Chapter 23

"Whoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief, except for him who is compelled while his heart is secure in faith. But those who [willingly] open their breasts to disbelief, upon them is wrath from Allah, and for them is a great punishment." (1). ¶

But what was the stance of the Muslims regarding the violence that the disbelievers of Quraish were inflicting upon them? - Was their stance one of refraining from defense, and forcing oneself to endure the harm with as much patience and forbearance as possible? - Or was their stance one of proactive defense, and responding to aggression in kind? - Or was their stance one of deterrence? Meaning: preempting those among the disbelievers who were preparing for aggression by confronting them with the same type of aggression they intended to commit, before they could execute it! This is by way of repelling aggression before it occurs! ¶

Which of these three stances was the position of the Muslims toward the harm and aggression they received from the polytheists? This is the subject of the next point: ¶

Second Point: The stance of the bearer of the Message (the Prophet ﷺ) and his followers regarding the aggression of Quraish against them. The events that took place between the Muslims and the aggressive disbelievers of Quraish during the pre-Hijrah period indicate that the Muslims adopted all of these mentioned stances; they were not limited to a single approach. Rather, according to the varying circumstances, they chose for each situation the appropriate stance that would suffice for it, so as to protect the Islamic call and its followers from the danger of total liquidation, or the danger of a severe blow that would halt the progression of the Call. ¶

A- As for the stance of refraining from defense, it is of two types: - The stance of refraining from defense when no means of defense exist. - The stance of refraining from defense while the capability for it exists. ¶

(1) Surah An-Nahl, Verse 106. ¶

As for the stance of refraining from defense when there is no means or capacity to do so, this was the state of the weak among the Muslims who lacked the protection or tribal backing to support them if they were to defend themselves. Examples of this include the 'family of Yasir', the enslaved like Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him), and the free-born like Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him). ¶

It is recorded in the Seerah of Ibn Hisham, with his chain of narration from Al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam (may Allah be pleased with him), that he said: 'The first to recite the Quran aloud after the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) in Makkah was Abdullah ibn Mas'ud. One day, the companions of the Messenger of Allah gathered and said: By Allah, the Quraish have never heard this Quran recited aloud to them! Who is the man who will let them hear it? Abdullah ibn Mas'ud said: I will. They said: We fear for you; we only want a man who has a clan to protect him from the people if they want to harm him. He replied: Let me be, for Allah will protect me. So, Ibn Mas'ud went out until he reached the Maqam (at the Kaaba) in the morning while the Quraish were in their gatherings. He stood by the Maqam and recited: 'In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful - The Most Gracious, He has taught the Quran,' raising his voice. The people stared and said: What is the son of Umm 'Abd saying? Then they said: He is certainly reciting some of what Muhammad has brought. They rose up and struck him on his face, but he continued to recite until he had reached as much as Allah willed for him to reach. He then returned to his companions with marks on his face, and they said to him: This is what we feared for you! He replied: The enemies of Allah have never been more insignificant to me than they are now! If you wish, I will go back tomorrow and do the same! They said: No, you have already made them hear what they detest.' ¶

Furthermore, the stance of refraining from defense while having the capacity for it was manifested in the attitude of the Prophet (peace be upon him), as he received the aggression of Quraish with patience and forbearance, despite having the capacity for retaliation and victory through his own inherent strength and by relying on the protection provided by 'Banu Hashim' and 'Banu al-Muttalib' had he so chosen. Regarding this protection, he (peace be upon him) said: 'Banu Hashim and Banu al-Muttalib are one and the same,' and 'They never deserted us, neither in Jahiliyyah nor in Islam.' ¶

If the Prophet ﷺ had done so and sought aid through his clan's strength, he would have surely cut off the hands of those who dared to harm him, just as no one could harm his uncle Hamza ibn Abd al-Muttalib due to his personal strength and the protective influence he commanded within his tribe! However, when the polytheists realized that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ preferred to remain patient against their harm and refrained from resorting to self-defense—whether through his own strength or the protection he enjoyed within his clan—some of the foolish among the disbelievers found in this an open door to act audaciously toward the Prophet ﷺ and harm him. ¶

But why did the Messenger of Allah ﷺ prefer the stance of withholding from defense over the stance of taking up defense? Perhaps if we look at the fruits resulting from the stance he favored, we would see some of what explains the reason for that preference: ¶

1. Among these fruits: Establishing a model by the leader of the Da'wah (call) for his followers to endure the various forms of torment and persecution that the path of the Da'wah imposes. This is the path of all divine missions until victory is decreed for them, in addition to the immense reward found in persevering through the burdens of the Da'wah! ¶

2. Among these fruits: The sense of consolation and solace that the oppressed find within themselves when they see the Messenger of Allah ﷺ suffering harm in the way of Allah, yet refraining from defending himself out of a desire for reward and for the sake of the Da'wah's interest, even though he was supported by the strength of his clan—indeed, he was supported from the heavens in that defense had he desired it! For the Angel of the Mountains offered—by the command of Allah the Almighty—to bring the two mountains (Al-Akhshabayn) upon the polytheists, yet he refused. ¶

I say: This stance of the Prophet ﷺ—despite his ability to defend himself had he wished—makes the oppressed feel a sense of solace regarding the trials they face at the hands of the polytheists. It lightens their sense of suffering and imbues their souls with perseverance and the strength to overcome horrors! ¶

3 - Among these (benefits) is the result of the stance of patience taken by the Messenger ﷺ and his companions, which triggered an awareness among the polytheists that if the bearers of the call were not certain of the truth of the message they were carrying, they would not have taken such a firm stance against challenges and confrontations. This prompts them to reflect and investigate the truthfulness of the proponent of this call in what he brought, instead of relying on rejection based on blind fanaticism for inherited paganism. This, in itself, is a gain for the call that can lead to its embrace and joining its ranks. Perhaps the conversion of Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) contains some evidence for this meaning we have mentioned. ¶

4 - Another is that the stance of patience by the Messenger ﷺ and his companions also generates, at least in some polytheists, a sense of the extent of the injustice that the leaders of disbelief inflict upon people, as they subject them to torture because of a creed they have believed in! This leads them to dissociate emotionally from those leaders, in accordance with the natural human aversion to injustice. It also causes them to gravitate emotionally toward the oppressed Muslims, due to the inherent inclination of the soul toward the weak. Even if this does not bring them into the ranks of the call, it is sufficient to prevent them from harming it, and in that is an undeniable benefit for the call. ¶

5 - Another is preventing the escalation of the aggressive stance held by the polytheists against the Muslims to the point of armed confrontation, which would expose the Islamic call to the risk of liquidation during that stage when it possessed neither an organization nor an army with which to face the Quraish on the battlefield. ¶

These are some of the blessed fruits of the stance of steadfast patience and abstaining from launching a defensive response, which the Prophet ﷺ and some of his companions adopted in the face of the aggression that the Quraish directed against the bearer of the call and those working in its field. Perhaps this provides some explanation for the encouragement to adopt this position and prioritizing it over the reactive impulse to respond to violence with violence, or evil with evil, during this stage of the Islamic call in Makkah before the Hijrah. ¶

It is for this reason that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) encouraged his Companions to remain steadfast in this position. He would cite for them the examples of the followers of previous messengers and instill hope for victory in their hearts as a result of adhering to the stance of patience: ¶

It is recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari: "Narrated Khabbab bin al-Aratt: We complained to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) while he was reclining on his cloak in the shade of the Ka'bah, saying, 'Will you not ask for help for us? Will you not pray for us?' He replied, 'Among those before you, a man would be seized, a pit would be dug for him in the earth, and he would be placed in it. Then a saw would be brought and placed upon his head, splitting it in two, and his flesh and bone would be raked with iron combs, yet this would not divert him from his religion. By Allah! This matter (Islam) will prevail until a rider travels from Sana'a to Hadhramaut fearing none but Allah, and (fearing) the wolf for his sheep; but you are impatient.'" (1) ¶

This pertains to the position of restraint from defense taken by the caller of the Message and the believers toward the aggression of the polytheists of Quraish in Makkah before the Hijrah. ¶

B- As for the position of defense and responding to violence with its like, it is manifested in the following incident narrated by Ibn Ishaq, who said: ¶

"The Companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), when they prayed, would go into the mountain passes (2), hiding their prayer from their people. Once, Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas was with a group of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) in one of the passes of Makkah when a group of polytheists appeared before them—while they were praying. They rebuked them and mocked what they were doing until they fought them. That day, Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas struck one of the polytheists with the jawbone of a camel (3), wounding him, and that was the first blood shed in Islam." (4) ¶

Thus, the fighting here, meaning physical struggle, was initiated by the polytheists, and Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas responded to them in self-defense, and what happened, happened. ¶

(1) Sahih al-Bukhari, no. (6943), Fath al-Bari: 12/315-316. (2) Al-Shi'ab: The singular is shi'b, meaning a path in the mountain [See: Al-Misbah al-Munir, p. 119]. (3) Al-Lihy: Its plural is alha and liha: the jawbone upon which the teeth are located... [See: Al-Misbah al-Munir, p. 210]. (4) Sirat Ibn Hisham (Al-Rawd al-Unuf: 3/2 and Tarikh al-Tabari: 2/318). ¶

From this category is what Ibn al-Jawzi narrated with his chain of transmission from Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: 'When a man would accept Islam, men would attack him, and he would strike back at them.' (1) ¶

This was the state of defense: ¶

(H) As for the position of deterrence—meaning confronting someone who intends harm against a Muslim with a similar action, before the enemy is able to carry out their deed—this position is also a form of self-defense. Otherwise, if someone intends to kill me with a weapon, and I restrain myself so as not to be the initiator of the fight, waiting for his strike in order to respond to it in self-defense, when would that defense occur? Is it after the soul, by that strike, has reached the realm of death or is in a state of agony? Thus, the position of deterrence—within the framework we have drawn—is a facet of defense against which there is no objection. ¶

Among the evidence for this is what is narrated in the story of the conversion of Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him). Imam Ibn al-Jawzi narrated from Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) the following text: '... Umar set out until he came to the house (i.e., Dar al-Arqam). At the door were Hamza, Talha, and a group of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). When Hamza saw the people alarmed by Umar, he said: Yes, this is Umar. If Allah intends good for Umar, he will accept Islam and follow the Messenger, and if He intends otherwise, killing him will be easy for us...' (2). ¶

The meaning of Hamza’s (may Allah be pleased with him) statement, 'and if He intends otherwise,' is: He intends to draw his sword against us, not merely to strike or harass. This is because, as stated in the Sirah of Ibn Hisham, one of the companions at Dar al-Arqam looked through a gap in the door and saw Umar, so he returned in alarm, saying: 'This is Umar ibn al-Khattab, girded with his sword.' Hamza ibn Abd al-Muttalib said: 'Let him in. If he has come with a good intention, we will welcome him, and if he intends evil, we will kill him with his own sword!' (3) ¶

Furthermore, it is well-known what is intended by the 'evil' for which someone who girds himself with a sword prepares. ¶

And thereafter: These are the stances that the Muslims adopted regarding the polytheists while the latter were inflicting various forms of torment upon them, as evidenced by the events that took place during that period of the Islamic Da'wah in Makkah before the Hijrah: - The stance of patience in the face of harm and refraining from defense. - The stance of undertaking defense. - The stance of deterrence. We now come to the final point in this conclusion. Third Point: What are the Shari'ah evidences that regulated the relationship between the Muslims and the polytheists, which was defined by the three aforementioned stances regarding the violence used by the disbelievers against the proponents of the Islamic Da'wah? The answer: First: Among the evidences for this is the practical and tacit Sunnah (Sunnah Amaliyyah and Taqririyyah). - The Messenger (peace be upon him) adopted the stance of patience, pardon, and refraining from reciprocating aggression, as previously explained. - The Prophet (peace be upon him) also approved (tacitly) the stance of defense and reciprocating aggression in kind from the Companions who used to meet force with force, and he did not rebuke them for it. - Likewise, he did not rebuke Hamza (may Allah be pleased with him) when he announced that he would kill 'Umar if he saw him intending evil against the Muslims. Second: There are chapters (Surahs) of the Holy Qur'an revealed in Makkah that addressed the issue of the transgression occurring against the Muslims and clarified the stance that Muslims ought to adopt in response. The Holy Qur'an defined two paths for the Muslims that are permissible for them to follow regarding this matter: - The first path: The path of seeking victory (Intisar) and redress, meaning reciprocating violence with violence and defense. ¶

Defending oneself, and this includes the stance of deterrence, as it is a facet of defense and responding to aggression—as previously explained. ¶

The second path: is the path of patience and forgiveness (al-'afw). The Noble Quran has encouraged this second path, and perhaps the blessed fruits produced by following this path, as we have seen before, explain that encouragement. ¶

It is stated in the Meccan Surah Ash-Shura: 'And those who, when tyranny strikes them, they defend themselves. And the retribution for an evil deed is an evil one like it, but whoever pardons and makes reconciliation - his reward is [due] from Allah. Indeed, He does not like wrongdoers. And whoever defends himself after having been wronged - those are not against whom there is any cause [for blame]. The cause is only against the ones who wrong the people and tyrannize upon the earth without right. Those will have a painful punishment. And whoever is patient and forgives - indeed, that is of the matters [worthy] of resolve.' (1) ¶

In Tafsir al-Qurtubi, it states regarding the verse 'And those who, when tyranny strikes them...': i.e., 'the tyranny of the polytheists reached them' (2). He then says: 'Forgiveness is recommended; however, the matter may be reversed in some situations, making the abstention from forgiveness recommended... and this is when there is a need to curb increased tyranny and cut off the source of harm' (3). ¶

Furthermore, Surah Ash-Shura is entirely Meccan according to the statements of al-Hasan, Ikrimah, 'Ata, and Jabir. Ibn Abbas and Qatadah excepted four verses from it, from verse twenty-three to verse twenty-six, stating they were revealed in Medina (4), and these are outside the scope of the verses we are currently discussing. ¶

Based on this, these verses permit Muslims to defend themselves in the face of the polytheists' tyranny against them and to respond to evil with an equivalent evil—during the Meccan stage of the Islamic call before the establishment of the Islamic state—even though they encourage forgiveness and patience, deeming them as matters of firm resolve. ¶

As for the preference of defending oneself for a Shariah-based interest, al-Qurtubi provides evidence from an event that occurred... ¶

In Medina, it is narrated that Zainab bint Jahsh, the wife of the Prophet (peace be upon him), spoke words to Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) in the presence of the Prophet (peace be upon him) that she disliked. The Prophet (peace be upon him) would forbid her, but she would not desist, so he said to Aisha, 'Take your revenge.' This is recorded by Muslim in his Sahih with a similar meaning. ¶

In Tafsir al-Tabari, it is narrated from Ibn Abbas regarding the verse: 'Then whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you' (2:194). This and similar verses were revealed in Mecca. The Muslims at that time were few in number and possessed no authority (sultan) to overpower the polytheists, while the polytheists would abuse and harm them. So, Allah commanded the Muslims that whoever among them seeks retribution should do so only to the extent of the harm received, or remain patient, or forgive, which is better. When the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) migrated to Medina and his authority was established, he commanded the Muslims to refer their grievances to their authority and not to transgress against one another as in the days of Jahiliyyah (ignorance). ¶

Furthermore, when Ibn Abbas says, 'This and the like were revealed in Mecca,' he implies that this Shariah ruling—retaliating against aggression with its equivalent—was revealed in Mecca, even though these verses are from Surah al-Baqarah, which is a Medinan surah. ¶

The remainder of Ibn Abbas’s statement establishes the Shariah ruling that governed the relationship between Muslims and others in Mecca before the Hijra, specifically concerning the violence the polytheists used against the Muslims. ¶

A final note is that initiating combat against the polytheists in Mecca—that is, beyond the scope of self-defense against direct aggression or preparing for its causes—was not practiced at all. From this, we understand the position of the Prophet (peace be upon him) regarding the offer made by Abbas bin Nadlah. ¶

One of the men who pledged allegiance at the Second Pledge of Aqaba expressed to the Prophet ﷺ his readiness to attack the polytheists at Mina. The Prophet ﷺ replied: 'We have not been commanded to do that; rather, return to your encampments' (1). ¶

With this final observation, we reach the conclusion of this first chapter, in which we addressed the state of the Islamic Dawah during the Meccan period—the phase prior to the legislation of Jihad in its combat sense. We now proceed to stand at the threshold of the second chapter of this section, which addresses the phase following the legislation of Jihad. ¶

450 (1) Sirat Ibn Hisham (Al-Rawd al-Unuf: 192/2). ¶

Chapter Two: The Post-Legislation Phase of Jihad ‘The Islamic Call in the Medinan Period’ After the Hijrah ¶

Section One: The Permission to Engage in Combat. Section Two: A brief overview of the accounts of battles and their cessation through treaties in the Sirah of the Messenger ﷺ, and the most prominent rulings derived therefrom. Section Three: The invitation of the Messenger ﷺ to heads of state to embrace Islam and its relationship with Jihad. Section Four: The motives for declaring Jihad on all fronts during the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphate. ¶

Part Two: On the Principles of Fiqh (Usul al-Fiqh) Second Objective: On Evidences (Adillah) It contains several chapters. Chapter One: On the Book (The Quran) It contains several issues (Masail). ¶

Issue One The 'Book' refers to the Magnificent Quran. It is the Speech of Allah revealed to His Messenger, miraculous in its composition (nazm), its recitation is an act of worship, it has been transmitted to us by mass narration (tawatur), it is preserved from alteration and substitution, recorded in the Mushafs, beginning with Surah Al-Fatihah and concluding with Surah An-Nas. It is a definitive proof (hujjah qati'iyyah). Specification (takhsis) is permissible within it, whether the specifier is connected (muttasil) or disconnected (munfasil), rational or traditional (naqli). Likewise, the abrogation (naskh) of its ruling is permissible. It is not permissible to add to the text (nass) based on solitary reports (khabar al-wahid); rather, one must act upon it, just as one must act upon general statements (mujmal) if no clarification is found therein. The principle regarding a command (amr) is obligation (wujub); regarding a prohibition (nahy) is prohibition (tahrim); regarding a report is truthfulness (sidq); and regarding literal expression (zahir) is its real meaning (haqiqah), unless there is a diverting indicator (qarinah). ¶

Issue Two A command to do something is a prohibition of its opposite, and a prohibition of something is a command to do its opposite, provided the opposite has only one limit; otherwise, it is not. An absolute command does not necessitate repetition, nor immediate execution; rather, it necessitates the performance of the commanded action in general. ¶

Issue Three A term shared between two or more meanings (mushtarak) cannot be assigned to one of them without evidence. Metaphor (majaz) is only resorted to when the literal meaning (haqiqah) is impossible. ¶

Issue Four Generality (umum) is an attribute of words, while specificity (khas) is the opposite of generality. Takhsis (specification) is the exclusion of some items covered by a general term. The specifiers (mukhassisat) are many, including: the Book, Sunnah, Consensus (Ijma), Analogy (Qiyas), and Reason ('Aql). Included in generality are: plural nouns with the definite article (lam), conditional nouns, relative pronouns, and indefinite nouns in a negative context. ¶

Issue Five An absolute (mutlaq) remains absolute until a restriction (taqyid) is provided. A restricted (muqayyad) text is specific to its ruling. It is not valid to apply the absolute to the restricted unless the ruling and the cause are identical, or just the ruling, or just the cause, according to those who hold this view. The most correct view is that there is no analogy (qiyas) in matters of pure worship ('ibadat). ¶

Chapter Two Section One: Permission for Combat (Qital) Introduction to the contents of this research Point One: What was the state of the Muslims before the permission for combat was granted? What was the implication of that prohibition of combat before the permission was issued? And what were the evidences that led the Muslims to restrain their hands from fighting the disbelievers who were inflicting persecution and torture upon them? Point Two: When was the permission for combat granted? What are the evidences in which this permission was conveyed? What is meant by the combat that was permitted? And what is meant by the permission issued regarding combat? ¶

Al-Jami' li-Ahkam al-Qur'an (The Compendium of the Rulings of the Qur'an), Volume 17, Authored by: Abu Abdallah Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Ansari al-Qurtubi, Translator: Dr. Muhammad Parvin Gonabadi, Publisher: Intisharat-e Naser Khosrow. ¶

Section One: Permission for Combat ¶

Introduction: Regarding the contents of the research. Perhaps, if we wish to clarify this subject to the greatest extent possible, it is our duty to cast an insightful glance upon it. I mean a glance that includes the period before the permission for combat, why this permission was granted after the prohibition, what is meant by 'permission' (idhn), and what is meant by the combat for which permission was granted? ... along with other matters that revolve around this subject. However, we must not exceed the limits in such a way that it leads us—by way of digression—toward discussing matters that have been designated for special sections elsewhere in this treatise. Accordingly, I see that the desired clarification of this section—within the framework mentioned—requires us to address the following two points: 1. What was the state of the Muslims before the permission for combat? What was the significance of that prohibition of combat before the permission was issued? What were the evidences that caused the Muslims to withhold their hands from fighting the disbelievers who were assaulting them with oppression and persecution? 2. When was the permission for combat granted? What are the evidences in which that permission came? What is meant by the combat for which permission was granted? And what is meant by the permission issued regarding combat? 1. The First Point: What was the state of the Muslims before the permission for combat? ... etc. We have previously defined the state in which the Muslims were in Makkah before the Migration (Hijrah) and before the issuance of the permission for combat. ¶

Imam Ibn al-Arabi summarizes this state in 'Ahkam al-Quran' by saying: 'The disbelievers used to intentionally harm the Prophet ﷺ and the believers... The polytheists choked him until he was near death, then Abu Bakr rescued him... His companions were brought to the brink of death; Abu Jahl killed Sumayyah, the mother of Ammar ibn Yasir, and Bilal was tortured. After this, nothing remained but retaliation through combat... ¶

After the Prophet ﷺ exercised pardon and forgiveness for what they had done, Allah permitted him to engage in combat once he was established in Medina, and he sent forth the expeditions...' ¶

Ibn al-Arabi continues: 'Our scholars, may Allah have mercy on them, said: Before the Pledge of Aqabah, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was not permitted to wage war, and bloodshed was not lawful for him. He was only commanded to invite to Allah, to be patient with harm, and to overlook the ignorant... Quraish persecuted those who followed him from the Muhajirun, to the point of trying to force them out of their religion and exiling them from their lands. They were either tempted in their faith and tortured, or fleeing and wandering in the lands! Some fled to Abyssinia... and some remained patient under persecution. When Quraish became arrogant towards Allah... and tortured those who believed in Him, Allah permitted His Messenger to wage war...' ¶

This was the state of the Prophet ﷺ and the Muslims in Mecca before the Hijra and before the permission for combat was revealed. ¶

Now, what is the implication of the prohibition of combat? - Does it encompass surrendering to torture and refraining from self-defense, regardless of the trials and calamities inflicted upon the Muslim at the hands of the polytheists in Mecca? - Does it include refraining from killing a polytheist who raises a weapon against a Muslim with the intent to kill him? - Or is the 'unpermitted' combat meant to be: that the Muslims in Mecca mobilize, form a fighting unit, and engage the disbelievers of Mecca in... ¶

Armed conflict, and bloody warfare... until Allah judges between the two parties? Or does the forbidden fighting refer to: Launching campaigns of assassinations against the leaders of disbelief in Mecca who were torturing the Muslims, with the intent of revenge and retribution? The answer to this is: It has already been established in the first chapter of this section that the Muslims' stance regarding the harm inflicted upon them by the infidels of Quraysh varied between patience and forgiveness, and retribution and victory, meeting blow for blow, and self-defense. This included the readiness to kill a polytheist if he raised a weapon against a Muslim intending to kill him! The events and evidence pointing to these varied stances have already been mentioned in that chapter. Therefore, we must understand the statement of Al-Jassas: 'The Ummah did not differ that fighting was forbidden before the Hijrah,' as meaning that the fighting which was forbidden before the Hijrah was not the fighting in the sense of mutual combat, meeting violence with violence, nor in the sense of intending to kill in self-defense against those who sought to kill them—as indicated by the evidence mentioned in the previous chapter. Thus, the meaning of the fighting that was forbidden and not permitted in Mecca before the Hijrah remains limited to the latter two meanings, which are: The Muslims gathering to challenge the Quraysh on the battlefield; and launching campaigns of physical liquidation against the leaders of the Quraysh through assassinations, carried out by adventurous Muslims motivated by revenge for the persecution inflicted upon them! ¶

These are the two meanings of combat (qital) that were prohibited and unauthorized during the Meccan period of Da'wah, prior to the establishment of the Islamic state in Medina. Evidence for this is found in the background of the revelation (asbab al-nuzul) of the following verse: 'Have you not seen those to whom it was said, "Restrain your hands [from fighting], establish prayer, and give zakah"? But then when fighting was ordained for them, at once a party of them feared the people as they fear Allah or with [even] greater fear. They said, "Our Lord, why have You decreed upon us fighting? If only You had postponed [it for] us for a short time." Say, "The enjoyment of this world is little, and the Hereafter is better for he who fears Allah. And injustice will not be done to you, [even] as much as a thread [inside a date seed]."' (Surah An-Nisa: 77). Imam al-Wahidi al-Naysaburi states regarding the occasion of this verse's revelation: 'This verse was revealed concerning a group of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), including Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad, Qudama ibn Maz'un, and Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas. They suffered much harm from the polytheists and would say: "O Messenger of Allah! Give us permission to fight these people!" He would reply: "Restrain your hands from them, for I have not been commanded to fight them!" When the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) migrated to Medina and Allah the Almighty commanded them to fight the polytheists, some found it difficult and burdensome, so Allah revealed this verse.' Al-Nasa'i narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) that 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf and his companions came to the Prophet (ﷺ) in Mecca and said: "O Messenger of Allah! We were in a state of honor while we were polytheists, but when we believed, we became humiliated!" He replied: "I have been commanded to pardon, so do not fight." When Allah moved him to Medina and commanded him to fight, they desisted, and Allah the Almighty revealed: "Have you not seen those to whom it was said, 'Restrain your hands, and establish prayer...'" up to His saying: "...And injustice will not be done to you, [even] as much as a thread [inside a date seed]." This demonstrates that some Muslims had requested the Prophet (ﷺ) to permit them to engage the disbelievers of Mecca. ¶

Regarding the request for combat before the establishment of the Islamic State in Medina, and how the Prophet ﷺ rejected this request: 'Restrain your hands, for I have not been commanded to fight them,' and 'I have been commanded to pardon, so do not fight.' ¶

Here, the 'pardon' (afw) commanded—by way of obligation—refers to refraining from initiating hostilities against the disbelievers in response to their aggression. It does not mean an absolute pardon that includes refraining from self-defense. As previously mentioned, the command to pardon in that context was by way of preference (istihsan) due to the underlying public interest (maslahah). This is evidenced by the Prophet ﷺ acknowledging the companions who defended themselves against the harm they suffered, responding to evil with the like thereof (1), as discussed in the previous chapter. ¶

This pertains to the prohibition imposed by Islam on Muslims during the Meccan dawah phase, prior to the establishment of the Islamic State, regarding armed engagement with Quraish and confronting them on the battlefield! ¶

As for the prohibition imposed on carrying out assassinations (ightiyal) against the criminals of Quraish who subjected Muslims to harm and torture: ¶

It is stated in Tafsir al-Qurtubi regarding this: 'The saying of the Almighty: "Indeed, Allah defends those who have believed; indeed, Allah does not like everyone treacherous and ungrateful" (2). It is reported that this was revealed because when the believers were numerous in Mecca and were persecuted by the disbelievers—and those who migrated to the land of Abyssinia had left—some of the believers in Mecca intended to kill any disbeliever they could, to assassinate them, to betray them, and to scheme against them. So this verse was revealed... in which He—Glory be to Him—promised defense and forbade, in the clearest terms, treachery and betrayal' (3). ¶

And it is stated in Tafsir al-Tabari: 'From Qatadah regarding the verse: "Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged," he said: "This is the first verse revealed regarding combat; they were permitted to fight. Some claimed that the reason for this permission was that the Companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had asked his permission to kill the disbelievers who had harmed and oppressed them in Mecca before the Hijrah, through assassination and in secret! So Allah revealed regarding that: 'Indeed, Allah does not like everyone treacherous and ungrateful.' Then, when they migrated..."' ¶

After the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and his companions migrated to Medina, he granted permission for their killing and fighting. Thus, He said: "Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged..." (1). ¶

These texts and reports—taken together—indicate that while in Mecca, before the establishment of the Islamic state in Medina, fighting was prohibited for Muslims. This prohibition included a ban on general confrontation between Muslims and polytheists, as well as a ban on declaring a war of assassinations targeting polytheists in general, whether common individuals or leaders who inflicted harm upon the Muslims. ¶

This concludes the first point of this research. Now we move to: ¶

2- The second point, which is: - When was the permission for fighting granted? - What are the evidences for this permission? - What is meant by the permitted fighting? - What is meant by the 'permission' issued regarding fighting? ¶

The answer to this is: Permission for fighting was revealed during the journey of Hijrah (migration) to Medina, as mentioned in the authentic hadith narrated by Al-Tirmidhi and Al-Nasa'i, that "Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) said: When the Messenger of Allah ﷺ left Mecca, Abu Bakr said: They have harmed their Prophet until he had to leave; they shall surely perish! Then Allah the Almighty revealed: 'Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged, and indeed Allah is competent to give them victory' (2). Abu Bakr then said: I knew that there would be fighting." This is the version of Al-Tirmidhi. In the version of Al-Nasa'i, he said: "When the Prophet ﷺ was driven out of Mecca, Abu Bakr said: They have driven out their Prophet, indeed we belong to Allah and indeed to Him we will return! Then the verse 'Permission [to fight] has been given...' was revealed, and I realized that there would be fighting." ¶

(1) Tafsir al-Tabari: 17/123. (2) Surah Al-Hajj, verse 39. Al-Qurtubi stated: "There is an ellipsis here: meaning, permission was given to those who are capable of fighting, in the act of fighting; it was omitted due to the clarity of the speech regarding the omitted part." Tafsir al-Qurtubi (12/67-68). ¶