A Critical Exposition of the Popular 'Jihad'Rodwell ... "Contend earnestly."
Palmer ... "Be strenuous."
[Sidenote: (34) _Ibid_, 58.]
47. "And the faithful will say, 'Are these they who swore by G.o.d their (_Jahda_) utmost oath that they were surely on your side?'
Vain their works; and they themselves shall come to ruin."
Sale ... "Most firm."
Rodwell ... "Most solemn."
Palmer ... "Most strenuous."
[Sidenote: (35) _Ibid_, 59.]
48. "O ye who believe! should any of you desert his religion, G.o.d will then raise up a people whom He loveth, and who love Him, lowly towards the faithful, lofty to the unbelievers (_Yojahidoona_) striving in the path of G.o.d, and not fearing the blame of the blamer. This is the Grace of G.o.d; on whom He will He bestoweth it, and G.o.d is all-embracing, Omniscient!"
Sale ... "They shall fight for the religion of G.o.d."
Rodwell ... "For the cause of G.o.d will they contend."
Palmer ... "Strenuous in the way of G.o.d."
[Sidenote: _Jihad_ does not mean the waging of war.]
49. These are all the verses of the Koran which contain the word "_Jahd_" or "_Jihad_," or any derivations from them. I believe that I have clearly shown by means of a careful comparison between the translators and commentators and the original pa.s.sages in the Koran, that the word _Jahd_ or _Jihad_ in the cla.s.sical Arabic and as used in the Koran does not mean waging war or fighting, but only to do one's utmost and to exert, labour or toil. The meaning which has come to be ascribed to the word is undoubtedly a conventional one, and is one that has been applied to it at a period much less recent than the revelation of the various chapters of the Koran.
[Sidenote: _Katal_ and _Kital_.]
50. I do not mean to contend that the Koran does not contain injunctions to fight or wage war. There are many verses enjoining the Prophet's followers to prosecute a defensive war, but not one of aggression. The words "_katal_" and "_kital_" distinctly indicate this.
[Sidenote: Conclusion.]
51. I have already a.n.a.lysed all the verses containing these words (_katal_ and _kital_) in this book. What I have aimed at in the Appendix is to show that those authors and translators who cite certain verses of the Koran containing the word _Jahd_ or _Jihad_ and its derivations in support of their a.s.sertion, and that the Mohammadan religion sanctions the waging of war and the shedding of blood, are altogether in the wrong.
[Footnote 322: The Sihah of Jouhari (who died 397 or 398), the Asas of Zamakhshire (born 467, died 538 A.H.), Lisanul-Arab of Ibn Mokarram (born 630, died 711), and Kamoos of Fyrozabadee (born 729, died 816), _vide_ Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon, Book I, Part II, page 473.]
[Footnote 323: The Misbah by Fayoomee (finished 734 A.H.), _vide_ Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon, Book I, Part II, page 473.]
[Footnote 324: Sihah, Asas, Ibnel Atheer Jezree, author of Nihayeh (died 606), the Mughrib of Almotarrazi (born 536, died 610), the Misbah and Kamoos, _vide_ Lane, _ibid_, page 474.]
[Footnote 325: _Vide_ Rodwell's Translation of the Koran _in loco_.]
[Footnote 326: _Vide_ Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon _in loco_.]
[Footnote 327: The a.s.semblies of Al Hariri, translated from the Arabic by Thomas Chenry, M.A., Vol. I, Introduction, p. 67. William and Norgate, 1867.]
[Footnote 328: In the treaty of Medina, which was made as early as the second year of the Hejira, the word Jihad is used, regarding which Sir W. Muir says:--"This word came subsequently to have exclusively the technical signification of Jihad or _crusade_ or _fighting_ for the Faith. If we give it this signification here, it would involve the clause in the suspicion of being a later addition; for as yet we have no distinct development of the intention of Mahomet to impose his religion on others by force: it would have been dangerous, in the present state of parties, to advance this principle. The word is sometimes used in the more general sense in the Coran; Sura XXIX, 5, 69; XX, 77, and a few other places."--Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 32. Again he says with reference to Sura II, v. 215, which also contains the same word: "The word (_Jihad_) is the same as that subsequently used for a religious war, but it had not yet probably acquired its fixed application. It was applied in its _general_ sense before the Hejira, and probably up to the battle of Badr."--_Ibid_, p. 74, footnote.]
[Footnote 329: This Sura is generally said to have been revealed at Mecca, but this is probably only the case as regards verses 1, 24, 43, 56, 60, 65, 67, 75. Mr. Muir places it at the close of the Meccan Suras of the fifth period. See Nold, p. 158; Rev. Rodwell, p. 500.]
[Footnote 330: _Vide_ Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, 74.]
[Footnote 331: _Ibid, footnote._]
[Footnote 332: _Vide_ Sura LXXII, 9; XVII, 69.]
[Footnote 333: _i.e._, from Mecca when driven out of it by the Meccans in your persecution.]
[Footnote 334: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 114.]
[Footnote 335: _Kitabul Jihad_, _Maghazi_ and _Tafseer_.]
APPENDIX B.
SLAVERY AND CONCUBINE-SLAVES AS CONCOMITANT EVILS OF WAR.
[Sidenote: Slavery and concubinage not allowed by the Koran.]
1. It is a false accusation against the Koran, that it allows enslavement of the captives of war, and sanctions female captives to the conquerors' embrace, or, in other words, female captives are made concubines on the field of battle. There is not a single sentence in the Koran allowing either of the above allegations. Sir W. Muir, in his "Life of Mahomet," could neither quote any verse of the Koran sanctioning the enslavement of the captives of war or servile concubinage, nor was he able to relate any instance of them during the several battles described therein. Yet, in a recent work,[336] he refers boldly, but vaguely, to the Koran; and regarding the battle of Walaja fought by Khalid against the Persians in A.H. 12 writes, after quoting Khalid's oration on gaining the victory:--
"Now, also, the cunning device of the Coran, with respect to the other s.e.x, began to tell. Persian ladies, both maids and matrons, 'taken captive by the right hand,' were forthwith, without stint of number, lawful to the conquerors' embrace; and, in the enjoyment of this privilege, they were nothing loth to execute upon the heathen 'the judgment written.'"
I do not understand why, if such was the case, Khalid did not refer the believers to the so-called "cunning device" of the Koran? By referring to this imaginary device of the Koran to the lawfulness of female captives "to the conquerors' embrace," he might have struck a chord, at which every Bedouin heart would have leapt with joy, instead of referring, as he did, merely to the riches of the land and fair fields.
In fact there is no such inducement in the Koran.
[Sidenote: Measures taken by the Koran to abolish slavery.]
2. Slaves are mentioned in the Koran _defacto_, but not _dejure_. The Koran took several measures to abolish future slavery. Its steps for its abolition were taken in every moral, legal, religious, and political departments. The liberation of slaves was morally declared to be a work of piety and righteousness--(Sura XC, 13; II, 172).[337] Legally the slaves were to be emanc.i.p.ated on their agreeing to pay a ransom--(Sura XXIV, 33).[338] They were to be set at liberty as a penalty for culpable homicide--(Sura IV, 94);[339] or in expiation for using an objectionable form of divorce--(Sura LVIII, 4);[340] and also they were to be manumitted from the Public Funds out of the poor-taxes--(Sura IX, 60).[341] They were religiously to be freed in expiation of a false oath taken in mistake--(Sura V, 91).[342] These were the measures for the abolition of existing slavery. The future slavery was abolished by the Koran by putting hammer deep unto its root and by annihilating its real source. The captives of war were, according to the clear injunctions of the Koran contained in the 5th verse of the 47th Sura, to be dismissed either by a free grant or by exacting a ransom. They were neither to be enslaved nor killed.
4. "When ye encounter the unbelievers strike off their heads, till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of _the rest_ make fast the fetters."
5. "And afterwards let there either be free dismissals or ransoming, till the war hath laid down its burdens. Thus do...."
_Sura_ XLVII.
These verses convey very clearly the decree of the abolition of future slavery, and do not require any further remarks. Moreover they were acted upon accordingly even in the lifetime of the Prophet.
[Sidenote: None of the prisoners of war were enslaved.]
3. None of the prisoners of Badr A.H. 2, of Karkart-al-Kadr A.H. 3, of Katan in Najd A.H. 4, of Zat-al Riqa[343] A.H. 5, of Bani Mustalik A.H.
5, of Koreiza A.H. 5, of Batan Makka A.H. 6,[344] or of Honain (Hawazin) A.H. 8,[345] was enslaved. All, without an exception, were set free either by way of free dismissal, or by exacting ransom (in cash or in exchange of Moslem prisoners) in strict conformity with the dictates of Sura XLVII, 5. There were no prisoners in the battles of Ohad A.H. 3, Ahzab A.H. 5, and Khyber A.H. 7.[346]
[Sidenote: Bani Koreiza not enslaved.]