Chapter 1

Jihad and Combat in Islamic Political Thought: A Ph.D. dissertation on Jihad in the early Islamic period, Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh), and the modern era. Volume I. Authored by Dr. Muhammad Khayr Haykal, Professor of Fiqh of the Qur'an and Sunnah and Comparative Family Law at Omdurman Islamic University (Damascus Branch), Department of Postgraduate Studies. Distributed by Dar Ibn Hazm and Dar Al-Bayariq. ¶

Introduction ¶

A brief overview of the history of wars before Islam and their motivations ¶

Introduction: A brief overview of the history of wars before Islam and their motivations ¶

- Depictions of wars during centuries of peace. - Depictions of wars during centuries of conflict. - Raids by nomadic tribes on the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia. - Ancient Egypt up to the Islamic conquest. - The Assyrian Empire. - Greece, Alexander the Great, and his conquests. - The post-Alexander era, the rise of the Roman Empire, and its conquests. - The Kingdom of Persia and its conflict with the Roman Empire. - The Arabian Peninsula and an outline of its military history. ¶

Causes of wars before Islam: - Basic and essential livelihood needs. - Greed and the desire for accumulation. - Deterrence and intimidation (terrorism). - Retaliation and revenge. - Aiding the oppressed who cry for help. - Washing away the insult to a guest with blood. - Zeal for honor and chastity. - Acquiring bondwomen for the sake of ostentation and humiliating others. - Imposing control over others by force. - Some Jahili (pre-Islamic) concepts that incited combat. ¶

- Attaining material benefits and securing cheap labor by enslaving the defeated. - Disagreement over religion, whether out of mere fanaticism or for the purpose of calling to the truth. - Struggle for power. - Struggle over strategically important territories. - Suppressing revolts within the country and in remote provinces. - Interference in the internal affairs of other states. - Global domination. - Differences in lifestyle. - Establishing unity within the nation and state, and eliminating factors of fragmentation. - Liberating the country from foreign occupation. - Greed for inheriting states (succession). - Restoring balance with adversaries. - Protecting the country's external interests. - Violation of treaties between states. - Coercion to join alliances. - Entrapping allied states in a way that forces them to violate treaties, using this as a pretext to declare war against them. - Fear of the adversary's future power, and striking them before they become strong (preventive war). - Eliminating separatist movements and usurpers of power in the peripheries of the land. - Clearing the 'internal house'; i.e., purging the country of elements of discord and corruption, or those coveting power. - Proxy war. ¶

Introduction: A brief glimpse into the history of wars before Islam and their motivations. It is a matter of historical necessity and consensus among historians and students of history that history is essentially a record of conflicts and wars between states, nations, and peoples. Its pages are soaked in blood, and its fields are strewn with body parts; we can hardly find an era in which humanity laid down its arms. Even what is termed in history as 'centuries of peace' was labeled as such by those who meant, firstly, that these centuries were specific to a particular historical state and did not apply to other states of the world; and secondly, that it is considered a period of peace in a special sense—that is, a decrease in the volume of the external activities of that state beyond its borders and a reduction in its internal civil wars. But do this decrease and reduction mean the absence of war and the establishment of peace? ¶

Instances of war during centuries of peace: For example, during the first 'century of peace' (1) of the 'Roman Empire,' which began in 30 BC, the armies of this empire launched an invasion, overran southern Britain, annexed it, and made it one of its provinces (2). This invasion and annexation did not affect the naming of this century as a century of peace. This concerns external activity. As for internal activity, during this same century of peace, the Roman Emperor 'Gaius' persisted in seduction, debauchery, contempt for the rights of the people, and disregard for human dignity, until it reached the point where he appointed his horse as a consul of 'Rome'—that is, one of its rulers. Consequently, in view of its new position, the Emperor would invite this horse to his banquets and feed it. ¶

(1) Ancient Times: 573 by Dr. James Henry Breasted - translated into Arabic by Dawood Qurban. (2) Ancient Times: 587. ¶

He would consume the finest foods and drink wine from golden goblets. The Caesar began to squander the state's wealth on illicit acts and immorality, spreading oppression and murder, which drove the people to revolt against him and assassinate him, thereby relieving the country and its people from him (1). ¶

In this 'era of peace' also appeared the famous Nero in 'Rome,' who transgressed and acted with arrogance. The shedding of blood became trivial to him, and spreading corruption and destruction became one of his pleasures! Illustrative of his disregard for life, he killed his teacher, his chief minister, his wife, and ordered the killing of his mother! Among his acts of corruption and ruin was his setting fire to Rome, which lasted for a full week, while he amused himself with the sight of the mad flames consuming people and stone, playing a melody on a musical instrument he called 'The Destruction of Troy.' He did not stop there, but went further by accusing the Christians of starting the fire, proceeding to arrest many of them and subjecting them to the worst forms of torture (2). ¶

Scenes of Warfare in the Centuries of Conflict: ¶

If this was the state of the 'centuries of peace' in the history of the Roman Empire, what, then, would be the state in the centuries of war and combat? ¶

This introduction does not have the space to discuss the history of wars, nor is that one of the primary purposes of this treatise. Therefore, we will briefly outline the most important features of this martial history from the annals of general history, from the beginning of what is called the 'historical era' to the Islamic era. Historians have determined, roughly, that the historical era began between four thousand and three thousand years before Christ (3), as the people of these epochs left behind monuments, carvings, chronicles, and writings that indicate aspects of their life in both peace and war. ¶

Raids of Nomadic Tribes on the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia: ¶

Historians have mentioned that the first permanent settlement of man at the beginning of historical times was in... ¶

The Nile Valley in Egypt, and the land between the two rivers—the Tigris and the Euphrates—in the Jazeera region, were the most suitable places in the world for settlement. ¶

A group of people settled in these regions and multiplied. Behind them were other groups of people living in the forests of Europe, the deserts of the Arabs, and the seasonal grazing lands of Central Asia. They relied on climatic conditions across different seasons, migrating from one place to another; these were the primitive nomadic peoples. ¶

These nomads would raid the settled populations in the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia, driven by existential necessity to seize food reserves and whatever they could acquire through these raids of plunder and pillage, including the food and goods they needed. ¶

Initially, these raids were not intended for occupation or settlement in the targeted lands, due to the large number of their settled enemies and the sophisticated metallic weaponry they possessed—which the nomads lacked. Thus, they would raid, loot, and then retreat to the places where they lived. ¶

However, over time, these nomadic peoples managed to obtain advanced weaponry, and their leaders were able to bring massive groups of their own people under their control. Their raids subsequently transformed into warfare for the purpose of conquest and settlement. The inhabitants of the land became slaves to the new masters from among the primitive nomadic leaders, who began to adopt a settled life, learning from those they had conquered the arts and methods of their lifestyle. Then, other nomadic groups would arrive to practice upon them the same role they had played against their predecessors, and so on. ¶

This is the general picture of the history of the founders of ancient human civilizations in relation to the primitive nomadic peoples neighboring them. ¶

The most famous of these civilizations were established in Egypt, Mesopotamia, the so-called Fertile Crescent, and Persia. Then, they moved to the Aegean world, Greece, and eventually the Roman lands. Furthermore, civilizations emerged to the east of Persia, whose signs appeared around two thousand years BCE in India and China (1). ¶

All these civilizations were targets for the raids of nomadic peoples, as we have previously mentioned. Later, the influence of these civilizations grew stronger, their borders, interests, and ambitions expanded, and friction between them became inevitable. Thus, wars between these civilizations became a new front in armed conflict, in addition to the old front of their struggle against the nomadic peoples who raided them from time to time. ¶

Ancient Egypt until the Islamic Conquest: Here is Egypt, in the middle of the 28th century BCE. Its ambitions extended beyond its borders, launching its warships to traverse the waves of the Mediterranean Sea, heading towards the Phoenician coasts on the eastern shore of this sea. The military expedition would return after completing its mission. Some of the images carved on the walls of Egyptian temples recorded aspects of this Egyptian invasion of the Phoenician coast. One such image depicts an Egyptian fleet consisting of eight warships returning from its military campaign, carrying Phoenician captives from their lands to Egypt (2). ¶

Moreover, ancient Egypt was able, through its expansionist wars, to extend its kingdom as far south as Nubia. To this day, the fortresses built by one of the Pharaohs remain there to repel the Nubian tribes from his lands. An inscription on one of the rocks states that it is not permissible for slaves to cross to the north without permission. The owner of this inscription then says: 'I am the King, I do what I say, and my successor who maintains this border is not my son. I have erected this statue of mine on the boundaries I have set, not for worship, but so that you may fight for its sake' (3). ¶

In the north, Egypt, during the era of Thutmose III in the fifteenth century BC, was able to defeat the Syrian princes allied against him in the Battle of Megiddo near Haifa. He then annexed, through warfare, central and northern Syria and crossed the Euphrates into Iraq. ¶

In the Mediterranean Sea, his authority extended through his warships to the Aegean Sea, and one of his commanders became the ruler of the Aegean islands (1). ¶

At the same time, Egypt was also subject to external invasions from time to time, which plundered its wealth; invaders even attacked it in its own home. ¶

The Hyksos ('Shepherd Kings') invaded it and occupied about four centuries of its history, until the Egyptian Pharaoh 'Ahmose' came, expelled the shepherds, and utterly destroyed them (2). ¶

Then the 'Hittites' waged war on Egypt and seized 'Syria', which had been under its sovereignty. In the middle of the twelfth century BC, the Egyptian army was defeated by the Hittites. It happened that the daughter of Akhenaten and wife of Tutankhamun, after the death of her father and then her husband, feared that the throne would be lost to her family, so she tried to keep it within the family. She wrote to the 'Emperor of the Hittites' to marry one of his sons; excavations have revealed the remnants of this correspondence, but her wish was not fulfilled (3)! ¶

Then Egypt fell under an attack by an army coming from Nubia, and Nubian sovereignty lasted throughout the reign of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty (4). ¶

It was then occupied by the Assyrian Empire (5). It later fell under Persian occupation in the sixth century BC, then gained freedom for sixty years, after which the Greek occupation came at the hands of Alexander the Great in 332 BC. The 'Ptolemies', successors of Alexander, came to rule Egypt (6), until it was invaded by the Roman Caesar 'Octavian' during the reign of the last one. ¶

The Ptolemaic dynasty and Cleopatra arrived, and 'Egypt' was annexed to the Roman Empire, becoming one of its provinces in 30 BCE. Then came the Islamic conquest to cleanse the land of 'Egypt' from Roman rule. Thus, we see that 'Egypt,' the first great state in ancient history, was a militaristic state that would emerge from one war only to enter another; its history is merely a paradigm of the history of the civilizations and states contemporary to it. ¶

The Assyrian Empire: This is its peer in ancient history, the second great state, which is the 'Assyrian Empire,' whose capital was 'Nineveh' in the land of Assyria, between the two rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates. It was also a militaristic state, emerging from one war only to enter another. From the inception of these Assyrians, around 3000 BCE, they began engaging in constant wars with the Hittites, the Akkadians, and the Mitanni, and they allied with the Egyptians against the Babylonians in order to establish their existence and found their state. Once this state gained strength and secured the foundations for expansion and conquest, it launched into its expansionist wars, subjugating Syria and gradually annexing it to its provinces. The Phoenician cities fell under its control, and its armies reached the borders of 'Egypt' under the leadership of 'Sennacherib.' Although the Assyrian army failed to take Egypt in this campaign, it renewed the attempt during the reign of King 'Ashurbanipal,' conquered it, and the Delta remained under Assyrian rule for a period of time. ¶

Greece, Alexander the Great, and his conquests: It was in this same vein that wars were fought between the city-states of ancient Greece, until Alexander the Great, a student of Aristotle, emerged. He utilized war to bring Greece under his authority, then launched his expansionist campaigns which included Asia Minor, then under Persian rule, followed by the Phoenician coast, Egypt, and then he turned toward the Persian lands, which he swept through. He continued eastward until he reached India, and proceeded southward until he reached the Indian Ocean (1). He subsequently turned back after sensing his army's inability to continue their long journeys. Al-Tabari mentions here that Alexander conquered India, China, and Tibet, and entered the 'land of darkness' near the North Pole (2)! ¶

Post-Alexander, the rise of the Roman Empire, and its conquests: Wars erupted between the successors of Alexander, whose empire split after his death into three kingdoms: the Kingdom of Macedonia in Europe, the Kingdom of Asia, and the Kingdom of Egypt (3)... until the Roman Empire arose and grew strong. It began its expansionist wars, leading to the conflicts between 'Rome' and 'Carthage' for one hundred and twenty years, until the horrific struggle ended with the destruction of 'Carthage' in 146 BCE. The domains of 'Carthage' were annexed to 'Rome' under the name of the Province of Africa (4). ¶

'Rome' launched its expansionist wars and seized the three kingdoms that had been held by Alexander’s successors (5). ¶

The Persian Empire and its conflict with the Roman Empire: It happened that a military leader from the lineage of 'Sasan' arose in Persia named 'Ardashir bin Babak,' demanding vengeance for the blood of his cousin 'Dara' or 'Darius,' who was killed during Alexander’s war against Persia (6). ¶

"He was—as it is said—intent on restoring the kingdom to its rightful owners and to the state that existed during the time of his ancestors and forebears who preceded the 'muluk al-tawa'if' (petty kings), aiming to unite it under one leader and one monarch." (1) This Ardashir clashed with the kings of the many cities and regions, whom al-Tabari calls 'muluk al-tawa'if'. He engaged them in continuous wars for the sake of national unity, thereby unifying Persia under his authority. After him, his son Shapur (2) rose to power and began his expansionist wars, seizing many Roman territories. ¶

The Holy Qur'an mentions a facet of the bloody conflict that took place between Persia and Rome in the words of the Almighty: "Alif-Lam-Mim. The Romans have been defeated. In the nearest land. But they, after their defeat, will overcome. Within several years. To Allah belongs the command before and after." (3) These blessed verses point to two of the wars that erupted between these two great powers. ¶

The first war occurred before the migration of the Muslims to Medina, in which Persia defeated the Romans. The Persians seized al-Ruha, Aleppo, Armenia, Asia Minor, Antioch, Caesarea, Damascus, and Jerusalem; nothing remained with Heraclius, the Caesar of Rome, except Constantinople. Nine years later, the second war took place, in which the Romans defeated the Persians, coinciding with the time of the Battle of Badr or, as some say, the year of Hudaybiyya. ¶

Heraclius returned, led the Roman armies, entered Persian territory, killed its men, occupied Ctesiphon (al-Mada'in), and reclaimed Asia Minor, Armenia, and Azerbaijan in 623–624 CE; he then seized the Caucasus and the Tigris Valley (4). ¶

These are glimpses of the wars that raged between the great powers of the ancient world before the era of Islam. Were the small nations and states, therefore, far from the scourges of war? ¶

The Arabian Peninsula and a portion of its military history: ¶

History tells us that from approximately 2000 BCE, various small kingdoms arose in the Arabian Peninsula, stretching from the south to the north. These kingdoms would sometimes expand, sometimes contract, sometimes remain independent, and at other times fall under the influence of others. Among these were the Kingdom of the Minaeans in the south, followed by the Kingdom of Saba, and then the Kingdom of Himyar. ¶

To the north were the Kingdom of Al-Jawf, the Kingdom of Tayma, the Nabataean Kingdom, the Kingdom of Palmyra, and the Ghassanid Kingdom; while in the northeast was the Lakhmid Kingdom. ¶

The history of these kingdoms was not devoid of wars, raids, and the calamities and disasters that accompanied or followed them. The Holy Quran refers to one of the kings of Himyar, who—if the report by Ibn Hisham is correct—was the Jewish 'Dhu Nuwas,' who died in 525 CE. He invaded 'Najran,' whose inhabitants were Christians, and compelled them to abandon their religion for Judaism, otherwise, they faced only death. He dug trenches for them, set them ablaze, and exterminated twenty thousand people of Najran, either by burning them in the fire or putting them to the sword. Regarding Dhu Nuwas and his soldiers, Allah the Almighty revealed to His Messenger (PBUH) the verses in Surah Al-Buruj: 'Cursed were the companions of the trench, containing the fire full of fuel, when they were sitting near it, and they were witnesses to what they were doing to the believers. And they resented them not except because they believed in Allah, the Exalted in Might, the Praiseworthy.' ¶

Later, the Christian Kingdom of Abyssinia invaded Yemen at the incitement of Byzantium, led by the Abyssinian commander 'Aryat' accompanied by 'Abraha.' The Holy Quran informs us about the invasion of Makkah by 'Abraha,' the failure of this expedition, and the destruction of the invading army in Surah Al-Fil: 'Have you not considered, [O Muhammad], how your Lord dealt with the companions of the elephant? Did He not make their plan into misguidance? And He sent against them birds in flocks, striking them with stones of hard clay, and He made them like eaten straw.' ¶

In the north, wars never ceased between the Ghassanids, agents of the Byzantines, and the Lakhmids (al-Manadhira), agents of the Persians in Al-Hirah and the surrounding lands of Iraq(1). ¶

This is in addition to the raids and skirmishes that occurred between Arab tribes or between the internal factions of a single tribe, in the heart of the Arabian Peninsula, which are known in history as the 'Days of the Arabs' (Ayyam al-Arab). To understand the nature of these raids and wars in the pre-Islamic era (Jahiliyyah), it suffices to know that Abu al-Faraj al-Isfahani wrote a book about the 'Days of the Arabs' that contains 1,700 such days(2). ¶

In conclusion: ¶

It was in this manner, as described above, that the local and international situation stood before Islam. The fires of war were raging on both fronts; their heat did not wane, nor was their blaze extinguished, with blood being shed for no noble purpose or lofty value. ¶

The Causes of War Before Islam: ¶

For what purpose were those wars, both great and small, fought, and what were the reasons that drove them? ¶

This is what we will discuss in these final lines of the introduction. ¶

We do not intend here to address the deep-seated causes known as the 'generators of collective aggressive spirit'(3), which grow within various structures—demographic, economic, geographical, historical, and psychological(4). For these deep causes are still being addressed by studies and research in a newly established field known as 'Polemology' (the science of war)(5). Indeed, we do not intend to cover those distant causes that remain subject to ongoing study. ¶

and researches. However, we intend here only the apparent, tangible causes, and the real causes that sometimes lie behind them—causes for which the apparent ones serve as a spark or a veil behind which they hide. We mention below the causes that have appeared to us as the impetus for those ancient wars, through our examination of many Arab history books, as well as translated foreign ones. ¶

1 - Basic Subsistence Needs: Under this cause, we categorize the raids of nomadic peoples when nature would restrict the means of life in their deserts. They would raid settled civilizations in their fertile and productive lands, whether with the intent of obtaining their needs through plunder and pillage, or with the intent of permanent settlement—as previously mentioned. ¶

Also in this category are many of the raids by Arab tribes in their deserts during times of fertility, when some tribes would reach a lush pasture and abundant water first, thereby acquiring livestock that tempted their rivals. They would thus become targets for raids to strip them of what they possessed and displace them from where they had arrived. A Jahili poet expressed the enmities arising between tribes due to this by saying: 'A people who, when spring grows vegetation for them, their enmity grows with the greenery.'(1) ¶

2 - Greed and Accumulation: This occurs when the attackers are not driven to fight others by need or hunger, but rather by greed and the desire to accumulate wealth and possessions. This is like many of the wars of 'Egypt' in the north and south to acquire wealth. History mentions that the Pharaohs in 'Egypt' gathered vast wealth from Syria and Nubia, with which they built 'Karnak' and massive temples. And that the Pharaohs, in their wars for Syrian lands and their subsequent rule over them, did not care for security or order; rather, their sole concern was the exploitation of their wealth and resources to satisfy their greed. Thus, it was brought from 'Syria' to 'Egypt'. ¶

Herds of sheep and goats, caravans of timber, wheat, wine, oil, and other local and imported goods. ¶

Likewise, when the 'Assyrians' conquered a country, they would destroy it and transport its wealth—sheep, goats, horses, donkeys, and camels laden with gold and silver—to the royal palace in 'Nineveh'. ¶

'Al-Tabari' narrates in his history that 'Khosrow Anushirvan', the King of Persia, coveted the island of 'Sarandib'—south of India, known as the island of Ceylon—because it was a land of jewels. He sent an army there that engaged in fierce combat with its king, the king was killed, and vast wealth and many jewels were subsequently brought to 'Khosrow' from there. ¶

3 - Deterrence and Terror: This occurs when a people initiate war against others simply to demonstrate strength and deter opponents from considering aggression against them. This was the state of affairs in the pre-Islamic era (Jahiliyyah) in the Arabian Peninsula, as the nature of life at that time divided people into two categories: either the oppressor and aggressor, or the oppressed and victim of aggression. This nature of life is expressed by 'Zuhayr ibn Abi Sulma' in his famous poem: 'He who does not defend his trough with his weapons will have it demolished; and he who does not oppress the people will be oppressed.' It is also depicted by the words of 'Al-Nabigha al-Dhubyani': 'Wolves prey upon the one who has no dogs (protectors), yet they fear the assault of the ferocious lion.' ¶

4 - Vengeance and Retaliation: This occurs when an individual from one group commits an aggression against someone from another group, and they may belong to different tribes. ¶

Or [the conflict occurs between] two sub-tribes of a single tribe, and the family of the slain refuses to accept blood money (diyah), or even to take retribution (qisas) from the killer alone; instead, they wage war on the killer’s group with the intent of annihilating them or inflicting heavy casualties upon them. ¶

A woman expresses this cause of wars by dissuading her kin from accepting camels as blood money for their slain, inciting them to kill instead by saying: 'Beware, do not take milk (camels), but rather make your people (the enemy) taste the edge of the sword.' ¶

This is also expressed by the sister of 'Kulayb bin Wa'il', the leader of Taghlib, who was killed by 'Jassas bin Murrah al-Bakri'. Upon hearing of her brother’s death, she said: 'Woe to the house of Murrah from the assault after the assault!' ¶

Al-Muhalhil, the brother of the slain Kulayb, depicts his state and the resolution he formed regarding his brother's death by saying: 'It is as if, when the herald announced Kulayb's death, sparks flew between my ribs. I shall not put down my shield and sword until night is stripped from the day, Or until the nobles of Bakr are annihilated, leaving no trace behind them.' ¶

5. Responding to the plea of the oppressed: This cause is manifested in the accounts of the Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic era), which state that the Jews gained dominance over the Aws and Khazraj in Yathrib, oppressed them, and compelled them to pay tribute (kharaj) until their situation became dire. Consequently, their delegation traveled to one of the Ghassanid leaders in Syria, seeking his protection against the Jews. He granted it, traveled with them to Yathrib, fought the Jews, eliminated their leaders, empowered the Aws and Khazraj there, and then returned to Syria. ¶

6. Avenging the Insult of a Guest with Blood: This cause is exemplified by the 'Day of Hatib' among the Ayyam al-Arab (Days of the Arabs). The summary is: Hatib bin Qays, a leader of the Aws tribe, was hosting a guest from the Dhibyan tribe. It happened that the guest went to the market of the Banu Qaynuqa. A man from the Khazraj tribe said to a Jew from the Banu Qaynuqa (who were allies of the Khazraj): 'I will give you my cloak if you kick this Dhibyani.' The Jew took the cloak and kicked the Dhibyani with such force that those in the market heard it. The Dhibyani shouted: 'O Hatib, your guest has been kicked and humiliated!' Hatib arrived and struck the Jew with his sword, splitting his skull. The Khazraji then attacked Hatib the Osi, and a fight ensued. Hatib found a man from the Aws and killed him, and thus war ignited between the Aws and the Khazraj. ¶

7. Zeal for Honor (Ghuyrah): This cause is represented by one of the days of the 'Fijar Wars' (sacrilegious wars) in the pre-Islamic period of the Arabs. They were called so because they occurred during the Sacred Months, which indicates the gravity of this cause of war for them, as they violated the sanctity of these months. The summary is: Some dissolute youths from the Quraysh and Kinana pressured a woman from the Qays tribe at the Souq Ukaz to uncover her face, but she refused. One of them played a trick; while she was sitting, he tied the edge of her cloak to something behind her. When she stood up, her body became exposed. She cried out: 'O for the sake of Amir!' They set out armed, and fighting broke out between Qays and Kinana during the sacred month. ¶

8. Acquiring Slave Girls for Boasting and Humiliating Others: This cause is represented by the report that Bastam bin Qays, leader of the Banu Shayban, said to his mother, Layla bint al-Ahwas: 'I have provided you with a slave girl from every tribe, and I will not rest until I have provided you with a slave girl from the Banu Dabba'—meaning, through raiding the Banu Dabba and enslaving their women. ¶

9 - The Obligation of Asserting Dominance by Force: This cause is illustrated by the account that Al-Mundhir ibn Ma’ al-Sama, King of Al-Hirah, sent to the tribe of 'Bakr' inviting them to submit to his authority, but they refused. Al-Mundhir swore that he would march against them, and if he defeated them, he would slaughter them on the summit of Mount Awara, so that their blood would reach the bottom of the mountain. He marched against them with his troops, and they met at Awara, where a fierce battle took place. The Bakr tribe was defeated, and Al-Mundhir took many of them prisoner. He ordered them to be slaughtered on Mount Awara, and the blood began to congeal. He was told: 'May you be safe from cursing! Even if you slaughtered every Bakri on the face of the earth, their blood would not reach the bottom, but if you were to pour water over it!' He did so, and the blood flowed to the bottom. ¶

10 - Some Jahili (Pre-Islamic) Concepts Inciting Combat: Such as: 'Support your brother, whether he is an oppressor or oppressed.' This Jahili concept, taken literally, is depicted by their poet who said: 'They do not ask their brother, when he calls upon them in times of calamity, for the proof of what he claims.' Also, making the capacity for oppression and treachery a standard of pride, and considering inability to do so a cause for satire and condemnation. This Jahili concept is depicted by Al-Najashi al-Harithi in his satire of the Banu 'Ajlan: 'A tribe that does not betray a trust, nor do they oppress people by as much as a mustard seed.' Perhaps among the examples of raids that represent treachery and injustice are the accounts from the Ayyam al-'Arab (The Days of the Arabs) which state that... ¶

Amr ibn al-Mundhir had concluded a treaty with the tribe of Tayy, stipulating that they would not dispute, raid, or boast against one another. Later, this 'Amr raided al-Yamamah. Upon his return, he passed by the territory of Tayy. One of his men said to him: 'May Allah preserve you! Take something from this tribe.' Amr replied: 'Woe to you! They have a treaty with us.' The man insisted: 'So what!' He continued to press him until he raided them, capturing women and livestock (1). ¶

11. Obtaining material benefits and cheap labor by enslaving the defeated: It was a common custom among most ancient peoples that when war resulted in a victor and the vanquished, the victor would retain the women and children of the defeated people for service. The victorious masters might force their slave women to sell their bodies to seekers of pleasure for the sake of obtaining profit, considering this a source of wealth that was a right of victory over the enemy. The Holy Quran recorded this mark of shame upon the forehead of Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic ignorance) while prohibiting this sinful act, in the words of the Almighty: "...And do not force your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life..." (2). ¶

As for the strong men of the defeated people, they would become slaves, either for hard labor for their masters or to be leased out to others, exploiting their efforts (3). ¶

12. Difference in religion, whether merely out of prejudice or for the sake of inviting to the Truth: This difference may be the cause of a criminal and sinful war, as in the military campaign led by the Jewish Himyarite King 'Dhu Nuwas' from southern Yemen towards Christian 'Najran', which he drowned in a 'bloodbath' because it refused to abandon its religion and enter 'Judaism'. Consequently, they were subjected to genocide through killing by the sword and burning by fire, as previously described. Difference in religion may also be a cause for fighting in the way of Allah, as described by the Holy Quran. ¶

(1) Ayyam al-Arab fi al-Jahiliyyah: 100. (2) Surah An-Nur: 33. (3) Al-Hurub wa al-Hadarat: 64. ¶