I would not reply. Then I said to him: ‘Abū `Alī, you choose whatever you are comfortable with.’ He said: `I will call you `Abd al-Ilāh [another name of God].’ I agreed. After that, when I passed by him, he would call me `Abd al-Ilāh, and I would respond and have some conversation with him.

On the Day of Badr, I passed by him as he was standing with his son `Alī, holding his hand. I was carrying some body armour which I had looted.

When he saw me, he called me `Abd `Amr, and I did not respond. He called me again `Abd al-Ilāh and I responded. He said: `Would you rather have me, for I am a better gain for you than this body armour.’ I agreed and told him to come with me, and threw the body armour away. I took him and his son prisoners and walked away. He said: `I have never seen a day like this! Do you not need milk?’22 I proceeded leading them away.

Umayyah asked me as I walked between him and his son, holding both their hands: ` `Abd al-Ilāh, who is the man in your host who has an ostrich feather on his chest?’ I told him that he was Ĥamzah ibn `Abd al-Muţţalib. He said:

`He is the one who has done us a great deal of harm.’ Then, as I was leading them away, Bilāl saw him with me. It was Umayyah who used to torture Bill in Makkah to force him to abandon Islam. He would take him out to the sandy area when it was extremely hot, and cause him to lie back on the sand, and place a large rock on his chest, telling him that he would remain so until he abandoned Muĥammad’s faith. Bilāl’s reply was always: `He is One! He is One!’ Now, when Bilāl saw him, he shouted: `Umayyah, head of idolatry, may I perish if he survives!’ I said to him: `Bilāl! Would you kill my two prisoners?’ He said: `May I perish if he survives.’ I said: `Do you hear me, you son of a black woman!’ He repeated his words. Bilāl appealed to the Anşār:

`Supporters of God’s cause! Here is Umayyah, head of idolatry. May I perish if he survives.’ A group of the Anşār surrounded us forming a circle and I was trying to defend him, but one of the men struck Umayyah’s son’s leg and he fell down. Umayyah uttered a loud cry, the like of which I never heard before. I said to him: `Try to escape, but there seems to be no escape for you.

By God, I cannot defend you.’ They soon killed both of them.” `Abd al- Raĥmān used to say afterwards: `May God forgive Bilāl! I lost my loot and he killed my two prisoners.’23

Ibn Isĥāq later adds:

When the battle was over, the Prophet instructed some people to look for Abū Jahl among the dead. The first man to meet Abū Jahl in the battle was Mu`ādh ibn `Amr ibn al-Jamūĥ of the Salamah clan. He reports: “I noticed a group of men standing around him like a siege, saying to one another: ‘Abū al-Ĥakam24 shall not be reached.’ When I heard them saying that, I resolved to get to him. I made a determined attack towards him and when he was within my reach I struck him with my sword once, which was enough to send half his leg high into the air, as a date stone flies from underneath the date-stone crusher. His son, `Ikrimah, struck back at me and cut off my arm, which remained attached to my body by a thin piece of my skin. I was prevented by the raging battle from coming back on him. I, however, kept on fighting for the rest of the day, pulling my arm behind me. When it became too troublesome I bent down and put my hand under my foot and stood up to cut off my arm.” As Abū Jahl was wounded, Mu`awwadh ibn al-Ĥārith passed by him and hit him hard until he could not get up. He then left him, not quite dead.

Mu`awwadh went on fighting until he was killed.

When the Prophet ordered a search for Abū Jahl among the dead, `Abdullāh ibn Mas‘ūd found him. The Prophet had told his Companions: `If you cannot identify him among the dead, look for a cut on his knee. When we were young, he and I pushed each other when we were attending a banquet held by `Abdullāh ibn Jud`ān. I was a little thinner than him. When I pushed him, he fell on his knees, badly injuring one of them.’ `Abdullāh ibn Mas`ūd reports: “I found him at his last breath. When I recognized him, I put my foot over his neck. Once in Makkah he had attacked and hurt me. Now I said to him: `You enemy of God, haven’t you been humiliated?’ He said: `How? Am I not a man of merit you have killed? Tell me, who is victorious today?’ I said:

`God and His Messenger.” Some people from Abū Jahl’s clan of Makhzūm later claimed that Ibn Mas`ūd mentioned that Abū Jahl said to him as he put his foot over his neck: `You have climbed high, you little shepherd.’25

`Abdullāh ibn Mas`ūd continues his report: “I chopped off his head and took it to the Prophet and said: `Messenger of God! This is the head of Abū Jahl, God’s enemy.’ He said: `God is One. There is no deity other than Him.’ I put his head before the Prophet and he praised God.”26

Ibn Hishām says:

It is reported that `Umar ibn al-Khaţţāb said to Sa`īd ibn al-`Āş when he passed by him: `I see that you harbour some feelings and that you may think that I killed your father. Had I killed him, I would not apologize to you; but I killed my uncle al-`Āş ibn Hishām ibn al-Mughīrah. As for your father, I passed by him as he was searching like a bull with his horns and I sidestepped him. His cousin `Alī went to him and killed him.’27

Ibn Isĥāq reports on the authority of `Ā’ishah, the Prophet’s wife:

When the Prophet ordered that the killed be buried, they were all buried in one grave except for Umayyah ibn Khalaf, whose body swelled inside his armour. When they tried to remove it, his flesh was cut. So, they left it on him and buried him. When they were all buried, the Prophet stood at the grave and said to them: `People in the grave! Have you found out that what your Lord has promised you to be true? I have found that His promise to me has come true.’ Some of his Companions asked him: `Messenger of God! Do you speak to dead people?’ He said: `They have known that what God has promised is true.’ Some people mention that he said, `They hear what I say to them.’ But the Prophet only said, `They have known.”‘...

When the Prophet ordered that they should be buried, the body of `Utbah ibn Rabī`ah was drawn towards the grave. The Prophet looked at his son Abū Ĥudhayfah and saw that he was sad. He asked him: “Abū Ĥudhayfah! You may be experiencing some misgivings concerning what happened to your father.” He said: “No, Messenger of God. I have no doubt about my father and his death. But I knew him to be a sagacious and honourable man and I hoped that this would guide him to accept Islam. When I saw what happened to him and remembered that he died an unbeliever, I felt sad.” The Prophet prayed for Abū Ĥudhayfah and said some kind words...

The Prophet then ordered that all the booty picked up by the Muslims be collected together. As it was collected, people differed concerning it. Those who picked up the booty claimed it, while those who were fighting and chasing the enemy said to them: “Had it not been for us, you would not have picked it up. We kept the people preoccupied while you took it away.” A third group providing a guard to the Prophet said: “You do not have a claim stronger than ours. We had the booty close to us, and we could have picked it up, but we feared that the enemy would attack the Prophet and kept guarding him.” Asked about Sūrah al-Anfāl, or The Spoils of War, `Ubādah ibn al-Şāmit answered: “It was revealed concerning us, the people of Badr, when we disputed about the booty and were impolite about it. God removed it from us and gave it up to His Messenger who divided it equally among the Muslims.”...

When the Prophet arrived in Madinah, he assigned the prisoners to various groups of his Companions and said to them: “Look after the prisoners well.” Among the prisoners was Abū `Azīz ibn `Umayr ibn Hāshim. He reports that his brother, Muş`ab passed by him as he was being taken captive by a man from the Anşār. Muş`ab said to the Anşārī man: “Hold tight to him. His mother is rich and she might give a good ransom for him.” Abū `Azīz says: “I was assigned to a group of the Anşār. When they laid out their lunch or dinner, they would give me the bread while they themselves ate dates without bread.28 This was because of the Prophet’s instructions to them.

Every time any one of them had a piece of bread he would give it to me.

Sometimes I felt embarrassed by their hospitality and I gave the bread to any one of them who was around. He would return it without taking a single bite.” Ibn Hishām explains: Abū `Azīz was the holder of the banner of the unbelievers in Badr, next to al-Nađr ibn al-Ĥārith. When his brother Muş`ab ibn `Umayr said this to Abū al-Yusr, the man who held him captive took hold of him tightly, whilst Alma `Azīz remonstrated with him: “Is this what you recommend about me?” Muş`ab said: “He is my brother, ahead of you.” His mother asked what the highest ransom paid for a man from the Quraysh was, and she was told that it was 4000 dirhams. She sent that amount as his ransom. Then the Quraysh sent ransom for other prisoners.29

It was in comment on the Battle of Badr, of which we have given a brief outline, that this sūrah was revealed. It portrays the obvious events of this battle, and also shows the ultimate power behind the events and how God determined the sequence of events. Beyond that, it shows the line followed throughout human history. It describes all this in the unique language of the Qur’ān and its inimitable style. We will speak about all these in detail as we discuss the text. Here we will only highlight the main lines of the sūrah.

A particular event reported by Ibn Isĥāq on the authority of `Ubādah ibn al-Şāmit, the Prophet’s Companion who says in reference to this sūrah: “It was revealed concerning us, the people of Badr, when we disputed about the booty and were impolite about it. God removed it from us and gave it up to His Messenger who divided it equally among the Muslims.” This event sheds ample light on the opening of the sūrah and the line it takes. The Prophet’s Companions disputed over the little booty they gained in a battle that God considered a landmark in human history for the rest of time. But God wanted to teach them, and all humanity in succeeding generations, some highly important facts.

The first thing He wanted them to understand was that this battle was far more important than the spoils of war over which they were in dispute. Therefore, He called the day that witnessed it “the day when the true was distinguished from the false, the day when the two hosts met in battle.” (Verse 41)

He also wanted them to know that this greatly important event was accomplished by God’s will and planning, in every step and every move. He had a purpose which He wished to accomplish. This means that they had nothing to do with the planning and accomplishment of this great victory or with its outcome and consequences. Both its small booty and great consequences were the result of God’s will and design. He only put the believers, by His grace, through a fair test of His own making.

He wanted to show them the great gulf between what they wished for themselves, which was to take the caravan, and what He wanted for them, and for all humanity, through the escape of the caravan and the encounter with the Quraysh army.

The sūrah starts with recording their questions about the spoils of war, and explains God’s ruling concerning them. It gives the spoils of war to God and His Messenger, calling on the believers to remain God-fearing and set to right their internal relations, after they were impolite concerning the booty, as `Ubādah ibn alŞāmit, the Prophet’s Companion describes. They are further called upon to obey God and His Messenger, reminding them of their faith which requires them to be so obedient. Furthermore, right at the outset, the sūrah paints a highly inspiring and awesome picture of the believers: “They ask you about the spoils of war. Say: The spoils of war belong to God and the Messenger. So, have fear of God and set to right your internal relations. Obey God and His Messenger, if you are true believers. True believers are only those whose hearts are filled with awe whenever God is mentioned, and whose faith is strengthened whenever His revelations are recited to them. In their Lord do they place their trust. They attend regularly to their prayers and spend on others some of what We have provided them with. It is those who are truly believers. They shall be given high ranks with their Lord, and forgiveness of sins and generous provisions.” (Verses 1-4)

This is followed by a reminder of what they wished and hoped for themselves and what God wanted for them. It describes what they see of what is happening on earth and God’s unlimited power beyond them and the events they see. (Verses 5-8)

This is followed by a further reminder of the support God had given them, the victory He facilitated for them, and the reward He has, by His grace, set for them.

(Verses 9-14)

Thus the sūrah proceeds, recording that the whole battle was fought by God’s will and under His direction, with His help and support. It is all by His will, and for His sake and to serve His cause. Thus, the fighters have no claim to the spoils of war, as they belong to God and His Messenger. Thus, when God gives them back the spoils of war, this becomes an act of His grace. They must be purged of any desire to gain such booty, so that their jihād and struggle is undertaken purely for God’s sake.

(Verses 17-18, 26, 41-44)

Since every battle believers fight is of God’s own planning, under His command and for His cause, the sūrah mentions time and again the need to remain steadfast, prepare well for it remembering that God’s support is certain to come, guard against the lure that keeps believers away from it, including property and offspring. They have to observe all values related to it, and guard against any element of showing off. The Prophet is ordered to encourage the believers to fight it. (Verses 15-16, 24, 27- 28, 45-47, 60, 65)

While orders are given to remain steadfast and stand firm in battle, the sūrah provides clarifications of different aspects of the Islamic faith, strengthening its roots, making it the source of every commandment and every judgement. Thus, orders are not left as individual and unrelated items; they are seen to be stemming from the same clear, consistent and profound source.

1. On the question of the spoils of war, the believers are reminded of the need to remain God-fearing, to feel their hearts filled with awe when He is mentioned, and of the close and permanent manifestation of faith by obedience to God and His Messenger: “They ask you about the spoils of war. Say: The spoils of war belong to God and the Messenger. So, have fear of God and set to right your internal relations. Obey God and His Messenger, if you are true believers. True believers are only those whose hearts are filled with awe whenever God is mentioned, and whose faith is strengthened whenever His revelations are recited to them. In their Lord do they place their trust. They attend regularly to their prayers and spend on others some of what We have provided them with. It is those who are truly believers. They shall be given high ranks with their Lord, and forgiveness of sins and generous provisions.” (Verses 1-4)

2. On the battle strategy, they are reminded of God’s will, power and planning.

It is He who intervened to direct every stage: “[Remember the day] when you were at the near end of the valley and they were at the farthest end, with the caravan down below you. If you had made prior arrangements to meet there, you would have differed on the exact timing and location. But it was all brought about so that God might accomplish something He willed to be done.” (Verse 42)

3. On the events and results of the battle, they are reminded of God’s leadership, help and support: “It was not you who slew them, but it was God who slew them.

When you threw [a handful of dust], it was not your act, but God’s, so that He might put the believers through a fair test of His own making.” (Verse 17)

4. When the order is given to the believers to remain steadfast, they are reminded of the fact that God wants them to have a true and worthy life, and that He is able to stand between a man and his heart. It is He who guarantees victory to those who place their trust in Him alone: “Believers, respond to the call of God and the Messenger when he calls you to that which will give you life, and know that God comes in between a man and his heart, and that to Him you shall all be gathered.” (Verse 24) “Believers, when you meet an enemy force, be firm, and remember God often, so that you may be successful.” (Verse 45)

5. Defining the ultimate objective of the battle, God commands: “Fight them until there is no more oppression, and all submission is made to God alone.” (Verse 39) “It does not behove a Prophet to have captives unless he has battled strenuously in the land.” (Verse 67) “God promised you that one of the two hosts would fall to you. It was your wish that the one which was not powerful to be yours, but it was God’s will to establish the truth in accordance with His words and to wipe out the unbelievers.

Thus He would certainly establish the truth firmly and show falsehood to be false, however hateful this might be to the evildoers.” (Verses 7-8)

6. On the organization of the Muslim community’s international relations, faith is seen as the basis of the community and its distinctive character. It is faith values that determine position and loyalty. (Verses 72-75)

In this sūrah, the line that is seen to be clearly prominent, side by side with the line of faith, is that of jihād. It is given its high value both in concept and in strategy. It is also purged of all personal elements. Its essential justification is clarified so that it is well understood by all those who fight for God’s cause at any time. They reiterate this justification with confidence, reassurance and pride. Overall, the sūrah gives this impression, but we may refer to some verses that are particularly relevant and will elaborate upon it when we discuss them. These are verses 15-16, 55-57, 60, 65, 67, 74.

The sūrah also sets the Muslim community’s international relations on the basis of faith, as we have already stated. It outlines the rules that form the basis of such relations with other communities in times of war and peace, up to the time when this sūrah was revealed. It details rulings on the distribution of the spoils of war; and also on international treaties, providing fundamental principles that govern all these areas. (Verses 1, 15-16, 20-21, 24, 27, 38-39, 41, 45-47, 55-62, 64-71, 72-75)

Such are the main lines of the sūrah. When we remember that it was revealed to comment on the Battle of Badr, we can appreciate some aspects of the method the Qur’ān follows in the education of the Muslim community, preparing it for the leadership of humanity. We can also recognize how Islam looks at what happens on earth and in human life, in order to give Muslims the right perception.

Badr was the first major battle when the Muslims inflicted a very heavy defeat on their idolater enemies. But the Muslims did not leave their homes for this purpose or with this intention. They only marched to intercept a trade caravan belonging to the Quraysh, the tribe that confiscated all their homes and property. They wanted to regain some of their losses, but God wanted something else. He wanted the caravan to escape and the Muslims to meet in battle their most hardened enemies who were able to place Islam under siege in Makkah. They further plotted to kill God’s Messenger [peace be upon him] after they had mounted an uncompromising campaign of persecution against his companions.

God willed that this battle would be the criterion that separates the truth from falsehood, and that it be a landmark in the line of Islamic history and, consequently in human history. He willed that this battle should show the great gulf between what people may plan for themselves, believing it to serve their best interests, and what God chooses for them, even though they may think little of it at first sight. He wanted the emerging Muslim community to properly learn the factors that bring victory and those that bring defeat, receiving these directly in the battlefield, from none other than God, their Lord and protector.

The sūrah includes highly inspiring directives pointing to these highly important issues, as well as much of the rules that govern states of peace and war, captives and booty, treaties and pacts, and what ensures victory or defeat. All these are given in the most enlightening and instructive style of the Qur’ān which begins by expounding the faith and its main concepts, making it the prime mover in all human activity. This is characteristic of the Qur’ānic method of looking at events and evaluating them.

The sūrah also portrays scenes of the battles and images of thoughts and feelings before, during and after the battle. These scenes and images are so vivid and lifelike that they enable the reader and the listener to interact with them.

At times, the sūrah gives glimpses of the life the Prophet and his companions lived in Makkah, when they were few in number, weak, fearing that others may do away with them. Now when they remember what their life was like then, they will realize the extent of God’s grace in giving them this great victory. They know that they can only achieve victory with God’s help, and by following the faith they preferred to their own life and property. The sūrah also portrays some images of the life of the unbelievers before and after the Prophet’s migration to Madinah, as well as images of the doom suffered by earlier unbelievers such as Pharaoh and his people. These are given in order to establish the law that never fails, which gives victory to believers and defeat to God’s enemies.

The second half of the sūrah mirrors the first, beginning with a definitive ruling on the sharing out of the spoils of war, coupled with a call to believe in God and His revelations. It expounds on God’s planning in this battle that gave the Muslims such spoils of war, portraying images of what actually took place in the battle. We clearly see that the believers were only a means through which God accomplished His purpose. Believers are then urged to always remain steadfast when they meet their enemy in battle, remembering to glorify God, obey Him and His Messenger, and steer away from internal conflict, lest they weaken and be defeated. They must also guard against showing off and against being deceived by Satan’s wicked schemes.

They must always place their full trust in God who alone can bring them victory. It tells them of the rule God has established in punishing unbelievers for their sins.

In the first half, the sūrah mentioned how the angels were ordered to support the believers and strike the unbelievers’ necks and hands. Here in the second half, we see them striking the unbelievers on their faces and backs. The description of the unbelievers as the worst of all animals which occurs in the first half is repeated in the second in the context of their violation of every treaty or promise they make. This leads to the rules defined by God for the conduct of international relations by the Muslim community, both with those who take a hostile attitude and those who wish to live in peace with it. Some of these rules are provisional and some final.

Up to this point, the nature and sequence of issues discussed in the second half of the sūrah mirror the first half, with some more details on rules governing relations with other communities. As the sūrah draws to its close, it adds certain issues and rules to complete the picture. God reminds His Messenger and the believers of His favour of bringing about unity of their hearts, which could not have been accomplished except through God’s will and grace. The Prophet and the believers are also reassured that God will protect them. God then commands His messenger to encourage his followers to fight, making it clear that, with their faith and if they remain steadfast, they are a good match to a force of unbelievers ten times their number, because the unbelievers are devoid of understanding, since they do not believe. When they are at their weakest, the believers are equal to twice their number, provided they remain steadfast. God is sure to support those who are steadfast in the defence of His cause.

God then takes issue with the believers because of their taking ransom from their prisoners of war, in return for their release, when the Muslims had not yet fought hard to irretrievably weaken their enemy and establish their own authority. Thus the policy of the Islamic movement in different stages and conditions is established and shown to be flexible, looking at every stage and what responses are suitable for it.

The sūrah tells the believers how to treat prisoners of war, and how to present the Islamic faith to them in a fair manner to encourage them to embrace it. God makes it clear to the prisoners of war that to resort to treachery again is futile. It was God who gave the believers mastery over them when they played false to Him by refusing to believe in Him and His Messenger. Should they try to play false to the Prophet, God will most certainly hand them over to him.

The final passage in the sūrah organizes internal relations within the Muslim community, and its relations with groups that embrace Islam but remain away from the land of Islam. It also regulates relations between the Muslim community and unbelievers in certain cases, and in general. These rules clearly show the nature of the Muslim community and the Islamic approach to its relations with others. It is absolutely manifest that Islam will always exist in a positive, forward- looking and proactive community. All the rules governing its internal and external relations are based on this fact. It is simply not possible to separate the faith and the law from the positive, proactive approach and the sound structure of the Muslim community.