Author: Vinod Kumar
Publication: KashmirHerald.com
Date: November 2002
URL: http://www.kashmirherald.com/featuredarticle/islamandprisonersofwar.html
Islamic website http://www.everymuslim.com
quoting Sheikh Muhammad Abu Zahra, from
his book Concept of War in Islam;
writes "Islam advocates clemency with captives. History has never known
warriors so merciful to their captives as the early Muslims who followed
the teachings of their religion. Numerous religious texts demand clemency
with captives."
It goes on to say the Koran offers
only two alternatives regarding the captives - free dismissal or ransoming
- without referring to enslavement.
(Ref: http://members.tripod.com/maseeh1/advices7/id227.htm)0
The official website of Middle East
Media Research Institute, http://www.memri.org, recently posted a summary
of an article from another website, probably run by Chechens. This article
has different views on the issue of treatment of prisoners under Islam.
(Ref: http://memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD43402)
The article under reference is titled
"A Guide to the Perplexed Regarding the Permissibility of Killing Prisoners,"
which appeared in the column "Jihad News from the Land of the Caucasus".
In this the author suggests that the Islamic religious scholars present
five different alternatives, drawn from the various interpretations of
the Koran:
1) A polytheist prisoner must be
killed. No amnesty may be granted to him, nor can he be ransomed.
2) All infidel polytheists and
the People of the Book (i.e., Jews and Christians) are to be killed. They
may not be granted amnesty, nor can they be ransomed.
3) Amnesty and ransom are the only
two ways to deal with prisoners.
4) Amnesty and ransom are possible
only after the killing of a large number of prisoners.
5) The Imam, or someone acting
on his behalf, can choose between killing, amnesty, ransom or enslaving
the prisoner.
The above two are diagonally opposite
views of Islam about the treatment of prisoners.
How is one to arrive at a rational
opinion regarding what Islam really says on this issue?
The best way, I believe is to look
into what Islamic scriptures have to say. Of course, the most authentic
source of Islam is the Koran itself and after the Koran it is the recorded
traditions of the Prophet known as the Hadis. Of all the four most well
known traditions, the one compiled by Imam Bukhari is deemed to be most
authentic.
On the question of taking prisoners
and freeing them with ransom, Sahih Al-Bukhari records
"It is not fitting for a prophet
that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until
he has made a great slaughter (among his enemies). You desire the good
of this world (money or ransom) but Allah desires (for you) the hereafter,
and Allah is All- mighty, All-Wise." (Sahih Al- Bukhari, vol. 4, pp. 161)
This is claimed to be as Statement
of Allah.
What should be done with the warriors
of the defeated people?
When the tribe of Bani Koreiza was
defeated, they were ready to accept S'ad's judgement. So the Prophet sent
for S'ad who was near to him. S'ad came and sat next to the Prophet who
said to him, "These people are ready to accept your judgement." S'ad issued
his judgement that the their warriors should be killed and their children
and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O,
S'ad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgement of
the King (Allah)." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, vol. 4, pp. 176)
It is worthwhile to note that the
Prophet did not intervene to say that the prisoners should be freed but
commended S'ad's judgement as "similar to judgement of the King (Allah)."
As a consequence all the seven or
eight hundred men of the Jewish tribe were put to death in one day and
the women and children sold into slavery and the spoils divided among the
army. The same day her husband and all her male relatives were killed,
the Prophet invited Reihana, the Jew to be his wife; an offer she declined,
and chose to remain his slave or concubine. (The Life of Mahomet by Sir
William Muir)
Many commentators claim Islam prohibits
killing of women and children. While there is a hadith where the Prophet
prohibits killing of women and children (Sahih Al-Bukhari, vol. 4, pp.
160) but there is also a Hadith that says a raid on the enemy should not
be abandoned just because it might endanger the lives of women and children.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 4, pp. 158-159)
Thus the incidental killing of women
and children has the sanction in the traditions of the Prophet. In the
aftermath of 9/11, the oft repeated contention that killing of women and
children is not allowed in Islam is not true.
It is not surprising that some Muslims
conquerors have followed the practice of killing the prisoners and defeated
combatants. To give one example: Hajjaj, the governor of Irak asked Muhammad
bin Kasim to lead an expedition on Sind in 712 CE. Chach-nama - historical
account of Sind -- records "after the conquest was effected, and the affairs
were settled and the report of conquest had reached Hajjaj, he (Hajjaj)
sent a reply to the following effect:
"O my cousin; I received your life
inspiring letter. I was much pleased and overjoyed when it reached me.
The events were recounted in an excellent and beautiful style, and I learnt
that the ways and rules you follow are comfortable to the Law. Except that
you give protection to all, great and small alike, and make no difference
between enemy and friend. God says, -- Give no quarter to Infidels, but
cut their throats. Then, know this is the command of the great God….."
(The History of India as told by its own Historians by Elliott and Dowson,
vol. 1)
Beside this the Muslim conquest
of India is full of Hindu prisoners being made slaves and sold in the markets
of Ghazni and beyond, forced to convert to Islam at the point of sword
and killed for refusing to do so. Timur Lang's killing of 100,000 Hindu
prisoners in one day is unparallel in history.
Yes, there were times when the Prophet
spared the lives of the prisoners but generally it was on one of the two
conditions - either they converted to Islam or accepted the status of dhimmies
and paid the jiziya. Muslim conquerors of India have followed this practice
also.
In its posting, www.memri.org summarizes
the article saying the author prefers the position that "the Prophet Muhammad
had dealt with the prisoners in different ways to maximize the benefits
to Muslims."
The position that "the Koran offers
only two alternatives regarding the captives - free dismissal or ransoming
- without referring to enslavement" does not have much basis. The underlying
message that one gathers is whatever is good for the Muslims and serves
the interests of Islam is valid.
