A CRITICAL EXPOSITION OF THE POPULAR "JIHÁD. " A CRITICAL EXPOSITION OF THE POPULAR "JIHÁD. " SHOWING THAT ALL THE WARS OF MOHAMMAD WERE DEFENSIVE; AND THATAGGRESSIVE WAR, OR COMPULSORY CONVERSION, IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE KORAN. WITH APPENDICESPROVING THAT THE WORD "JIHAD" DOES NOT EXEGETICALLY MEAN'WARFARE, ' AND THAT SLAVERY IS NOT SANCTIONEDBY THE PROPHET OF ISLAM. BY MOULAVI GHERÁGH ALI, _Author of_ "REFORMS UNDER MOSLEM RULE, ""HYDERABAD (DECCAN) UNDER SIR SALAR JUNG. " CALCUTTA:THACKER, SPINK AND CO. 1885. CALCUTTA:PRINTED BY THACKER, SPINK AND CO. NOTE. I here take the opportunity of removing a wrong idea of the allegedinjunction of the Prophet against our countrymen the Hindús. The Hon'bleRaja Sivá Prasad, in his speech at the Legislative Council, on the 9thMarch, 1883, while discussing the Ilbert Bill, quoted from Amir Khusro's_Tarikh Alái_ that, "Ala-ud-dín Khiliji once sent for a Kází, and askedhim what was written in the Code of Mehammadan law regarding the Hindús. The Kází answered that, the Hindús were _Zimmis_ (condemned to pay theJízya tax); if asked silver, they ought to pay gold with deep respectand humility; and if the collector of taxes were to fling dirt in theirfaces, they should gladly open their mouths wide. God's order is to keepthem in subjection, and the Prophet enjoins on the faithful to kill, plunder and imprison them, to make Mussulmáns, or to put them to thesword, to enslave them, and confiscate their property. . . . '" [_Vide_Supplement to the _Gazette of India_, April 21, 1883, page 807. ] These alleged injunctions, I need not say here, after what I have statedin various places of this book regarding intolerance, and compulsoryconversion, are merely false imputations. There are no such injunctionsof the Prophet against either _Zimmis_, (_i. E. _, protected orguaranteed) or the Hindús. TO THE HONORABLE SYED AHMED KHAN BAHADUR, C. S. I. , THIS BOOK IS, WITHOUT EVEN ASKING PERMISSION. AND WHOLLY WITHOUT HIS KNOWLEDGE. DEDICATED AS A SLIGHT BUT SINCERE TESTIMONY OF ADMIRATION FOR HIS LONG AND VARIOUS SERVICES IN THE CAUSE OF ISLAM AND IN RESPECT OF HIS RELIGIOUS AND SOCIAL REFORMS IN THE MOSLIMS OF INDIA, AND OF GRATITUDE FOR MUCH PERSONAL KINDNESS AND FRIENDSHIP, BY THE AUTHOR. [Transcriber's Note: All errata listed below have been corrected in thee-text. Mistakes not listed below have been left as they appeared inthe printed book, although missing or misplaced punctuation marks havebeen corrected. ] ERRATA. _Page_ _Line_ _For_ _Read_ v 21 them _Omit_ " 22 them it xvii _f. N. _ Maaddite Moaddite xxxiv 21 Morra Murra " 22 Soleim Suleim xlii 9 Kauuka Kainuka xliii 22 _f. N. _ Mozeima Mozeina xlv 25 Khusain Khushain liv 1 Ban Bani " 10 Ghassianide Ghassanide lxxxviii 30 Khalips Khalifs xci 30 Caliphater Caliphate 11 10 Kurzibn Kurz-ibn 18 9 God[2] God: " " desist[3] desist " 16 persecution persecution[2] " 17 (fitnah (fitnah[3]) 27 5 liberty and liberty, any of " 6 brethern merely brethren, merely " 6-7 such a manner such manner " 8 Society or Society, or " 9 of it materially of it, materially " 12 deserve pity deserve only pity 34 6 Ibu Ibn 61 6 Rafi Rafe 72 24 ibu ibn " 25 ibu ibn 73 4 bil bin 90 1 as stallions for breeding purposes 135 28 Durar Dinar 136 16 Sirni Sirin 192 1 Jihad does not mean {Read this as a the waging of war marginal gloss " 3 _Jahad_ _Jahd. _ " 14 Katal and Kital Read this as a marginal gloss. " 20 Conclusion Ditto, ditto. SUMMARY OF CONTENTS. Introduction i-civ Note cv Genealogical Table of the Arabs cvi-cvii I. The persecutions suffered by the early Moslems 1-11 II. The Meccans or the Koreish 11-16 III. The defensive character of the wars of Mohammad 16-34 IV. The Jews 34-40 V. The Christians or Romans 40-41 VI. The intolerance 42-51 VII. The ninth chapter of _Sura Barát_ 51-55 VIII. The alleged interception of the Koreish caravans by the Moslems 55-60 IX. The alleged assassinations by the command or connivance of Mohammad 60-76 X. The alleged cruelty in executing the prisoners of war 76-91 XI. Some miscellaneous objections refuted 91-114 XII. The popular Jihád or Crusade 114-161 Appendix A. The word Jihad in the Koran does not mean warfare 163-192 Appendix B. Slavery and concubinage not allowed by the Koran 193-223 Appendix C. Koranic references 225-227 Index 229-249 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction-- Paras. Page. 1. Object of the book i 2. Early wrongs of the Moslem; justification in taking up arms, if taken ii 3. Commencement of the war; the Koreish being public enemy were liable to be treated as such _ib. _ 4. But the Moslems could not take up arms to redress their wrongs under certain circumstances iii 5. Moslems otherwise engaged at Medina had no intention of suffering the horrors of war by taking the initiative, but were in imminent danger from the enemy iv 6. The Koreish first attacked the Moslems at Medina. They could not forbear the escape of the Moslems v 7. Three battles waged by the Koreish against Mohammad--Badr, Ohad, and Ahzáb: these wars on the Moslem side were purely in defence, not waged even to redress their wrongs or re-establish their rights vii 8. The battle of Badr was defensive on the part of Mohammad. Reasons for the same viii 9. Mohammad at Medina, owing to the attacks, inroads, and threatening gatherings of the Koreish and other tribes, had hardly time to think of offensive measures xi 10. Armed opposition of the Koreish to the Moslem pilgrims from Medina in the vicinity of Mecca. The truce of Hodeibia xv 11. The Koreish again commit hostilities and violate their pledge. War declared against those who had violated the truce. War not carried out xvi 12. War with foes other than Koreish xviii 13. Expedition to Tabúk to check the advancing enemy. No war took place xix 14. Number of the wars of Mohammad much exaggerated: _Ghazava_ defined; number of actual wars xx 15. The Revd. Mr. Green's remarks on the wars of Mohammad criticised xxiii 16. Another view of the wars of Mohammad xxviii 17. Caravans if waylaid were waylaid by way of reprisal xxx 18. Intolerance; no compulsory conversion enjoined or took place during Mohammad's lifetime: Sir W. Muir quoted and refuted xxxi 19. A brief sketch of the propagation of Islam at Mecca: Islam at Mecca; Islam at Abyssinia; Conversions at Nakhla xxxii 20. Rapid stride of Islam at Medina xxxvii 21. The increasing number of Moslem converts at Mecca after the Hegira xxxix 22. Disturbed state of the public peace among the tribes surrounding Medina. Internicine wars, an obstacle to the propagation of Islam xl 23. Sketch of the intertribal wars in Arabia during the lifetime of Mohammad xli 24. Spread of Islam in the surrounding tribes at Medina after the Hegira I--VI xliii 25. Mecca a barrier against the conversion of the Southern tribes xliv 26. Tribal conversions in the sixth year. Conversion among several other tribes of the North and North-east in A. H. VIII xlv 27. Surrender of Mecca, A. H. VIII xlvii 28. Mecca not compelled to believe _ib. _ 29. The wholesale conversion of the remaining tribes, A. H. IX and X xlviii 30. The various deputations in the 9th and 10th year of the Hegira li 31. A list of the deputations of conversion received by Mohammad at Medina during A. H. IX and X li--lviii 32. All conversions, individual and tribal, were without any compulsion lix 33. Mohammad was not favoured with circumstances round him. The difficulty Mohammad encountered in his work. Marcus Dods quoted: Dr. Mohseim's causes of the spread of Islam and Hallam quoted lx--lxv 34. Mohammad's unwavering belief in his own mission and his success show him to be a true prophet. Mohammad's efforts established monotheism in Arabia. His manly exertions, and his single handed perseverance. The business and office of a prophet described. Sir W. Muir and Stobart quoted lxv--lxix 35. The reforms of Mohammad, his iconoclastic policy. The redemption of Arabia from venal debauchery and infatuated superstition. Muir, Marcus Dods, Stephens quoted lxix--lxxvii 36. Indictment against Mohammad. His alleged cruelty and sensuality. Muir, Rev. Hughes, Marcus Dods, and Stanley Poole refuted lxxviii--lxxxvii 37. Objections to the (1) Finality of the social reforms of Mohammad, (2) positive precepts, (3) ceremonial law, (4) morality, (5) want of adaptability to the varying circumstances lxxxvii--lxxxix 38. All these objections apply rather to the teaching of the Mohammadan Common Law than to the Koran xc 39. (1) Finality of social reforms of Mohammad discussed. Intermediary not to be considered final xc--xcii 40. (2) Positive precepts and (3) ceremonial law, pilgrimage, _Kibla_, amount of alms, fasts, forms and attitude of prayer, &c. : pretentious prayers and ostentatious almsgiving xcii--xcvii 41. (4) The Koran, both abstract and concrete in morals xcvii--cii 42. (5) Adaptability of the Koran to surrounding circumstances cii--ciii 43. Suitability of the Koran to all classes of humanity ciii--civ Note cv Genealogical tables of the tribes mentioned in para. 31 of the Introduction cvi--cvii ALL THE WARS OF MOHAMMAD WERE DEFENSIVE. _I. --The Persecution. _ 1. The early persecution of Moslems by the people of Mecca 2 2. Notices of the persecutions in the Koran 4 3. Insults suffered by Mohammad 5 4. Historical summary of the persecutions 8 5. The Hegira, or the expulsion of the Moslems from Mecca 9 6. The persecution of the Moslems by the Koreish after their flight from Mecca 11 _II. --The Meccans or the Koreish. _ 7. A Koreish chieftain commits a raid near Medina, A. H. 1 _ib. _ 8. The Koreish march to attack Medina. Battle of Badr _ib. _ 9. Attack by Abu Sofian upon Medina, A. H. 2 12 10. Battle of Ohad 12 11. Mohammad's prestige affected by the defeat _ib. _ 12. Abu Sofian threatened the Moslems with another attack next year 13 13. The Koreish again attack Medina with a large army. Mohammad defends the city. The enemy retire. A. H. 5 14 14. Mohammad with his followers advanced to perform the lesser pilgrimage of Mecca. The Koreish oppose Mohammad, who return disappointed. The treaty of Hodeibia 15 15. Violation of the treaty by the Koreish and their submission 16 16. Two other tribes assume the offensive _ib. _ _III. --The Defensive Character of the Wars. _ 17. Verses from the Koran in support of the defensive character of the wars 25 18. What the above quoted verses show 26 19. Justification of the Moslems in taking up arms against their aggressors 27 20. The first aggression after the Hegira was not on the part of Mohammad 28 21. The alleged instances examined 29 22. Hamza and Obeida's expeditions _ib. _ 23. Abwa, Bowat, and Osheira expeditions 30 24. The affair at Nakhla 31 25. At Badr Mohammad came only in his defence 33 26. The first aggression after the Hegira if from Mohammad, might fairly be looked upon as retaliation 34 _IV. --The Jews. _ 27. The Jews broke treaties _ib. _ 28. Bani Kainukaa, Bani Nazeer, Khyber, and Ghatafán 35 29. Notice of them in Koran 37 30. The judgment of Sád 38 31. Defensive character of the expedition against the Jews of Khyber 40 _V. --The Christians or Romans. _ 32. Tabúk, the last expedition _ib. _ 33. Description of the wars concluded 41 _VI. --The Intolerance. _ 34. Mohammad never taught intolerance 43 35. In what sense the wars were religious wars 44 36. The alleged verses of intolerance explained 45 37. Sir William Muir quoted 47 38. Comment on the above quotation 50 39. Object of Mohammad's wars 51 _VII. --The Ninth Chapter or Sura Barát. _ 40. The opening portion of the IX Sura of the Koran only relates to the Koreish who had violated the truce 55 _VIII. --The alleged Interceptions of the Koreish Caravans. _ 41. The nine alleged interceptions of the Koreish caravans 57 42. The interceptions were impossible under the circumstances in which Mohammad was placed 59 43. The interceptions, if occurred, were justified by way of reprisal 60 _IX. --The alleged Assassinations. _ 44. Instances of the alleged assassinations cited 61 45. Mr. Stanley Poole quoted 62 46. Asma-bint Marwan 63 47. The story deserves not our belief 64 48. Abu Afak 65 49. Kab, son of Ashraf 66 50. Mohammad could never have had any share in Kab's murder 68 51. Sofian bin Khalid 69 52. Justification of Sofian's alleged murder 70 53. Abu Rafe 72 54. Oseir bin Zarim 73 55. The intended assassination of Abu Sofian 74 56. Irving and Muir quoted; concluding remarks 76 _X. --The alleged Cruelties in executing Prisoners of War and others. _ 57. Treatment of the prisoners of war _ib. _ 58. Law of nations regarding the prisoners of war 77 59. The execution of Nadher Ibn Harith 79 60. The execution of Okba 80 61. Free liberty granted to Ozza, a prisoner of war 81 62. Abul Ozza proved a traitor and was executed _ib. _ 63. The execution of Moavia Ibn Mughira _ib. _ 64. Justification of Mughira's execution 82 65. The intended execution of the prisoners of Badr and the wrong version of Sir W. Muir 83 66. Mohammad was never blamed in the Koran for releasing prisoners 84 67. The Koran enjoins the prisoners of war to be either freely liberated or ransomed, but neither executed nor enslaved 87 68. High treason of the Bani Koreiza against Medina and their execution 88 69. The whole of the Bani Koreiza were never executed _ib. _ 70. The women and children of Bani Koreiza were never sold 89 71. The exaggerated number of persons executed 91 _XI. --Some Miscellaneous Objections refuted. _ 72. The execution of Omm Kirfa for brigandage 92 73. The alleged mutilation of the Urnee robbers 93 74. Amputation or banishment substituted temporarily in place of imprisonment for want of a well organized system of jails 95 75. Torture of Kinana 96 76. The alleged execution of a singing girl 97 77. The charitable spirit of Mohammad towards his enemies 98 78. Abu Basir not countenanced by the Prophet in contravention to the spirit of the treaty of Hodeibia 101 79. Nueim not employed by the Prophet to circulate false reports in the enemy's camp 102 80. Deception in war allowed by the International Law _ib. _ 81. Lecky's standard of morality 104 82. The alleged permission to kill the Jews 106 83. Sir W. Muir quoted 108 84. The expulsion of the Bani Nazeer _ib. _ 85. Their fruit-trees were not cut down 109 86. Females and the treaty of Hodeibia 110 87. Stanley defended 111 88. Marriage a strict bond of union 113 _The Popular Jihád. _ 89. The Koran enjoins only defensive wars 114 90. The Mohammadan Common Law and the Jihád 116 91. When is Jihád a positive injunction _ib. _ 92. The Hedáya quoted and refuted 117 93. Rule of interpretation 118 94. The Common Law and its commentators 119 95. Kifáya quoted 120 96. Further quotations 121 97. The _Kifáya_ refuted 122 98. S. IX, 5, discussed 123 99. S. II, 189, discussed _ib. _ 100. S. II, 189, and VIII, 40, are defensive 124 101. All injunctions were local and for the time being 125 102. _Ainee_ quoted and refuted _ib. _ 103. _Sarakhsee_ quoted and refuted 126 104. _Ibn Hajar_ quoted 128 105. _Ibn Hajar_ refuted 129 106. _Halabi_ quoted _ib. _ 107. _Halabi_ refuted 132 108. _Ainee_ again quoted and refuted _ib. _ 109. Continuation of the above 133 110. Traditions quoted and refuted _ib. _ 111. Early Moslem legists against the Jihád 134 112. Biographical sketches of the legists 135 113. European writers' mistakes 137 114. Sir W. Muir quoted and refuted 138 115. Islam not aggressive 139 116. Mr. Freeman quoted and refuted 140 117. The Revd. Mr. Stephens quoted and refuted 141 118. Mr. Bosworth Smith quoted and refuted 143 119. Mr. George Sale quoted and refuted _ib. _ 120. Major Osborn quoted 146 121. Major Osborn refuted 149 122. The IX Sura of the Koran _ib. _ 123. The Revd. Mr. Wherry quoted 150 124. Example cited from Jewish history explained 152 125. Mosaic injunctions 153 126. The Revd. Mr. Hughes quoted and refuted 154 127. Meaning of the word Jihád 155 128. Sura XLVIII, 5, explained 156 129. The Revd. Malcolm MacColl quoted 157 130. The untenable theories of the Mohammadan Common Law 158-161 APPENDIX A. 1. Jihád or Jihd in the Koran does not mean war or crusade 163 2. Classical meaning of Jihád, &c. 164 3. Post-classical or technical meaning of Jihád 165 4. The classical logic and Arabian poets _ib. _ 5. The conjugation and declination of Jahd or Jihád in the Koran 166 6. The number of instances in which they occur in the Koran 167 7. In what sense they are used in the Koran 168 8. Conventional significations of Jihád 169 9. Mohammadan commentators, &c. , quoted 170 10. When the word Jihád was diverted from its original signification to its figurative meaning of waging religious wars 171 11. All verses of the Koran containing the word Jihád and its derivations quoted and explained 176 12. The above verses quoted with remarks 177 _The Meccan Suras. _ 13. _Lokman_, XXXI, 14 _ib. _ 14. _Furkan_, XXV, 53, 521 178 15. _The Pilgrimage_, XXII, 76, 78 _ib. _ 16. _The Bee_, XVI, 108, 111 179 17. _The Spider_, XXIX, 5 180 18. _Ibid_, 7 _ib. _ 19. _Ibid_, 69 _ib. _ 20. _The Bee_, XVI, 40 181 21. _Creator_, XXXV, 40 _ib. _ _The Medinite Suras. _ 22. _The Cow or Heifer_, II, 215 182 23. _Al Amran_, III, 136 _ib. _ 24. _The Spoils_, VIII, 73 183 25. _Ibid. _ 75 _ib. _ 26. _Ibid. _ 76 _ib. _ 27. _The Cattle_, VI, 109 _ib. _ 28. _Mohammad_, XLVII, 33 184 29. _Battle Array_, LXI, 11 _ib. _ 30. _Woman. _ IV. 97 185 31. _Light. _ XXIV, 52 _ib. _ 32. _The Forbidding. _ LXVI, 9 _ib. _ 33. _The Immunity. _ IX, 74 186 36. _The Tried_, LX, 1 187 35. Hatib's _Story_ 188 36. _The Apartment_, XLIX, 15 _ib. _ 37. _The Immunity_, IX, 16 _ib. _ 38. _Ibid_. 19 _ib. _ 39. _Ibid_, 20 189 40. _Ibid_, 24 _ib. _ 41. _Ibid_, 41 _ib. _ 42. _Ibid_, 44 190 43. _Ibid_, 82 _ib. _ 44. _Ibid_, 87 _ib. _ 45. _Ibid_, 89 191 46. _The Table_, V, 39 _ib. _ 47. _Ibid_, 58 _ib. _ 48. _Ibid_, 59 _ib. _ 49. Jihád does not mean the waging of war 192 50. _Katal_ and _Kitál_ _ib. _ 51. Conclusion _ib. _ APPENDIX B. 1. Slavery and concubinage not allowed by the Koran 193 2. Measures taken by the Koran to abolish future slavery 194 3. None of the prisoners of war was enslaved 196 4. _Bani Koreiza_ not enslaved 198 5. _Rihana_ 201 6. Omar, the second Khalif, liberated all the Arab slaves 202 7. Concubinage 203 8. Maria the Coptic 204 9. Despatch of _Mokowkas_ 205 10 & 11. Maria neither a slave nor a concubine 207 12. Maria had no son 209 13. The story of Maria and Haphsa a spurious one 211 14. The affair not noticed in the early biographies 212 15. Sir W. Muir's authority not valid _ib. _ 16. The best commentators and traditionalists refute the story 214 17. The story not accredited by the Koran _ib. _ 18. The story when fabricated _ib. _ 19. Zeinab's case 215 20. The story a spurious one 216 21. Sir W. Muir's conjectures not justified 217 22. A wrong translation of Sir W. Muir 219 23. In Zeinab's case no exceptional privilege was secured 220 24. The false story traced to _Mukatil_ _ib. _ 25. _Katádas_ conjectural interpretation not warranted 222 26. Other conjectures 223 APPENDIX C. I. --The verses of the Koran referring to the persecution of the Koreish at Mecca 225 II. --The verses of the Koran referring to the aggressions of the Koreish at Medina as well as those of the inhabitants thereof _ib. _ III. --The verses of the Koran alluding to the wars of defence against the Koreish and Arabs, &c. , with several references to their aggressions _ib. _ IV. --The verses of the Koran alluding to the various battles 226 INTRODUCTION. [Sidenote: Object of the book. ] 1. In publishing this work, my chief object is to remove the general anderroneous impression from the minds of European and Christian writersregarding Islam, that Mohammad waged wars of conquest, extirpation, aswell as of proselytizing against the Koreish, other Arab tribes, theJews, and Christians;[1] that he held the Koran in one hand and thescimitar in the other, and compelled people to believe in his mission. Ihave endeavoured in this book, I believe on sufficient grounds, to showthat neither the wars of Mohammad were offensive, nor did he in any wayuse force or compulsion in the matter of belief. [Footnote 1: "He now occupied a position where he might become the agentfor executing the divine sentence, and at the same time triumphantlyimpose the true religion on those who had rejected it. " The Life ofMahomet, by Sir W. Muir, page 211. London, 1877. (New Edition. ) "The free toleration of the purer among the creeds around him, which theProphet had at first enjoined, gradually changes into intolerance. Persecuted no longer, Mohammad becomes a persecutor himself; with theKoran in one hand, and scymitar in the other, he goes forth to offer tothe nations the three-fold alternative of conversion, tribute, death. "--Mohammed and Mohammedanism, by Mr. R. Bosworth Smith, page 137. Second Edition. ] [Sidenote: Early wrongs of the Moslems. ] [Sidenote: Justification in taking up arms, if taken. ] 2. All the wars of Mohammad were defensive. He and those who tookinterest in his cause were severely oppressed at intervals, and were ina sort of general persecution at Mecca at the hands of the ungodly andfierce Koreish. Those who were weak and without protection had to leavetheir city, and twice fly to the Christian land of Abyssinia, pursued bythe wrathful Koreish, but in vain. Those who remained at Mecca weresubject to all sorts of indignities, malignity and a deprivation of allreligious and social liberty, because they had forsaken the inferiordeities of the Koreish, and believed in the only ONE GOD of Mohammad, inwhose mission they had full belief. Mohammad and his followers had everysanction, under the natural and international law, then and there towage war against their persecutors with the object of removing the(_fitnah_) persecution and obtaining their civil rights of freedom andreligious liberty in their native city. [Sidenote: Commencement of the state of war. ] [Sidenote: The Koreish being public enemies were liable to betreated as such. ] 3. The fierce persecutions renewed by the Koreish at the time of theexpulsion of the Moslems from Mecca were acts of hostility tantamount toa declaration of war. From that time commenced the state of war betweenthe parties. In the Arab society at Mecca there was neither an organizedGovernment, nor any distinction between a public and private person andproperty. There was no regular army in the State, and what existed wasnot a permanently organized body, so provided with external marks thatit could be readily identified. The form of Government at Mecca waspatriarchal, and the chiefs of the Koreish and the citizens of Medinathemselves constituted an army when occasion arose. Therefore, since thecommencement of hostilities or the state of war, every individual of theKoreish or the Meccans was a public enemy of the Moslems, and liable tobe treated as such in his person and property, except those who wereunable to take part in the hostilities, or, as a matter of fact, abstained from engaging in them. Therefore it was lawful for the Moslemsto threaten or to waylay the caravans of the enemy, which passed to andfrom Mecca close to Medina, and also to attack the Koreish at Mecca, ifthey could possibly do so. [Sidenote: But the Moslems could not take up arms to redress theirwrongs under certain circumstances. ] 4. But as the people amongst whom the Prophet and his fugitive Moslemsnow sojourned had only pledged to defend them at Medina, the flyingMohammadans could not take up arms against their aggressors, theKoreish, to defend their rights of religious liberty and citizenship, much less of taking arms to compel the non-believers to believe inMoslem faith, and so they preferred to live in peace at Medina, andenjoy the blessings of their new religion without any disturbance fromwithout, if possible. [Sidenote: Moslems otherwise engaged at Medina had no intention ofsuffering the horrors of war by taking the initiative. ] [Sidenote: But were in imminent danger from the enemy. ] 5. In fact, the Moslems, after suffering so long such heavy persecutionsat Mecca, had at length got an asylum of peace at Medina, where they hadvery little desire left to entertain any idea of commencing hostilitiesor undergoing once more the horrors of war, and were too glad to live inpeace after their last escape. The people of Medina had only agreed todefend the Prophet from attack, not to join him in any aggressive stepstowards the Koreish. The attention of Mohammad and his followers who hadfled with him was mainly occupied in preaching and teaching the tenetsof Islam, in establishing a fraternity between the refugees and thecitizens, in building a house for prayer, in providing houses forrefugees, in contracting treaties of neutrality with the Jews of Medinaand other surrounding tribes, Bani Zamra (a tribe connected with Mecca)and also with Bani Mudlij (a tribe of Kinana related to the Koreish), inanticipation of the impending danger[2] from the Koreish, who hadpursued them on the similar occasions before, and in organizing, aboveall these, some of the religious and civil institutions for theMoslems, who were now fast assuming the position of an independentsociety or commonwealth. Under such circumstances, it was next toimpossible for Mohammad or his adherents to think of anything like anoffensive war with their inveterate foes, or to take up arms forproselytizing purposes. [Footnote 2: See Sura XXIV, verse 54. ] [Sidenote: The Koreish first attacked the Moslems at Medina. They couldnot forbear the escape of the Moslems. ] 6. The Koreish, seeing the persecuted had left almost all their nativelands for a distant city out of their approach, except by a militaryexpedition, and losing Mohammad, for whose arrest they had tried theirutmost, as well as upon hearing the reception, treatment, religiousfreedom and brotherly help the Moslems received and enjoyed at Medina, could not subdue their ferocious animosity against the exiles. Thehostility of the Koreish had already been aroused. The severity andinjustice of the Koreish was so great, that when, in 615 A. D. , a partyof 11 Moslems had emigrated to Abyssinia, they had pursued them toovertake them. And again, in 616 A. D. , when the persecution by theKoreish was hotter than before, a party of about 100 Moslems had fledfrom Mecca to Abyssinia, the Koreish sent an embassy to Abyssinia toobtain the surrender of the emigrants. There is every reason to believethat the Koreish, enraged as they were on the escape of the Moslems intheir third and great emigration in 622 A. D. , would naturally havetaken every strong and hostile measure to persecute the fugitives. [3] It was in the second year from the general expulsion of the Moslems fromMecca that the Koreish, with a large army of one thousand strong, marched upon the Moslems at Medina. Medina being 250 miles or 12 stagesfrom Mecca, the aggressive army, after marching 8 stages, arrived atBadr, which is 3 or 4 stages from Medina. Mahommad--with only 300Moslems, more being from among the people of Medina than therefugees--came out of Medina in self-defence to encounter the Koreish, and the famous battle of Badr was fought only at thirty miles fromMedina. There could be no doubt that the affair was purely andadmittedly a defensive one. Sura XXII, verses 39-42, copied at page 17 of this book, was firstpublished in the matter of taking up arms in self-defence after thebattle of Badr. [Footnote 3: The idea of forbearance on the part of the Koreish, asentertained by Sir W. Muir, is not borne out by their former conduct ofpersecuting the believers and pursuing the fugitives among them. Hesays: "Mahomet and Abu Bakr trusted their respective clans to protecttheir families from insult. But no insult or annoyance of any kind wasoffered by the Coreish. Nor was the slightest attempt made to detainthem; although it was not unreasonable that they should have beendetained as hostages against any hostile incursion from Medina"[A]. Theywere contemplating a grand pursuit and attack on the Moslems, and had noreason to detain the families of Mahomet and Abu Bakr as hostages whilstthey could not think that the Moslems will take the initiative, as theywere too glad to escape and live unmolested. ] [Footnote A: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol II, page 265. ] [Sidenote: The three battles waged by the Koreish against Mohammad. ] 7. The Koreish carried on three aggressive battles against the Moslemsat Medina. The first, called the Battle of Badr, took place at thirtymiles from Medina, the Koreish having come down 250 miles from Mecca. The second, called the Battle of Ohad, was fought at a distance of onemile from Medina, the enemy having advanced 250 miles from Mecca. Thethird was the battle of confederates, in which they had mustered an armyof ten thousand strong. The city was besieged for several days, and theMoslems defended themselves within the walls of Medina which they hadentrenched. These were the only battles between the Koreish andMohammad, in each the latter always acted on the defensive. Neither heattacked the Koreish offensively to take revenge, nor to compel them byforce of arms to accept his religion. [Sidenote: These wars were purely in defence, not to redress theirwrongs or to establish their rights. ] Even these three battles were not waged by Mohammad to redress wrong orestablish imperilled rights. They were only to repel force by right ofself-defence. Had Mohammad and his Moslems invaded Mecca and foughtbattles against the Koreish there, he would have been justified forwaging war to redress the injuries of person and property inflicted bythe Meccans on the Moslems whom they were tormenting for their religionand had expelled them from their homes, and had even barred theiryearly visitation to the shrine of Kaába. A war which is undertaken forjust causes, to repel or avert wrongful force, or to establish a right, is sanctioned by every law, religious, moral or political. [Sidenote: The battle of Badr was defensive. ] 8. Sir W. Muir, the great advocate for the aggressive Koreish, holdsthat the war of Badr was "brought on by Mahomet himself, "[4] and that heintended to surprise the caravan of the Koreish returning from Syriaunder the charge of Abu Sofian, and had come out to Medina to waylay it. Abu Sofian sent for an army of the Koreish for his aid, and thuscommenced the battle of Badr. I have given my reasons at pages 74-76 ofthe book to show that this is a false account. I will point out fromcontemporary records, _i. E. _, the Koran, that Mohammad neither meant, nor had he come out of Medina, to attack the caravan. [Sidenote: Reasons for the same. ] I. The verses 5 and 6 of Sura VIII[5] show that a part of the believerswere quite averse to Mohammad's coming out of Medina on the occasion ofthe battle of Badr. Had their mission been one of plundering richcaravans, as it is generally alleged, there could be no reason for thataversion of a party of believers who are accused so often of a hostileattitude towards the Koreish, and possessed of that great love of bootyand adventure so prominent among the Arabs. The fact is, a party ofbelievers had disputed with Mohammad the necessity of the combat and itsprobable result outside Medina. They preferred to defend themselveswithin its walls. This argument is against the allegation that Mohammadwith his followers had started to waylay the caravan, and the Koreishhad come only to rescue it. II. The 43rd[6] verse of the same Sura shows that it was by a mereaccident or coincidence that all the three parties of the Moslems, theKoreshite army and the caravan had arrived, and encamped close to Badrin front of each other. This is an argument against those who say thatMohammad had intentionally come to Badr to waylay the caravan there. [7]There was, in fact, no predetermination on the part of Mohammad eitherto waylay the caravan, or encounter the Koreish army at Badr. Mohammadwith his followers had come out only to check the advancing enemy in hisself-defence. III. The seventh[8] verse of the same Sura shows that while the partieshad so accidentally encamped close to each other, the Moslems haddesired then and there only to attack the caravan, as a reprisal or byway of retaliation, instead of combating with the Koreish army. This isan argument in support of my contention that there was no previousarrangement to attack the caravan. IV. The same verse also shows that Mohammad had no intention ofattacking the caravan either before his coming out of Medina, as it isalleged by ignorant people, or after coming at Badr in front of theenemy's army. V. Sura VIII, verse 72, [9] which treats of the prisoners of the wartaken at Badr, expressly notes the treachery of the Meccans before theirbeing taken prisoner, and refers obviously to their aggressively settingout of Mecca to attack the Moslems at Medina. VI. Sura IX, verse 13, [10] at a subsequent event of the violation ofthe truce of Hodeibia by the Koreish, very distinctly charges them withattacking first and waging offensive war and being aggressive. As therewas no war or attack from the Koreish on the Moslems before Badr, Iconclude that in the war of Badr the Koreish were aggressive. [Footnote 4: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 255, _foot-note_. Thisnote has been expunged in the New Edition of "The Life": _Vide_ page317. ] [Footnote 5: 5. "_Remember_ how thy Lord caused thee to go forth fromthy home on _a mission_ of truth, and verily a part of the believerswere quite averse to it. " 6. "They disputed with thee about the truth after it had been madeclear, as if they were being led forth to death and saw it before them. "Sura VIII. ] [Footnote 6: 43. "When ye were encamped on the near side of the valley, and they were on the further side, and the caravan was below you, if yehave made an engagement to _attack_, ye would assuredly have failed theengagement; but _ye were led into action notwithstanding_, that Godmight accomplish the thing _destined_ to be done. " Sura VIII. ] [Footnote 7: Muir's Life of Mahomet. New Edition, page 226. ] [Footnote 8: "And _remember_ when God promised you that one of the twotroops should fall to you, and ye desired that they who had no armsshould fall to you: but God purposed to prove true the truth of hiswords, and to cut off the uttermost part of the infidels. "] [Footnote 9: "But if they seek to deal treacherously with thee--theyhave already dealt treacherously with God before! Therefore hath Hegiven you power over them. "] [Footnote 10: "Will ye not do battle with a people who have broken theircovenant and aimed to expel your Apostle and attacked you first? Willyou dread them?"] [Sidenote: Mohammad, owing to the attacks, inroads and threateninggatherings from the Koreish and other Arab tribes, had hardly time tothink of offensive measures. ] 9. But Mohammad, harassed and attacked every year by the Koreish andother hostile Arab tribes, had hardly any time to wage an aggressive waragainst his Koreshite foes, to establish his imperilled rights, or toredress the injuries of the Moslems or his own wrong; much less oftaking up arms to compel them to renounce idolatry and believe in hisDivine mission. During the first year after their expulsion from Mecca, the Moslems were in constant danger from the ferocity of the Koreish, and when Mohammad was contracting treaties of neutrality with theneighbouring tribes, Kurz-bin-Jábir, a Koreish of the desert, committeda raid upon Medina. In the course of the second year the Koreish foughtthe battle of Badr, followed by a petty inroad of theirs upon Medina atthe end of the year. The Bani Nazeer treasoned against Medina by givingintelligence to, and entertaining, the enemy. In the beginning of thethird year, the nomad tribes of Suleim and Ghatafán, inhabitants of theplains of Najd, and descendants of a stock common with the Koreish, twice projected a plundering attack upon Medina. At the same time theMoslems were defeated at the battle of Ohad, near Medina, by theKoreish, which circumstance greatly affected the prestige of theProphet, who was threatened with a similar fate the next year by hisvictorious enemies. With the opening of the fourth year, the inimicalspirit of many of the Bedouins, as well as that of the Jews of BaniNazeer, was perceptible, and in various quarters large masses wereorganized to act against Mohammad and to take advantage of the defeat atMedina. The tribes of Bani Asad and Bani Lahyán were brought together tofollow the victory of the Koreish at Ohad. And last, not least, theMoslem missionaries were cut to pieces at Ráji and Bir Máuna. At theclose of the year, the people of Medina were alarmed by an exaggeratedaccount of the preparations at Mecca to attack Medina as promised lastyear (Sura III, v. 176). During the fifth year certain tribes ofGhatafán were assembling with suspicious purposes at Zat-al-Rikaa andthe marauding bands near Dumatal Jandal threatened a raid upon Medina. The Bani Mustalik, a branch of Khozaa, hitherto friendly to Mohammad'scause, took up arms with a view of joining the Koreish in the intendedattack upon Medina. At the end of the year, the Koreish, joined by animmense force of the Bedouin tribes, [11] marched against Medina, andlaid siege to it for many days. The Bani Koreiza, having defected fromMohammad, joined the Koreish army when Medina was besieged. In the beginning of the sixth year Uyeina, the chief of the BaniFezárá, had committed an inroad upon Medina. [12] A Medinite caravan, under the charge of Zeid-bin-Háris, was seized and plundered by the BaniFezárá. [13] In the month of Zul-Kada, (the eleventh month of the Arablunar year), when war was unlawful throughout Arabia, but much more sowithin the sacred precincts of Mecca, Mohammad and his followers, longing to visit the house of their Lord and the sacred places aroundit, and to join the yearly pilgrimage which they had grown from theirchildhood to regard as an essential part of their social and religiouslife, not to mention their intense desire of seeing their houses andfamilies from which they were unjustly expelled, started from Medina forperforming the lesser pilgrimage. They were under the impression that, in the peaceful habits of pilgrims, the Koreish would be morally boundby every pledge of national faith to leave them unmolested, and Mohammadhad promised them a peaceful entry. But the Koreish armed themselves andopposed the progress of the Moslems towards Mecca, notwithstanding thepious object and unwarlike attitude of the pilgrims. At length a treaty, in terms unfavourable to the Moslems, but in fact a victory won byIslam, was concluded by Mohammad and the Koreish at Hodeibia. By thispeace war was suspended for ten years. From my brief sketch of Mohammad's first six years' sojourn in Medina, it is evident that during this time Medina was constantly in a sort ofmilitary defence. The Moslems were every moment in the danger of aninvasion, attack, or inroad from without, and treachery, conspiracy andtreason from within. They either had to encounter superior numbers or todisperse hostile gathering or to chastise sometimes marauding tribes. SoMohammad could scarcely breathe freely at Medina, but much less could hefind time and opportunity to mature a scheme of attacking the Koreish atMecca in order to revenge himself and his refugees for the persecutionswhich the Koreish had inflicted on the Moslems, to redress their wrongs, and to re-establish their rights of civil and religious liberty, or tomake converts of them or any other tribes at the point of sword. [Footnote 11: Bani Ashja, Murra Fezárá, Suleim, Sád, Asad, and severalclans of Ghatafán, the Jews of Wady-al-Koraa and Khyber. ] [Footnote 12: A party of Moslems at Zil Kassa was slain, and Dihya, sentby Mohammad to the Roman Emperor, on his return, was robbed of everything by the Bani Juzám beyond Wady-al-Kora. ] [Footnote 13: The Jews at Khyber were enticing the Bani Fezárá and BaniSad-bin-Bakr and other Bedouin tribes to make depredations upon Medina. ] [Sidenote: Armed opposition of the Koreish to the Moslem pilgrims in thevicinity of Mecca. ] [Sidenote: Mohammad proclaimed war against the opposing Koreish toobtain the right of civil and religious liberty at Mecca. ] 10. It was only when the Moslems, unarmed as they were in pilgrim'sgarb, were opposed by the armed Koreish, who had encamped at Zú Towa, clothed in panther's skin, or, in other words, with a firm resolution tofight to the last, and when Osman, the Moslem envoy to Mecca, wasactually placed in confinement, [14] of whom the rumour was constantlyrife that he was murdered at Mecca, and when a party of the Koreish hadactually attacked the camp of Mohammad, [15] that excitement, alarm andanxiety prevailed in the Moslem camp, and Mohammad took a solemn oathfrom the Faithful to stand by their cause even unto death. (SuraXLVIII. [16]) In the meantime appeals were received from the Moslemsdetained in confinement at Mecca, and otherwise oppressed fordeliverance. _Vide_ Sura IV, verses 77, 99, 100; Sura VIII, verses 72, 73. He, on this occasion, proclaimed a war with the Koreish in the eventof their attacking first, and enjoining the believers to redress theirearlier and later wrongs, to establish their civil and religiousliberty, to have free access to their native city, to have the freeexercise of their religion, and to make away with the oppressions ofKoreish once for all. The following verses were published on the occasion:--Sura II, verses186-190, 212-215. The Sura XLVIII afterwards had reference to theoccasion, specially verses 10, 22-27. They are quoted in pp. 17-19. [Sidenote: The war thus proclaimed did not take place. ] But happily a truce was agreed upon, and not a drop of blood was shed oneither side. Thus the injunctions contained in the verses referred toabove were never carried out. Mohammad, in proclaiming this war, had allthe laws and justice on his side. Even this war, had it been waged, would have been defensive, undertaken for the purpose of establishingthe civil rights of the Moslems and their religious liberty, hithertounjustly denied them. [Footnote 14: Ibn Hisham, p. 746. ] [Footnote 15: _Ibid. _ 745, see Sura XLVIII. ] [Footnote 16: Mohammad had gained over some of the Bedouin tribes in thedirection of Mecca, and were on friendly terms with him. At this timethey were summoned by Mohammad to join him if there be a war. They didnot join him except a very few. ] [Sidenote: The Koreish again commit hostilities and violate theirpledges. ] [Sidenote: War declared against those who had violated the truce. ] 11. This truce did not last long. The last act of hostility on the partof the aggressive Koreish was the violation of the truce within twoyears of its being concluded. This resulted in the submission of Mecca. The tribe of Bani Khozáa, [17] who were now converts to Islam since thetruce, and who had entered into an open alliance with Mohammad at thetreaty, were attacked by the Koreish and their allies, the BaniBakr. [18] The aggressed Moslems appealed for aid to Mohammad through adeputation, that displayed their wrongs to Mohammad and his followers invery touching terms, urging in a plaintive tone to avenge them upon thetreacherous murderers. War was declared by Mohammad against theaggressors, who had violated the truce, and attacked the Bani Khozáa, toredress their wrongs. A proclamation was issued declaring immunity fromGod and his Apostle to those who had broken the league and aided theBani Bakr against the Khozáa. Four months' time was allowed them to maketerms, in default of which they were to be warred against, seized, andbesieged, in short, to suffer all the hardships of war. Sura IX, verses1-15, was published declaring the war. It has been copied at pages 22-25of the book. [Sidenote: War not carried out. ] But the threatened war did not actually take place, and Meccasurrendered by a compromise. Thus Mohammad obtained his object of civiland religious liberty of the Moslems at Mecca and Medina, and avertedthe (_fitnah_) persecutions and oppressions of the Koreish withoutactual war or bloodshed, and also secured peace for his followers inexchange of the constant fear and agitation impending over them. Thiswas promised some years ago in Sura XXIV, verse 54, which runs asfollows:-- "God hath promised to those of you who believe and do the things that are right, that He will cause them to succeed other in the land, as He gave succession to those who went before them, and that He will establish for them their religion in which they delight, and that after their fears He will give them security in exchange. They shall worship Me: nought shall they join with Me: And whoso after this believe not, they will be the impious. " [Footnote 17: The Bani Khozáa are also taken notice of in Sura VIII, verses 73-74. ] [Footnote 18: The Bani Bakr, son of Abd Monát, were a branch of Kinánaof the Moaddite stock. ] [Sidenote: War with foes other than the Koreish. ] 12. Now I shall dispense with the Koreish and refer to the wars of otherenemies of the early Moslems. There is only one war of the Arab tribesother than the Koreish noticed in the Koran, and that is the battle ofHonain. In this war the Sakifites were the aggressors. The battle ofMuraisia is not noticed in the Koran, but it is stated by biographersthat information of a new project against him after the defeat at Ohadin the direction of Mecca, and the Bani Mustalik's raising fresh forceswith a view of joining the Koreish in the threatened attack of Medinahaving reached Mohammad, he resolved by a bold attempt to prevent theirdesign. I have shown in the book that the expedition of Mohammad againstKhyber was purely in self-defence. A war undertaken to protect ourselvesfrom the impending danger of an attack from the enemy and with thepurpose of checking its advance, is a defensive war under the Law. I amnot going to treat of expedition of the Bani Koreizá separately, butthis much is necessary to say here, that they had treacherously defectedfrom the Moslem with whom they had entered into a defensive alliance, and had joined the confederate army against the Moslems. For a detailaccount of them, the reader is referred to pages 87-91 of this book. [Sidenote: Expedition to Tabúk to check the advancing enemy. No war tookplace. ] 13. The expedition of Mecca, already described, ended in a submissionand compromise without any resort to arms; that against Tabúk wasundertaken, as it is admitted by all writers, Moslem and European, forpurely defensive purposes. Mohammad was much alarmed on this occasionowing to the threatening news of a foreign invasion against the Moslemcommonwealth. The following verses of the Ninth Sura are most probablydirected towards the Romans and their Jewish and Christian allies, [19]if not towards the Jews of Khyber:-- 29. "Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the Truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled. " 124. "Believers wage war against such of the unbelievers as are your neighbours, and let them assuredly find rigour in you, and know that God is with those who fear him. "--_Sura IX. _ Mohammad returned without any war, and there was no occasion to carryout the injunctions contained in these verses. Mohammad had taken great pains, according to the severity of theimpending danger, to induce the Moslems to go to war in their owndefence. But as the season was hot, and the journey a long one, some ofthem were very backward in doing so. There is a very violent denunciation against those who on various falsepretences held back on the occasion. [Footnote 19: The Jews of Macna Azrúh and Jabra, and the ChristianChiefs of Ayla and Dúma. ] [Sidenote: Number of the wars of Mohammad. ] 14. The above sketch of the hostilities will show that there were onlyfive battles in which actual fighting took place. The biographers ofMohammad and the narrators of his campaigns are too lax in enumeratingthe expeditions led by Mohammad. They have noted down the names andaccounts of various expeditions without having due regard to a rationalcriticism, or without being bound by the stringent laws of the technicalrequirements of traditionary evidence. Consequently, they give usromances of the expeditions without specifying which of them are trueand which fictitious. There are many expeditions enumerated by thebiographers[20] which have, in fact, no trustworthy evidence for theirsupport; some are altogether without foundation, and some of them arewrongly termed as expeditions for warring purposes. _Ghazávát_ iswrongly understood by European writers as meaning "plunderingexpeditions. " Deputations to conclude friendly treaties, missions toteach Islam, embassies to foreign chiefs, mercantile expeditions, pilgrims' processions, parties sent to disperse or chastise a band ofrobbers, or to watch the movements of an enemy, spies sent to bringinformation, and forces dispatched or led to fight with or check anenemy are all called "_Ghazavát_" (expeditions, ) "_Saráya_" and "_Baús_"(enterprises and despatches). Thus the number of Mohammad's expeditionshas been unduly exaggerated, first by biographers, who noted down everyexpedition or warlike enterprise reported in the several authentic andunauthentic traditions long after their occurrences, and did not at alltrouble their heads by criticising them; and secondly by giving allmissions, deputations, embassies, pilgrims' journies, and mercantileenterprises under the category of "_Ghazavát_" and "_Saráya_, " latelyconstrued by European writers as "plundering expeditions, " or "adespatch of body of men with hostile intents. " The biographers, bothArabian and European, have gone so far as to assert that there were 27expeditions led by Mohammad in person, and 74 others headed by personsnominated by himself, making in all 101. This number is given by Ibn SádKátib Wákidi (vide _Kustaláni_, Vol. VI, page 386). Ibn Is-hak alsogives the number of Mohammad's expeditions to be 27, while others led athis order are put down at 38 only (vide _Ibn Hishám_, pp. 972 and 973). Abú Yola has a tradition from Jabir, a contemporary of Mohammad, whomentions only 21 expeditions. But the best authority, Zeid-bin-Arqam, inthe earliest traditions collected by Bokhári, _Kitábul Maghazi_, in twoplaces in his book, reduces the number to 19, including all sorts ofexpeditions and the number in which he was with Mohammad. Out of thesealleged 27, 21, 19 and 17 expeditions, there were only 8[21] or 9, [22]in which an actual fighting took place. Even the latter minimizednumbers are not deserving of confidence. The actual expeditions are asfollow:-- 1. Badr. 2. Ohad. * Muraisi. 3. Ahazáb. * Koreiza. 4. Khyber. * Mecca. 5. Honain. * Táyif. There are no good authorities for the war at Muraisi with the BaniMustalik. There were no fightings with the Koreiza, as their affair wasbut a continuation of the war of Ahzab, and therefore does not require aseparate number. At Mecca there was no action, and it surrendered by acompromise. As for Táyif it was a part of the battle of Honain likeAutás. It was besieged to lay hold of the fugitives who had sought therea shelter, and subsequently the siege was raised. Thus, there remainonly five expeditions, which I have numbered out of nine, in whichMohammad fought against his enemies in his and his followers' defence. Even these five scarcely deserve the name of battle. From a militarypoint of view, they were but petty skirmishes in their results. Theenemy's loss at Badr was 49, at Ohad 20, at Ahzáb 3, at Khyber 93, andat Honain 93; but the last two numbers are open to doubt, and seem to beexaggerated. The loss on the Moslem side was 14, 74, 5, 19, and 17respectively. The whole casualties in these wars on the side of theMoslems were 129, and on that of the enemies 258, which is exactlydouble those of the Moslems, and looks suspicious; hence it must beaccepted with caution. [Footnote 20: The biographers have only compiled or arranged the mass ofpopular romances and favourite tales of campaigns, which had becomestereotyped in their time, but were for the most part the inventions ofa playful fantasy. ] [Footnote 21: Musa-bin-Akba (died 141 A. H. )] [Footnote 22: Ibn Sád and Ibn Is-hak as already alluded to. ] [Sidenote: Mr. Green quoted. ] 15. The Rev. Samuel Green writes:-- "It has been insinuated that Mahomet first took up arms in his own defence, and by more than one historian he has been justified in seeking to repel or prevent the hostilities of his enemies, and to exact a reasonable measure of retaliation. 'The choice of an independent people, ' says Gibbon, 'had exalted the fugitive of Mecca to the rank of a sovereign, and he was invested with the just prerogative of forming alliances, and of waging offensive or defensive war. '[23] That such a sentiment was entertained by a Mahometan does not at all surprise us, nor is it marvellous that it should be justified by an infidel; if it be true, war needs nothing to render laudable but the pretext of former injuries and the possession of power. The defence set up for Mahomet is equally availing for every sanguinary and revengeful tyrant; and men, instead of being bound together by the ties of clemency and mutual forgiveness of injuries, are transformed into fiends, watching for the opportunity of destroying each other. "[24] There was no pretence of former injuries on the part of the Moslems tomake war on the Koreish. They were actually attacked by the Koreish andwere several times threatened with inroads by them and their allies. Soit was not until they were attacked by the enemy that they took up armsin their own defence, and sought to repel and prevent hostilities oftheir enemies. The defence set up for Mohammad is not equally availingof every sanguinary and revengeful tyrant. It was not only that Mohammadwas wronged or attacked, but all the Moslems suffered injuries andoutrages at Mecca, and when expelled therefrom, they were attacked upon, were not allowed to return to their homes, and to perform the pilgrimagethere. The social and religious liberty, a natural right of everyindividual and nation, was denied them. A cruel or revengeful tyrant maynot be justified in taking up arms in his own defence, or in seeking toredress his personal wrongs and private injuries; but the whole Moslemcommunity at Mecca was outraged, persecuted and expelled, --and theentire Mohammadan commonwealth at Medina was attacked, injured andwronged, --their natural rights and privileges were disregarded--aftersuch miseries the Moslems took up arms to protect themselves from thehostilities of their enemies and to repel force by force; and werejustified by every law and justice. The right of self-defence is a part of the law of nature, and it is theindispensable duty of civil society to protect its members. Even if asanguinary and revengeful tyrant were to do so in his own behalf, hewould be quite justified in this particular act. A just war, that is oneundertaken for just causes to repel or revert wrongful force, or toestablish a right, cannot be impeached on any ground, religious, moral, or political. But the Moslems had tried every possible means ofobtaining a pacific solution of the difficulty which had arisen betweenthem and their enemies, the Koreish and the Jews, to avert war and itshorrors. Mohammad had repeatedly informed the Koreish that if theydesist they will be forgiven. 88. "But if they desist, then verily God is gracious, merciful. " 189. "But if they desist, then let there be no hostility, save against wrong-doers. "--_Sura II. _ 19. "_O Meccans!_ if ye desired a decision, now hath the decision come to you. It will be better for you to give over _the struggle_. If ye return _to it_, we will return; and your forces, though they be many, shall by no means avail you aught, because God is with the faithful. " 39. "Say to the infidels: If they desist what is now past shall be forgiven them; but if they turn _to it_, they have already before them the doom of the former. "--_Sura VIII. _ And the same was the case regarding the Jews. 104. "Many of those who have Scripture would like to bring you back to unbelief after you have believed, out of selfish envy, even after the truth hath been shown to them. Forgive them then, and shun them till God shall come with his decree. Truly God hath power over all things. "--_Sura II. _ 63. "But if they lean to peace, lean thou also to it; and put thy trust in God. He verily is the hearing, the knowing. "--_Sura VIII. _ 16. . . . "Thou wilt not cease to discover the treacherous ones among them, except a few of them. But forgive them and pass it over. Verily God loveth those who act generously. "--_Sura V. _ But there could be no peace or mutual agreement on the part of the enemyuntil the truce of Hodeibia, which was also violated by them in a shorttime. Even in the wars which were waged for self-preservation, the Prophet hadvery much mitigated the evils which are necessarily inflicted in theprogress of wars. Fraud, perfidy, cruelty, killing women, children andaged persons were forbidden by Mohammad;[25] and a kind treatment of theprisoners of war enjoined. But foremost of these all--slavery, anddomestication of concubinary slaves, the concomitant evils of war--wereabolished by him, ordering at the same time that prisoners of war shouldbe either liberated gratis or ransomed. Neither they were to be enslavednor killed. (_Vide_ Sura XLVII, verses 4 and 5; and Appendix B of thiswork. ) Attacking offensively was forbidden by the Koran (II, 186 _LaTaatadú_, _i. E. _ 'Do not attack first'). Mohammad had taken oaths fromthe Moslems to refrain from plundering (_vide_ page 58 of this book). "All hostilities and plundering excursions between neighbouring tribes that had become Musalman he forbade on pain of death; and this among those who had hitherto lived by plunder or by war, and who he knew might be deterred by such prohibition from joining him. 'Let us make one more expedition against the Temim, ' said a tribe that was almost, but not altogether, persuaded to embrace the faith, 'and then we will become Musalmans. '"[26] "In avenging my injuries, " said he (Mohammad), "molest not the harmless votaries of domestic seclusion; spare the weakness of the softer sex, the infant at the breast, and those who in the course of nature are hastening from this scene of mortality. Abstain from demolishing the dwellings of the unresisting inhabitants; destroy not their means of subsistence, respect their fruit trees, and touch not the palm, so useful to the Syrians for its shade, and delightful for its verdure. "[27] "The Bani Bakr, " writes Sir W. Muir, "meanwhile, foreseeing from the practice of the Prophet that, under the new faith, their mutual enmities would be stifled, resolved upon a last passage of arms with their foes. The battle of _Shaitain_ fought at the close of 630 A. D. Was a bloody and fatal one to the Bani Tamím. "[28] [Footnote 23: "Decline and Fall, Chap. 1. "] [Footnote 24: The Life of Mahomet, founder of the religion of Islamismand of the Empire of the Saracens, by the Rev. Samuel Green, page 126:London, 1877. ] [Footnote 25: Mohammad's instruction to Abdal-Rahman was--"In no caseshalt thou use deceit or perfidy, nor shalt thou kill any child. "--Muir, Vol. IV, p. 11. ] [Footnote 26: 'Quoted by Dr. Cazenove, ' "Christian Remembrancer, "January, 1855, page 71, from Caussin de Perceval. Mohammed &Mohammedanism. By R. Bosworth Smith, Second Edn. , pp. 257 & 258. London, 1876. ] [Footnote 27: An History of Mohammedanism; comprising the Life andCharacter of the Arabian Prophet; by Charles Mills, page 27. London1818. ] [Footnote 28: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. I, Intro. , p. Ccxxvii. London, 1861. ] [Sidenote: Another view of the wars of Mohammad. ] 16. There is another view of the wars of Mohammad held by some of theEuropean and American writers that he commenced hostilities on thecaravans of the Koreish which passed from Medina by way of reprisal andretaliation, [29] and that he at first took up arms in his self-defence, but at last he proclaimed, and waged, offensive wars against theKoreish. [30] I have already shown how improbable the line of action wason the part of Mohammad under the circumstances at Medina; and this lineof policy is quite contrary to the several verses of the Koran on thesubject, all enjoining the waging of wars in self-defence. But supposingthat hostilities were first commenced by Mohammad after the Hegira, thestate of war having commenced at the expulsion of the Moslems fromMecca, it was lawful for him to take up arms to redress the wrongs ofthe Moslems and to establish their lawful right by force of arms. A warcommenced on these grounds is a defensive war, though from a militarypoint of view it may be an offensive one. [31] "The right of self-defence, " writes Kent, a great authority on the International Law, "is part of the law of our nature, and it is the indispensable duty of civil society to protect its members in the enjoyment of their rights, both of person and property. This is the fundamental principle of the social compact. . . . The injury may consist, not only in the direct violation of personal or political rights, but in wrongfully withholding what is due, or in the refusal of a reasonable reparation for injuries committed, or of adequate explanation or security in respect to manifest and impending danger. "[32] [Footnote 29: Sir W. Muir doubts the intense hatred and bitter crueltyattributed by tradition to the Koreish, and says: "In accordance withthis view is the fact that the first aggressions, after the Hegira, weresolely on the part of Mahomet and his followers. It was not untilseveral of their caravans had been waylaid and plundered and blood hadthus been shed that the people of Mecca were forced in self-defence toresort to arms. " The Life of Mahomet, Vol. II, page 265, foot-note. London, 1861. This note disappears in the new edition of 1877. In hiswork "The Coran, " page 24, London, 1878, Sir W. Muir says: "The caravansof Mecca offered a tempting opportunity for reprisals, and severalexpeditions were organized against them. "] [Footnote 30: Mr. G. Sale writes: "He gave out that God had allowed himand his followers to defend themselves against the infidels; and atlength, as his forces increased, he pretended to have the divine leaveeven to attack them. " _The Prelim. Dis. Sect. 11. _ Mr. Henry Coppéewrites regarding Mohammad: "But he soon found that he must take up armsin self defence, and in the thirteenth year of his mission, he announcedthat God permitted him not only to fight in his self-defence, but topropagate his religion by the sword. " History of the Conquest of Spainby the Arab-Moors, by Henry Coppée. Vol. I, page 39. Boston, 1881. ButDr. A. Sprenger makes the object of the wars of Mohammad purelydefensive. He writes:--"The Prophet now promulgated, in the name of God, the law to fight their enemies, in order to put a stop to persecutions;and this became henceforth the watchword of his bloody religion. " TheLife of Mohammad, p. 207: Allahabad, 1851. ] [Footnote 31: M. Bluntschili, a modern authority on the InternationalLaw, holds: "A war undertaken for defensive motives is a defensive war, notwithstanding that it may be militarily offensive. " The InternationalLaw, by William Edward Hall, M. A. , Oxford, 1880, page 320. ] [Footnote 32: Kent's Commentary on International Law. Edited by J. T. Abdy, LL. D. , Second Edition, page 144. ] [Sidenote: Caravans, if waylaid, were by reprisal. ] 17. As regards the threatened attack on the caravans or capturing of it, there are not any satisfactory grounds of proof; but if they wereattacked and captured, I do not see any reason why they should beobjected to. When hostilities commence, the first objects that naturallypresent themselves for detection and seizure are the person and propertyof the enemy. Even under the International Law of most civilizedcountries, the legitimacy of appropriating the enemy's property rests onthe commencement of the state of war. Under the old customs of war abelligerent possessed the right to seize and appropriate all theproperty belonging to an enemy's state or its subjects, of whatever kindthey be or in whatsoever place where the acts of war are permissible. Sothose who object to the early Moslems' threatening, or capturing, orappropriating the person or property of the enemy, and call themrobbery, rapine or brigandage, show their complete ignorance of theInternational Law, ancient or modern. [Sidenote: Intolerance--no compulsory conversion enjoined, or tookplace during Mohammad's life-time. ] 18. The subject of the alleged intolerance on the part of Mohammad, theProphet, towards the unbelievers has been fully discussed in paragraphs34-39 (pp. 41-51). It is altogether a wrong assumption of Europeanwriters that the Koran enjoins compulsory conversion of the unbeliever, or that Mohammad proselytized at the point of the sword. Sir W. Muirwrites:-- [Sidenote: Sir W. Muir quoted. ] "Persecution, though it may sometimes have deterred the timid from joining his ranks, was eventually of unquestionable service to Mahomet. It furnished a plausible excuse for casting aside the garb of toleration; for opposing force to force against those who obstructed the ways of the Lord; and last of all for the compulsory conversion of unbelievers. "[33] Opposing force to force and even redressing our wrongs andre-establishing our imperilled rights is not 'intolerance. ' Mohammad didrepel the force of his enemies when it was quite necessary for theMoslem self-preservation and protection, but he never compelled any ofhis enemies or unbelievers, whether a single individual, or a body ofmen, or a whole tribe, to believe in him. The Koran and historycontradict such an allegation. The Koran everywhere in the Meccan andMedinite Suras preaches complete toleration of every religion. Historynowhere authentically records any instance of Mohammad's enforcingconversion by means of the sword. [Footnote 33: The Life of Mahomet from original sources, by Sir W. Muir, LL. D. New Edition, page 68, London, 1877. See also page 57 of thesame. ] [Sidenote: A brief sketch of the propagation of Islam at Mecca. ] [Sidenote: Conversion at Nakhla. ] 19. Mohammad propagated his religion both at Mecca and Medina before, aswell as after, the Hegira, by persuasion and preaching sustained byreasonable evidence. It prevailed against all persecution and oppositionof the Koreish and Jews. In fact, it flourished and prospered under thesevere persecutions and crushing oppositions by the mere dint of its owntruth. [34] Sometimes the persecution of the Koreish itself was the causeof conversion to the Moslem faith. [35] The number of converts during thefirst three years after the assumption by Mohammad of his propheticaloffice is estimated at fifty. Then commenced the general persecution andthe overwhelming opposition. Mohammad had, in order to prosecute hisendeavours peaceably and without interruption, occupied the house ofArqam, one of his early converts, and there preached and recited theKoran to those who used to be conducted to him. A great multitudebelieved therein; but the brunt of the jealousy and enmity of theKoreish fell upon the converted slaves, as well as upon strangers andbelievers among the lower classes, who had no patron nor protector. Somebelievers, sixteen in number, had already left for Abyssinia. Some cameback and brought tidings of their kind reception there. At this timeabout a hundred Moslems emigrated to Abyssinia. [36] This shows theincreasing number of the converts, who represented for the most partfugitives of Mecca. There were some Christian converts to Islam atAbyssinia also. [37] The Koreish being disquieted by the hospitablereception of the refugees at Abyssinia, and enraged by the refusal ofNajashee to surrender them, sought to stay the progress of secessionfrom their ranks by utterly severing the party of the Prophet fromsocial and friendly communication with them. In the seventh year of theProphet's mission the ban commenced, and lasted for full three years. There could be very few conversions during the period of this wearyseclusion. The efforts of the Prophet were chiefly confined to theconversions of the members of his own noble clan, the Bani Hŕshim, who, though unbelievers in his mission, had resolved to defend his person, and were with him in their confinement. The time of pilgrimage aloneafforded Mohammad a wider field. He preached against idolatry at thefairs and assemblages of the pilgrims[38]. After his release fromimprisonment in the tenth year of his mission, he went to preach atTŕyif, but was ignominiously expelled the city[39]. On his return toMecca he converted a party of the tribe of Jinn[40] (not Genii accordingto the vulgar notion)[41] at Nakhla. After his return from Tŕyif hepreached to an audience of six or seven persons from Medina, whobelieved and spread Islam there. [Footnote 34: I do not mean to say that flourishing under persecution isa convincing proof of the divine origin of a religion. Not that areligion established by force is altogether of human invention. Almostall religions are divine however they may have been established, butflourishing under opposition and persecution is a natural course. Christianity suffered from persecutions and other harrowing evils for300 years, after which time it was established, and paganism abolishedby public authority, which has had great influence in the propagation ofthe one and destruction of the other ever since. ] [Footnote 35: "The severity and injustice of the Cureish, overshootingthe mark, aroused personal and family sympathies; unbelievers sought toavert or to mitigate the sufferings of the followers of the Prophet; andin so doing they were sometimes themselves gained over to his side. " TheLife of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Second Edition, page 68. ] [Footnote 36: Among them were the representatives of the followingtribes or clans of the Koreish, the Háshimites, Omiyyiads, Bani AbdShams, Bani Asad, Bani Abd bin Kosáyy, Bani Abd-ud-Dár, Bani Zohrá, BaniTaym bin Morra, the Mukwhumites, the Jomahites, and the Bani Sahm. _Vide_ Sprenger, page 190, Allahabad, 1851. ] [Footnote 37: _Vide_ Hishamee, page 259. An allusion to these convertsmay be found in Sura V, verses 85 and 86, if it does not refer to thoseof Najrán. ] [Footnote 38: He preached to the following tribes among others:--BaniAamr bin Sasaa, Bani Mohárib, Bani Hafasa (or Khafasa), Bani Fezára, Bani Ghassán, Bani Kalb, Bani Háris, Bani Kab, Bani Ozra, Bani Murra, Bani Hanifa, Bani Suleim, Bani Abs, Bani Nazr, Bani Bakka, Bani Kinda, and Bani Khozaimah. ] [Footnote 39: "There is something lofty and heroic in this journey ofMahomet to Tâyif; a solitary man, despised and rejected by his ownpeople, going boldly forth in the name of God, --like Jonah toNineveh--and summoning an idolatrous city to repentance and to thesupport of his mission. It sheds a strong light on the intensity of hisown belief in the divine origin of his calling. "--The Life of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Vol. II, page 207. ] [Footnote 40: The Arabs also had a similar clan named Bani Shaitán, aclan of the Hinzala tribe, the descendants of Tamim, through Zeid Monatof the Moaddite stock. The Bani Shaitán (the children of Satan) dweltnear Kúfa. --_Vide_ Qalqashandi's Dictionary of Arab Tribes. ] [Footnote 41: Sura XLVI, verses 28, 29. These people were from Nisibinand Nineveh in Mesopotamia. They were Chaldeans, soothsayers, andcabalists. In the book of Daniel the Chaldeans are classed withmagicians and astronomers, and evidently form a sort of the priest classwho have a peculiar "tongue" and "learning" (Dan. I. 4). In Arabic, persons of similar professions were called _Kahins_. Some of this classof people pretended to receive intelligence of what was to come to passfrom certain satans or demons, whom they alleged to hear what passed inthe heavens. Others pretended to control the stars by enchanting them. They produced eclipses of the sun and moon by their alleged efficiencyin their own enchantments. They practised astrology as well as astronomyand fortune-telling. It appears that the Chaldeans (Kaldai or Kaldi) were in the earliesttimes merely one out of the many Cushite tribes inhabiting the greatalluvial plain known afterwards as Chaldea or Babylonia. In process oftime as the Kaldi grew in power, their name prevailed over that of theother tribes inhabiting the country; and by the era of the Jewishcaptivity it had begun to be used generally for all the inhabitants ofBabylonia. It had thus come by this time to have two senses, bothethnic: in the one, it was the special appellative of a particular raceto whom it had belonged from the remotest times; in the other, itdesignated the nation at large in which the race was predominant. Afterwards it was transferred from an ethnic to a mere restricted sense, from the name of a people to that of a priest caste or sect ofphilosophers. The Kaldi proper belonged to the Cushite race. While bothin Assyria and in Babylonia, the sernitic type of speech prevailed forspecial purposes, the ancient Cushite dialect was purely reserved forscientific and religious literature. This is no doubt the "learning" andthe "tongue" to which reference is made in the Bible (Dan. I. 4). Itbecame gradually inaccessible to the great mass of people who hademigrated by means, chiefly, of Assyrian influence. But it was theChaldean learning in the old Chaldean or Cushite language. Hence all whostudied it, whatever their origin or race, were, on account of theirknowledge, termed Chaldeans. In this sense Daniel himself, "the masterof Chaldeans" (Dan. V. 11. ), would, no doubt, have been reckoned amongthem, and so we find Seleucas, a Greek, called a Chaldean by Strabo(XVI. 1, § 6). The Chaldeans were really a learned class, who by theiracquaintance with the language of science became its depositaries. Theywere priests, magicians or astronomers, as their preference for one orother of those occupations inclined them; and in the last of these threecapacities they probably effected discoveries of great importance. TheChaldeans, it would appear, congregated into bodies forming what we mayperhaps call universities, and they all engaged together in it for theirprogress. They probably mixed up to some extent astrology with theirastronomy, even in the earlier times, but they certainly made greatadvance in astronomical science to which their serene sky andtransparent atmosphere specially invited them. In later times they seemcertainly to have degenerated into mere fortune-tellers (_vide_ Smith'sDict. Of the Bible, Art. _Chaldeans_). In their practice of astromancy or enchanting the stars, and inpretending to overhear what passed in the heavens, they, the Jinns, usedto sit on the tops of lofty mansions at night-time for hours offeringsacrifices to the stars and enchanting them. In their peculiar tongueand learning they called this practice "stealing a hearing" and "sittingfor listening" (Suras XV, verse 17, and LXXII, verses 8, 9). Now at the time of Mohammad's assuming the Prophet's office there hadbeen an unusually grand display of numerous falling stars, which atcertain periods are known to be specially abundant. At the same timethere were good many comets visible in different parts of heavens, whichcertainly might have smitten with terror these Jinns, _i. E. _, theastromancers and soothsayers. There was one comet visible in 602 A. D. , and other two appeared in 605 A. D. In 607 A. D. Two more comets werevisible; another one appeared in 608 A. D. Each of the years 614 and 615had one comet. There were also comets visible in 617 A. D. (_vide_Chambers's Descriptive Astronomy). These comets are most probablynoticed in the contemporary record (_i. E. _ the Koran). A comet is called_Tariq_, or "night comer, " in Sura LXXXVI, verse 1; and described as thestar of piercing radiance. (_Annajmus Saqib. Ibid_ 3. ) The _Kahins_ were very much alarmed at the stupendous phenomena of thefalling stars and the comets; and had stopped their soothsaying anddivinations. Whenever they used to sit on their places of listening, enchanting, and divination during night-time, looking at the heavens, their eyes met with showers of shooting stars and brilliant comets whichbewildered them very much. It is said that the first whose attention wasattracted to the unusual shooting stars was a clan of the Sakeefites ofUs-Tayif (Ibn Hisham, page 131). These Jinns, when they were convertedto Islam at Nakhla near Tayif, expressed their bewilderment from theunusual shower of falling stars and the appearance of numerous comets intheir peculiar language:-- "The heaven did we essay but found it filled with mighty garrison and ofdarting flames. " "We sat on some of the seats to listen, but whoever now listenethfindeth a darting flame in ambush for him. " "We know not whether evil be meant for them that are on earth, orwhether their Lord meaneth true guidance for them. "--Sura LXXII, verses8-10. So the pretenders of hearing the discourses of heavenly bodies beingquite harassed by the extraordinary showers of the falling stars, andthe appearances of numerous comets, had stopped their divination. Thiswas taken notice of in the Koran:-- "They overhear not exalted chiefs, and they are darted from every side. " "Driven off and consigned to a lasting torment; while if one steal bystealth then a glistering flame pursueth him. "--Sura XXXVII, verses8-10. "Save such as steal a hearing, and him do visible flames pursue. "--SuraXV, verse 18. "The satans were not sent down with this _Koran_. It beseemed them not, and they had not the power. For they are far removed from thehearing. "--Sura XXVI, verses 210-212. As an instance of terror and bewilderment caused by meteors and shootingstars among credulous people, I will quote the following anecdote: About the middle of the tenth century an epidemic terror of the end ofthe world had spread over Christendom. The scene of the last judgmentwas expected to be in Jerusalem. In the year 999 the number of pilgrims proceeding eastwards, to awaitthe coming of the Lord in that city, was so great that they werecompared to a desolating army. During the thousandth year the number ofpilgrims increased. Every phenomenon of nature filled them with terror. A thunderstorm sent them all upon their knees. Every meteor in the skyseen at Jerusalem brought the whole Christian population into thestreets to weep and pray. The pilgrims on the road were in the samealarm. Every shooting star furnished occasion for a sermon, in which thesublimity of the approaching judgment was the principal topic (_vide_Extraordinary Popular Delusions by Charles Mackay, LL. D. , London, pp. 222 and 223). It was a conceit or imposture of the _Kahins_ to pretend that theirdemons had access to the outskirts of the heavens, and by assiduouseavesdropping secured some of the secrets of the upper world andcommunicated the same to the soothsayers or diviners upon earth. TheJews had a similar notion of the demons (schedim), learning the secretsof the future by listening behind the veil (pargôd). The Koran falsifiedthem in their assertions. It says that the heavens (or the stars) aresafe and protected against the eavesdropping (or enchantments) of thesoothsayers. "We have set the signs of Zodiac in the heavens, and we have decked themforth for the bewilders. " "And we guard them from every stoned satan. "--Sura XV, verses 16, 17. "Verily we have adorned the lower heaven with the adornment of thestars;" "And we have guarded them against every rebellious satan. "--Sura XXXVII, verses 6, 7. ". . . And we have furnished the lower heaven with lights and haveprotected it. . . . "--Sura XLI, verse 11. The Koran further says that the soothsayers impart to their votaries orto those who go to consult them what they have heard from other peopleand are liars:-- "They impart what they have heard, but most of them are liars. "--SuraXXVI, verse 223. It is nowhere said in the Koran that the stars are darted or hurled atthe Satans. Sura LXVII, verse 5, literally means, "of a surety we havedecked the lower heaven with lights and have made them to be (means of)'_Rojúm_' conjectures to the (or for the) devils, _i. E. _ theastrologer. " The primary meaning of _Rajm_ is a thing that is thrown orcast like a stone: pl. '_Rojúm_, ' but it generally means speaking ofthat which is hidden, or conjecturing or speaking by conjecture, as inSura XVIII, verse 21. In Sura XIX, verse 47, the word "_La-arjomannaka_"has been explained both ways, meaning (1) "I will assuredly cast stonesat thee, " and (2) "I will assuredly say of thee, (though) speaking ofthat which is hidden (from me) or unknown (by me), what thou dislikestor hatest. " _Vide_ Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon, page 1048. ] [Sidenote: Rapid stride of Islam at Medina. ] 20. Next year twelve new converts were made from persons who had come tosee the Prophet from Medina. They returned as missionaries of Islam, andIslam spread rapidly in Medina from house to house and from tribe totribe. The Jews looked on in amazement at the people whom they had invain endeavoured from generations to convince of the errors ofpolytheism, and to dissuade from the abominations of their idolatry, suddenly of their own accord casting away idols and professing belief inthe one True God. [42] Thus speedily without let or hindrance, force orcompulsion, did Islam take firm root at Medina and attain to a full andmature growth. There remained not a single house among the Aws andKhazraj tribes[43] of Medina in which there were not believing men andwomen, excepting the branch of the Aws Allah, who were not converts tillafter the siege of Medina. At this time there were many Moslems inMecca, Medina, and Abyssinia, and not a single one of them could be saidto have been converted to Islam by compulsion: on the contrary, theywere used to be forced to renounce Islam. [Footnote 42: "After five centuries of Christian evangelization, we canpoint to but a sprinkling here and there of Christian converts;--theBani Hârith of Najrân: the Bani Hanîfa of Yemâma; some of the Bani Tayat Tayma, and hardly any more. Judaism, vastly more powerful, hadexhibited a spasmodic effort of proselytizm under Dzu Nowâs; but, as anactive and converting agent the Jewish faith was no longeroperative. "--Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. I, page ccxxxix. ] [Footnote 43: The Aws or Khazraj were two branches of the Azdite tribesof Yemen from the Kahlanite stock. After their emigration to the Norththey separated themselves from the Ghassinides and returned to Medina, where they settled. ] [Sidenote: The increasing number of Moslem converts at Mecca after theHegira. ] 21. When the Moslems were obliged to emigrate from Mecca under thesevere Koreishite persecutions, all the followers of the Prophet withthe exception of those detained in confinement or unable to escape fromslavery had emigrated with their families to Medina. But there were manynew converts at Mecca since the expulsion of the Moslems. Those unableto fly from Mecca in the teeth of the oppressions of the wrathfulKoreish (Sura IV. , 77, 79, 100) were increasing. They appealed fordeliverance and aid, while the Moslem pilgrims were near Mecca atHodeibia, six years after the Hegira, and an allusion is made to thegreat number of the Meccan converts, living at Mecca during that time inSura XLVIII, 25. [Sidenote: Disturbed state of the public peace among the tribessurrounding Medina. Internecine wars an obstacle to the propagation ofIslam. ] 22. Irrespective of the wars prosecuted by the Koreish from the Southagainst Mohammad at Medina, and the constant danger of inroad and attackupon Medina from the neighbouring tribes--a great obstacle in thepropagation of Islam which could only be successfully accomplished in astate of peace and tranquility of both parties, --the most important andgreat tribes in the North and Centre of Arabia were at war against eachother during the life of Mohammad, either before his mission from 570 to610 A. D. Or during his public mission from 610 to 632 A. D. Thedisastrous internecine wars were kept up for scores of years and theevils necessarily inflicted in their progress were not confined to thebelligerents only. It required years to remove the evils of war and toefface the traces of misery and sorrow the wars had brought. [44] [Footnote 44: The same remarks apply to the wars fought duringMohammad's lifetime but before his public mission. ] 23. Here I will give a brief sketch of the internecine wars which tookplace among the various Arab tribes during the time of Mohammad. *Wars during Mohammad's Lifetime, between the Arabian Tribes in the Northand Centre of Arabia. * _Before his mission_, 570-610, A. D. (1. ) The battle of Rahrahán between Bani Aamir bin Saasaa and Bani Tamimin Najd, 578, A. D. (2. ) The Bani Abs on the side of Bani Aamir and Bani Zobian on the sideof Tamim, 579, A. D. , at _Sheb Jabala_. (3. ) Sacrilegious war at Táyif called Harb fi-jár, 580-590, A. D. (4. ) Several battles between Bani Bakr and Tamim in 604, A. D. And thefollowing years. _During his mission. _ (A)--_While at Mecca, 610-622, A. D. _ (1. ) The war of Dáhis between Bani Abs and Zobian, the branches ofGhatafán in Central Arabia; lasted forty years, 568 to 609, A. D. (2. ) The battle of Zú-kár between the Bani Bakr and the Persians in theKingdom of Hira, 611, A. D. (3. ) The Bani Kinda and Bani Háris attacked Bath Tamim when they hadretired to Kuláb in the confines of Yemen and repulsed them. (4. ) The Bani Aws and Khazraj of Medina were at war. The battle of Boáswas fought in 615, A. D. The Bani Aws were assisted by two tribes ofGhassan, by Mozeima and the Jewish tribes Nazeer and Koreiza. The BaniKhazraj were supported by Joheina, Ashja and the Jews of Kainuka. (B)--_While at Medina_, 622 to 632, _A. D. _ (1. ) The standing warfare between the Bani Hawázin and the Bani Abs, Zobian, and Ashja of Ghatafán was kept up by assassinations and pettyengagements till they become converts to Islam. (2. ) The Koreish fought two battles of Badr and Ohad against the Moslemsat Medina in 624 and 625, A. D. , respectively. (3. ) Several clans of the great Ghatafán family (the Bani Murra, Ashjaand Fezára) the Bani Suleim and Sád, a branch of Hawázin, and Bani Asadfrom Najd Bedouin tribes, and Bani Koreiza the Jews, had besieged Medinain 627, A. D. , in confederation with the Koreish. (4. ) Bani Tamim and Bani Bakr renewed their hostilities, and from 615 to630, A. D. , several battles occurred between them. The last battle wasthat of Shaitain in 630, A. D. In this year, after the battle, both the tribes were converted toIslam. (5. ) The Bani Ghaus and Jadila branches of Bani Tay in the north ofMedina warred against each other. The war of Fasád continued twenty-fiveyears till they embraced Islam in 632, A. D. [Sidenote: Spread of Islam in the surrounding tribes at Medina after theHegira I-VI. ] 24. During the six eventful years of Mohammad's sojourn at Medina, fromthe Hegira to the truce of Hodeibia, where he was every year attacked orthreatened by other hostile Arab tribes, acting always in self-defence, he had converted several members or almost entire tribes residing roundMedina. Among them were the following:-- 1. The Bani Aslam. [45] 2. Joheina. [46] 3. Mozeina. [47] 4. Ghifár. [48] 5. Saad-bin-Bakr. [49] 6. Bani Ashja. [50] We never find a single instance even in the _Magházis_ (accounts of thecampaigns of Mohammad, however untrustworthy they be) of Mohammad'sconverting any person, families, or branches of tribes by the scimitarin one hand and the Koran in the other. [Footnote 45: The Bani Aslam tribe settled north of Medina in the valleyof Wady-al-Koraa. They were a branch of the Kozaaite tribes descendedfrom Himyar. ] [Footnote 46: Joheina were a branch of Kozaa, the descendants of Himyar. This tribe inhabited in the vicinity of Yenbo, north of Medina. ] [Footnote 47: Mozeina were a tribe of the Moaddite stock of Mecca. Theyinhabited in Najd, north-east of Medina. ] [Footnote 48: Ghifár were sons of Moleil-bin-Zamra, the descendants ofKinána, one of the Moaddite tribes. ] [Footnote 49: Saad-bin-Bakr were a branch of Hawazin. Mohammad had beennursed among them. ] [Footnote 50: The Bani Ashja were a branch of the Ghatafán of the Meccanstock of the Moaddites. The Bani Ashja appear all to have been hostileto Mohammad. They fought against the Prophet at the siege of Medina withfour hundred warriors in their contingent. Sir W. Muir says, "The BaniAshjâ, who had joined in the siege of Medina, gave in their adhesionshortly after the massacre of the Coreitza; they told Mahomet that theywere so pressed by his warring against them, that they could stand outno longer. --K. Wackidi, page 60. " Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, 107, _footnote_. This story is altogether false. We never hear of Mohammadwarring against Bani Ashja; on the contrary, they had themselves invadedMedina. ] [Sidenote: Mecca a barrier against the conversion of the southerntribes. ] 25. Up to this time, notwithstanding the persecutions, exiles and warsagainst Islam, it had spread by the mere force of persuasion among theMeccans, some of whom had emigrated to Abyssinia and most to Medina, thewhole of the influential tribes of Aws and Khazraj at Medina, as well asamong the Jews there, and among some of the tribes in the north, andeast of Medina and the centre of Arabia. But as Mecca in the south haddeclared war against Islam, most of the Arab tribes connected somehowwith the Meccans, and those inhabiting the southern and south-easternparts of Arabia, to whom Mecca served geographically as a barrier, watched the proceedings of the war and the fate of Islam, and had noopportunity of coming to Medina to embrace Islam, nor of having friendlyintercourse with the Moslems, nor of receiving Mohammadan missionariesin the face of the wars waged by the Koreish who were looked upon as theguardians of the Kaaba, the spiritual or religious centre of theidolatrous Arabs. At the end of the last or the fifth year many Bedouintribes, among whom might be counted the Bani Ashja, Murra, Fezara, Suleim, Sad-bin-Bakr and Bani Asad, had furnished several thousand Arabsto the Koreish for the siege of Medina. Only when the aggressions of theKoreish against the Moslems were suspended that the warring tribes andthose of the Central, Southern and Eastern Arabia could think of whatthey had heard of the reasonable preaching of Islam against theiridolatry and superstitions. [Sidenote: Tribal conversions in the sixth year. ] 26. Since the truce of Hodeibia at the end of the sixth year after theHegira Mecca was opened for intercourse, where there were some more andfresh conversions. The Bani Khozaa, descendants of Azd, were convertedto Islam at the truce of Hodeibia. At the pilgrimage in the followingyear some influential men of Mecca adopted Islam. The movement was notconfined to these leading men, but was wide and general. In the seventhyear the following tribes were converted to Islam and their deputationsjoined Mohammad at Khyber: 1. Bani Ashár. [51] 2. Khushain. [52] 3. Dous. [53] [Sidenote: Conversions among several other tribes of the North andNorth-east in A. H. , 8. ] During the same year Mohammad converted several other tribes in thenorth and north-east of Arabia. Among them were-- 1. Bani Abs. 2. Zobián. 3. Murra. 4. Fezara. [54] 5. Suleim. [55] 6. Ozra. 7. Bali. 8. Juzám. [56] 9. Sálaba. [57] 10. Abdul Kays. [58] 11. Bani Tamim. [59] 12. Bani Asad. [60] [Footnote 51: The Bani Ash-ár inhabited Jedda. They were of theKahlánite stock, the descendants of Al-Azd. ] [Footnote 52: The Bani Khushain were a clan of Kozaá, of Himiaritestock. ] [Footnote 53: The Bani Dous belong to the Azdite tribe of the stock ofKahtán. They lived at some distance south of Mecca. They had joinedMohammad at Khyber. ] [Footnote 54: These were the sub-tribes of Ghatafán of the Meccan stock. The chief families of Ghatafán were the Bani Ashja, Zobian, and the BaniAbs. Murra and Fezára were the branches of Zobian. They all inhabitedNajd. Uyenia, the chief of the Bani Fezára, had committed an inroad uponMedina in A. H. 6. In the same year the Bani Fezára had waylaid a Medinacaravan and plundered it. ] [Footnote 55: The Bani Suleim, a branch of the Bani Khasafa and a sistertribe to Hawázin, who lived near Mecca, and in whose charge, Mohammad, when but an infant, was placed, were also a tribe of the Meccan stockdescended through Khasafa from Mozar and Moádd. Bani Suleim, like BaniMurra and Fezára, branches of Ghatafán, had long continued to threatenMohammad with attacks. The Bani Suleim having joined Aamir bin Tofeil, chief of Bani Aamir, a branch of the tribe of Hawázin with their clansUsseya, Ril, and Zakawán, had cut to pieces a party of Moslemmissionaries at Bir Mauna, invited by Abu Bera Amr ibn Málik, a chief ofthe Bani Aamir, who had pledged for their security. The Bani Suleim hadjoined also the Koreish army at the siege of Medina. In the seventhyear, they had slain another body of Moslem missionaries sent to them. ] [Footnote 56: The Bani Ozra were a tribe of Kozaá, like Joheina. They, together with the Bani Bali and Juzám, inhabited the north of Arabia inthe part of the territory belonging to Ghassan. The family of Himyar, descendants from Kahtán in Yemen, had flourished through the line ofKozaá, the Bani Ozza, Joheina and other important tribes to the north ofthe Peninsula on the border of Syria. It has been quoted by Sir W. Muirfrom Katib Wakidi that the chief of the Bani Juzám carried back to thema letter from Mohammad to this tenor: "Whoever accepteth the call ofIslam, he is among the confederates of the Lord; whoever refuseth thesame, a truce of two months is allowed for him for consideration. "(Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 107, _foot-note_). The words "forconsideration" are not in the original Arabic. --_Vide_ Ibn Hisham, p. 963. It is not clear what was meant by the two months' truce he wasadvised to give them, to make terms before he could commencehostilities, if the tradition for which there is no authority be true. This has nothing to do with their compulsory conversions. ] [Footnote 57: Salaba was a branch of the Zobián. ] [Footnote 58: The Bani Abd-ul-Kays are a Moaddite tribe, the descendantsof Rabia. They inhabited Bahrein on the Persian Gulf. ] [Footnote 59: The Bani Tamim were branch of Tábikha, a tribe of theMoaddite stock of Mecca and a sister tribe of Mozeina. They are famousin the history of Najd, a province north-east of Medina, from theconfines of Syria to Yemen. Some of these branches were with Mohammad atthe expeditions to Mecca and Honain. All the branches of the tribes thathad not yet embraced Islam were now converted. ] [Footnote 60: The Bani Asad ibn Khozeima were a powerful tribe residingnear the hill of Katan in Najd. They were of the Moaddite tribe of theMeccan stock. Tuleiba, their chief, had assembled a force of cavalry andrapid camel-drivers to make a raid upon Medina in A. H. 4. They weredispersed by the Moslems. In the next year they joined the Koreish inthe siege of Medina. ] [Sidenote: Surrender of Mecca. A. H. , 8. ] 27. The position of Islam at Mecca was greatly strengthened since thetruce in A. H. 6, by increase in the number of Moslems, influential andleading, as well as of persons of minor note and importance there, consequently the advocates of Islam, peace and compromise were growingin number and confidence. Among the idolatrous Koreish there were nochiefs of marked ability or commanding influence left at Mecca; almostall of them had gone over to the cause of Islam. In the meantime theinfraction of the terms of the truce by the Bani Bakr and Koreish causedthe surrender of Mecca without bloodshed. [Sidenote: The Meccans not compelled to believe. ] 28. Though Mecca had surrendered, all its inhabitants had not alreadybecome converts to Islam. Mohammad did not take any compulsory means toconvert the people: "Although the city had cheerfully accepted hissupremacy, " writes Sir W. Muir, "all its inhabitants had not yetembraced the new religion, or formally acknowledged his propheticalclaim. Perhaps he intended to follow the course he had pursued at Medinaand leave the conversion of the people to be gradually accomplishedwithout compulsion. "[61] [Footnote 61: The Life of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, page 136. Those who had newly joined the Moslem Camp at Mecca to repel thethreatening gathering of Hawázin, and those of them who preferredsubmission to the authority of Mohammad, are called by Sir W. Muir "hisnew converts. " (IV. , 149). But in fact they were not called believers. They are called simply _Muallafa Qolubohum_ in the Koran (IX. , 60) whichmeans whose hearts are to be won over. ] [Sidenote: The wholesale conversion of the remaining tribes in A. H. , 9& 10. ] 29. Now it was more than twenty years that the Koran had been constantlypreached to the surrounding tribes of Arabs at Mecca at the time offairs[62] and at the annual pilgrimage gatherings, [63] by Mohammad, andby special missionaries of Islam from Medina, and through the reports ofthe travellers and merchants coming and going from Mecca and Medina toall parts of Arabia. The numbers of different distant tribes, clans andbranches had spread the tidings of Islam. There were individual convertsin most of the tribes. Those tribes already not brought over to Islamwere ready to embrace it under the foregoing circumstances. Idolatry, simple and loathsome, had no power against the attacks of reasondisplayed in the doctrines of the Koran. But the idolatrous Koreishopposed and attacked Islam with persecution and the sword, andstrengthened idolatry with earthly weapons. The distant pagan tribes onthe side of the Koreish, geographically or genealogically, wereprevented by them from embracing the new faith. As soon as thehostilities of the Koreish were suspended at the truce of Hodeibia, theArabs commenced to embrace Islam as already described, and no soonerthey surrendered and Kaaba[64] stripped of its idols--and the struggleof spiritual supremacy between idolatry and Islam was practicallydecided--all the remaining tribes on the south and east who had nothitherto adhered to Islam hastened to embrace it hosts after hostsduring the 9th and 10th year of the Hegira. [Footnote 62: Okáz between Táyif and Nakhla. Mujanna in the vicinity ofMarr-al Zahrán, and Zul-Majáz behind Arafat, both near Mecca. ] [Footnote 63: "From time immemorial, tradition represents Mecca as thescene of a yearly pilgrimage from _all_ quarters of Arabia:--from Yemen, Hadhramaut and the shores of the Persian Gulph, from the deserts ofSyria, and from the distant environs of Híra and Mesopotamia. "--Muir, I, ccxi. ] [Footnote 64: Sir W. Muir thinks: "The possession of Mecca now imparteda colour of right to his pretensions; for Mecca was the spiritual centreof the country, to which the tribes from every quarter yielded areverential homage. The conduct of the annual pilgrimage, the custody ofthe holy house, the intercalation of the year, the commutation at willof the sacred months, --institutions which affected all Arabia, --belongedby ancient privilege to the Coreish and were now in the hands ofMahomet. . . . Moreover, it had been the special care of Mahomet artfullyto interweave with the reformed faith all essential parts of the ancientceremonial. The one was made an inseparable portion of the other. "--TheLife of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 169. But the remaining tribes who had nothitherto embraced Islam, and the chiefs of the Southern and EasternArabia, did not adopt Islam, because Mohammad possessed Mecca, aposition of no political supremacy. No paramount authority throughoutthe Peninsula had ever been vested in the chief who possessed Mecca. Mohammad on the surrender of Mecca had abolished all the idolatrousinstitutions which might have served as political or social inducementsto the Pagan Arabs to embrace Islam. The intercalation of the year andcommutation of the sacred months were cancelled for ever in the plainwords of the Koran: "Verily, twelve months is the number of months withGod, according to God's book, _since_ the day when He created theHeavens and the earth, of these, four are sacred; this is the rightusage. " . . . "To carry over _a sacred month to another_ is an increase ofunbelief only. They who do not believe are led into error by it. Theyallow it one year and forbid it another, that they may make good thenumber of _months_ which God hath hallowed, and they allow that whichGod hath prohibited. The evil of their deeds hath been prepared for them_by Satan_; for God guideth not the people who do not believe. "--SuraIX, verses 36, 37. The custody of the house was no more an office ofhonour or privilege. The ancient ceremonial of pilgrimage was notinterwoven with the reformed faith. The rites of Kaaba were stripped ofevery idolatrous tendency. And the remaining and essential part of thepilgrimage was depreciated. "By no means can their flesh reach unto God, neither their blood; but piety on your part reacheth Him. "--Sura XXII, verse 38. And after all the idolaters were not allowed to enter it. "Itis not for the votaries of other gods with God, witnesses againstthemselves of infidelity, to visit the temples of God. "--Sura IX, verse28. Sir W. Muir himself says regarding Mohammad: "The rites of Kaabawere retained, but stripped by him of every idolatrous tendency; andthey still hang, a strange unmeaning shroud, around the living theism ofIslam. "--Vol. I, Intro. , p. Ccxviii. ] [Sidenote: The various deputations and embassies in the 9th and 10thyear of the Hegira. ] 30. During these two years deputations of conversion to Islam werereceived by Mohammad at Medina from the most distant parts of thePeninsula, from Yemen and Hazaramaut from Mahra Oman and Bahrein in thesouth, and from the borders of Syria and the outskirts of Persia. Manyof the chiefs and princes of Yemen and Mahra, of Oman, Bahrein andYemama--christians and pagans--intimated by letter or by embassy theirconversion to Islam. The Prophet used to send teachers with deputationsand embassies, where they were not already sent, to instruct the newlyconverted people the duties of Islam and to see that every remnant ofidolatry was obliterated. [Sidenote: List of the deputations of conversion received by Mohammad atMedina during A. H. 9 and 10. ] 31. Here is a list of the important deputations and embassies as well asthe conversion of notable personages during these two years arranged inalphabetical order with geographical and genealogical notes. [65] Sir W. Muir thinks it "tedious and unprofitable" to enumerate them all, [66]while he takes notice of every apocryphal tradition and devours witheagerness all fictions unfavourable to the cause of Islam. Bani Aámir. [67] Bani Abd-ul-Kays. [68] Bani Ahmas. [69] Bani Anaza. [70] Bani Asad. [71] Bani Azd (Shanovah). [72] Bani Azd (Oman). [73] Bani Báhila. [74] Bani Bahra. [75] Bani Bajíla. [76] Bani Baka. [77] Bani Bakr bin Wail. [78] Bani Bali. [79] Bani Báriq. [80] Bani Dáree. [81] Farwa. [82] Bani Fezára. [83] Bani Gháfiq. [84] Bani Ghánim. [85] Bani Ghassán. [86] Bani Hamadán. [87] Bani Hanífa. [88] Bani Háris of Najrán. [89] Bani Hilál bin Aamir bin Sáasáa. [90] Bani Himyar. [91] Bani Jaad. [92] Bani Jaafir bin Kelab bin Rabia. [93] Jeifer bin al Jalandi. [94] Bani Joheina. [95] Bani Jufi. [96] Bani Kalb. [97] Bani Khas-am bin Anmár. [98] Bani Khaulán. [99] Bani Kiláb. [100] Bani Kinána. [101] Bani Kinda. [102] Bani Mahrah. [103] Bani Mohárib. [104] Bani Morád. [105] Bani Muntafiq. [106] Bani Murrah. [107] Bani Nakhá. [108] Bani Nohd. [109] Bani Ozra. [110] Bani Raha. [111] Bani Rawasa. [112] Bani Saad Hozeim. [113] Bani Sadif. [114] Bani Sadoos. [115] Bani Sahim. [116] Bani Sakeef. [117] Bani Salámáni. [118] Bani Shaibán. [119] Bani Sodaa. [120] Bani Taghlib. [121] Bani Tajeeb. [122] Bani Tamim. [123] Bath Tay. [124] Bani Zobeid. [125] [Footnote 65: For these deputations see Ibn Is-hak (died 151), Hishamee(died 213), Ibn Sad (died 213), Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, Chap. 30th, Seerat Shámí (died 942), and Halabí (died 1044). For thegenealogies of these tribes consult Qalqashandi's Dictionary of Tribes, and Ibn Khaldún's History. Regarding the geographical positions of thesetribes the reader is referred to the most valuable map of Arabia in SirW. Muir's Annals of Early Caliphate, London 1882. ] [Footnote 66: The Life of Mahomet by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, pp. 181 and226. ] [Footnote 67: A branch of Hawázin and sister tribe of the Sakeefinhabited the province of Najd and were of the Moaddite stock. The tribehad taken little share with the rest of the Bani Hawázin at the battleof Honain against the Moslems A. H. 8. The famous poet Lebid, author ofone of the Moallakas, belonged to that tribe. [See the Life of Lebidfrom Ketab-ul-Aghani, in an article on the Moallaqah by Lebid, by C. J. Lyall, C. S. , in the Journals of the Asiatic Society, Bengal, No. 1, 1877, pp. 62-76: Calcutta. ]] [Footnote 68: Bani Abd-ul-Kays from Bahrein. The tribe has beendescribed at page 47. There were many persons in the embassy. They wereChristians before they embraced Islam. ] [Footnote 69: Descended from Anmár of the Kahtanite stock of Yemen. ] [Footnote 70: A sub-tribe of Asad, descendants of Rabia of the Moadditestock. These are the Aneze of Burkhardt. ] [Footnote 71: Already described at p. 47. The rest of them now embracedIslam. It is said that Sura xlix, 17, refers to them. ] [Footnote 72: Bani Azd (Shanovah) from Yemen. This tribe was a portionof the Azdite tribe left at Yemen at the time of the northern emigrationof Azd. They were a branch of Kahtan of the Kahtanite stock. In theiremigration northward from Yemen they resided a long time in Hijaz atBatn Murr near Mecca. In their journey further on to the north of Syria, leaving Kozaa, they changed their name to Ghassán from their longresidence, by the way, near a fountain of that name. The tribes Aus andKhazraj had separated afterwards from these Ghassanides, and settled atYathrib, afterwards known as Medina. One Surad was the chief of theembassy of Azd from Yemen to Mohammad at Medina. Sir W. Muir says: "Thisperson was recognized by Mahomet as the ruler of his clan, andcommission was given to him to war against the heathen tribes in hisneighbourhood. " (The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, page 219. ) The Arabicword "_yojáhid_, " in the original biographies, only means "to strive, "and does not mean "to make war, " as understood by Sir W. Muir. He hashimself translated the same word as "striving" in Vol. III, page 32. Atpage 265 of the same volume he translates it by "to do utmost. " I havediscussed the subject in full in Appendix A. Of this work. ] [Footnote 73: Another branch of the Azd described above. ] [Footnote 74: Bani Báhila, otherwise called Sáad Manát, descendants ofGhatafán of the Moaddite stock. ] [Footnote 75: Bani Bahra (bin Amr bin Al-Háf bin Kozaá), who were abranch of the Kozaá of the Himyarite stock, had emigrated to the north, and settled in the Ghassanide territory. ] [Footnote 76: Bani Bajíla, a sister of Khas-am and descendants of Anmarbin Nizar of the Kahtanite stock. They inhabited Yemen. The Bajíla afterprofessing Islam had destroyed the famous image of Kholasa. ] [Footnote 77: A branch of Bani Aamir bin Sáasáa in the centre ofArabia. ] [Footnote 78: They lived about Yemama and the shores of the PersianGulf. They were one of the Moaddite tribes. The war of Basus betweenBani Bakr and their sister tribe Bani Taghlib had lasted for fortyyears. There have been famous poets in the Bani Bakr tribe, among whomare Tarafa, Haris bin Hiliza, and Maimún Al-Asha. The Bani Bakr and BaniTamim were constantly at war, which was abandoned under the influence ofIslam, when both the parties were converted to it during the lifetime ofMohammad. ] [Footnote 79: They were a branch of the Kozaá from the Himyarite stock, the descendants of Kahtan, and had settled in the north of Arabia in theGhassanide territory on the borders of Syria. ] [Footnote 80: A sub-tribe of Kozaá. ] [Footnote 81: A clan of the tribe of Lakhm. ] [Footnote 82: An Arab of the Bani Juzam in the north of Arabia andGovernor of Amman in the Ghassanide territory announced his conversionto Mohammad by a despatch in A. H. 8. ] [Footnote 83: They have already been described at page 46. Theirdeputation waited upon Mohammad on his return from Tabúk. ] [Footnote 84: Descendants of Anmár of the Kahtanite stock. ] [Footnote 85: A sub-tribe of Azd at Yemen. ] [Footnote 86: Already described under Bani Azd. ] [Footnote 87: Bani Hamadán of the Kahtanite descent. An important tribein the east of Yemen. ] [Footnote 88: A Christian branch of the Bani Bakr who inhabited Yemama. "The account of the embassy of the Bani Hanífa is more decidedlyunfavourable to Christianity, but its details appear of doubtfulauthority. Moseilama, the false Prophet, was among the number, and thereare some unlikely anticipations of his sacrilegious claims. "As the embassy were departing, Mahomet gave them a vessel in which werethe leavings of the water with which he had performed his lustration;and he said, --'_When you reach your country, break down your church, andsprinkle its sight with this water, and make in its place a mosque_'. . . . "The story appears to me improbable, because nowhere else is Mahometrepresented as exhibiting such antagonism to Christians and theirchurches when they submitted themselves to him. "--Muir's Life ofMahomet, Vol. II, pp. 303-4, _footnote_. The author changes his opinionin the fourth volume of his work and says: "I have there stated (in Vol. II) the story to be improbable. But I am now inclined to think thatduring the last year or two of Mahomet's life, there was quite enough ofantagonistic feeling against Christianity as it presented itself in theprofession of the Arab and Syrian tribes to support thenarrative. "--Life of Mahomet by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, page 218, _footnote_. This is a mere presumption on the part of the writer, and there is noproof of Mohammad's antagonism towards Christianity at any period of hislife except against those who waged war with him. The following verse ofthe Koran will show how far I am true:-- "Verily they who believe (Moslems), and they who follow the Jewishreligion, and the Christians and Sabeites, whoever of those believeth inGod and the Last Day, and doth that which is right shall have theirreward with their Lord: Fear shall not come upon them, neither shallthey be grieved. "] [Footnote 89: Also a Christian tribe in Yemen descended from theKahtanite stock of the Bani Madhij, and collateral therefore with BaniKinda. Two of the embassy, one of them being Akil or Abd-ul-Masih, thechief of the deputation, adopted Islam. The rest returned with a fullguarantee from Mohammad for the preservation of their social andreligious liberty. Further information regarding the Bani Háris ofNajrán will be found at pp. 48 and 106 of this book. "_Kâtib al Wâckidi_, p. 69. The subsequent history of the NajránChristians is there traced. They continued in possession of their landsand rights under the treaty during the rest of Mohammad's life and thewhole of Abu Bakr's Caliphate. Then they were accused of taking usury, and Omar expelled them from the land, and wrote as follows:-- "The despatch of Omar, the Commander of the Faithful, to the people ofNajrán. Whoever of them emigrates is under the guarantee of God. NoMoslem shall injure them;--to fulfil that which Mahomet and Abu Bakrwrote unto them. "Now to whomsoever of the chiefs of Syria and Irâc they may repair, letsuch chiefs allot them lands, and whatever they cultivate therefromshall be theirs; it is an exchange for their own lands. None shallinjure or maltreat them; Moslems shall assist them against oppressors. Their tribute is remitted for two years. They will not be troubledexcept for evil deeds. "Some of them alighted in Irâc, and settled in Najránia near to Cufa. "That the offence of usury is alleged in justification of this measureappears to me to disprove the common tradition that a command was saidto have been given by Mahomet on his deathbed for the Peninsula to beswept clear of all other religions but Islam. "--Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. II, pp. 301-2. ] [Footnote 90: Descendants of the great Ghatafán tribe alreadydescribed. ] [Footnote 91: Bani Himyar from Yemen. The Himyarites are too well-knownto be described. The Himyarite princes of Ro-en, Mu-afir, Hamadan andBazan, all of the Christian faith in Yemen, embraced Islam and announcedtheir conversion by letter sent to Mohammad through their emissarieswhich reached him after his return from Tabúk. ] [Footnote 92: Either a clan of Lakhm, or a branch of Bani Aámir. ] [Footnote 93: A sub-tribe of the Bani Aámir bin Sáasáa alreadydescribed. ] [Footnote 94: The King of Omán, together with the people of Omán, embraced Islam during A. H. 8 and 9. The people of Omán were of theAzdite stock. ] [Footnote 95: Already described at page 43. ] [Footnote 96: A branch of Saad-al-Ashira from the Kahtanite stock. Thistribe inhabited Yemen. They had some peculiar prejudice against eatingthe heart of an animal. Mohammad had caused their chief to break hissuperstition, which he did by making him eat the roasted heart of ananimal. But they returned disgusted when told that his (the chief's) mother whohad committed infanticide was in hell. However they sent anotherdeputation a second time and finally embraced Islam. ] [Footnote 97: They settled in Dumat-ul-Jundal, now Jal-al-Jowf, north ofArabia. They were a tribe of the Bani Kozaá descended from Himyar. ] [Footnote 98: A tribe of the Kahtanite stock at Yemen. They lived in ahilly country of that name in Yemen. ] [Footnote 99: They were a tribe of the Kahtanite stock on the coast ofYemen. ] [Footnote 100: A clan of the Bani Aámir bin Sáasáa of the Hawázin tribealready described. ] [Footnote 101: Descendants of Khazima of the Moaddite stock. ] [Footnote 102: The Bani Kinda princes, Vail bin Hijar and Al-Ash-as binKays; the former, the chief of the coast, and the latter, the chief ofthe Hazaramaut in the south of Arabia. They with their whole clansembraced Islam. Bani Kinda were a powerful tribe of the Kahálánitestock. ] [Footnote 103: A clan of Ozra from Kozaá described at page 46. ] [Footnote 104: Descendants of Ghatafán of the Moaddite stock. ] [Footnote 105: They inhabited the sea-coast of Yemen, and were a tribeof Muzhie of the Kahtanite stock. ] [Footnote 106: A branch of the tribe of Aámir bin Sáasáa. ] [Footnote 107: A branch of Zobian. ] [Footnote 108: They were a tribe of the Kahtanite stock, residing inYemen. Their deputation consisted of two hundred persons. It is saidthis was the last deputation received by Mohammad. Some time before thisAli was sent to the Bani Nakh-a and other tribes of the Mudhij stock inYemen. ] [Footnote 109: A tribe of Kozaá of the Himyarite stock at Yemen. ] [Footnote 110: A sub-tribe of Kozaá inhabiting Syria described at page46. ] [Footnote 111: A tribe of Muzhij of the Kahtanite stock at Yemen. ] [Footnote 112: They were a clan of the Bani Aámir bin Sáasáa alreadydescribed. ] [Footnote 113: A tribe of the Kozaá of the Moaddite stock, and accordingto some from Yemen. ] [Footnote 114: Descendants of Hazaramaut of the Kahtanite stock atYemen. ] [Footnote 115: A clan of the Bani Hanifa, descendants of Bakr bin Wailalready described. ] [Footnote 116: A clan of the Bani Shaiban, the descendants of Bakr binWail already mentioned. ] [Footnote 117: The Bani Sakeef (Thackif) were a branch of the Mazartribes of the Moaddite stock. They were a sub-tribe of the Hawázin andsister tribe to the Bani Adwán, Ghatafán, and Suleim. They (the BaniSakeef) lived at Tayif and worshipped the idol _Lat_ or _Táqhia_. Orwa, a chief of Tayif, had gone to Medina to embrace Islam. His firstgenerous impulse was to return to Tayif and invite his fellow-citizensto share in the blessings imparted by the new faith. Upon his makingpublic his conversion, he was wounded by a mob and suffered martyrdom. But he left a favourable impression of Islam at Tayif. Their deputationconsisted of six chiefs with fifteen or twenty followers. The Prophetreceived them gladly and pitched a tent for their accommodation in thecourt of his mosque. Every evening after supper he paid them there avisit and instructed them in the faith till it was dark. Sir W. Muirwrites:--"The martyrdom of Orwa compromised the inhabitants of Tayif, and forced to continue the hostile course they had previously beenpursuing. But they began to suffer severely from the marauding attacksof Bani Hawazin under Malik. That chief, according to his engagement, maintained the increasing predatory warfare against them. "--Life ofMahomet, Vol. IV, page 204. At page 155 he says regarding Malik, --"beingconfirmed in his chiefship he engaged to maintain a constant warfarewith the citizens of Tayif. " But there was no such engagement withMálik. The authority (Hishamee) referred to by Sir W. Muir does notspeak anything of the alleged engagement. _Vide_ Hishamee, page 879. Hishamee has only so much that Mohammad made Malik chief of those whowere converted from the tribe. These were the clans of Somála, Salma, and Fahm, and that he used to fight with them against the Sakifites. SirW. Muir further writes that the inhabitants of Tayif said amongthemselves: "We have not strength to fight against the Arab tribe allaround that have plighted their faith to Mahomet, _and bound themselvesto fight in his cause_" (Vol. IV, p. 205). The italics are mine andthese words are not to be found in the original authorities. Hishamee(page 914) has _Bayaoo va Aslamoo_, _i. E. _, they have plighted andsubmitted (or converted to Islam). ] [Footnote 118: Descendants of the Kozaá inhabited the hills of that name(Salámán). ] [Footnote 119: Descendants and branch of Bakr bin Wail. ] [Footnote 120: A tribe of the Kahtanite stock from Yemen. ] [Footnote 121: The Bani Taghlib bin Wail were a tribe of the Moadditestock of Meccan origin and a sister tribe to the Bani Bakr bin Wail. Their wars are famous in the annals of Arabia. The war of Basús has beenalready alluded to under Bani Bakr. These tribes, the Bani Bakr andTaghlib, were located in Yemama, Bahrein, Najd, and Tihama, but lastlythe Bani Taghlib had emigrated to Mesopotamia and professed theChristian faith. The members of their deputation to Mohammad wore goldencrosses. When invited to Islam, they did not embrace it, but promised toallow their children to become Moslems. Mohammad allowed them tomaintain unchanged their profession of Christianity. Their Christianitywas of a notoriously superficial character. "The Taghlib, " said Ali, thefourth Khalif, "are not Christians; they have borrowed from Christianityonly the custom of drinking wine. "--Dozy _Historie_, i, 20. ] [Footnote 122: A clan of Kinda from the sub-tribe of Sakun at Yemen. ] [Footnote 123: The Bani Tamim were descendants of Tabikha bin Elyas ofthe Moaddite stock. They are famous in the history of Najd, thenortheastern desert of which from the confines of Syria to Yemama theyinhabited. They were at constant warfare with the Bani Bakr bin AbdMonát, descendants of Kinána of the Moaddite stock, from 615 to 630 A. D. All the branches of the tribe which had not yet converted to Islam werenow converted in A. H. 9. ] [Footnote 124: The Bani Tay was a great tribe of the Kahtanite stock ofYemen, had moved northwards, and settled in the mountains of Ajá andSalmá to the north of Najd and Hijaz and the town of Tyma. They hadadopted Christianity, but some of them were Jews and Pagans. Theirintertribal war has been alluded to in para. 26. The whole tribe nowembraced Islam. "A deputation from the Bani Tay, headed by their chief, Zeid-al-Khail, came to Medina to ransom the prisoners, soon after Ali'sexpedition. Mahomet was charmed with Zeid, of whose fame both as awarrior and a poet he had long heard. He changed his name to Zeid _alKheir_ (_the beneficent_), granted him a large tract of country, andsent him away laden with presents. " Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 178. ] [Footnote 125: They were a branch of Sad-al-Ashirá of the Mazhij tribeof the Kahtanite stock. They inhabited the sea-coast of Yemen. ] [Sidenote: All the conversions, individual and tribal, without anycompulsion. ] 32. Thus all these tribal conversions and the speedy spread of Islam inthe whole of Arabia was accomplished without any resort to arms, compulsion, threat, or "the scymitar in one hand and the Koran in theother. " The Pagan Arabs, the Christians and the Jews, those who embracedIslam, adopted it joyfully and voluntarily. Islam had been muchpersecuted for many years from the third year of its Prophet's missionto the sixth year after the Hegira--a period of about sixteen years, butit flourished alike during persecutions and oppositions as well asduring periods of peace and security of the Moslems. It was the resultof Mohammad's staunch adherence to the uncompromising severity of hisinflexible principles of preaching the divine Truth and his sincerebelief in his own mission that he bore steadfastly all the hardships ofpersecutions at Mecca and the horrors of the aggressive wars of theKoreish and others at Medina, and persuaded the whole of Arabia, Pagan, Jewish and Christian, to adopt Islam voluntarily. [126] [Footnote 126: The rebellion of almost the whole of Arabia--wronglycalled apostasy--after the death of Mohammad was chiefly against theGovernment of Abu Bakr, the first Khalifa of the Republic of Islam. Nosuch paramount power over the whole of Arabia was ever vested in thechiefs of Mecca, and the Arabs were unaccustomed to this new form ofGovernment. They had neither rebelled against Islam, nor apostatizedfrom their religion, except a very few of them who had attachedthemselves to Moseilama for a short time. ] [Sidenote: Mohammad was not favoured with circumstances round him. ] 33. It was not an easy task for Mohammad to have converted the Arabsfrom their national idolatry to a religion of pure and strictmonotheism. The aspect of Arabia was strictly conservative, and therewere no prospects of hopeful changes. The indigenous idolatry anddeep-rooted superstition, the worship of visible and material objects ofdevotion, --idols and unshaped stones, --something that the eyes can seeand the hands can handle, --and the dread of invisible genii and otherevil spirits, held the Arab mind in a rigorous and undisputed thraldom. Arabia was obstinately fixed in the profession of idolatry which thePeninsula being thickly overspread, widely diffused and thoroughlyorganized, was supported by national pride and latterly by the sword. "It was, " writes Dr. Marcus Dods, "certainly no hopeful task which Mohammed undertook when he proposed by the influence of religion to combine into one nation tribes so incapable of being deeply influenced by any religion, and so irreconcilably opposed to one another; to abolish customs which had the sanction of immemorial usage; and to root out an idolatry, which, if it had no profound hold upon the spiritual nature, was at least bound up with old family traditions and well-understood tribal interests. "[127] The sacrifices made to, and the requirements essential to Islam, itsnumerous positive prohibitions, the immediate repudiation of oldprejudices, the renunciation of all sorts of idolatry and superstition, the throwing aside of favourite idols and the abandoning of licentiousrites and customs, the total abstinence from much-relished vices, thedemand for producing practical effect on the will and character, and thereaping of material fruits from holy and religious life--were barriersinsurmountable for the speedy progress of Islam. Notwithstanding these impediments Mohammad succeeded, by the influenceof his religion, in combining into one nation the wild and independenttribes, and putting a stop to their internecine wars; in abolishing thecustom which had the sanction of immemorial usage; and in rooting outthe national idolatry of indigenous growth, without compromising hisinflexible principles of truth and sincerity and honesty; and withoutadopting the superstitions and vices of the people. Dr. Mosheim thinks that, "the causes of this new religion's rapid progress are not difficult to be discovered: Mahomet's law itself was admirably fitted to the natural disposition of man, but especially to the manners, opinions and vices prevalent among the people of the East; for it was extremely simple proposing few things to be believed; nor did it enjoin many and difficult duties to be performed, or such as laid severe restraints on the propensities. "[128] It is manifest from the history of religions that the people generallytry their best to obtain religion's sanction for the vices prevalentamong them. But there is no doubt in this that Mohammad never sanctionedthe idolatries and superstitions of the Arabs, nor he framed hisdoctrines according to the opinions and fancies of the people. Hepreached vehemently against everything he found blamable in the people;he spared not their dear idols and beloved gods and the dreaded genii, nor accommodated his preaching and reform to indulge them in their evilpractices; nor did he adopt any of the vices current among the peopleinto his system. Mohammad certainly did lay stress on the propensities of the mind andmade the actions of the heart answerable to God, and preferred inwardholiness to outside form. 53. "The heart is prone to evils. "--Sura XII. 38. "The hearing and the sight and the heart, each of these shall be inquired of. "--Sura XVI. 225. "God will not punish you for a mistake in your oaths; but He will punish you for that which your hearts have assented to. God is gracious, merciful. " 284. "Whatever is in the Heavens and in the Earth is God's, and whether ye disclose what is in your minds or conceal it, God will reckon with you for it; and whom He pleaseth will He forgive, and whom he pleaseth will He punish; for God is All-powerful. "--Sura II. 5. "And unless made with intent of heart, mistakes in this matter shall be no crimes in you. "--Sura XXXIII. The teachings of the Koran make our natural inclination subject toregulation. It lays stress upon the heart of men. Note the followinginjunctions regarding internal purity: 120. "Abandon the outside iniquity and its inside. "--Sura VI. 152. "Come not near the pollutions outside or inward. "--_Ibid. _ 31. "Say: Truly my Lord hath forbidden filthy actions whether open or secret, and iniquity and unjust violence. "--Sura VIII. Referring to Dr. Mosheim's cause of the spread of Islam, I will quoteHenry Hallam's opinion regarding the causes of the success of Islam. Henry Hallam, after enumerating the three important causes of thesuccess of Islam, the first of which is "those just and elevated notionsof the divine nature and of moral duties, the gold-ore that pervades thedross of the Koran, which were calculated to strike a serious andreflecting people, " and explaining the two others which are not againstus, he says:-- "It may be expected that I should add to this what is commonly considered as a distinguishing mark of Mohammedanism, --its indulgence to voluptuousness. But this appears to be greatly exaggerated. Although the character of its founder may have been tainted by sensuality as ferociousness, I do not think that he relied upon inducements of the former kind for the diffusion of his system. We are not to judge of this by rules of Christian purity, or of European practice. If polygamy was a prevailing usage in Arabia, as is not questioned, its permission gave no additional license to the proselytes of Mohammed, who will be found rather to have narrowed the unbounded liberty of oriental manners in this respect; while his decided condemnation of adultery and of incestuous connections, so frequent among barbarous nations, does not argue a very lax and accommodating morality. A devout Mussulman exhibits much more of the stoical than the epicurean character. Nor can any one read the Koran without being sensible that it breathes an austere and scrupulous spirit. And in fact, the founder of a new religion or sect is little likely to obtain permanent success by indulging the vices or luxuries of mankind. I should rather be disposed to reckon the severity of Mohammed's discipline among the causes of its influence. Precepts of ritual observance, being always definite and unequivocal, are less likely to be neglected, after their obligation has been acknowledged than those of moral virtue. Thus the long fasting, the pilgrimages, and regular prayers and ablutions, the constant almsgiving, the abstinence from stimulating liquors, enjoined by the Koran, created a visible standard of practice among its followers, and preserved a continual recollection of their law. "But the prevalence of Islam in the lifetime of its Prophet, and during the first ages of its existence, was chiefly owing to the spirit of martial energy that he infused into it. The religion of Mohammed is as essentially a military system as the institution of chivalry in the west of Europe. The people of Arabia, a race of strong passions and sanguinary temper, inured to habits of pillage and murder, found in the law of their native prophet not a license, but a command, to desolate the world, and the promise of all that their glowing imaginations could anticipate of Paradise annexed to all in which they most delighted upon earth. "[129] This is sufficient to refute the opinion of Dr. Mosheim. But whatHallam says regarding the prevalence of Islam in the lifetime of theProphet, and during the first ages of its existence, that "the people ofArabia, a race of strong passions and sanguinary temper, inured tohabits of pillage and murder, found in the law of their native prophetnot a license, but a command, to desolate the world, " is untenable. There was neither a command nor a license to desolate the world, nor wasany person or tribe converted to Islam with that object in view. All theteachings of the Koran and the history of the early spread of Islamfalsify such an idea. [Footnote 127: Mohammed, Buddha and Christ, by Marcus Dods, D. D. , page83. ] [Footnote 128: Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, Book II, Chap. III, page 73. ] [Footnote 129: Hallam's Middle Ages, Vol. II, pp. 118-9. ] [Sidenote: Mohammad's unwavering belief in his own mission and hissuccess show him to be a true prophet. ] 34. I will pause here for a while, and ask the indulgence of the readerto reflect upon the circumstances of the persecutions, insults andinjuries, expulsion and attack suffered by Mohammad and his earlyfollowers, [130] and his unwavering adherence to preach against thegross idolatry and immorality of his people, which all show his sincerebelief in his own mission, and his possession of an irresistible inwardimpulse to publish the Divine Truth of his Revelations regarding theunity in the Godhead and other moral reforms. His preachings ofmonotheism, and his enjoining righteousness, and forbidding evil deeds, were not attended to for many years with material success. In proportionas he preached against the gross idolatry and superstition of hispeople, he was subjected to ridicule and scorn, and finally to aninveterate persecution which ruined his and his follower's fortune. Buthe unflinchingly kept his path; no threats and no injuries hindered himfrom still preaching to the ungodly people a purer and higher theologyand better morality than had ever been set before them. He claimed notemporal power, no spiritual domination; he asked but for simpletoleration, for free permission to win men by persuasion into the way oftruth. He declared he was sent neither to compel conviction bymiracles, nor to constrain outward profession by the sword. [131] Doesthis leave any doubt of the strong conviction in his mind, as well as inthe truth of his claim, to be a man sent by God to preach the DivinePerfection, and to teach mankind the ways of righteousness? He honestlyand sincerely conveyed the message which he had received or which heconscientiously or intuitively believed to have received from his Godand which had all the signs and marks of truth in itself. What is meantby a True Prophet or a Revelation is not more than what we find in thecase of Mohammad. [132] The general office and main business of a prophet is to proclaim tomankind the Divine Perfection, to teach publicly purer theology andhigher morality, to enjoin the people to do what is right and just, andto forbid what is wrong and bad. It is neither a part of the prophet topredict future events, nor to show supernatural miracles. And further, aprophet is neither immaculate nor infallible. The Revelation is anatural product of human faculties. A prophet feels that his mind isillumined by God, and the thoughts which are expressed by him and spokenor written under this influence are to be regarded as the words of God. This illumination of the mind or the effect of the Divine Influencediffer in any prophet according to the capacity of the recipient, oraccording to the circumstances--physical, moral, and religious--in whichhe is placed. [Footnote 130: The early followers of Mohammad bore persecutions andexile with patience and steadfastness; and never recanted. Look to theincreasing number of these early Moslems, their magnanimous forbearance, and the spontaneous abandonment of their dear homes and relations, andtheir defending their Prophet with their blood. The number of Christianbelievers during the whole lifetime of Christ was not more than 120 (ActI, 15). They had a material view of the Messiah's kingdom, and had fledat the first sound of danger. Two of the disciples when walking toEmmaus observed, "We trusted that it had been He who should haveredeemed Israel, " and the apostle asked Jesus after the so-calledresurrection, "Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore the kingdom ofIsrael?" "During the periods thus indicated as possible for comparison, persecution and rejection were the fate of both. But the thirteen years'ministry of Mahomet had brought about a far greater change to theexternal eye than the whole lifetime of Christ. The apostles fled at thefirst sound of danger, and however deep the inner work may have been inthe 500 by whom our Lord was seen, it had produced as yet but littleoutward action. There was among them no spontaneous quitting of theirhomes, nor emigration by hundreds, such as distinguished the earlyMoslems; nor any rapturous resolution by the converts of a foreign cityto defend the Prophet with their blood. "--The Life of Mahomet by Sir W. Muir, Vol. II, page 274. ] [Footnote 131: "Let us for a moment look back to the period when a banwas proclaimed at Mecca against all the citizens, whether professedconverts or not, who espoused his cause; when they were shut up in the_Sheb_ or quarter of Abu Tâlib, and there for three years withoutprospect of relief endured want and hardship. Those must have beensteadfast and mighty motives which enabled him amidst all thisopposition and apparent hopelessness of success, to maintain hisprinciples unshaken. No sooner was he relieved from confinement, than, despairing of his native city, he went forth to Tâyif and summoned itsrulers and inhabitants to repentance; he was solitary and unaided, buthe had a message, he said, from his Lord. On the third day he was drivenout of the town with ignominy, blood trickling from the wounds inflictedon him by the populace. He retired to a little distance, and therepoured forth his complaint to God: then he returned to Mecca, there tocarry on the same outwardly hopeless cause with the same high confidencein its ultimate success. We search in vain through the pages of profanehistory for a parallel to the struggle in which for thirteen years theProphet of Arabia in the face of discouragement and threats, rejectionand persecution retained his faith unwavering, preached repentance, anddenounced God's wrath against his godless fellow-citizens. Surrounded bya little band of faithful men and women, he met insults, menaces, dangers, with a high and patient trust in the future. And when at lastthe promise of safety came from a distant quarter, he calmly waiteduntil his followers had all departed, and then disappeared from amongsthis ungrateful and rebellious people. "--Muir, Vol. IV, pages 314-15. ] [Footnote 132: "That he was the impostor pictured by some writers isrefuted alike by his unwavering belief in the truth of his own mission, by the loyalty and unshaken confidence of his companions, who had ampleopportunity of forming a right estimate of his sincerity, and finally, by the magnitude of the task which he brought to so successful an issue. No impostor, it may safely be said, could have accomplished so mighty awork. No one unsupported by a living faith in the reality of hiscommission, in the goodness of his cause, could have maintained the sameconsistent attitude through long years of adverse fortune, alike in theday of victory and in the hour of defeat, in the plenitude of his powerand at the moment of death. "--Islam and its Founder, by J. W. H. Stobart, M. A. , page 23. "Of the sincerity of his belief in his own mission there can be nodoubt. The great merit is his that among a people given up to idolatryhe rose to a vivid perception of the Unity of God, and preached thisgreat doctrine with firmness and constancy, amid ridicule andpersecution. But there it seems to me that the eulogy of the Prophetought to cease. "--Islam under the Arabs by R. D. Osborn. London 1876, p. 90. ] [Sidenote: Striking effects of Mohammad's reforms. ] 35. Although his mission was only to convey the message and preachpublicly what was revealed to him, and he was not responsible for theconversion of the ungodly polytheists to the purer theology and highermorality, or in other words, to the faith of Islam, yet whatever successand beneficial results in the sphere of theology, morality, and reformsin social matters he achieved was a strong evidence of his Divinemission. In the name of God and in the character of His Apostle, hewrought a great reform according to his light in his own country. "Everygood tree bringeth forth good fruit. "--(Matt. VII, 17). Facts arestubborn things, and facts are conclusive in these points. The effects produced by his preaching, and the changes wrought by themin the religious, social, and political sphere of the polytheists, theidolatrous and grossly superstitious Arabs within a comparatively shortperiod, mostly consisting of persecutions at Mecca, and struggles atMedina, were very striking. From an indiscriminate mass of polytheismand gross superstitious belief in gods, genii, the sons and daughters ofGod, he gave them a pure monotheistic belief, recognizing no othersuperior power but the Almighty. He raised the moral standard of hiscountrymen, ameliorated the condition of women, curtailed and mitigatedpolygamy and slavery, and virtually abolished them as well asinfanticide. He most sternly denounced and absolutely forbade manyheinous evils of the Arab society. He united a number of wild andindependent tribes into a nation and abolished their internecine wars. Sir W. Muir says:-- "Few and simple as the positive precepts of Mahomet up to this time appear, they had wrought a marvellous and a mighty work. Never, since the days when primitive Christianity startled the world from its sleep, and waged a mortal combat with Heathenism, had men seen the like arousing of spiritual life, the like faith that suffered sacrifice and took joyfully the spoiling of goods for conscience sake. "From time beyond memory, Mecca and the whole Peninsula had been steeped into spiritual torpor. The slight and transient influence of Judaism, Christianity, or Philosophy upon the Arab mind, had been but as the ruffling here and there the surface of a quiet lake;--all remained still and motionless below. The people were sunk in superstition, cruelty, and vice. It was a common practice for the eldest son to marry his father's widows inherited as property with the rest of the estate. Pride and poverty had introduced among them, as it has among the Hindus, the crime of female infanticide. Their religion consisted in gross idolatry, and their faith was rather the dark superstitious dread of unseen beings, whose goodwill they sought to propitiate, and to avert their displeasure, than the belief in an over-ruling Providence. The Life to come and Retribution of good and evil were, as motives of action, practically unknown. "Thirteen years before the Hegira, Mecca lay lifeless in this debased state. What a change those thirteen years had now produced! A band of several hundred persons had rejected idolatry, adopted the worship of one great God, and surrendered themselves implicitly to the guidance of what they believed a revelation from Him;--praying to the Almighty with frequency and fervour, looking for pardon through His mercy, and striving to follow after good works, almsgiving, chastity and justice. They now lived under a constant sense of the Omnipotent power of God, and of His providential care over the minutest of their concerns. In all the gifts of nature, in every relation of life, at each turn of their affairs, individual or public, they saw His hand. And, above all, the new spiritual existence in which they joyed and gloried, was regarded as the mark of His especial grace, while the unbelief of their blinded fellow-citizens was the hardening stamp of His predestined reprobation. Mahomet was the minister of life to them, --the source under God of their new-born hopes; and to him they yielded a fitting and implicit submission. "In so short a period, Mecca had, from this wonderful movement, been rent into two factions, which, unmindful of the old land-marks of tribe and family, were arrayed in deadly opposition one against the other. The believers bore persecution with a patient and tolerant spirit. And though it was their wisdom so to do, the credit of a magnanimous forbearance may be freely accorded to them. One hundred men and women, rather than abjure the precious faith, had abandoned their homes, and sought refuge, till the storm should be overpast, in Abyssinian exile. And now even a larger number, with the Prophet himself, emigrated from their fondly-loved city, with its sacred temple, --to them the holiest spot on earth, --and fled to Medîna. There the same wonder-working charm had within two or three years prepared for them a brotherhood ready to defend the Prophet and his followers with their blood. Jewish truth had long sounded in the ears of the men of Medîna, but it was not till they heard the spirit-stirring strains of the Arabian prophet, that they too awoke from their slumber, and sprang suddenly into a new and earnest life. "[133] Further on Sir W. Muir says:-- "And what have been the effects of the system which, established by such instrumentality, Mahomet has left behind him. We may freely concede that it banished for ever many of the darker elements of superstition which had for ages shrouded the Peninsula. Idolatry vanished before the battle-cry of Islam; the doctrine of the unity and infinite perfections of God, and of a special all-pervading Providence, became a living principle in the hearts and lives of the followers of Mahomet, even as it had in his own. An absolute surrender and submission to the divine will (the very name of _Islam_) was demanded as the first requirement of the religion. Nor are social virtues wanting. Brotherly love is inculcated within the circle of the faith; orphans are to be protected, and slaves treated with consideration; intoxicating drinks are prohibited, and Mahometanism may boast of a degree of temperance unknown to any other creed. "[134] Dr. Marcus Dods writes:-- "But is Mahommed in no sense a Prophet? Certainly he had two of the most important characteristics of the prophetic order. He saw truth about God which his fellowmen did not see, and he had an irresistible inward impulse to publish this truth. In respect of this latter qualification Mahommed may stand comparison with the most courageous of the heroic prophets of Israel. For the truth's sake he risked his life, he suffered daily persecutions for years, and eventually banishment, the loss of property, of the goodwill of his fellow-citizens, and the confidence of his friends--he suffered in short as much as any man can suffer short of death, which he only escaped by flight, and yet he unflinchingly proclaimed his message. No bribe, threat or inducement could silence him. 'Though they array against me the sun on the right hand, and the moon on the left, I cannot renounce my purpose. ' And it was this persistency, this belief in his call, to proclaim the Unity of God which was the making of Islam. Other men have been monotheists in the midst of idolaters, but no other man has founded a strong and enduring monotheistic religion. The distinction in his case was his resolution that other men should believe. . . . His giving himself out as a prophet of God was, in the first instance, not only sincere, but probably correct in the sense in which he himself understood it. He felt that he had thoughts of God which it deeply concerned all around him to receive, and he knew that these thoughts were given him by God, although not, as we shall see, a revelation strictly so called. His mistake lay by no means in his supposing himself to be called upon by God to speak for him and introduce a better religion, but it lay in his gradually coming to insist quite as much on men's accepting him as a prophet as on their accepting the great truth he preached. He was a prophet to his countrymen in so far as he proclaimed the Unity of God, but this was no sufficient ground for his claiming to be their guide in all matters of religion, still less for his assuming the lordship over them in all matters civil as well. . . . " The learned doctor further on in his book, "Mohammed, Buddha, andChrist, " remarks:-- "But as we endeavour to estimate the good and evil of Islam, it gradually appears that the chief point we must attend to is to distinguish between its value to Arabia in the seventh century and its value to the world at large. No one, I presume, would deny that to Mohammed's contemporaries his religion was an immense advance on anything they had previously believed in. It welded together the disunited tribes, and lifted the nation to the forefront of the important powers in the world. It effected what Christianity and Judaism had alike failed to effect--it swept away, once and for ever, idolatry, and established the idea of one true God. Its influence on Arabia was justly and pathetically put by the Moslem refugees in Abyssinia, who when required to say why they should not be sent back to Mecca, gave the following account of their religion and what it had done for them: 'O king, we were plunged in ignorance and barbarism; we worshipped idols; we ate dead bodies; we committed lewdness; disregarded family ties and the duties of neighbourhood and hospitality; we knew no law but that of the strong, when God sent among us a messenger of whose truthfulness, integrity, and innocence we were aware; and he called us to the unity of God, and taught us not to associate any god with him; he forbade us the worship of idols, and enjoined upon us to speak the truth, to be faithful to our trusts, to be merciful, and to regard the rights of others; to love our relatives and to protect the weak; to flee vice and avoid all evil. He taught us to offer prayers, to give alms, and to fast. And because we believed in him and obeyed him, therefore are we persecuted and driven from our country to seek thy protection. '"[135] But after all we have here seen of the opinions of Dr. Marcus Dods andSir W. Muir, let us turn to what the Rev. Stephens thinks of Mohammad:-- "The aim of Mahomet was to revive among his countrymen the Arabs, as Moses revived among his countrymen the Jews, the pure faith of their common forefather Abraham. In this he succeeded to a very great extent. For a confused heap of idolatrous superstitions he substituted a pure monotheistic faith; he abolished some of the most vicious practices of his countrymen, modified others; he generally raised the moral standard, improved the social condition of the people, and introduced a sober and rational ceremonial in worship. Finally he welded by this means a number of wild independent tribes, mere floating atoms, into a compact body politic, as well prepared and as eager to subdue the kingdoms of the world to their rule and to their faith, as ever the Israelites had been to conquer the land of Canaan. * * * * * "The Koran also enjoins repeatedly and in very emphatic language the duty of showing kindness to the stranger and the orphan, and of treating slaves, if converted to the faith, with the consideration and respect due to believers. The duty even of mercy to the lower animals is not forgotten, and it is to be thankfully acknowledged that Mohammedanism as well as Buddhism shares with Christianity the honour of having given birth to hospitals and asylums for the insane and sick. * * * * * "The vices most prevalent in Arabia in the time of Mahomet which are most sternly denounced and absolutely forbidden in the Koran were drunkenness, unlimited concubinage and polygamy, the destruction of female infants, reckless gambling, extortionate usury, superstitious arts of divination and magic. The abolition of some of these evil customs, and the mitigation of others, was a great advance in the morality of the Arabs, and is a wonderful and honourable testimony to the zeal and influence of the reformer. The total suppression of female infanticide and of drunkenness is the most signal triumph of his work. "[136] The reverend gentleman quoted above continues: "First of all, it must be freely granted that to his own people Mahomet was a great benefactor. He was born in a country where political organization, and rational faith, and pure morals were unknown. He introduced all three. By a single stroke of masterly genius he simultaneously reformed the political condition, the religious creed, and the moral practice of his countrymen. In the place of many independent tribes he left a nation; for a superstitious belief in gods many and lords many he established a reasonable belief in one Almighty yet beneficent Being; taught men to live under an abiding sense of this Being's superintending care, to look to Him as the rewarder, and to fear Him as the punisher of evil-doers. He vigorously attacked, and modified and suppressed many gross and revolting customs which had prevailed in Arabia down to his time. For an abandoned profligacy was substituted a carefully regulated polygamy, and the practice of destroying female infants was effectually abolished. "As Islam gradually extended its conquest beyond the boundaries of Arabia, many barbarous races whom it absorbed became in like manner participators in its benefits. The Turk, the Indian, the Negro, and the Moor were compelled to cast away their idols, to abandon their licentious rites and customs, to turn to the worship of one God, to a decent ceremonial and an orderly way of life. The faith even of the more enlightened Persian was purified: he learned that good and evil are not co-ordinate powers, but that just and unjust are alike under the sway of one All-wise and Holy Ruler, who ordereth all things in heaven and earth. "For barbarous nations, then, especially--nations which were more or less in the condition of Arabia itself at the time of Mahomet--nations in the condition of Africa at the present day, with little or no civilisation, and without a reasonable religion--Islam certainly comes as a blessing, as a turning from darkness to light and from the power of satan unto God. "[137] [Footnote 133: The Life of Mahomet by Sir W. Muir, LL. D. , Vol. II, pp. 269-71. ] [Footnote 134: The Life of Mahomet by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, pp. 320-21. ] [Footnote 135: Mohammed, Buddha and Christ, by Marcus Dods, D. D. , pp. 17-19 & 119. ] [Footnote 136: Christianity and Islam: The Bible and the Koran, by Rev. W. R. W. Stephens, pp. 94, 104, 112, London, 1877. ] [Footnote 137: Christianity and Islam: The Bible and the Koran, by theRev. W. R. W. Stephens, pp. 129-30, London, 1877. ] [Sidenote: Indictment against Mohammad. ] 36. What the opponents of Mohammad can possibly say against his missionis his alleged moral declension at Medina. [138] They accuse him ofcruelty[139] and sensuality[140] during his sojourn in that city afterhe had passed without any blame more than fifty-five years of his age, and had led a pious missionary life for upwards of fifteen years. Thesemoral stains cannot be inconsistent with his office of being a prophetor reformer. It is no matter if a prophet morally degrades his characterunder certain circumstances, or morally degrades his character at theend of his age--after leading for upwards of fifty-five years a life ofthe highest moral principles, and as a paragon of temperance andhigh-toned living--while he has faithfully conveyed the message, and hassincerely and honestly preached religious reforms, and the sublimity ofhis preachings have in themselves the marks of divine truth. If the said prophet defends his stains or immoral deeds by professedrevelations, and justifies himself in his flagrant breaches of moralityby producing messages from heaven, just and equally as he does when heteaches the purer theology and higher morality for which he iscommissioned, then and from that time only we will consider him as animpostor, guilty of high blasphemy in forging the name of God for hislicentious self indulgences. But in the case of Mohammad, in the first place, the charges of crueltyand sensuality during a period of six or seven years towards the end ofhis life, excepting three years, are utterly false; and secondly, ifproved to have taken place, it is not proved that Mohammad justifiedhimself by alleging to have received a divine sanction or command to thealleged cruelties and flagrant breaches of morality. The charges ofassassinations and cruelties to the prisoners of war and others, and ofthe alleged perfidy and craftiness enumerated by Sir W. Muir, have beenexamined and refuted by me in this book. _Vide_ pp. 60-73 and pp. 76-97. The cases of Maria, a slave-girl, and Zeinab not coming directly underthe object of this book have been treated separately in Appendix B, pp. 211-220 of this work. Mohammad, in his alleged cruelties towards his enemies, is notrepresented by Sir W. Muir to have justified himself by specialrevelation or sanction from on high, yet the Rev. Mr. Hughes, whose workhas been pronounced as having "_the rare merit of being accurate_, "makes him (Mohammad) to have done them under the sanction of God in theKoran. "The best defenders of the Arabian Prophet[141] are obliged to admit that the matter of Zeinab, the wife of Zeid, and again of Mary, the Coptic slave, are 'an indelible stain' upon his memory; that he is untrue once or twice to the kind and forgiving disposition of his best nature; that he is once or twice unrelenting in the punishment of his personal enemies, and that he is guilty even more than once of conniving at the assassination of inveterate opponents; but they do not give any satisfactory explanation or apology for all this being done _under the supposed sanction_ of God in the Qurán. "[142] Such is the rare accuracy of Mr. Hughes' work. It is needless for me torepeat here that none of these allegations are either true or facts, oralleged to have been committed under the sanction of God in the Koran. The Rev. Marcus Dods writes regarding the character of Mohammad:-- "The knot of the matter lies not in his polygamy, nor even in his occasional licentiousness, but in the fact that he defended his conduct, when he created scandal, by professed revelations which are now embodied as parts of the Koran. When his wives murmured, and with justice, at his irregularities, he silenced them by a revelation giving him conjugal allowances which he had himself proscribed as unlawful. When he designed to contract an alliance with a woman forbidden to him by his own law, an inspired permission was forthcoming, encouraging him to the transgression. "[143] Both of these alleged instances given above are mere fabrications. Therewas no revelation giving Mohammad conjugal allowances which he hadhimself proscribed as unlawful, nor any permission was brought forwardto sanction an alliance forbidden to him by his own law. This subjecthas been fully discussed by me in my work "Mohammad, the True Prophet, "and the reader is referred to that work. [144] A few verses on themarital subject of Mohammad are greatly misunderstood by Europeanwriters on the subject, and Dr. Dods shares the generally wrong ideawhen he says:-- "He rather used his office as a title to license from which ordinary men were restrained. Restricting his disciples to four wives, he retained to himself the liberty of taking as many as he pleased. " (Page 23. ) This is altogether a gross misrepresentation of the real state ofthings. Mohammad never retained to himself the liberty of taking as manywives as he pleased. On the contrary, Sura XXXIII, 52, expressly forbadehim all women except those he had already with him, giving him no optionto marry in the case of the demise of some or all of them. This willshow that he rather used his office as a restraint against himself ofwhat was lawful for the people in general to enjoy. The only so-calledprivilege above the rest of the believers (Sura XXXIII, 49) was not "toretain to himself the liberty of taking as many wives as he pleased, "but to retain the wives whom he had already married and whose numberexceeded the limit of four under Sura IV, 3. Other believers having morewives than four as in the case of Kays, Ghailán, and Naofal, wererequested to separate themselves from the number exceeding the limitprescribed for the first time. This was before polygamy was declared tohave been virtually abolished, _i. E. _, between the publication of _vv. _3 and 128 of Sura IV. There was neither any breach of morality, noranything licentious in his retaining the marriages lawfully contractedby him before the promulgation of Sara IV, 3. Even this privilege (SuraXXXIII, 49) was counterbalanced by _Ibid_, 52, which runs thus:-- "Women are not allowed thee hereafter, nor to change them for other women, though their beauty charm thee, except those already possessed by thee. " Mr. Stanley Lane Poole suffers under the same misrepresentation as otherEuropean writers[145] do when he says that:-- "The Prophet allowed his followers only four wives, he took more than a dozen himself. " He writes:-- "When, however, all has been said, when it has been shown that Mohammad was not the rapacious voluptuary some have taken him for, and that his violation of his own marriage-law may be due to motives reasonable and just from his point of view rather than to common sensuality. " "Did Mohammad believe he was speaking the words of God equally when he declared that permission was given him to take unto him more wives, as when he proclaimed, 'There is no god but God?'"[146] Mohammad did not violate his own marriage-law, and never pretended thatpermission was given to him to take more wives than what was allowed forother people. All his marriages (which are wrongly considered to havebeen about a dozen) were contracted by him before he published the lawunjustly said to have been violated by him. He retained these wivesafter the law was promulgated, and their number exceeded four, but hewas interdicted to marry any other women in the place of these in caseof their demise or divorce. Other believers were advised after thepromulgation of the law to reduce the number of their wives exceedingfour, but were at liberty to replace their wives within the limitassigned in the case of their demise or divorce. Mohammad's case had nobreach of morality or sensual license in it. It was very wise ofMohammad to retain all the wives he had married before Sura IV, 3, cameinto force, for the reason that the wives thus repudiated by him mighthave married some of the unbelievers, even some of his enemies, whichwould have been derogatory to the Prophet in the eyes of hiscontemporaries and a laughing-stock for his enemies. [Footnote 138: "We may readily admit that at the first Mahomet didbelieve, or persuaded himself to believe, that his revelations weredictated by a divine agency. In the Meccan period of his life therecertainly can be traced no personal ends or unworthy motives to beliethis conclusion. The Prophet was there, what he professed to be, 'asimple Preacher and a Warner;' he was the despised and rejected teacherof a gainsaying people; and he had apparently no ulterior object buttheir reformation. Mahomet may have mistaken the right means to effectthis end, but there is no sufficient reason for doubting that he usedthose means in good faith and with an honest purpose. "But the scene altogether changes at Medîna. There the acquisition oftemporal power, aggrandisement, and self-glorification mingled with thegrand object of the Prophet's previous life, and they were sought afterand attained by precisely the same instrumentality. Messages from Heavenwere freely brought forward to justify his political conduct, equallywith his religious precepts. Battles were fought, wholesale executionsinflicted, and territories annexed, under pretext of the Almighty'ssanction. Nay, even baser actions were not only excused, but encouragedby the pretended divine approval or command. A special license wasproduced, allowing Mahomet a double number of wives; the discreditableaffair of Mary the Coptic slave was justified in a separate Sura; andthe passion for the wife of his own adopted son and bosom friend was thesubject of an inspired message in which the Prophet's scruples wererebuked by God; a divorce permitted, and marriage with the object of hisunhallowed desires enjoined. "--Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 317-8. ] [Footnote 139: "But the darker shades of character as well as thebrighter must be depicted by a faithful historian. Magnanimity ormoderation are nowhere discernible as features in the conduct of Mahomettowards such of his enemies as failed to tender a timely allegiance. Over the bodies of the Coreish who fell at Badr he exulted with savagesatisfaction; and several prisoners, accused of no crime but that ofscepticism and political opposition, were deliberately executed at hiscommand. The prince of Kheibar, after being subjected to inhuman torturefor the purpose of discovering the treasures of his tribe, was, with hiscousin, put to death on the pretext of having treacherously concealedthem; and his wife was led away captive to the tent of the conqueror. Sentence of exile was enforced by Mahomet with rigorous severity on twowhole Jewish tribes at Medîna; and of a third like his neighbours, thewomen and children were sold into distant captivity, while the menamounting to several hundreds were butchered in cold blood before hiseyes. "In his youth Mahomet earned among his fellows the honourable title of'the Faithful. ' But in later years, however much sincerity and goodfaith may have guided his conduct in respect of his friends, craft anddeception were certainly not wanting towards his foes. The perfidiousattack at Nakhla, where the first blood in the internecine war with theCoreish was shed, although at first disavowed by Mahomet, for itsscandalous breach of the sacred usages of Arabia, was eventuallyjustified by a pretended revelation. Abu Basîr, the freebooter, wascountenanced by the Prophet in a manner scarcely consistent with theletter, and certainly opposed to the spirit, of the truce of Hodeibia. The surprise which secured the easy conquest of Mecca was designed withcraftiness, if not with duplicity. The pretext on which the Bani Nadhîrwere besieged and expatriated (namely, that Gabriel had revealed theirdesign against the prophet's life), was feeble and unworthy of an honestcause. When Medîna was beleaguered by the confederate army, Mahometsought the services of Nueim, a traitor, and employed him to sowdistrust among the enemy by false and treacherous reports; 'for, ' saidhe, 'what else is war but a game at deception?' In his propheticalcareer, political and personal ends were frequently compassed by theflagrant pretence of _Divine_ revelations, which a candid examinationwould have shewn him to be nothing more than the counterpart of his ownwishes. The Jewish and Christian systems, at first adopted honestly asthe basis of his own religion, had no sooner served the purpose ofestablishing a firm authority, than they were ignored, if not disowned. And what is perhaps worst of all, the dastardly assassination ofpolitical and religious opponents, countenanced and frequently directedas they were in all their cruel and perfidious details by Mahomethimself leaves a dark and indelible blot upon his character. "--Muir'sLife of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 307-9. "The reader will observe that simultaneously with the anxious desire toextinguish idolatry, and to promote religion and virtue in the world, there was nurtured by the Prophet in his own heart a licentiousself-indulgence; till in the end, assuming to be the favourite ofHeaven, he justified himself by 'revelations' from God in the mostflagrant breaches of morality. He will remark that while Mahometcherished a kind and tender disposition, 'weeping with them that wept, 'and binding to his person the hearts of his followers by the ready andself-denying offices of love and friendship, he could yet take pleasurein cruel and perfidious assassination, could gloat over the massacre ofan entire tribe, and savagely consign the innocent babe to the fires ofhell. "--Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 322-3. ] [Footnote 140: "In domestic life the conduct of Mahomet with one graveexception was exemplary. As a husband his fondness and devotion wasentire, bordering, however, at times upon jealousy. As a father he wasloving and tender. In his youth he is said to have lived a virtuouslife. At the age of twenty-five he married a widow forty years old; andfor five and twenty years he was a faithful husband to her alone. Yet itis remarkable that during this period was composed most of thosepassages of the Coran in which the black-eyed Houris, reserved forbelievers in Paradise, are depicted in such glowing colours. Shortlyafter the death of Khadija the Prophet married again; but it was nottill the mature age of fifty-four that he made the dangerous trial ofpolygamy, by taking Ayesha, yet a child, as the rival of Sauda. Once thenatural limits of restraint were overpassed, Mahomet fell an easy preyto his strong passion for the sex. In his fifty-sixth year he marriedHaphsa; and the following year, in two succeeding months, Zeinab bintKhozeima and Omm Salma. But his desires were not to be satisfied by therange of a harem already greater than was permitted to any of hisfollowers; rather as age advanced, they were stimulated to seek for newand varied indulgence. A few months after his nuptials with Zeinab andOmm Salma, the charms of a second Zeinab were by accident discovered toofully before the Prophet's admiring gaze. She was the wife of Zeid, hisadopted son and bosom friend; but he was unable to smother the flame shekindled in his breast; and, by _divine_ command, she was taken to hisbed. In the same year he married a seventh wife, and also a concubine. And at last, when he was full three score years of age, no fewer thanthree new wives, besides Mary the Coptic slave, were within the space ofseven months added to his already well-filled harem. "--Muir's Life ofMahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 309-10. ] [Footnote 141: "_Vide_ Muhammad and Muhammadanism, by Mr. R. BosworthSmith, M. A. , an Assistant Master of Harrow School. "] [Footnote 142: Notes on Muhammadanism, by the Rev. T. P. Hughes, Missionary to the Afghans, Peshawar; Second Edition, page 4, London, 1877. ] [Footnote 143: Mohammed, Buddha and Christ, by Marcus Dods, D. D. , pp. 24& 25. ] [Footnote 144: _Vide_ pp. 48-61. This work is being printed at EducationSociety's Press, Byculla, Bombay. It appears that Dr. Dods, in the firstinstance, had in view Sura XXXIII, 51. This is by no means givingMohammad conjugal allowances which he himself had proscribed asunlawful. As a preliminary measure to abolish polygamy and to accustomthe people to monogamy, Mohammad, when reducing the unlimited polygamypractised in Arabia, had put a strong condition to treat their wives, when more than one, equitably in every sense of the word, --_i. E. _, inthe matter of social comfort, love and household establishment (Sura IV, 3). When the measure had given a monogamous tendency to the Arabsociety, it was declared that it was impossible practically to treatequitably in all respects the contemporary wives (Sura IV, 128), andthose who had already contracted contemporaneous marriage before themeasure referred to above was introduced were absolved from thecondition laid down in Sura IV, 3, but were advised, regarding theirthen existing wives, not to yield wholly to disinclination. SimilarlyMohammad was also relieved from that condition in Sura XXXIII, 51, without "giving him any conjugal allowance which he had himselfpronounced unlawful. " The second instance is of Zeinab's case I suppose. Zeinab was in no way, when divorced by Zeid, "a woman forbidden to himby his own laws. "] [Footnote 145: "The Apostle becomes a creature so exalted that even theeasy drapery of Mohammadan morality becomes a garment too tight-fittingfor him. 'A peculiar privilege is granted to him above the rest of thebelievers. ' He may multiply his wives without stint; he may and he doesmarry within the prohibited degrees. "--_Islam under the Arabs_, by R. D. Osborn, London 1876, p. 91. ] [Footnote 146: Studies in a Mosque, by S. L. Poole, pp. 77 and 80, London, 1880. ] [Sidenote: Finality of the social reforms of Mohammad. ] [Sidenote: Positive precepts. ] [Sidenote: Ceremonial law. ] [Sidenote: Concrete morals of the Koran. ] [Sidenote: Want of adaptibility of the Koran to surroundingcircumstances. ] 37. It has been said with much stress regarding the teachings ofMohammad: (1) That although under the degraded condition of Arabia, theywere a gift of great value, and succeeded in banishing those fiercevices which naturally accompany ignorance and barbarism, but animperfect code of ethics has been made a permanent standard of good andevil, and a final and irrevocable law, which is an insuperable barrierto the regeneration and progress of a nation. It has been also urgedthat his reforms were good and useful for his own time and place, butthat by making them final he has prevented further progress andconsecrated half measures. What were restrictions to his Arabs wouldhave been license to other men. [147] (2) That Islam deals with positiveprecepts rather than with principles, [148] and the danger of a precisesystem of positive precepts regulating the minute detail, the ceremonialworship, and the moral and social relations of life, is, that it shouldretain too tight a grip upon men when the circumstances which justifiedit have changed and vanished away, and therefore the imposition of asystem good for barbarians upon people already possessing higher sort ofcivilization and the principles of a purer faith is not a blessing but acurse. Nay more, even the system which was good for people when theywere in a barbarous state may become positively mischievous to thosesame people when they begin to emerge from their barbarism under itsinfluence into a higher condition. [149] (3) That the exact ritual andformal observations of Islam have carried with them their own Nemesis, and thus we find that in the worship of the faithful formalism andindifferences, pedantic scrupulosity and positive disbelief flourishside by side. The minutest change of posture in prayer, the displacementof a simple genuflexion, would call for much heavier censure thanoutward profligacy or absolute neglect. [150] (4) That morality is viewednot in the abstract, but in the concrete. That the Koran deals much morewith sin and virtue in fragmentary details than as a whole. It dealswith acts more than principles, with outward practice more than inwardmotives, with precepts and commands more than exhortation. It does nothold up before man the hatefulness and ugliness of _all_ sin _as awhole_. [151] (5) "That Islam is stationary; swathed in the rigid bandsof the Coran, it is powerless, like the Christian dispensation, [152] toadapt itself to the varying circumstances of time and place, and to keeppace with, if not to lead and direct, the progress of society and theelevation of the race. In the body politic the spiritual and secular arehopelessly confounded, and we fail of perceiving any approach to freeinstitutions or any germ whatever of popular government. "[153] [Footnote 147: _Vide_ Islam and its Founder, by J. W. H. Stobart, B. A. , page 229, London, 1878; and Mohammed, Buddha and Christ, by Marcus Dods, D. D. , pp. 122-23, London, 1878. Major Osborn writes, "But to the polityerected on these rude lines was given the attribute of finality. Inorder to enforce obedience and eliminate the spirit of opposition, Mohammad asserted that it was, down to the minutest details, the work ofa Divine Legislature. "--_Islam under the Arabs_, pp. 45 and 46. ] [Footnote 148: _Vide_ The Faith of Islam, by the Rev. Edward Sell, page7, London, 1880. ] [Footnote 149: _Vide_ Christianity and Islam, the Bible, and the Koran, by the Rev. W. R. W. Stephens, pp. 95 and 131, London, 1877. ] [Footnote 150: _Vide_ Islam and its Founder, by J. W. H. Stobart, B. A. , page 237; and Stephens' Christianity and Islam, page 121. Major Osbornwrites: "From the hour of his birth the moslem becomes a member of asystem in which every act of his life is governed by a minute ritual. Heis beset on every side with a circle of inflexible formalities. "--_Islamunder the Khalifs of Baghdad_, pp. 78-9. He further writes in afootnote, p. 79: "Thus prayer is absolutely useless if any matter, legally considered impure, adheres to the person of the worshipper, eventhough he be unconscious of its presence. Prayer also is null and voidunless the men and women praying are attired in a certain prescribedmanner. "] [Footnote 151: _Vide_ Christianity and Islam, by W. R. W. Stephens, pp. 122-23. Major Osborn writes: "The Prophet knew of no religious lifewhere the external rite was not deemed of greater importance than theinner state, and, in consequence, he gave that character to Islam also. Hence there are no moral gradations in the Koran. All precepts proceedfrom the will of God, and all are enforced with the same threateningemphasis. A failure of performance in the meanest trivialities of civillife involves the same tremendous penalties as apostacy andidolatry. "--_Islam under Khalifs_, p. 5. He further says: "In theirreligious aspect, these traditions are remarkable for that strangeconfusion of thought which caused the Prophet to place on one level ofwickedness serious moral crimes, breaches of sumptuary regulations, andaccidental omissions in ceremonial observations. Sin, throughout, isregarded as an external pollution, which can, at once, be rectified bythe payment of a fine of some kind. " _Ibid_, page 62. ] [Footnote 152: "Occasionally our author would seem to write what hecertainly does not mean; thus, in the middle of an excellent summary ofthe causes of Islam's decadence, it is stated, --'Swathed in the rigidbands of the Koran, _Islam is powerless like the Christian dispensation_to adapt itself to the varying circumstances of time and place. '"--_TheSaturday Review_, June 23, 1883. ] [Footnote 153: _Vide_ Annals of the Early Caliphate, by Sir W. Muir, K. C. S. I. , LL. D. , D. C. L. , page 456, London, 1883. ] [Sidenote: The preceding objections not applicable to the Koran. ] 38. All these objections more or less apply rather to the teachings ofthe Mohammadan Common Law (canon and civil), called _Fiqah_ or _Shara_, than to the Koran, the Mohammadan Revealed Law. Our Common Law, whichtreats both ecclesiastical and the civil law, is by no means consideredto be a divine or unchangeable law. This subject has been treated by mein a separate work[154] on the Legal, Political and Social Reforms towhich the reader is referred. The space allowed to me in thisIntroduction, which has already exceeded its proper limit, does notadmit a full and lengthy discussion of the objections quoted above, butI will review them here in as few words as possible. [Footnote 154: Reforms, Political, Social and Legal, under the MoslemRule, Bombay Education Society's Press, 1883. ] [Sidenote: Finality of the social reforms of Mohammad. ] 39. (1) Mohammad had to deal with barbarous nations around him, to begradually reformed, and besides this the subject of social reforms was asecondary question. Yet it being necessary to transform the character ofthe people and to reform the moral and social abuses prevailing amongthem, he gradually introduced his social reforms which proved immenseblessings to the Arabs and other nations in the seventh century. Perhapssome temporary but judicious, reasonable and helpful accommodations hadto be made to the weakness and immaturity of the people, as haltingstages in the march of reforms only to be set aside at their adultstrength, or to be abolished when they were to begin to emerge fromtheir barbarism under its influence to a higher civilization. Consequently gradual amelioration of social evils had necessarily topass several trials during progress of reform. The intermediate stagesare not to be taken as final and irrevocable standard of morality and aninsuperable barrier to the regeneration of the Arabian nation. Ouradversaries stick indiscriminately to these temporary measures orconcessions only, and call them half measures and partial reforms madeinto an unchangeable law which exclude the highest reforms, and form aformidable obstacle to the dawn of a progressive and enlightenedcivilization. I have in view here the precepts of Mohammad forameliorating the degraded condition of women for restricting theunlimited polygamy and the facility of divorce, together with servileconcubinage and slavery. [155] Mohammad's injunctions and precepts, intermediary and ultimate, temporary and permanent, intended for theremoval of these social evils, are interwoven with each other, interspersed in different Suras and not chronologically arranged, inconsequence of which it is somewhat difficult for those who have no deepinsight into the promiscuous literature of the Koran to find out whichprecept was only a halting stage, and which the latest. It was only fromsome oversight on the part of the compilers of the Common Law that, inthe first place, the civil precepts of a transitory nature and as amediate step leading to a higher reform were taken as final; and in thesecond place, the civil precepts adapted for the dwellers of the Arabiandesert were pressed upon the neck of all ages and countries. A socialsystem for barbarism ought not to be imposed on a people alreadypossessing higher forms of civilizations. [Footnote 155: "The cankerworm of polygamy, divorce, servile concubinageand veil lay at the root. They are bound up in the character of itsexistence. A reformed Islam which should part with the divine ordinanceson which they rest, or attempt in the smallest degree to change them bya rationalistic selection, abetment or variation would be Islam nolonger. " Annals of the Early Caliphate by Sir W. Muir, page 458. ] [Sidenote: Positive precepts. ] [Sidenote: Ceremonial law. ] 40. (2) In fact the Koran deals with positive precepts as well as withprinciples, but it never teaches a precise system of precepts regulatingin minute details the social relations of life and the ceremonial ofworship. On the contrary, its aim has been to counteract the tendency tonarrowness, formality, and severity which is the consequence of a livingunder a rigid system of positive precepts. Mohammad had to transform thecharacter of the Arab barbarians who had no religious or moral teacheror a social reformer before his advent. It was therefore necessary togive them a few positive precepts, moulding and regulating their moraland social conduct, to make them 'new creatures' with new notions andnew purposes, and to remodel the national life. (3) But lest they shouldconfuse virtue as identical with obedience to the outward requirementsof the ceremonial law, --the formal ablutions, the sacrifices inpilgrimages, the prescribed forms of prayers, the fixed amount of alms, and the strict fasts, the voice of the Koran has ever and anon beenlifted up to declare that a rigid conformity to practical precepts, whether of conduct or ceremonial, would not extenuate, but ratherincrease in the eyes of God the guilt of an unprincipled heart and anunholy life. [Sidenote: Pilgrimage. ] Regarding the pilgrimage[156] or the sacrifices (its chief ceremony), the Koran says:-- "By no means can their flesh reach unto God, neither their blood, but piety on your part reacheth him. Thus hath he subjected them to you, that ye might magnify God for his guidance: and announce glad tidings to the doers of good. "--Sura XXII, 38. [Sidenote: Kibla. ] Regarding the _Kibla_ in prayers it is said in the Koran:-- "The west and the east is God's: therefore whichever way ye turn there is the face of God. "--Sura II, 109. "All have a quarter of the Heavens to which they turn them; but wherever ye be, hasten emulously after good. "--_Ibid_, 143. "There is no piety in turning your faces toward the east or west, but he is pious who believeth in God and the last day, and the angels and the scripture, and the prophets; who for the love of God disburseth his wealth to his kindred; and to the orphans, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and those who ask, and for ransoming; who observeth the prayer, and payeth alms, and who is of those who are faithful to their engagements when they have engaged in them, and patient under ills and hardships, and in time of trouble, these are they who are just, and these are they who fear the Lord. "--_Ibid_, 172. [Sidenote: Amount of alms. ] In the place of a fixed amount of alms the Koran only says to give whatye can spare. "They will ask thee also what shall they bestow in alms: "Say: What ye can spare. "--_Ibid_, 216, 217. [Sidenote: Fasts. ] Instead of imposing a very strict fast, which in the middle of summer isextremely mortifying, the Koran makes its observance optional. "And as for those who are able to keep it and yet observe it not, the expiation of this shall be the maintenance of a poor man. And he who of his own accord performeth a good work, shall derive good from it: and good shall it be for you to fast, if ye knew it. "--_Ibid_, 180. [Sidenote: No prescribed forms of prayer. ] The Koran does not teach any prescribed forms of worship and otherritualistic prayers. No attitude is fixed, and no outward observance ofposture is required. There is no scrupulosity and punctiliousness, neither the change of posture in prayer nor the displacement of asingle genuflexion calls any censure on the devotee in the Koran. Simplyreading the Koran (Suras LXXIII, 20; XXIX, 44), and bearing God in mind, standing and sitting; reclining (III, 188; IV, 104) or bowing down orprostrating (XXII, 76) is the only form and ritual, if it may be calledso, of prayer and worship taught in the Koran. "Recite then as much of the Koran as may be easy to you. "--Sura LXXIII, 20. "Recite the portions of the Book which have been revealed to thee and discharge the duty of prayer; verily prayer restraineth from the filthy and the blameworthy. And assuredly the gravest duty is the remembrance of God; and God knoweth what ye do. "--Sura XXIX, 44. "And when the Koran is rehearsed, then listen ye to it and keep silence: haply ye may obtain mercy. " "And think within thine ownself on God, with lowliness and with fear and without loud-spoken words, at even and at morn; and be not of the heedless. "--Sura VII, 203, 204. [Sidenote: Pretentious prayers and ostentatious almsgiving condemned. ] The Koran condemns pretentious prayers and ostentatious almsgiving. "Verily the hypocrites would deceive God; but he will deceive them! When they stand up for prayer, they stand carelessly to be seen of men, and they remember God but little"--Sura IV, 141. "Woe then to those who pray, " "Who in their prayer are careless;" "Who make a show of devotion, " "But refuse help _to the needy_. "--Sura CVII, 4-7. "And they fall down on their faces weeping, and it increaseth the humility. "--Sura XVII, 110. "O ye who believe! make not your alms void by reproaches and injury; like him who spendeth his substance to be seen of men, and believeth not in God and in the latter day. The likeness of such an one is that of a rock with a thin soil upon it, on which a heavy rain falleth, but leaveth it hard. No profit from their works shall they be able to gain; for God guideth not the unbelieving people. "--Sura II, 266. "We have made ready a shameful chastisement for the unbelievers, and for those who bestow their substance in alms to be seen of men, and believe not in God and in the last day. Whoever hath satan for his companion, an evil companion hath he!"--Sura IV, 42. [Sidenote: No indispensable hours or places for prayers. ] There are no indispensable hours or places to be observed for prayers. In Suras XI, 116; and IV, 104, the time of prayer is set down in generalterms without specifying any fixed hour. There are some more times namedin Suras XVII, 81, 82; XX, 130; L, 38, 39; and LII, 48, 49, but they arespecial cases for Mohammad himself, and "as an excess in the service. "_Vide_ Sura XVII, 81. On this subject Dr. Marcus Dods observes:-- "There are two features of the devout character which the Mohammedans have the merit of exhibiting with much greater distinctness than we do. They show not the smallest hesitation or fear in confessing God, and they reduce to practice the great principle that the worship of God is not confined to temples or any special place:-- "Most honour to the men of prayer, Whose mosque is in them everywhere! Who amid revel's wildest din, In war's severest discipline, On rolling deck, in thronged bazaar, In stranger land, however far, However different in their reach Of thought, in manners, dress or speech, -- Will quietly their carpet spread. To Mekkeh turn the humble head, And, as if blind to all around, And deaf to each distracting sound, In ritual language God adore, In spirit to his presence soar, And in the pauses of the prayer, Rest, as if rapt in glory there. " "There are of course formalists and hypocrites in Islam as well as in religions of which we have more experience. The uniformity and regularity of their prostrations resemble the movements of a well-drilled company of soldiers or of machines, but the Koran denounces "woe upon those who pray, but in their prayers are careless, who make a show of devotion, but refuse to help the needy;" while nowhere is formalism more pungently ridiculed than in the common Arabic proverb, "His head is towards the Kibleh, but his heels among the weeds. " We could almost excuse a touch of formalism for the sake of securing that absolute stillness and outward decorum in worship which deceives the stranger as he enters a crowded mosque into the belief that it is quite empty. Persons who hold themselves excused from the duty of worship by every slight obstacle might do worse than get infected with the sublime formalism of Cais, son of Sad, who would not shift his head an inch from the place of his prostration, though a huge serpent lifted its fangs close to his face and finally coiled itself round his neck. And if some are formal, certainly many are very much in earnest. "[157] [Sidenote: Ablutions. ] The ablutions have not been imposed as burdens, or as having anymysterious merit, but merely as a measure of cleanliness. "God desireth not to lay a burden upon you, but he desireth to purify you. " [Footnote 156: The institution of pilgrimage is a harmless one, andconducive to unity in religion for Arabs, and gives moreover an impetusto trade at large. ] [Footnote 157: Mohammed, Buddha, and Christ, by Marcus Dods, D. D. , pp. 30-1. ] [Sidenote: Koran both abstract and concrete in morals. ] 41. (4) The Koran seems fully aware of the danger of the precise andfixed system of positive precepts moulding and regulating everydepartment of life. The danger is that the system of formalism in whichmen are tied down to the performance of certain religious functions, minutely and precisely fixed in respect to time, place and manner, sothat neither less nor more is required of them, retains too tight a gripupon them, when the circumstances which justified it have changed orvanished away. The moral growth of those who live under such a system ofminute and punctilious restraint is stunted and retarded. The tendencyof mankind to formalism is so strong that they very commonly, thoughoften unconsciously, fall into the error of imagining that there is apeculiar intrinsic merit and virtue in the mere discharge of thoseprescribed forms of duties and religious ceremonies. Morality is withthem not in the abstract but in the concrete, as consisting of a mass ofreligious observances, rather than of a certain disposition of hearttowards God and man. The Koran deals with vice and virtue as a whole aswell as in fragmentary details. It treats of inward motives as much asof outward practice, of exhortations equally with precepts and commands. It holds up before man the hatefulness and ugliness of vice _as awhole_. It does not enclose the whole of the practical morality andpiety within the narrow compass of a fixed number of precepts. It laysthe foundation of that far-reaching charity which regards all men asequal in the sight of God, and recognizes no distinction of races andclasses. 120. "And abandon the semblance of wickedness and wickedness itself. They, verily, whose _only_ acquirement is iniquity shall be repaid for what they have gained. " 152. "Say: Come, I will rehearse what your Lord hath made binding on you, that ye assign not aught to Him as sharers of his Divine honour, and that ye be good to your parents; _and_ that ye slay not your children because of poverty, for them and for you will We provide; and that ye come not near to pollutions, outward or inward; and that ye slay not anyone whom God hath forbidden you, unless for a just cause. This hath He enjoined on you: haply ye will understand. "--Sura VI. 31. "Say: Only hath my Lord forbidden filthy actions, whether open or secret, and iniquity, and unjust violence, and to associate with God that for which He hath sent down no warranty, and to speak of God that of which ye have no knowledge. "--Sura VII. 33. "To those who avoid great crimes and scandals, but commit only lighter faults, verily, thy Lord will be rich in forgiveness. He well knew you when He produced you out of the earth, and when ye were embryos in your mothers' womb. Assert not then your own purity. He best knoweth who feareth him. "--Sura LIII. 13. "O men! verily We have created you of a male and a female: and We have divided you into peoples and tribes that ye might take knowledge one of another. Truly the most worthy of honour in the sight of God is he who feareth Him most. Verily God is Knowing, Cognizant. "--Sura XLIX. 143. "And every _nation_ has a quarter _of the Heavens_. It is God who turneth them _towards it_: hasten then emulously after good: wheresover ye be, God will one day bring you all together: verily God is all powerful. "--Sura II. 52. "And to thee We have sent down the Book _of the Koran_ with truth, confirmatory of previous scripture and its safeguard. Judge therefore between them by what God hath sent down, and follow not their desires, after the truth which hath come unto thee. To everyone of you have We given a rule and an open way. " 53. "And if God had pleased He had surely made you all one people; but He would test you by what He hath given to each. Be emulous then in good deeds. To God do ye _all_ return, and He will tell you concerning the subjects of your disputes. "--Sura V. 127 "And vie in haste for pardon from your Lord, and a Paradise, vast as the Heavens and the Earth, prepared for the God-fearing. " 128. "Who gives alms, _alike_ in prosperity and _in_ distress, and who master their anger, and forgive others! And God loveth the doer of good. " 129. "And who, after they have done a base deed or committed a wrong against their own souls, remember God and implore forgiveness of their sins--and who can forgive sins but God only?--and persevere not in what they have willingly done amiss. "--Sura III. 21. "Vie in hasting after pardon from your Lord, and Paradise--whose outspread is as the outspread of the Heaven and of the Earth. Prepared is it for those who believed in God and his apostles. Such is the bounty of God: to whom He will He giveth it: and of immense bounty is God!"--Sura LII. 183. "Ye shall assuredly be tried in your possessions and in yourselves. And many hurtful things shall ye assuredly hear from those to whom the scriptures were given before you, and from those who join other gods with God. But if ye be steadfast and fear God, then this verily is _God's_ decree for the affairs of _life_. "--Sura III. 16. "O my son! observe prayer and enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, and be patient under whatever shall betide thee: verily this is a bounden duty. "--Sura XXXI. 38. "Yet let the recompense of evil be only a like evil; but he who forgiveth and maketh peace, shall find his reward for it from God; verily He loveth not those who act unjustly. " 39. "And there shall be no way _open_ against those who, after being wronged, avenge themselves. " 40. "Only shall there be a way _open_ against those who unjustly wrong others, and act insolently on the earth in disregard of justice. These! a grievous punishment doth await them. " 41. "And whoso beareth _wrongs_ with patience and forgiveth, --this verily is a bounden duty. "--Sura XLII. [Sidenote: Adaptability of the Koran to surrounding circumstances. ] 42. (5) The Koran keeps pace with the most fully and rapidly-developingcivilization, if it is rationally interpreted, not as expounded by theUlema in the Common Law Book and enforced by the sentiment of a nation. It is only the Mohammadan Common Law, with all its traditions or oralsayings of the Prophet, --very few of which are genuine reports, and thesupposed chimerical concurrence of the learned Moslem Doctors and mostlytheir analogical reasonings (called _Hadees_, _Ijma_, and _Kias_), passed under the name of _Fiqah_ or _Shariat_, that has blended togetherthe spiritual and the secular, and has become a barrier in some respectsregarding certain social and political innovations for the highercivilization and progress of the nation. But the Koran is notresponsible for this all. Mr. Stanley Lane Poole writes:-- "The Koran does not contain, even in outline, the elaborate ritual and complicated law which now passes under the name of Islam. It contains merely those decisions which happened to be called for at Medina. Mohammad himself knew that it did not provide for every emergency, and recommended a principle of analogical deduction to guide his followers when they were in doubt. This analogical deduction has been the ruin of Islam. Commentators and Jurists have set their nimble wits to work to extract from the Koran legal decisions which an ordinary mind could never discover there; and the whole structure of modern Mohammadanism has been built upon the foundation of sand. The Koran is not responsible for it. "[158] I can only differ from the above in the allegation that Mohammadrecommended a principle of analogical deduction. [Footnote 158: The Speeches and Table-talk of the Prophet Mohammad, byStanley Lane Poole, pages lii and liii, Introduction, London, 1882. ] [Sidenote: Suitability of the Koran to all classes of humanity. ] 43. Thus the system of religious and moral teaching of the Koranadmirably suits the lower and the higher forms of humanity. The preceptswhich regulate some department of social life, moral conduct, andreligious ceremonial are blessings to the barbarous; and that portion ofthe Koran which inculcates large principles, for the due application ofwhich much must be left to the individual conscience, suits the samepeople when they begin to emerge from their barbarism under itsinfluence into a higher condition, or to those already possessing thehigher forms of civilization. For instance, the command to give fullmeasure, to weigh with just balance, to abstain from wine and gambling, and to treat persons with kindness are intended for men not reachingthe high forms of civilization. The teachings of the Koran regarding thegraces of truth, honesty and temperance and mercy, the virtues ofmeekness, and the stress laid upon thoughts and inclinations are fit toinstruct persons who have attained the higher forms of civilization, andhave outgrown the need of positive precepts of minute detail. C. Ali. Hyderabad, Deccan, _March 1884_. [Transcriber's Note: Despite the reference to a "Note" on page cv inthe Table of Contents, no such page exists in this edition of theprinted book. ] KAHTAN. | . --------------------+-------------------. | | Yarab. Hazaramaut. | * Yoshjab. * | Sadif. Saba. | . -----------------------------. | | Himyar. Kahlan. * | * . -----------------+----------. Kozaa. | | | Rabia. Zeid. Al-Hafi. * | | * . -----------------------. | Hamadan. | | | Abad. * . -----+-----+----------. * * | | | * Ghous. Aslom. Amran. Amr. | | * * | . ------+--+-----+------. | * * . -----+-----. | | | | | Zeid. | | | | Murrah. Muzhij. Tay. Ash-ar. | | . -------+. Bahra. * Bali. | | | | | | | * . ---+---. | . --+-----. | | Jarm. Taghlib. Mahra. | | | | | | | | Adi. Khaulan. | Ghous. Kharija. | | Vabra. | | | | | | . --------------. | Jadila. | | . ---------. | | | | | | | | Lakhm. Ofeir. Juzam. | | | Kalb. Khoshain. | | . ------+------. | | | Dar. Kinda. | | | | | Taym Allat. | Ans. Illah. | | | Sukun. | | | | . ---+-------+-----. Morad. | Saad-ul-Ashira | | | | | | | Joheina. Saad. Nohd. . ------------------. Jufi. | | | | | Ozra. Harb. Amr. | | | | . ----------. Nakha. | | | | Raha. Sada. . -----------------------. | . ----------+----------. | | Azd. Anmar. | | . ---------------+---. . ------+-+-------. | | | | | Mazin. Shahnvah. Khas-am. Ghous. Ghafiq. | | | | . ----------+----------. . -------+-------. Bajila. Ahmas. | | | | | | Saalba. Harisa. | Samala. Doos. Haddan. | | Jafna. . --+----. | (The Ghassinides). | | | Aus. Khazraj. | | . -----+---+----------. | | | Adi. Afsa. Lohay. | | | Bariq. Aslam. Khozaa. | | Salaman. Mustalik. MOADD. * * NIZAR. | . -----------+---------------------------------. | | Mozar (Modhar). Rabia. | * . ------+----------------------------------. * | | | Al-Nás. Al-Yás. . -----. | * | | Kays. * Anaza. | | Khundif. | Aylan. | Jadila. | . -------+-----. * . ------+-----------. | | * | | Tábikha. Modrika. | Khasafa. Ghatafan. | * | * | Add. * | * . ----+------. | | | Mansúr. | | . --------+-----. . +---. | | Aasir. Reis. | | | | | | . ----+---. | | Tamim. * Mozeina. | Hozeil. | | | . +-----. | * | | | Suleim. Hawazan. | | | * * Khozeima. | | | | Sad Monat | | Darim. | | | | . --+--. Bakr. Bahila. | | | | Lahyán. | | | * | | Saliba bin Sád. | | Makwan. * * Movahib. | Kinana. | | . +--------. | | * . +--------+------. | | . ----+-----. | | | | | Asha. Baghiz. | | | . -----+. Sakeef. Saad. Saasaa. | Abd Monat. Nazar. | | | | . ---+---. | | | Ussya. Ril. Aamir. | | . ---+-. Malik. | | Zobian. Abs. | | | | . -------------+-. * * Bakr. Fahr or | | | * * | Koreish. | Rabia. Hilal. | | Zamra. | | | | Mudlij. | Ghalib. | . ----------+--+-------------. | Ghifar. | | | | | . -+-----+------. Loway. | Kilab. Kaab. Aamir. | | | | | * | * Shahm. Murra. Fezára. | | * . ----+-+----. * | | | | | | | . ---------------------+ | Rivas. Kosheir. * Jaada. Baka. | | | | Káb Khozeima. | * | | | . ----------------+-. . --------+-----+ Muntafiq. | | | | Murrah. * * Abd-ul-Kays. | * * . -------+-+-----. | | | | | . ----+-. . -+---+----. Kilab. Taym. Mukhzum. | | | | | | Sahm. Jamah. | | Aus Allat. . --+------. | | | | Taym Allah. | Kossay. Zohra. | | Wail. . -----------+---------------. | | | | . -----+---. * Abd Manaf. Abd-ud-Dár. | | * | Taghlib. Bakr. | . -----+----------------------. * Asad. | | * Hashim. Abd Shams. | | | Hanifa. Abd-ul-Muttálib. Omayya. * | | * . -------+----+-----------. Harab. | | | | (Sakhr). . ------. Abbas. Abdullah. Abu Talib. | | | | | | Abu Sofian. Taheem * Ibn Abbas. Mohammad. Ali. | * Moavia. | Shaiban. * * | Sadús. ALL THE WARS OF MOHAMMAD WERE DEFENSIVE. _The Persecutions. _ [Sidenote: 1. The early persecutions of Moslems by the people of Mecca. ] The severe persecution which Mohammad and his early converts suffered atMecca at the hands of their fellow-citizens, the Koreish, is a factadmitted by all historians. The Koran, which may be regarded as a contemporary record of theill-feeling manifested towards the Prophet and his followers, bearsample testimony to the fact. Not only were the early Moslems persecutedfor renouncing the pagan religion and obtaining converts to themonotheistic religion of Mohammad, but they were also tortured andotherwise ill-treated to induce them to return to the religion whichthey had forsaken. The persecution seems to have been so great thatMohammad was compelled to recognize those of his followers, who by forceand cruelty were compelled to renounce Islam and profess paganism, butwere inwardly steadfast in their belief of the one true God, as trueMoslems. The Koran says: "Whoso after he hath believed in God denieth Him, if he were forced toit, and if his heart remain steadfast in the faith, _shall beguiltless_; but whoso openeth his breast to infidelity, on them, in thatcase, shall be wrath from God, and a severe punishment awaiteththem. "--Sura xvi, 108. "The incarceration and tortures, " says Mr. Stobart, "chiefly by thirstin the burning rays of the sun, to which these humble converts weresubjected, to induce their recantation and adoration of the nationalidols, touched the heart of Mahomet, and by divine authority, hepermitted them, under certain circumstances, to deny their faith so longas their hearts were steadfast in it. "[159] [Sidenote: 2. Notices of the persecution in the Koran. ] The oppressions, trials, and sufferings which the early Moslemsunderwent compelled them to fly from their homes, leaving their familiesand property in the hands of their oppressors. They chose this courserather than revert to paganism. They held steadfastly to the one trueGod whom their Prophet had taught them to trust and believe. All thesefacts are clearly outlined in the following verses of the Koran:-- "And as to those who when oppressed have fled their country for the sakeof God, We will surely provide them a goodly abode in this world, butgreater the reward of next life, did they but know it. " "They who bear ills with patience, and put their trust in theLord!"--xvi, 43, 44. "To those also who after their trials fled their country, then did theirutmost and endured with patience, verily, thy Lord will afterwards beforgiving, gracious. "--_Ibid_, 111. "But they who believe, and who fly their country, and do their utmost inthe cause of God, may hope for God's mercy: and God is Gracious, Merciful. "--ii, 215. "And they who have fled their country and quitted their homes andsuffered in my cause and have fought and fallen--I will blot out theirsins from them and will bring them into gardens beneath which thestreams do flow. "--iii, 194. "And as to those who fled their country for the cause of God, and wereafterwards slain, or died, surely with goodly provision will God providefor them! for verily, God is the best of providers!"--xxii, 57. "Those believers who sit at home free from trouble, and those who toilin the cause of God with their substance and their persons, shall not betreated alike. God hath assigned to those who strive with their personsand with their substance, a rank above those who sit at home. Goodlypromises hath He made to all: But God hath assigned to those who makeefforts a rich recompense above those who sit still at home. " "The angels, when they took the souls of those who had been unjust totheir own weal, demanded, 'What hath been your state?' They said, 'Wewere the weak ones of the earth. ' They replied, 'Was not God's earthbroad enough for you to flee away in?' These! their home shall be Hell, and evil the passage to it"-- "Except the men and women and children who were not able through theirweakness to find the means _of escape_, and were not guided on theirway. These haply God will forgive: for God is Forgiving, Pardoning. "--iv, 97, 99, 100. "God doth not forbid you to deal with kindness and fairness towardsthose who have not made war upon you on account of your religion, ordriven you forth from your homes: verily, God loveth those who act withfairness. " "Only doth God forbid you to make friends of those who, on account ofyour religion, have warred against you, and have driven you forth fromyour homes, and have aided your expulsion: and whoever maketh friends ofthem, these therefore are evil-doers. "--lx, 8, 9. [Sidenote: 3. Insults suffered by Mohammad. ] The Prophet himself suffered insults and personal injuries from thehands of his persecutors. He was prevented from offering his prayers(xcvi, 10). He allowed himself to be spat upon, to have dust thrown uponhim, and to be dragged out of the Kaaba by his own turban fastened tohis neck. He bore all these indignities with the utmost humility, and hedaily beheld his followers treated oppressively. After his uncle's deathhis life was attempted, but he escaped by flying to Medina. "And _call to mind_ when the unbelievers plotted against thee, to detainthee prisoner or to kill thee or to banish thee: they plotted--but Godplotted; and of plotters is God the best. "--viii, 30. [Sidenote: 4. Historical summary of the persecutions. ] About 615 of the Christian era, the Koreish of Mecca began to persecutethe faith of Islam. Those who had no protection among the early Moslemswere hard pressed, as related above. A body of eleven men, some withtheir families, fled the country, and found refuge, notwithstandingtheir pursuit by the Koreish, across the Red Sea at the Court ofAbyssinia. This was the first Hegira, or flight of the persecutedMoslems. After some time, the persecution being resumed by the Koreishmore hotly than ever, a larger number of Moslems, more than hundred, emigrated to Abyssinia. This was the second flight of the Moslems. TheKoreish had sent an embassy to the Court of Abyssinia to fetch back therefugees. The king denied their surrender. About two years later theKoreish formed a hostile confederacy, by which all intercourse with theMoslems and their supporters was suspended. The Koreish forced upon theMoslems, by their threats and menaces, to retire from the city. Forabout three years, they, together with the Prophet and the Hashimitesand their families, had to shut themselves up in the _Sheb_ of AbuTálib. They remained there, cut off from communication with the outerworld. The ban of separation was put rigorously in force. The terms ofthe social and civil ban put upon them were, that they would neitherintermarry with the proscribed, nor sell to or buy from them anything, and that they would entirely cease from all intercourse with them. Mohammad, in the interval of the holy months, used to go forth andmingle with the pilgrims to Mecca, and preached to them the abhorrenceof idolatry and the worship of the One True God. The _Sheb_, or quarterof Abu Tálib, lies under the rocks of Abu Cobeis. A low gateway cut themoff from the outer world, and within they had to suffer all privationsof a beleaguered garrison. No one would venture forth except in thesacred months, when all hostile feelings and acts had to be laid aside. The citizens could hear the voices of the half-famished children insidethe _Sheb_ and this state of endurance on the one side, and persecutionon the other, went on for some three years. Five of the chiefsupporters of the adverse faction detached from the league and broke upthe confederacy and released the imprisoned religionists. This was inthe tenth year of Mohammad's ministry. Soon after Mohammad and the earlyMoslems suffered a great loss in the death of his venerable uncle andprotector Abu Tálib. Thus, Mohammad and his followers became againexposed to the unchecked insults and persecutions incited by Abú Sofian, Abu Jahl, and others; and being a handful in the hostile city, wereunable to cope with its rich and powerful chiefs. At this criticalperiod, either because he found it unsafe to remain at Mecca, or becausehe trusted his message would find more acceptance elsewhere, Mohammadset off to Tayef of the Bani Thakif, --the town was one of the greatstrongholds of idolatry. There was a stone image, called Al-Lât, adornedwith costly vestments and precious stones, was an object of worship, andesteemed to be one of the daughters of God. Here Mohammad preached tounwilling ears, and met with nothing but opposition and scorn from thechief men, which soon spread to the populace. He was driven out of thetown, maltreated, and wounded. He could not return to and enter Meccaunless protected by Mut-im, a chief of the blood of Abd Shams. At the yearly pilgrimage, a little group of worshippers from Medina wasattracted and won over by the preaching of Islam; and the followingyear it increased to twelve. They met Mohammad and took an oath ofallegiance. A teacher was deputed by Mohammad to Medina, and the newfaith spread there with a marvellous rapidity. Again the time ofpilgrimage arrived, and more than seventy disciples from Medina pledgedthemselves to receive and defend him at the risk of their lives andproperty. This was all done in secret; but the Koreish, having gotnotice of it, renewed such severities and persecutions, including, insome cases, imprisonment, as hastened the departure of the Moslems toMedina, their city of refuge. [Sidenote: 5. The Hegira. ] Mohammad, being much troubled by the intolerance of the people and thepersonal safety and security of himself and his followers beingendangered, and mutual intercourse denied, saw that it was hopeless toexpect any forbearance on the part of the Koreish, who would not permithim to live and preach his religion at home, and looked for assistanceand protection from a strange land. He asked the people of Medina toreceive and protect him. The Medina converts, who had come to Mecca onpilgrimage, pledged themselves to Mohammad, and promised to defend himas they would defend their wives and children. The Medina converts, although not acting on the offensive, became at once objects ofsuspicion to the Koreish, who endeavoured to seize those who were inMecca. They maltreated one of the Medina converts who fell into theirhands, and the work of persecution was recommenced in rightearnest. [160] Two months elapsed before the believers, except thosedetained in confinement or who were unable to escape from slavery, orwomen and children, could emigrate. Families after families silentlydisappeared, and house after house was abandoned. One or two quarters ofthe city were entirely deserted. The Koreish held a council andproscribed Mohammad, who escaped together with Abu Bakr, leaving Ali inhis house, around whom, to lull the suspicions of his neighbours, hethrew his own mantle, and desired him to occupy his bed. Mohammad andhis follower took refuge in a cave. The Koreish despatched scouts in alldirections to search for Mohammad, but in vain. After hiding for threedays in the cave, Mohammad and Abu Bakr started for Medina, where theyarrived safely. The foregoing circumstances would have fully justified immediatehostilities on the part of Mohammad, but he did not take up arms untilcompelled to do so by the attacks of the Meccans. [Sidenote: 6. The persecution of the Moslems by the Koreish after theirflight from Mecca. ] Notwithstanding the flight of the Prophet and of all the early Moslemconverts who were able to effect an escape except their families, womenand children, and those weak Moslems who could not leave Mecca, theMeccans or the Koreish did not forgive the fugitives and did not abstainfrom their aggressions against them. They maltreated the children andweak Moslems left at Mecca (iv, 77, 99 and 100), expelled the Moslemsfrom their houses, and would not allow them to come back to Mecca for apilgrimage (ii, 214). The Meccans several times invaded the Medinaterritory with the avowed intention of making war upon the Moslems (andactually fought the battles of Bedr, Ohad, Khandak or Ahzáb, at Medina), consequently the Moslems were forced to resort to arms in pureself-defence. These were sufficient grounds for the Moslems to assume the offensive. They were desirous also of rescuing their families and those who hadbeen unable to join in the flight from the tyranny and oppression of theMeccans. Yet they were in no instance the aggressors. Driven from theirhomes and families they did not resort to arms until absolutelycompelled to do so in self-defence. All that Mohammad claimed for himself and his followers was, fullliberty of conscience and actions, and permission to preach and practicehis religion without being molested. This being refused, he advised hisfollowers to leave the city and seek refuge elsewhere. They emigratedtwice to Abyssinia, and for the third time were expelled to Medina, where he himself followed, when his own life was attempted. [Footnote 159: Islam and its Founder, by J. W. H. Stobart, B. A. , page 76. But, in fact, there was no such permission. The verse quoted above says, that the wrath and punishment of God will be on those who deny God, except those who do so by being forced. The latter were not put on thesame footing as the former; in short, those who denied God undercompulsion were not counted unbelievers. ] [Footnote 160: "The support of the Medina adherents, and the suspicionof an _intended_ emigration, irritated the Koreish to severity; and thisseverity forced the Moslems to petition Mahomet for leave to emigrate. The two causes might co-exist and re-act one another; the persecutionwould hasten the departure of the converts, while each fresh departurewould irritate the Koreish to greater cruelty. "--William Muir's Life ofMahomet, Vol. II, pp. 242, 243, foot-note. ] _The Meccans or the Koreish. _ [Sidenote: 7. A Koreish chieftain commits a raid near Medina. --A. H. , I. ] The attitude of the Koreish towards the Prophet and his followers afterthe flight rapidly became more hostile. Kurz-ibn Jábir, one of themarauding chieftains of the Koreish, fell upon some of the camels andflocks of Medina, while feeding in a plain a few miles from the city, and carried them off. [Sidenote: 8. The Koreish march to attack Medina. Mohammad marches forthin defence, and gains the battle at Badr. --A. H. , II. ] Still there was no hostile response from Medina, till the aggressors(the Koreish) brought from Medina an army of 950 strong, mounted on 700camels and 100 horses, to Badr, nine stages from Mecca, advancingtowards Medina. Then the Prophet set out from Medina at the head of hissmall army of 305 to check the advance of his aggressors. This was thefirst offensive and defensive war between the Koreish and Mohammadrespectively. The aggressors lost the battle. [Sidenote: 9. Attack by Abu Sofian upon Medína. --A. H. , II. ] After this Abu Sofian, the head of the Koreish, accompanied by 200mounted followers, alarmed Mohammad and the people of Medina by a raidupon the cornfields and palm gardens two or three miles north-east ofMedina. The nomad tribes of Suliem and Ghatafán, who were descended froma common stock with the Koreish, being probably incited by them, or atleast by the example of Abu Sofian, had twice assembled and projected aplundering attack upon Medina--a task in itself congenial with theirpredatory habits. [Sidenote: 10. The battle of Ohad. ] The Koreish made great preparations for a fresh attack upon Medina. Oneyear after the battle of Badr, they commenced their march, --threethousand in number, seven hundred were mailed warriors, and two hundredwell mounted cavalry. Reaching Medina they encamped in an extensive andfertile plain to the west of Ohad. Mohammad met Abu Sofian at the head of 700 followers and only twohorsemen, but lost the battle and was wounded. [Sidenote: 11. Mohammad's prestige affected by the defeat. ] Mohammad's prestige being affected by the defeat at Ohad, many of theBedouin tribes began to assume an hostile attitude towards him. The BaniAsad, a powerful tribe connected with the Koreish in Najd and BaniLahyan in the vicinity of Mecca, prepared to make a raid upon Medina. The Mohammadan missionaries were killed at Rají and Bír Maúna. Themarauding bands of Duma also threatened a raid upon the city. BaniMustalik also raised forces to join the Koreish in their threatenedattack upon Medina. [Sidenote: 12. Abu Sofian threatened the Moslems with another attacknext year. ] Abu Sofian, while retiring from the field, victorious as he was, threatened the Moslem with a fresh attack the next year as he said toOmar: "We shall meet again, let it be after a year, at Badr. " Medina andthe Moslems, however, enjoyed a long exemption from the threatenedattack of the Koreish. At length the time came when the forces of the Koreish and the Moslemswere again to meet at Badr. But the year was one of great draught, andthe Koreish were desirous that the expedition should be deferred to amore favorable season. Accordingly the Koreish engaged Naeem, an Arab ofa neutral tribe, to repair to Medina, and there to give forth anexaggerated account of the preparations of the Koreish, in the hopethat, with the field of Ohad fresh in memory, it might deter the Moslemsfrom setting out to meet them. But Mohammad, with a force of fifteenhundred men and only ten horses, set forth for Badr. The Koreish, whonever appeared mortified at the triumph of Mohammad, began to projectanother grand attack upon him. [Sidenote: 13. The Koreish again attack Medina with a large army. Mohammad defends the city. The enemy retire. (Ditch or Nations. --A. H. , V. )] The winter season in the next year was chosen for the renewal ofhostilities by the Koreish. They joined an immense force of the Bedouintribes (the entire army was estimated at ten thousand), marched againstMohammad, and besieged Medina. Mohammad defended the city by digging aDitch. The army of Medina was posted within the trench, and that of theKoreish encamped opposite them. In the meantime Abu Sofian succeeded indetaching the Jewish tribe of Koreiza from their allegiance to Mohammad. The danger to Medina from this defection was great. The enemy made ageneral attack, which was repulsed. Bad weather set in, and Abu Sofianordered the allied force to break up. The enemy retired, and never cameagain to attack the Moslems. This, therefore, was the last war ofaggression on the part of the Koreish, and of defence on the part ofMohammad. [Sidenote: 14. Mohammad, with his followers, advanced to perform thelesser pilgrimage of Mecca. The Koreish opposed Mohammad, who returneddisappointed. --A. H. VI. ] Six years had passed since the expulsion of Mohammad and his followersfrom Mecca. They had not since visited the Holy house, nor had theyjoined the yearly pilgrimage, which was an essential part of theirsocial and religious life. Mohammad undertook to perform the lesserpilgrimage to Mecca in the month of Zalkada, in which war was unlawfulthroughout Arabia. Mohammad, with his followers, the pious and peacefulworshippers, fifteen hundred in number, set forth for Mecca. Thepilgrims carried no arms, but such as were allowed by custom totravellers, --_namely_, each a sheathed sword. The Koreish, with theirallies, the surrounding tribes, hearing of the approach of thepilgrims, took up arms. They pushed forward to obstruct the pilgrims. Mohammad encamped at Hodeibia, where a treaty of peace was concludedbetween the Koreish and Mohammad. The treaty was to the effect, that warshould be suspended for ten years, neither party attacking the other. Whosoever wished to join Mohammad and enter into treaty with him, shouldhave liberty to do so. "If any one goeth over to Mohammad, without thepermission of his guardian, he shall be sent back to his guardian. Butif any one from amongst the followers of Mohammad return to the Koreish, the same shall not be sent back, provided, on the part of the Koreish, that Mohammad and his followers retire from us this year withoutentering our city. In the coming year he may visit Mecca--he and hisfollowers--for three days, when we shall retire therefrom. But they maynot enter it with any weapons, save those of the travellers--_namely_, to each a sheathed sword. " Bani Khozaá entered into the alliance ofMohammad, and Bani Bakr adhered to the Koreish. [Sidenote: 15. Violation of the treaty by the Koreish, and theirsubmission. ] The peace remained unbroken until the Koreish violated the treaty ofHodeibia[161] and treacherously killed several men of the Bani Khozaá. Mohammad marched against them in the eighth year of the Hegira indefence of the injured and oppressed Bani Khozaá, and to chastize theKoreish for violation of the treaty. But the Koreish submitted to theauthority of Mohammad before he arrived at Mecca, and the city wasoccupied without resistance. [Sidenote: 16. Two other tribes assume the offensive. ] Soon after, the great and warlike tribe of Hawazin and Thakeef assumedthe offensive. They assembled at Autas, and advanced upon Honain toattack Mohammad. He was obliged to leave Mecca and set out to dispersethem, who were beaten back at Honain (S. Ix, 26-28). Taif of the Thakeefwas besieged, but in vain. [Footnote 161: Unfortunately several missionary expeditious sent byMohammad were met with unfavorable circumstances. The party sent to BaniSuleim, demanding their allegiance to the faith of Islam, was slain. Another party sent to Bani Leith was surprised, and its camelsplundered. A small party sent by Mohammad to Fadak was cut to pieces byBani Murra. Another party sent to Zat Atlah to call upon the people toembrace Islam, of which only one person escaped. Mohammad's messengerdespatched to the Ghassanide Prince at Bostra was murdered by the chiefof Muta. His army sent to avenge the treachery of the chief wasdefeated. All these mishaps and reverses dangerously affected theprestige of Mohammad, and encouraged the Meccans to violate the truce. ] _The defensive character of the wars. _ [Sidenote: 17. Verses from the Koran in support of the defensivecharacter of the wars. ] This brief sketch of the defensive wars of Mohammad with the Koreishwill fully show, that those who assert that Mohammad was aggressive orrevengeful in his wars, or that he made war to force his religion uponthe people, are altogether in the wrong. I will now quote some verses of the Koran, showing that all the wars ofMohammad with the Koreish were defensive wars. 39. "Verily, God will ward off[162] _mischief_ from believers: lo, Godloveth not the false, the unbeliever. " 40. "A sanction is given to those who have been fought, [163] becausethey have suffered outrages, and verily, God is well able to succourthem"-- 41. "Those who have been driven forth from their homes wrongfully, onlybecause they say, 'Our Lord is the God. ' And if God had not repelledsome men by others, cloisters and churches and oratories and mosqueswherein the name of God is ever commemorated, would surely have beendestroyed! And him who helpeth God will God surely help: Verily, God isStrong, Mighty. " 42. "They who, if We established them in _this_ land, will observeprayer and pay the alms of obligation and enjoin what is recognized _asright_--and forbid what is unlawful. And the final issue of all thingsis unto God. "--Sura, xxii. 186. "And fight for the cause of God against those who fight againstyou: but commit not the injustice of _attacking them first_: verily, Godloveth not the unjust. " 187. "And kill them wherever ye find them, and eject them from whateverplace they have ejected you, for (_fitnah_)[164] persecution is worsethan slaughter: yet attack them not at the sacred mosque, until theyattack you therein; but if they attack you, then slay them--Such is therecompense of the infidels!"-- 188. "But if they desist, [165] then verily God is Gracious, Merciful!" 189. "And do battle against them until there be no more (_fitnah_)persecution, and the worship be that of God: but if they desist, thenlet there be no hostility, save against wrong-doers. " 214. "They will ask thee concerning war in the Sacred Month. Say: Theact of fighting therein is a grave crime; but the act of turning othersaside from the path of God, and unbelief in Him, and to prevent accessto the Sacred Mosque, and to drive out his people, is worse in the sightof God; and persecution[166] (_fitnah_[167]) is worse than bloodshed. But they will not cease to war against you until they turn you from yourreligion, if they be able: but whoever of you shall turn from hisreligion, and die an infidel, their works shall be fruitless in thisworld and in the next: and they shall be consigned to the fire; thereinto abide for aye. " 215. "But they who believe, and who fly their country, and do theirutmost in the cause of God, may hope for God's mercy: and God isGracious, Merciful. " 245. "And fight in the cause of God; and know that God is He whoHeareth, Knoweth. " 247. "Hast thou not considered the assembly of the children of Israelafter _the death of_ Moses, when they said to a prophet oftheirs, --'Raise up for us a king; we will do battle for the cause ofGod?' He said, 'May it not be that if to fight were ordained you, yewould not fight?' They said, 'And why should we not fight in the causeof God, since we are driven forth from our dwellings and our children?'But when fighting was commanded them they turned back, save a few ofthem: But God knew the offenders!" 252. "And by the will of God they routed them; and (Dâood) David slewGoliath; and God gave him the kingship and wisdom, and taught himaccording to his will: and were it not for the restraint of one by themeans of the other imposed on men by God, verily the earth had assuredlygone to ruin, but God is bounteous to his creatures. "--Sura, ii. 76. "Let those then fight in the cause of God who barter this presentlife for that which is to come; for whoever fighteth on God's path, whether he be slain or conquer, We will in the end give him a greatreward. " 77. "But what hath come to you that ye fight not on the path of God, and_for_ the weak among men, women and children, who say, 'O our Lord!bring us forth from this City whose inhabitants are oppressors; give usa champion from thy presence; and give us from thy presence adefender?'" 78. "They who believe, fight on the path of God; and they who believenot, fight on the path of Thâgoot: Fight then against the friends ofSatan--Verily, the craft of Satan shall be powerless!" 86. "Fight then on the path of God: lay not burdens on any but thyself;and stir up the faithful. The prowess of the infidels, God will haplyrestrain; for God is the stronger in prowess, and the stronger topunish. " 91. "They desire that ye should be unbelievers as they are unbelievers, and that ye should be alike. Take therefore none of them for friends, until they have fled their homes for the cause of God. If they turnback, then seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; but take noneof them as friends or helpers. " 92. "Except those who seek asylum among your allies, and those who comeover to you--prevented by their own hearts by making war on you, or frommaking war on their own people. Had God pleased, He would certainly havegiven them power against you, and they would certainly have made warupon you! But, if they depart from you, and make not war against youand offer you peace, then God alloweth you no occasion against them. " 93. "Ye will find others who seek to gain your confidence as well asthat of their own people: So oft as they return to sedition, they shallbe overthrown in it: But if they leave you not, nor propose terms ofpeace to you, nor withhold their hands, then seize them, and slay themwherever ye find them. Over these have We given you undoubtedpower. "--Sura, iv. 19. "_O Meccans!_ If ye desired a decision, now hath the decision cometo you. It will be better for you if ye give over _the struggle_ (_orattacking upon Medina or the Moslem_). If ye return _to it_ we willreturn; and your forces, though they may be many, shall by no meansavail you aught, because God is with the faithful. " 39. "Say to the infidels: If they desist (_from persecuting, obstructing, and attacking the Moslems_), what is now past shall beforgiven them; but if they return _to it_ (commit again thehostilities), they have already before them the doom of the ancients!" 40. "Fight then against them till civil strife be at an end, and thereligion be all of it God's; and if they desist, verily God beholdethwhat they do. " 41. "But if they turn their back, know ye that God is your protector:Excellent protector! and excellent helper!" 73. ". . . And they who have believed, but have not fled their homes, shall have no rights of kindred with you at all, until they too flytheir country. Yet if they seek aid from you on account of the faith, your part it is to give them aid, except against a people between whomand yourselves there may be a treaty. And God beholdeth your actions. " 74. "And the infidels have the _like_ relationships one with another. Unless ye do the same (_i. E. , aid the oppressed and repel theoppressor_), there will be discord in the land and greatcorruption. "--Sura, viii. (When the Meccans broke the Hodeibia treaty mentioned in the aboveparagraph, the Koreish and Bani Bakr attacked Bani Khozaá, who were inalliance with Mohammad. It became incumbent on him to assist Bani Bakrand to chastize the aggressors. The following verses were published onthat occasion, but happily, before the expiration of the fixed period, the Koreish submitted and Mecca was taken without bloodshed, and theseverses were not acted upon:--) 1. "An immunity from God and His Apostle to those with whom ye are inleague (_and they have violated the same--compare verses 4, 8 and 10_)among the polytheist Meccans. " 2. "Go ye therefore at large in the land four months (_i. E. , four sacredmonths from Shaw-wal. The treaty was violated by the Koreish in Ramzan, a month immediately previous to the sacred months. It is announced herethat four months' time is given to the aggressors, who violated thetreaty of Hodeibia, to make terms. After the time is over (verse 5) theMoslems will commence hostilities to defend their allies, the BaniKhozaá_), but know that ye shall not find God feeble, and that those whobelieve not, God will put to shame. " 3. "And a proclamation on the part of God and His Apostle to the peopleon the day of the greater pilgrimage, that God is free from _anyengagement with_ those who worship other gods with God, as is hisApostle. If then, ye turn to God, it will be better for you; but if yeturn back, then know that ye shall not find God feeble: and to those whobelieve not, announce thou a grievous punishment. " 4. "But this concerneth not those Polytheists with whom ye are inleague, and who have afterwards in no way failed you, and not yet aidedany one against you. Observe, therefore, your engagement with themthrough the whole time _of their treaty_. Verily, God loveth those whofear Him. " 5. "And when the sacred months are passed[168] kill those who join othergods with God[169] wherever ye find them; and seize them, and besiegethem, and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush; but if theyrepent and observe prayer and pay the obligatory alms, then let them gotheir way. [170] Verily, God is Gracious, Merciful. " 6. "If any one of those who join gods with God ask an asylum of thee, grant him an asylum, in order that he hear the Word of God; then let himreach his place of safety. This, for that they are people devoid ofknowledge. " 7. "How can they who add gods to God be in league with God and HisApostle, save those with whom ye made a league at the sacred temple? Solong as they are true to you, [171] be ye true to them: verily, Godloveth those who fear Him. " 8. "How _can they_? since if they prevail against you, they will notregard in their dealing with you, either ties of blood or good faith:With their mouths they content you, but their hearts are averse, andmost of them are perverse doers. " 9. "They sell the signs of God for a mean price, and turn others asidefrom his way; of a truth, evil is it that they do!" 10. "They respect not with a believer either ties of blood or goodfaith; and these are the transgressors!" 11. "Yet if they turn to God and observe prayer, and pay the impost, then are they your brethren in religion: and We make clear the signs formen of knowledge. "[172] 12. "But if, after alliance made, they violate their covenant and revileyour religion, then do battle with the ringleaders of infidelity--verilythere is no faith in them! Haply they will desist. " 13. "Will ye not do battle with a people (_the Meccans_) who have brokentheir covenant and aimed to expel your Apostle and attacked you first?Will ye dread them? God truly is more worthy of your fear if ye arebelievers!" 14. "Make war on them: By your hands will God chastize them and put themto shame, and give victory over them, and heal the bosom of a people whobelieve. " 36. ". . . And attack those who join gods with God one and all, as theyattack you one and all. "--Sura, ix. [Sidenote: 18. What the above-quoted verses show. ] I need not repeat here what these verses and the facts related aboveshow, that the wars of Mohammad with the Koreish were merely defensive, and the Koreish were the aggressors, and that Mohammad was quitejustified in taking up arms against them. "In the state of nature every man has a right to defend, " writes Mr. Edward Gibbon, [173] "by force of arms, his person and his possessions;to repel, or even to repeat, the violence of his enemies, and to extendhis hostilities to a reasonable measure of satisfaction and retaliation. In the free society of the Arabs, the duties of subject and citizenimposed a feeble restraint; and Mahommed, in the exercise of a peacefuland benevolent mission, had been despoiled and banished by the injusticeof his countrymen. " It has been fully shown in the foregoing paragraphsthat the Moslems in Mecca enjoyed neither safety nor security. Religiousfreedom was denied to them, though they were harmless and peacefulmembers of the community. Besides this they were expelled from theirhomes, leaving their families and their property in the hands of theirpersecutors, and were prevented from returning to Mecca, and wererefused access to the Sacred Mosque; and, above all, they were attackedby the Meccans in force at Medina. [Sidenote: 19. Justification of the Moslems in taking up arms againsttheir aggressors. ] The persecution of the early Moslems by the Koreish was on religiousgrounds. They would not allow the believers to renounce the religion oftheir forefathers and profess Islam. Their intolerance was so strong andharsh that they tortured some of the professors of the new faith torenounce the same and to rejoin their former idolatry. "Taking away thelives, the fortune, the liberty, any of the rights of our brethren, merely for serving their Maker in such manner as they are persuaded theyought, when by so doing they hurt not human society, or any member ofit, materially, is evidently inconsistent with all justice and humanity:for it is punishing those who have not injured us, and who, if theymistake, deserve only pity from us. "[174] The early Moslems had hadevery international right to resent persecution and intolerance of theMeccans and to establish themselves by force of arms, to enjoy theirreligious liberty and to practise their religion freely. [Sidenote 20. The first aggression after the Hegira was not on the partof Mohammad. ] Some of the European biographers of Mohammad say, "that the firstaggressions after the Hegira were solely on the part of Mahomet and hisfollowers. It was not until several of their caravans had been waylaidand plundered, and blood had thus been shed, that the people of Meccawere forced in self-defence to resort to arms. "[175] This is not correct. The aggressors, in the first instance, were theKoreish, who, as already shown, followed up their persecution of theMoslems by an attack upon the city in which the Prophet and hisfollowers had taken refuge. Even taking it for granted that the Moslemswere the first aggressors after the Hegira, was not the Hegira, orexpulsion itself (leaving aside the previous persecutions andoppressions at Mecca), a sufficient reason for the commencement ofhostilities by the Moslems, who were anxious to secure their moral andreligious freedom, and to protect themselves and their relatives fromfurther aggressions? Sir William Muir admits, that "hostilities, indeed, were justified bythe 'expulsion' of the believers from Mecca. "[176] "It may be said, "says Major Vans Kennedy, "that, in these wars, Mohammad was theaggressor by his having, soon after his flight, attempted to interceptthe caravans of Mecca. But the first aggression was, undoubtedly, theconspiracy of the Koreish to assassinate Mohammad, and when to save hislife he fled from Mecca, himself and his followers were thus deprived oftheir property, and obliged to depend for their subsistence on thehospitality of the men of Medina, it could not be reasonably expectedthat they would allow the caravans of their enemies to passunmolested. "[177] [Sidenote: 21. The alleged instances examined. ] There is no proof that Mohammad, after the Hegira, commenced hostilitiesagainst the Koreish by intercepting their caravans. The allegedinstances of the caravans being waylaid by the Moslems at Medina are notcorroborated by authentic and trustworthy traditions. They have alsointernal evidences of their improbability. The Medina people had pledgedthemselves only to defend the Prophet from attack, and not to join himin any aggressive steps against the Koreish. [178] Therefore, it seemsimpossible that they should have allowed Mohammad to take any aggressivesteps against the Koreish which would have involved them in greattrouble. [Sidenote: 22. Hamza and Obeida expedition. ] The alleged expeditions against the Koreish caravans by Hamza and theother by Obeida in pursuit of caravans which escaped, are in themselvesimprobable. Mohammad would not send fifty or sixty persons to waylay acaravan guarded by two or three hundred armed men. [Sidenote: 23. The Abwa, Bowat, & Osheira expeditions. ] The alleged expeditions of Abwa, Bowat, and Osheira, said to have beenled by Mohammad himself to intercept the Mecca caravans, but in vain, are altogether without foundation. He might have gone, if he had gone atall, to Abwa, and Osheira to negotiate friendly terms with BaniDhumra[179] and Bani Mudlij, as his biographers say, he did. [Sidenote: 24. The affair at Nakhla. ] The affair of the _Nakhla_ marauding party, as related in thetraditions, is full of discrepancies, and is altogether inconsistent anduntrustworthy. The very verse (Sura, ii, verse 214) which thebiographers say was revealed on the occasion, and which I have quotedabove (para. 16), contains a reference to the Meccans' fighting againstthe Moslems, which runs counter to the assumption of the Europeanbiographers, who make it an aggressive attack on the part of Mohammad. It is probable that Mohammad might have sent some six or eight scouts tobring in news of the movements and condition of the Koreish, whoseattitude towards Mohammad had become more hostile since his flight toMedina. As the Koreish had a regular and uninterrupted route to Syriafor traffic, it was only reasonable on the part of Mohammad to takeprecautions, and he was always on his guard. The biographers _IbnIs-hak_, _Ibn Hisham_ (p. 424), _Tabri_ (Vol. II, p. 422), _Ibnal Athir_in _Kamil_ (Vol. II, p. 87), _Halabi_ in _Insanul Oyoon_ (Vol. III, p. 318), say, that Mohammad had given written instructions toAbdoollah-bin-Jahsh, which was to the effect "bring me intelligence oftheir affairs. " They also say that Mohammad was displeased withAbdoollah's affair at Nakhla, and said, "I never commanded thee to fightin the Sacred Month. " The biographers also relate that Mohammad evenpaid blood-money for the slain. [Sidenote: 25. At Badr Mohammad had come only in his defence. ] Some of the European biographers of Mohammad allege, that the battle ofBadr was brought by Mohammad himself. They appear to hesitate to justifyMohammad in defending himself against the superior numbers of theKoreish, who had advanced to attack him as far as Badr, three stagesfrom Medina. It is alleged that Mohammad intended to attack the caravansreturning from Syria, conducted by Abu Sofian, his arch-enemy, thereforehe set out upon his march with eighty refugees and two hundred andtwenty-five people of Medina, and halted at Safra to waylay the caravan. Abu Sofian, warned of Mohammad's intention, sent some one to Mecca forsuccour. The Koreish, with nine hundred and fifty strong, marched forthto rescue the caravan. In the meantime, the caravan had passedunmolested, but the Koreish held a council whether to return or go towar. On the one hand, the biographers say, it was argued that the objectfor which they had set out having been secured, the army should at onceretrace its steps. Others demanded that the army should advance. Twotribes returned to Mecca, the rest marched onwards; but it is not fairto allege that Mohammad had set forth to attack the caravan. Had he anysuch intention, the people of Medina, who had pledged themselves only todefend him against personal attack, would not have accompanied him. Thepresence of a large number of the _Ansárs_, the people of Medina, morethan double that of the _Mohajirins_, the refugees, is a strong proofthat they had come out only in their defence. Mohammad, on receiving intelligence of the advancing force of theKoreish, set out from Medina to check the advance of the Meccan force, and encountered it at Badr, three days' journey from Medina. The Meccanarmy had advanced nine days' journey from Mecca towards Medina. Theforces met at Badr on the 17th of Ramzan (13th January 623), the Meccanshad left Mecca on the 8th of Ramzan (4th January), and Mohammad startedonly on the 12th of Ramzan (8th January), about four days after theMeccan army had actually set out to attack him. Supposing Abu Sofian hadsome reason for apprehending an attack from Medina, and sent for succourfrom Mecca, but the object of the Meccan army of the Koreish for whichthey had set out having been secured, the caravan having passedunmolested, they ought at once to have retraced their steps. The factthat Mohammad left Medina four days after the Koreish had left Meccawith a large army advancing towards Medina, is strongly in his favour. [Sidenote: 26. The first aggressions after the Hegira, if from Mohammad, might fairly be looked upon as retaliation. ] Even taking it for granted that the first aggressions after the Hegirawere solely on the part of the Moslems, and that several of the caravansof the Koreish had been waylaid and plundered, and blood had been shed, it would be unfair to condemn Mohammad. Such attacks, had they beenmade, might fairly be looked upon as a retaliation for the ill-treatmentof the Moslems before the flight from Mecca. "Public war is a state ofarmed hostility between sovereign nations or governments. It is a lawand requisite of civilized existence that men live in politicalcontinuous societies, forming organized units called states or nations, whose constituents bear, enjoy and suffer, advance and retrogradetogether, in peace and in war. The citizen or native of hostile countryis thus an enemy, as one of the constituents of the hostile state ornation, and as such is subjected to the hardships of war. "[180] Thealmost universal rule of most remote times was, and continues to be withbarbarous nations, that the private individual of a hostile country isdestined to suffer every privation of liberty and protection, and everydescription of family ties. But Mohammad protected the inoffensivecitizen or private individual of the hostile country. He even protectedthose who had actually come out of Mecca to fight at Badr, but werereluctant to do so. Mohammad had desired quarters to be given to severalpersons in the Koreish army at Badr. Abul Bakhtari, Zamaa, Hárith IbnAmir, Abbás and other Bani Háshim were amongst those named. [Footnote 162: Or defend, '_Yadafeo_' repel. ] [Footnote 163: _Yokâtaloona_, or who fight _Yokateloona_. The formerreading is the authorized and general. ] [Footnote 164: The primary signification of _fitnah_ is burning withfire. It signifies a _trial_ or _probation_ and affliction, distress orhardship; and particularly an _affliction whereby one is tried, proved, or tested_. --_Vide_ Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon, p. 2335. ] [Footnote 165: Desist from persecuting you and preventing you to enteryour native city and prohibiting access to the sacred mosque andattacking you, and from religious intolerance. ] [Footnote 166: _i. E. _, the religious persecution and intolerance andhindrance to visit the sacred mosque being suppressed; you may profess, preach and practice your religion freely. ] [Footnote 167: _Vide_ note 2 in p. 17. ] [Footnote 168: Shaw-wal, Zulkada, Zulhij, and Moharram, the 10th, 11th, 12th, and 1st months of the Arabian year. These verses were promulgated in Ramzan, the 9th month of the year. ] [Footnote 169: And have violated the Hodeibia Truce. Compare verses 4, 8, and 12. ] [Footnote 170: It is not meant that they should be forced to observeprayer or pay obligatory alms, or in other words be converted to Islam;the context and general scope of the Koran would not allow such ameaning. The next verse clearly enjoins toleration. ] [Footnote 171: The Bani Kinana and Bani Zamara had not violated thetruce of Hodeibia while the Koreish and Bani Bakr had done so. ] [Footnote 172: This is the same as verse 5. It only means, if meanwhilethey become converts to Islam, they are to be treated as brethren inreligion. But it cannot mean that it was the sole motive of making warwith them to convert them. Such an interpretation is quite contrary tothe general style of the Koran. ] [Footnote 173: The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, by Edward Gibbon, Vol. VI, p. 245. ] [Footnote 174: Archbishop Secker's Works, III, p. 271. ] [Footnote 175: Sir W. Muir, II, p. 265. ] [Footnote 176: Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 79. ] [Footnote 177: Remarks on the character of Mohammad (suggested byVoltaire's Tragedy of Mahomet) by Major Vans Kennedy. _Vide_Transactions of the Literary Society of Bombay for 1821, Vol. III, p. 453, reprint Bombay, 1877. ] [Footnote 178: "Mahomet did not send the Medina converts on any hostileexpedition against the Koreish, until they had warred with him at Badr, and the reason is, that they had pledged themselves to protect him onlyat their homes. "--K. Wackidi, 48; Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 64, _note_. ] [Footnote 179: "K. Wackidi, 98-1/2. The provisions are noted onlygenerally, "that neither party would levy war against the other, norhelp their enemies. " The version quoted by Weil binding the Bani Dhumrato fight _for the faith_, &c. , is evidently anticipatory and apocryphal. It is not given by the Secretary of Wackidi in his chapter oftreaties. "--Muir's Life of Mahomet, III, p. 67, _note_. ] [Footnote 180: Contributions to Political Science by Francis Lieber, LL. D. , Vol. II of his miscellaneous writings, p. 251, London, 1881. ] _The Jews. _ [Sidenote: 27. The Jews broke treaties. ] Mohammad, on his first arrival at Medina, made a treaty of alliance withthe Jews, by which the free exercise of their religion and thepossession of their rights and property were guaranteed. It wasstipulated in the treaty that either party, if attacked, should come tothe assistance of the other. Medina should be sacred and inviolable forall who joined the treaty. But the Jews broke their treaty and rebelled. They assisted the enemy during the siege of Medina, and committedtreason against the city. [Sidenote: 28. Bani Kainúkaá, Bani Nazeer, Koreiza, Khyber, andGhatafán. ] The Bani Kainúkaá were the first among the Jews who broke the treaty andfought against Mohammad between the battles of Badr and Ohad. [181] The Bani Nazeer broke their compact with Mohammad after his defeat atOhad. They had also made a conspiracy to kill Mohammad. They werebanished; some of them went over to Khyber. The Jewish tribe of Koreizahad defected from their allegiance to Mohammad, and entered intonegotiations with the enemy, when Medina was besieged by the Koreish andBedouin tribes at the battle of the Ditch. They were afterwards besiegedby Mohammad. They surrendered at the discretion of Sád, who passed abloody judgment against them. The Jews of Khyber (including those ofNazeer) and Bani Ghatafán, who had lately besieged Medina with theKoreish in the battle of the Ditch, made alliance against Mohammad, [182]and were making preparations for an attack on him. They had beeninciting the Bani Fezára and other Bedouin tribes in their depredations, and had combined with Bani Sád-Ibn Bakr to attack upon Medina. They weresubjected at Khyber, and made tributaries, paying _jizya_ in return ofthe protection guaranteed to them. [Sidenote: 29. Notices of them in the Koran. ] The treachery of the Bani Kainúkaá, Nazeer and Koreiza, and Khyber isnoticed in the Koran in the following verses:-- 58. "They with whom thou hadst leagued, but who ever afterwards breaktheir league, and fear not God!" 59. "And if thou capture them in battle, then (_by the example of theirfate_) put to flight those who are behind them--they will perhaps bewarned:"-- 60. "Or, if thou fear treachery from any people, throw back _theirtreaty_ to them in like manner: verily, God loveth not the treacherous. " 61. "And think not that the infidels shall get the better of Us! Verily, they shall not find God to be weak. " 62. "Make ready then against them what force ye can, and squadrons ofhorse whereby ye may strike terror into the enemy of God and your enemy, and into others beside them whom ye know not, _but_ whom God knoweth;And all that you expend for the cause of God shall be repaid you; and yeshall not be wronged. " 63. "But if they lean to peace, lean thou also to it; and put thy trustin God: He verily is the Hearing, the Knowing. " 64. "But if they seek to betray thee, then verily God will beall-sufficient for thee. He it is who strengthened thee with his helpand with the faithful and made their heart one. Hadst thou spent all theriches of the earth, thou wouldst not have united their hearts; but Godhath united them: He verily is Mighty, Wise. " 65. "O Prophet! God and such of the faithful as follow thee will beall-sufficient for thee!" 66. "O Prophet! stir up the faithful to the fight. . . . "--Sura, viii. 26. "And He caused those of the people of the Book (the Jews) who hadaided _the confederates_, to come down out of their fortresses, and castdismay into their hearts: a part ye slew, a part ye tookprisoners. "--Sura, xxxiii. 29. "Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have beengiven, [183] as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbidnot that which God and his apostles have forbidden, and who profess notthe profession of the Truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, andthey be humbled. " 124. "Believers! wage war against such of the unbelievers as are yourneighbours, and let them assuredly find rigour in you: and know that Godis with those who fear Him. "--Sura, ix. [Sidenote: 30. The judgment of Sâd. ] The Bani Koreiza had surrendered themselves to the judgment of _Sâd_, an_Awsite_ of their allies, Bani Aws. To this Mohammad agreed. Sâd decreedthat the male captives should be slaughtered. Mohammad, disapproving thejudgment, remarked to Sâd: "Thou hast decided like the decision of aking, " meaning thereby a despotic monarch. The best authentic traditionin Bokhari (Kitáb-ul-Jihád) has the word '_Malik_, ' monarch; but inother three places of Bokhari, Kitabul Monakib, Maghazi, and Istizan, the narrator has a doubt whether the word was _Allah_ or _Malik_. Moslim, in his collection, has also '_Malik_, ' and in one place thesentence is not given at all. It was only to eulogize the memory of Sâdafter his death, that some of the narrators of the story gave out thatMohammad had said that Sâd had decided like the decision of a _Malak_, angel; or some narrators interpreted the word _Malik_, king, as meaningGod; and therefore put the word _Allah_ in their traditions. Mohammadnever said _Malak_, meaning angel, or _Malik_, allegorically meaning_Allah_; he simply said _Malik_, literally meaning a king or monarch. [Sidenote: 31. Defensive character of the expedition against the Jewsof Khyber. ] The expedition against the Jews of Khyber was purely defensive in itscharacter. They had, since the Jews of the tribe of Nazeer and Koreizabeing banished from Medina in consequence of their treason against theMoslem commonwealth, had joined them, been guilty of inciting thesurrounding tribes to attack upon Medina, and had made alliance with theBani Ghatafán, who had taken a prominent part among the confederateswho had besieged Medina at the battle of the Ditch, to make a combinedattack upon Medina. They, especially Abul Hukeik, the chief of BaniNazeer, had excited the Bani Fezára and other Beduoin tribes to commitincursions on Medina. They had made a combination with the Bani Sád-IbnBakr to make inroads on the Moslims. Bani Sád, a branch of Hawazin, wereamong the confederates who had besieged Medina. Lately, Oseir Ibn Zárim, the chief of Nazeer at Khyber, maintained the same relations with BaniGhatafán, as their former chief had, to make a combined attack onMedina. The Bani Ghatafán, with their branches of Bani Fezára and BaniMurra, in league with those of Khyber, were always plotting mischief inthe vicinity of Fadak at Khyber. They (the Ghatafán) had continued for along time to alarm Medina with threatened attacks. At the seventh yearof the Hegira timely information was received by Mohammad of thecombined preparation of Khyber and Ghatafán. He rapidly set forth in hisdefence, and marched to Khyber at once. He took up a position at Rají, between Khyber and Ghatafán, to cut off their mutual assistance. So itwas not a sudden and unprovoked invasion, as Sir W. Muir calls it. Hewrites: "Mahomet probably waited for some act of aggression on the partof the Jews of Kheibar (it was the fertile lands and villages of thattribe which he had destined for his followers), or on the part of theirallies, the Bani Ghatafán, to furnish the excuse for an attack. But nosuch opportunity offering, he resolved, in the autumn of this year, on asudden and unprovoked invasion of their territory. "[184] It will appearfrom what I have stated above, that the invasion of Khyber was purelydefensive in its character. [Footnote 181: Hishamee, p. 545. Gottengen, 1859; or, The Life ofMuhammad, by Abd etl Malik ibn Hishám. London: Trübner and Co. , 1867. ] [Footnote 182: Hishamee, p. 757. ] [Footnote 183: The Jews of Khyber, if it does not relate to Tabook. SirW. Muir calls this hostile declaration against Jews and Christians, andsays, --"The exclusion and growingly intolerant position of Islam issufficiently manifested by the ban issued against the Jews andChristians, as unfit for the sacred rites and holy precincts of theMeccan temple; and by the divine commands to war against them until, inconfession of the superiority of Islam, they should consent to thepayment of a tribute. "--Life of Mahomet, Vol. II, p. 289. The commandreferred to by Sir W. Muir refers to the treatment of those who took uparms against the Mussalmans, rather than to their ordinary condition. Noban was issued against the Jews and Christians, as unfit for the sacredrites and holy precincts of the Meccan temple. On the contrary, theChristians of Najran, when arrived at Medina, were accommodated by theProphet in his Mosque, and they used to say their prayers there. ] [Footnote 184: Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 61. ] _The Christians or Romans. _ [Sidenote: 32. Tabúk, the last expedition. ] The last expedition of Mohammad was that of Tabúk, and it was alsopurely defensive. The travellers and traders arriving from Syria broughtnews of the gathering of a large army on the borders of Syria. A year'spay, they said, had been advanced by the Greek or Roman Emperor, who wasthen at Hims, in order that the soldiers might be well-furnished for along campaign; the tribes of the Syrian desert, the Bani Lakhm, Judzam, Amila, and Ghussan were flocking around the Roman Eagles, and thevanguard was already at Balcâ. Mohammad at once resolved to meet thisdanger. When he arrived in the vicinity of the Syrian border at Tabúk, he found no troops to oppose him. There were no signs of impendingdanger, and he therefore returned with his army to Medina. This was inthe ninth year of the Hegira. [Sidenote: 33. The conclusion. ] This concludes the description of all the wars of the Prophet. I hope Ihave shown, on good and reasonable grounds, and from the surest and mostauthentic sources, that the wars were not of an offensive and aggressivecharacter; but, on the contrary, they were wars of defence andprotection. The early Moslems were wronged, because they believed in thefaith of Mohammad; they were deprived of their civil and religiousrights, were driven forth from their homes and their properties, andafter all were attacked first, by the Koreish and their confederates, the Jews and other Arabian tribes. They fought neither for revenge, norto impose the faith of Mohammad by force of arms, nor for the plunder ofthe caravans which passed in proximity to their city. The permission tofight was only given to the believers because they were fought againstor were attacked first, and had been wronged and driven from their homeswithout just cause. They therefore took up arms against those who firstcompelled them to fly from their homes, and then attacked them. This wasin full accordance, therefore, with the law of nations and the sacredlaw of nature. The people of Medina had only pledged themselves toprotect Mohammad from his enemies. They could not, and would not, havegone forth or allowed Mohammad and his _ansárs_ to go forth to plunderthe caravan of the Koreish passing by Medina. _The Intolerance. _ [Sidenote: 34. Mohammad never taught intolerance. ] Those people are greatly mistaken who say, that "the one common dutylaid upon the Faithful is to be the agents of God's vengeance on thosewho believe not. These are to be slaughtered until they pay tribute, when they are allowed to go to Hell in their own way without furthermolestation. "[185] Mohammad did not wage war against the Koreish and theJews because they did not believe in his mission, nor because he was tobe the instrument of God's vengeance on them; on the contrary, he said, "He was no more than a warner. " "The truth is from your Lord, let him then who will, believe; and lethim who will, be an unbeliever. "[186] "Let there be no compulsion in religion. "[187] "Verily, they whobelieve, and the Jews, and the Sabeites, and the Christians, whoever ofthem believeth in God and in the last day, and doth what is right, onthem shall come no fear, neither shall they be put to grief. "[188] Evenduring active hostilities, those who did not believe were allowed tocome and hear the preaching, and were then conveyed to their place ofsafety. [189] Nor were the wars of Mohammad to exact tribute from theunbelievers. The tribute was only imposed upon those who had sought hisprotection, and even then they were exempted from other regular taxeswhich the Moslems paid to their Commonwealth. On the contrary, as has already been shown, Mohammad merely took uparms in the instances of self-preservation. Had he neglected to defendhimself after his settlement at Medina against the continued attacks ofthe Koreish and their allies, he with his followers would, in allprobability, have been exterminated. They fought in defence of theirlives as well as their moral and religious liberties. [Sidenote: 35. In what sense the wars were religious wars. ] In this sense the contest might be called a religious war, as thehostilities were commenced on religious grounds. Because the Koreishpersecuted the Moslems, and expelled them for the reason that they hadforsaken the religion of their forefathers, _i. E. _, idolatry, andembraced the faith of Islam, the worship of One True God; but it wasnever a religious war in the sense of attacking the unbelieversaggressively to impose his own religion forcibly on them. How much isSir W. Muir in the wrong, who says, that fighting was prescribed onreligious grounds? "Hostilities, " he says, "indeed, were justified bythe 'expulsion' of the believers from Mecca. But the main and true issueof the warfare was not disguised to be the victory of Islam. They wereto fight '_until the religion became the Lord's alone_. '"[190] [Sidenote: 36. The alleged verses of intolerance explained. ] The verses of the Koran referred to above are as follows: 186. "And fight for the cause of God against those who fight againstyou: but commit not the injustice of _attacking them first_: verily Godloveth not the unjust. " 187. "And kill them wherever ye shall find them, and eject them fromwhatever place they have ejected you; for (_fitnah_) persecution orcivil discord is worse than slaughter but attack them not at the sacredMosque, until they attack you therein, but if they attack you, then slaythem--Such is the recompense of the infidel!" 188. "But if they desist, then verily God is Gracious, Merciful. " 189. "And do battle against them until there be no more (_fitnah_)persecution or civil discord and the only worship be that of God: but ifthey desist, then let there be no hostility, save againstwrong-doers. "--Sura, ii. These verses generally, and the last one especially, show that thewarfare was prescribed on the ground of self-preservation, and to securepeace, safety and religious liberty, to prevent (_fitnah_) persecution. By preventing or removing the persecution (_fitnah_), the religion ofthe Moslems was to be free and pure from intolerance and compulsion torevert to idolatry, or in other words, to be the only or wholly of God. That is, when you are free and unpersecuted in your religion, and notforced to worship idols and renounce Islam, then your religion will bepure and free. You shall have no fear of being forced to join other godswith God. The same verse is repeated in Chapter VIII. 39. "Say to the unbelievers: If they desist, [191] what is now past shallbe forgiven them, but if they return _to it_, [192] they have alreadybefore them the doom of the former. "[193] 40. "Fight then against them till _fitnah_ (civil strife or persecution)be at an end, and the religion be all of it God's, and if they desist, verily God beholdeth what they do. " This shows that the fighting prescribed here against the Koreish wasonly in the case of their not desisting, and it was only to prevent andsuppress their _fitnah_, and when their intolerance and persecution wassuppressed, or was no more, then the Moslem religion was to become allof it God's. They were not forced to join any god with the true God. [Sidenote: 37. Sir W. Muir quoted. ] Sir W. Muir, in his last chapter on the person and character ofMohammad, observes in reviewing the Medina period: "Intolerance quicklytook the place of freedom; force, of persuasion. " . . . "Slay theunbelievers wheresoever ye find them" was now the watchword ofIslam:--"Fight in the ways of God until opposition be crushed, and theReligion becometh the Lord's alone!"[194] Here, Sir W. Muir plainlycontradicts himself. He has already admitted at the 136th page of thefourth volume of his work that the course pursued by Mohammad at Medinawas to leave the conversion of the people to be gradually accomplishedwithout compulsion, and the same measure he intended to adopt at histriumphal entry into Mecca. His words are: "This movement obligedMahomet to cut short of his stay at Mecca. Although the city hadcheerfully accepted his supremacy, all its inhabitants had not yetembraced the new religion, or formally acknowledged his prophetic claim. Perhaps, he intended to follow the course he had pursued at Medina, andleave the conversion of the people to be gradually accomplished withoutcompulsion. " This was at the end of the eighth year after the Hegira. Mohammad died at the beginning of the eleventh year, then the questionnaturally comes up, when was that alleged change to intolerance, andhow Sir W. Muir says, this change is traced from the period ofMohammad's arrival at Medina? In the action taken in the fifth year ofthe Hegira against the Jewish tribe of Koreiza, who had treasonedagainst the city, Sir W. Muir admits that up to that period Mohammad didnot profess to force men to join Islam, or to punish them for notembracing it. His words are: "The ostensible grounds upon which Mahometproceeded were purely political, for as yet he did not profess _toforce_ men to join Islam, or to punish them for not embracing it. "[195]In a foot-note he remarks: "He still continued to reiterate in hisRevelations the axiom used at Mecca, 'I am only a public preacher, ' aswill be shown in the next chapter. " Further, Sir W. Muir, in his accountof the first two years after Mohammad's arrival at Medina, admits in afoot-note (p. 32, Vol. III), that "as yet we have no distinctdevelopment of the intention of Mahomet to impose his religion on othersby force: it would have been dangerous in the present state of partiesto advance this principle. " [Sidenote: 38. Comment on the above quotation. ] It will appear from the foregoing statements that in each of the threedistinct periods of Mohammad's sojourn in Medina, _i. E. _, the first twoyears, the fifth year, and the eighth year, Sir W. Muir has himselfadmitted that Mohammad had no intention to impose his religion by force, and did not profess to force people to join Islam, or punish them fornot embracing it, and that the conversion of the people at Medina wasgradually accomplished without compulsion, and the same course hefollowed at his taking of Mecca. Then there is no room left for theuncalled for and self-contradictory remark of Sir W. Muir, that atMedina "Intolerance quickly took place of freedom; force, ofpersuasion. " Up to the end of the eighth year when Mecca was captured, there was admittedly no persecution or constraint put in requisition toenforce religion. Mohammad breathed his last early in the eleventh year. During the two years that intervened, the din of war had ceased tosound, deputations continued to reach the Prophet from all quarters ofArabia, and not a single instance of intolerance or compulsory adoptionof faith is found on record. [196] Mohammad, neither sooner, nor later, in his stay at Medina, swervedfrom the policy of forbearance and persuasion he himself had chalked outfor the success of his mission. At Medina, he always preached hisliberal profession of respect for other creeds, and reiteratedassurances to the people that he was merely a preacher, and expresslygave out that compulsion in religion was out of question with him. These are his revelations during the Medina period. "Verily, they whobelieve (Moslems), and they who follow the Jewish religion, and theChristians, and the Sabeites, --whoever believeth in God and the lastday, and doeth that which is right, shall have their reward with theirLord: and fear shall not _come_ upon them, neither shall they begrieved. " _Sura II_, 59. "And say to those who have been given the Scripture, and to the commonfolk, Do you surrender yourselves unto God? Then, if they becomeMoslems, are they guided aright; but if they turn away, then thy duty isonly preaching and God's eye is on his servants. " _Sura III_, 19. "The Apostle is only bound to preach: and God knoweth what ye bring tolight, and what ye conceal. " _Sura V_, 99. "Say: Obey God and obey the Apostle. But if ye turn back, _still_ theburden of his duty is on him only, and the burden of your duty rests onyou. And if ye obey him, ye shall have guidance; But plain preaching isall that devolves upon the Apostle. " _Sura XXIV_, 53. "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Now is the right way madedistinct from error; whoever therefore denieth Tâghoot, [197] andbelieveth in God, hath taken hold on a strong handle that hath no flawtherein: And God is He who Heareth, Knoweth. " _Sura II_, 237. "Whoso obeyeth the Apostle, in so doing obeyeth God and _as to those_who turn back _from thee_, We have not sent thee to be their keeper. " _Sura IV_, 82. [Sidenote: 39. The object of Mohammad's wars. ] "Slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them" was never the watchword ofIslam. It was only said in self-preservation and war of defence, andconcerned only those who had taken up arms against the Moslems. The verses--Suras II, 189; and VIII, 40--have been quoted above inparas. 17 and 37 (pp. 18, 21, 44 and 45), and they fully show by theircontext and scope that they only enjoined war against the Meccans, whoused to come to war upon the Moslems. The object of making war isprecisely set forth in these verses, and appears to mean that civilfeuds and persecutions be at an end. But Sir W. Muir wrongly translates_Fitnah_ as _opposition_. He himself has translated the meaning of theword in question as _persecution_, in Vol. II, p. 147, foot-note; intranslating the tenth verse of the Sura LXXXV he writes: "Verily, theywho persecute the believers, male and female, and repent themselvesnot. " The original word there is _Fatanoo_, [198] from _Fitnah_. I do notknow why he should put a twofold version on the same word occurring inthe same book. (Suras II, 187; VIII, 40. ) [Footnote 185: Islam under the Arabs, by Major R. D. Osborne, London, 1876, p. 27. ] [Footnote 186: XVIII, 28. ] [Footnote 187: II, 257. ] [Footnote 188: V, 73. ] [Footnote 189: IX, 6. ] [Footnote 190: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 79. ] [Footnote 191: From attacking and persecuting you and preventing youfrom entering your homes and visiting the sacred mosque. ] [Footnote 192: That is, if again attack you and commit aggressions. ] [Footnote 193: Meaning those who were defeated at Badr. ] [Footnote 194: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 319. ] [Footnote 195: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 282. ] [Footnote 196: There is only one instance of intolerance, _i. E. _, makingconverts at the point of sword, which Sir W. Muir, so zealous inaccusing Mohammad of religious persecution during the Medina period, hassucceeded in finding out during the ten eventful years of Mohammad'ssojourn in Medina. I refer to the story of Khalid's mission in thebeginning of the tenth year A. H. , to Bani Haris, a Christian tribe atNajran, whose people had entered into a covenant of peace with Mohammad, and to whom an ample pledge had been guaranteed to follow their ownfaith. According to Sir W. Muir, Khalid was instructed to call on thepeople to embrace Islam, and if they declined, he was, after three days, to attack and force them to submit (Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 224). The version of the story thus given by the Biographers of Mohammadis too absurd to be believed; because it is a well-established fact thatthe Bani Haris, or the Christians of Najran, had sent a deputation toMohammad only a year ago, _i. E. _, in A. H. 9, and obtained terms ofsecurity from him (Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. II, p. 299; Ibn Hisham, p. 401). It is quite an unfounded, though a very ingenious, excuse ofSir W. Muir to make the Bani Haris consist of two sects, --one ofChristians, and the other of idolators, --and to say that the operationsof Khalid were directed against the portion of Bani Haris stillbenighted with paganism; thus reconciling the apocryphal tradition withthe fact of the Bani Haris being at a treaty of security, toleration andfreedom, with Mohammad. "I conclude, " he writes in a note, "the operations of Khâlid weredirected against the portion of Bani Hârith still idolaters:--at allevents not against the Christian portion already under treaty" (The Lifeof Mahomet, Vol. IV, foot-note, p. 224). See the account of theconversion of Bani Hárith to Christianity long before Islam in Hishamee, pp. 20-22. Gibbon, Chapter XLII, Vol. V, p. 207, foot-note; and Muir'sVol. I, p. Ccxxviii. ] [Footnote 197: A name applied to an idol or idols--especially Allat andOzza, the ancient idols of the Meccans. ] [Footnote 198: The past tense, third person plural, of the infinitive_Fitnah_. ] _The Ninth Chapter, or Sura Barat. _ [Sidenote 40. The opening portion of the IXth Sura of the Koran onlyrelates to the Koreish who had violated the truce. ] [Sidenote: The injunctions contained in it were not carried outowing to the compromise. ] Sir William Muir, while relating the publication of some verses of theninth chapter of the Koran on the occasion of the great pilgrimage A. H. 9, and referring to the opening verses of the Sura (from 1st to 7thinclusive) writes: "The passages just quoted completed the system ofMahomet so far as its relations with idolatrous tribes and races wereconcerned. The few cases of truce excepted, uncompromising warfare wasdeclared against them all. "[199] This is not correct. The mistake, he aswell as others who follow him commit, lies in their taking the incipientverses of Chapter IX, as originally published at the end of the ninthyear of the Hegira, after the conquest of Mecca, in order to set asideevery obligation or league with the idolators to wage war with them, either within or without the sacred territory, and "they were to bekilled, besieged, and laid in wait for _wheresoever found_. "[200] Infact it has no such bearing of generally setting aside the treaties, anddeclaring _uncompromising warfare_, and was not published for the firsttime on the occasion stated above. The opening verses of the ninth Suraof the Koran, which I have quoted in full together with necessary notesin para. 17 (pp. 22-25), revealed for the first time, were before theconquest of Mecca, when the idolators thereof had broken the truce ofHodeibia. Their violation of the treaty is expressly mentioned in verses4, 8, 10 and 13, and the same verses also enjoin to respect and fulfilthe treaties of those idolators who had not broken theirs. Thereforeonly those aggressors who had been guilty of a breach of faith, andinstigated others to take up arms against the Moslems in the attack ofBani Bakr, on Khozáa, were to be waged war against, besieged, and takencaptives after the expiration of four months from the date of thepublication of the verses in question. But fortunately Abu Sofiancompromised before the commencement of the sacred months, and before theperiod of the four months had elapsed. The people of Mecca submittedwithout bloodshed, and hence it is obvious that the injunctionscontained in the commencement of the ninth chapter of the Koran werenever carried out. They remained as dead letter, and will, I think, soremain perpetually. Almost all European writers, as far as I know, labour under the delusion that at the end of the ninth year Mohammadpublished the opening verses of the ninth Sura, commonly designated_Súra Barát_. But the fact is that it was published in the eighth yearof the Hegira before the commencement of the sacred months, probably inthe month of Shabán, while Mohammad marched in Ramzán against Mecca, notwith the intention of prosecuting war, for it was to take place afterthe lapse of Zikad, Zelhaj and Moharram, but of taking Mecca bycompromise and preconcerted understanding between himself and AbuSofian. If it be admitted that the preliminary verses of Sura IX of theKoran were revealed or published for the first time in the last month ofthe ninth year of the Hegira, then they--the verses--become aimless, without being pregnant of any object in view. They contain injunctionsfor carrying hostile operations against those who had broken certaintreaties, had helped others against the Moslems, and themselves had alsoattacked them. They proclaimed war against certain tribes, whose peopledid not regard ties of blood and good faith, and had been the firstaggressors against the Moslems. Not many such persons were in the wholeof Arabia at and after the time alleged for the promulgation of theseverses, _i. E. _, at the last month of the ninth and the whole tenth year. By this time, almost all Arabia had tendered voluntary submission to theauthority of Mohammad. Deputations from each tribe of the Arabs continued to reach Medinaduring the whole of this period, and were pledged protection andfriendship by the founder of the Islamic faith. From Medina the sound ofdrums and the bray of clarions had now died away. Hereupon we are ableto speak with certainty that these verses could not be, and were not, revealed at the end of the ninth year as it has been asserted by severalwriters, both Mohammadan and European. And for the above reasons themost suitable occasion for the revelation of these verses is the breachof the truce of Hodeibia by the Koreish and their allies during theeighth year of the Hegira which caused the reduction of Mecca bycompromise. Several Mohammadan commentators are unanimous in theiropinion as to this point. Consequently the verses, ordaining themanifestation of arms against the treaty-breakers and aggressors, aswell as putting them to the sword wherever they were to be found, _i. E. _, within or without the harem, or the precincts of the SacredMosque, were not complied with owing to the compromise by the Koreish. [Footnote 199: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 211] [Footnote 200: "Islam and its Founder, " by J. W. H. Stobart, B. A. , p. 179. London, 1878. ] _The alleged Interception of the Koreishite Caravans. _ [Sidenote: 41. The nine alleged interceptions of the Koreish caravans. ] It has been asserted by European biographers of Mohammad that severalcaravans of the Koreish going to and from Syria were intercepted andwaylaid by the Moslems soon after the Hegira. The alleged incursions areas follow: (1. ) Seven months after Mohammad's arrival at Medina, an expeditionheaded by Hamza surprised a caravan under the conduct of Abu Jahl. (2. ) A month later a party led by Obeida was dispatched in the pursuitof another caravan guided by Abu Sofian. (3. ) After the expiration of another month, a third inroad headed by Sadproceeded to lie in ambush for the Koreish caravan on the way it wasexpected to pass. (4. ) Nearly twelve months after the Hegira, a fourth attempt wasundertaken to plunder a caravan of the Koreishites by Mohammad himselfat Abwa. (5. ) In the succeeding month Mohammad again marched to Bowat with thesole aim of despoiling a caravan composed of precious freight under theimmediate escort of Omeya-bin Khalf. (6. ) After the lapse of two or three months Mohammad set out to Osheirato make aggression on another rich caravan proceeding to Syria led byAbu Sofian. All these expeditions are said to have been not attended by any successon the part of the Moslems, the vigilance of the caravans in all caseseluding the pursuit made after them. [201] (7. ) In Rajab A. H. 2, a small band composed of some six persons wasordered to march to Nakhla to lie in wait there for the caravan of theKoreish. The party had a scuffle at Nakhla, in which a man of the convoywas killed; while two prisoners and the pilfered goods were taken toMedina. Hereupon Mohammad was much displeased, and told Abdallah-binJahsh, "I never commanded thee to fight in the sacred month. " (8. ) The caravan of the Koreish, which on its passage had safely escapedthe chase of the Moslems, as already described in No. 6, was on its wayback to Mecca. Mohammad anticipated their return, and prepared anattack, which terminated in the famous battle of Badr. (9. ) All these predatory inroads to intercept the caravans of Mecca aresaid to have happened during the first and the second year of theHegira, or before the battle of Badr. It remains for me now to mentionthe only remaining instance of Moslem's foray upon the Koreishitecaravan, which took place in the sixth year A. H. At _Al-Is_. The attackwas completely successful. [Sidenote: 42. The interceptions were impossible under the circumstancesin which Mohammad was placed. ] I have already explained (from paras. 21-24) that these earlyexpeditions, numbered 1 to 8, are not corroborated by authentic andtrustworthy traditions, and I have also given the probable nature ofthose marked 4, 5 and 6. It was impossible for Mohammad and his adherents, situated as they were, to make any hostile demonstrations or undertake a pillaging enterprise. The inhabitants of Medina, where the Prophet with his followers hadsought a safe asylum, and at whose invitation he had entered their city, had solemnly bound themselves on sacred oaths to defend Mohammad, solong as he was not himself the aggressor, from his enemies as they wouldtheir wives and their children. [202] Mohammad, on his own part, hadentered into a holy compact with them not to plunder or commitdepredations. [203] Upon these considerations it was impossible that the people of Medinawould have permitted or overlooked the irruptions so often committed byMohammad upon the caravans of the Koreish: much less would they havejoined with their Prophet, had he or any of his colleagues ventured todo so. But granting that the Medinites allowed Mohammad to manifestenmity towards the Koreish by a display of arms, or that no restraintwas put by them upon him when he encroached upon the territories of theneighbouring tribes, and that the caravans were molested without anygrounds of justice, was it possible, I ask, for the people of Medina toavoid the troubles they would be necessarily involved in by the refugethey had given to their Prophet? They had long suffered from internalfeuds, and the sanguinary conflict of Boás, a few years ago, which hadparalyzed their country, and humiliated its citizens, was but too freshin their memory yet. [Sidenote: 43. The interceptions, if occurred, were justified by way ofreprisals. ] Let us suppose that these alleged interceptions of the Meccan caravansby the Moslems did actually take place, as related by the biographers ofMohammad, were they not all justified by the International Code of theArabs, or the ancient usage and military law of nations. It has beenproved beyond all dispute that the Meccans were the first aggressors inpersecuting the Moslems, and expelling them from their dear homes atMecca with the unbearable annoyance, they caused the converts of the newfaith in the peaceful prosecution of their religion; taking all thesecauses of offence into consideration, as well as the International lawand the law of Nature, the Moslems might be said to have law and justiceboth on their sides in waging war with their harassers for therestoration of their property and homes, and even in retaliating andmaking reprisals until they attained the object long sought by them. When the Meccans, on their own part, had first trumpeted hostilityagainst the Moslems, the right of self-defence, as well as militarynecessity, compelled the latter to destroy their property, and obstructthe ways and channels of communication by which their traffic wasprospering; for, "from the moment one State is at war with another, ithas, on general principles, a right to seize on all the enemy'sproperty of whatsoever kind and wheresoever found, and to appropriatethe property thus taken to its own use, or to that of the captors. "[204] [Footnote 201: I have closely followed Sir W. Muir in these expeditions;_vide_ The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, pp. 64-69. ] [Footnote 202: "The people of Medîna were pledged only to defend theProphet from attack, not to join him in any aggressive steps against theCoreish. " Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 64. ] [Footnote 203: Bokharee relates from Obada-bin Sámat with the usualchain of narrators, that "I am one of the _Nakeebs_ who pledged to theProphet. We pledged that we will not join any other god with the God, and will not commit theft, and will not commit fornication, and will notcommit murder, and will not plunder. " Saheeh of Bokharee, Book ofCampaigns, chapter on Deputations from Ansárs. ] [Footnote 204: Wheaton's Elements of International Law, p. 419, Boston, 1855; Lieber's Miscellaneous Writings; Political science, Vol. II, p. 250, Philadelphia, 1881. ] _The alleged Assassinations. _ [Sidenote: 44. Instances of alleged assassinations cited. ] There were certain executions of culprits who had perpetrated the crimeof high treason against the Moslem Commonwealth. These executions, andcertain other cases of murders not grounded on any credible evidences, are narrated by European biographers of Mohammad as assassinationscommitted through the countenance and connivance which he lent them. They were about five or six in number, and they are styledassassinations from there being no trials of the prisoners by a judgeand a jury, nor by any systematic court-martial. The punishment of deathwas inflicted upon the persons condemned, either from private enmity orfor the unpardonable offence of high treason against the State, but itcannot be said, as I will hereafter show, that these so-called cases ofassassinations had received the high sanction of Mohammad, or they werebrought about at his direct instigation and assent for their commission. The alleged instances are as follows:-- 1. Asma-bint Marwán. 2. Abú Afak. 3. Káb-ibn Ashraf. 4. Sofian-ibn Khalid. 5. Abú Ráfe. 6. Oseir-ibu Zárim. 7. The attempted assassination of Abú Sofian. [Sidenote: 45. Mr. Poole quoted. ] Before reviewing the truth and falsity of evidence in each of thesecases, and showing how far the Prophet was privy to them, I will availmyself of a quotation from Mr. Stanley Lane Poole, who has remarked withhis usual deep discernment and accurate judgment, in his Introduction toMr. E. W. Lane's Selections from the Koran: "The execution of the half-dozen marked Jews is generally calledassassination, because a Muslim was sent secretly to kill each of thecriminals. The reason is almost too obvious to need explanation. Therewere no police or law-courts, or even courts-martial, at Medina; someone of the followers of Mohammad must therefore be the executer of thesentence of death, and it was better it should be done quietly, as theexecuting of a man openly before his clan would have caused a brawl andmore bloodshed and retaliation, till the whole city had become mixed upin the quarrel. If secret assassination is the word for such deeds, secret assassination was a necessary part of the internal government ofMedina. The men must be killed, and best in that way. In saying this Iassume that Mohammad was cognisant of the deed, and that it was notmerely a case of private vengeance; but in several instances theevidence that traces these executions to Mohammad's order is eitherentirely wanting or is too doubtful to claim our credence. "[205] 1. --_Asma-bint Marwán. _ [Sidenote: 46. Asma-bint Marwán. ] "The first victim was a woman, " writes Major Osborn, "Asma, daughter ofMarwan; she had composed some satirical verses on the Prophet and hisfollowers; and Muhammad, moved to anger, said publicly: 'Who will rid meof this woman?' Omeir, a blind man, but an ardent Moslem, heard thespeech, and at dead of night crept into the apartment where Asma layasleep surrounded by her little ones; he felt about in the darkness tillhis hand rested on the sleeping woman, and then, the next instance hissword was plunged into her breast. "[206] The story of Asma's murder has been variously related by the Arabianwriters, and the testimonies on which it rests are contradictory andconflicting in themselves. Wákidi, Ibn Sád, and Ibn Hishám relate a verystrange thing about it, that she was killed by Omeir the _blind_ at thedead of night. A blind person commits murder in a stranger's houseduring nocturnal quietness, and is not arrested by any one! Doctor Weilwrites, that Omeir was a former husband of Asma, and the origin of themurder may be traced to a long-brooding and private malice. Ibn Asákarin his history (vide _Seerat Shámee_) relates that Asma was afruit-seller; some person of her tribe asked her if she had betterfruits. She said 'yes, ' and entered her house followed by that man. Shestooped down to take something up, the person turned right and left, andseeing that nobody was near, gave a violent blow on her head, and thusdispatched her. [Sidenote: 47. The story deserves not our belief. ] The historians even relate that Omeir, being offended at the versescomposed by Asma, had volunteered himself of his own free-will to killher. [207] She might have been a sacrifice to envy or hatred by the swordof her assassin, but Mohammad really had no hand in her death. She hadmade herself an outlaw by deluding the people of Medina to a breach oftreaty with the Moslems, whereby the rights and jurisdictions of Jewsand Moslems were definitively settled. Ibn Ishak quietly leaves unnarrated any transaction with regard to Asma. Wakidi and Ibn Sád do not affirm that Mohammad, being annoyed at herlampoons, said dejectedly, "Who would rid me of that woman?" On thecontrary, Wakidi writes, that Omeir had voluntarily swore to take herlife. It is only Ibn Hisham who relates without citing his authority, that Mohammad, hearing Asma's verses, declared: "Is there nobody for me(i. E. , _to rid me_) from Bint Marwán?" This version of the story has nocorroborative proofs from the earliest biographers, and we are notinclined to put any faith in it. [208] 2. --_Abú Afak. _ [Sidenote: 48. Abú Afak. ] It has been related that Abú Afak of Bani Amr had enraged the Moslems byfomenting enmity and sedition against their Government, when one Háriswas executed for his murdering treacherously his fellow-comrade in thebattle of Ohad during the time they were fighting together side by side. A convert from amongst the Bani Amr vowed to slay Abú Afak, and fallingunawares upon him killed him with a cruel blow of his sword. From IbnIshak we learn that Mohammad had said with reference to Abú Afak, "Whowould rid me of this pestilent fellow?"[209] The biographers do not givetheir authorities whence they derived their information of the wordsattributed to Mohammad which he is said to have uttered with relation toAbú Afak before his followers; while at the same time it is no fairjustice to form a hasty opinion of the fact without a criticalexamination and well-balancing of evidences of men like Ibn Ishak andothers who have forgotten to tell us the original sources of their ownassertion. Besides, the words quoted above are not equivalent to aperemptory order, and even granting this last condition, we are notjustified in construing them to mean _assassination_. Sir W. Muir writesthat, "the Secretary of Wâckidi says distinctly--'Now this was bycommand of the Prophet. '" (Vol. III, p. 133, _f. N. _) But it is a veryeasy thing for the secretary or other biographers to give an ample playto their fancies, or to fabricate commands, which the Prophet had nevergiven out, on a very slender basis, or on no reasonable basis at all. The tendency of the biographers is always to exonerate the companions ofthe Prophet at the expense of truth, and to justify their deeds bycasting the whole blame upon him. 3. --_Káb, son of Ashraf. _ [Sidenote: 49. Káb, son of Ashraf. ] Káb-ibn Ashraf was an influential Jew connected with the tribe of BaniNazeer. Being very much mortified by the defeat of the Meccans at thebattle of Badr, he soon after proceeded to Mecca, where he stirred upthe Koreish to avenge themselves on the Moslems of Medina. On his returnto the latter place he manifested avowed hostility towards the MoslemCommonwealth. He was a traitor and a turncoat, for he not only violatedhis allegiance to the Moslems, but preached rebellion among theirenemies. Under such circumstances, he deserved execution by the militaryand international law, and was decapitated at Medina accordingly. Themode of execution was a sudden violence or deception, but Mohammad neverfulminated any harsh commands against him either for his assassinationor for his murder. He deserved capital punishment for his treachery, which was duly measured out to him in the absence of any legal tribunalsfor trials of criminals by jury, for in that case any man was authorizedto execute the sentence of the law. Even if it be taken for granted thatthe Prophet had prayed "O Lord, deliver me from the son of Ashraf, inwhatsoever manner seemeth good unto thee, because of his open seditionand verses;" or said, "Who can ease me of the son of Ashraf?"[210] Thisdoes not amount to a fiat for murder or execution, much less forassassination. [Sidenote: 50. Mohammad could not have any share in his murder. ] The biographers and narrators of the campaigns of Mohammad generallyrelate untrustworthy and fabulous details of such events, and are by nomeans to be relied upon. Mohammad Ibn Ishak, the earliest biographer, whose work exists, does not relate that Mohammad the Prophet ever prayedfor, or said to his followers, to be got rid of Káb; whereas the latestbiographers and traditionalists give us to understand that the Prophetsanctioned the murder of Káb by his own express orders. "I am far fromasserting, " says Sir W. Muir, "that every detail in the foregoingnarrative, either of instigation by Mahomet or of deception by theassassins, is beyond suspicion. The actors in such scenes were not slowto magnify and embellish their own services at the expense of truth. There may also have been the desire to justify an act of perfidy, atwhich even the loose morality of the day was startled, by casting theburden of it on the infallible Prophet. But, after allowing all dueweight to both of these considerations, enough remains to prove, in thiscase, the worst features of assassination, and the fact that they weredirectly countenanced, or rather prompted, by Mahomet himself. "[211]There is no substantial proof in this case which tends to establish theinstigation Mohammad offered for the murder of Káb. The best traditionsfor the story of Káb's assassination rest with Jábir-bin Abdullah, [212]and Ibn Abbás through Ikrama. [213] None of them can be an authority, for they were neither eye-witnesses, nor they heard the Prophet countenancing or prompting the assassination, nor they allude to their own authorities. Jábir-bin Abdullah was a mereboy at that time. He was not allowed to appear even at the battle ofOhad, which took place after the alleged execution of Káb, on account ofhis tender age. [214] Ibn Abbás was even younger than Jábir, and besides, was putting up at Mecca at the period in question. [215] Ikrama was aslave of Ibn Abbás, and was notoriously given to the forging offictitious traditions. [216] 4. --_Sofian-bin Khalid. _ [Sidenote: 51. Sofian-bin Khalid. ] After the reverse at Medina, in the battle of Ohad, large gatheringswere organized in various quarters of Arabia against the Moslems. TheBani Lahyán, and other neighbouring tribes, rallied round the standardof their chief Sofián, the son of Khálid, at Orna with the avowedpurpose of taking this occasion by the forelock when the tables wereturned at Ohad. "Mahomet, knowing that their movements depended solelyupon Sofiân, despatched Abdullah ibn Oneis with instructions toassassinate him. "[217] The accredited envoy volunteered himself for theservice, which he accomplished by destroying Sofian by surprise. NeitherIbn Ishak, nor Ibn Hisham, nor Ibn Sád have anything to say about'instructions' for assassination. Abdullah-bin Oneis may have been sentas a spy to reconnoitre the movements of Sofián and his army, or tobring advices concerning him, but it cannot be affirmed that he wastutored by Mohammad to assassinate Sofian, even on the supposition thathis mission was to kill the latter. [Sidenote: 52. Justifications of Sofian's alleged murder. ] Among the Arabs the international law of estates in their hostilerelations, and the military law and usage of former times, notforgetting to mention the European international law as late as the lastcentury, maintained the broad principle that "in war everything doneagainst an enemy is lawful that he may be destroyed, though unarmed anddefenceless; that fraud or even poison may be employed against him; thata most unlimited right is acquired to his person and property. "[218]Every sort of fraud except perfidy was allowed to be practised towardsan enemy in war. "I allow of any kind of deceit, " writes Bynkershoek, awriter on international law, the successor of Puffendorf and thepredecessor of Wolff and Vattel, "perfidy alone excepted, not becauseanything is unlawful against an enemy, but because when our faith hadbeen pledged to him, so far as the promise extends, he ceases to be anenemy. "[219] In the case of Sofián there was no perfidy, treachery, or violation offaith, nor was there any permission granted by Mohammad for hisassassination. He sent, if it be proved he did (but it is never proved), Abdullah against Sofián who had made every preparation of arms, and whohad mustered together several Bedouin tribes to attack Mohammad, tofight and kill him; it was a straightforward course allowed by theusages of the military law. Mohammad had distinctly and expresslyinterdicted _perfidy, deceit and assassination_. "Do not, " said he, charging his commanders and soldiers on the point of marching for amilitary expedition, "commit perfidy, and do not mutilate, and do notkill a child. "[220] He also laid down the golden maxim, "_Belief is therestraint to assassination. No believer should commitassassination_. "[221] 5. --_Abú Rafe. _ [Sidenote: 53. Abú Rafe. ] Abú Rafe, called also Sallám Ibn Abul Hokeik, was the chief of BaniNazeer, who had warred with the Moslems at Medina, and had been banishedto Khyber. He had taken a prominent part in the assembling of most ofthe Bedouin tribes at the war of the confederates when they besiegedMedina. Subsequently, he had excited Bani Fezara and other Bedouintribes to carry on their depredations among the Moslems. A band of thelatter was dispatched to inflict condign punishment upon him, and he metwith his death at their hands. But the account of his execution are fullof contradictions and discrepancies. But none of these diverse storieshas, that Mohammad commanded the assassination of Abú Rafe, while IbnIshak gives no account of him at all. Ibn Hisham has--"That Abú Rafe hadbrought the confederate army against Mohammad, and some of Khazraj hadasked permission to kill him, and Mohammad permitted them. "[222] Sir W. Muir narrates that Mohammad "gave them command to make away with AbulHuckeick, "[223] whilst the Secretary of Wákidi, whom he follows, simplysays, "He gave command to kill him. " "_Making away with a person_"creates an idea of secret murder tantamount to 'assassination, ' but suchis not the wording of the original. _Sending a party to kill_, or _fightwith an enemy_ are synonymous, and permissible by the international ormilitary law, the Arab mode of fighting mostly consisting of singlecombats. 6. --_Oseir-bin Zárim. _[224] [Sidenote: 54. Oseir-bin Zárim. ] Oseir-ibn Zarim, the chief of Bani Nazeer, had maintained a hostileanimosity against the Moslems of Medina, to war with whom he hadenrolled himself in the adverse tribe of Ghatafán. Preparations werebriskly made by this tribe to make a havoc of Medina, and Oseir had beenmade the hero of the enterprise. Hereupon Mohammad delegated the missionof bringing the insurgent to Medina to Abdullah-bin Rawáha and someothers, with a promise of making him Governor of Khyber, [225] andtreating him with marked distinction, if he yielded to the wishes of theProphet. Oseir complied, and set out with his followers to Medina. On acamel were mounted Abdullah-bin, Oneis, and Oseir. Hardly they hadtravelled six miles when Oseir repented of his determination to go toMedina, and stretched forth his hand towards the sword of Abdullah, wholeaped from the camel and cut off his leg, Oseir in the meantimewounding Abdullah's head with his camel staff. [226] Now, whether Oseir was assassinated or murdered perfidiously; whetherhe meditated treachery, and Abdullah struck him in hisself-defence, --whatever might be the case, certainly there is nothing inthe narrative of Oseir's death to show that Mohammad had sent him "on asecret errand with a view of getting rid of the Jewish chief" as Sir W. Muir explains. [227] The story is not imparted by earliest writers likeIbn Ishak, and the traditions of a later date are incoherent, one-sided, and imperfect. Notwithstanding these inaccuracies, no account tells usthat mandates were issued for fighting with or killing Oseir, much lessfor his assassination. 7. --_The alleged intended Assassination of Abú Sofian. _ [Sidenote: 55. The intended assassination of Abú Sofian. ] A Bedouin Arab was sent by Abú Sofian to Medina to assassinate Mohammad. The emissary was tracked in his evil attempt, and confessed the purposewith which he had come. This is related by Ibn Sád Katib Wakidi as thecause of Mohammad's sending Amr Ibn Omeya to assassinate AbúSofian. [228] According to Hishamee, Amr was commissioned by the Prophetto fight with Abú Sofián, and to kill him in immediate revenge for themurder of Khobeib and his companions captured at Raji. [229] Now, IbnIshak and Wákidí preserve absolute silence on this head. Ibn Hishamrelates nothing about assassination. It is only Ibn Sád Kátib Wákidí whohands down to posterity the orders of Mohammad for the assassination ofAbú Sofian. This tradition is neither strengthened by any sterlingwitness, nor is it a genuine one; and for this very reason it was notaccepted by Ibn Ishák or even by Wakidi, so prone to the recital ofapocryphal traditions. [Sidenote: 56. Irving and Muir quoted: concluding remarks. ] Referring to the above attempted assassination Mr. Washington Irvingsays: "During this period of his career Mahomet in more than oneinstance narrowly escaped falling by the hand of an assassin. He himselfis charged with the use of insidious means to rid himself of an enemy, for it is said that he sent Amru Ibn Omeya on a secret errand to Mecca, to assassinate Abu Sofian, but the plot was discovered, and the assassinonly escaped by rapid flight. The charge, however, is not wellsubstantiated, and is contrary to his general character andconduct. "[230] Sir W. Muir writes: "There is just a shadow of possibility that thetradition may have been fabricated by the anti-Omeyad party to throwodium on the memory of Abu Sofiân, as having been deemed by Mahometworthy of death. But this is not to be put against the evidence ofunanimous and apparently independent traditions. "[231] But, in fact, there are no unanimous and apparently independent traditions of thecommand of Mohammad to assassinate Abú Sofian; there is only one and butone, by Ibn Sád, which is wholly unreliable, and that too from the lipsof the would-be assassin himself who before the introduction of Islamwas a professional cutthroat, whose narration, therefore, deserves notour belief. Even if it be taken for granted that Mohammad did send some one toassassinate Abú Sofian, who had already sent some one to assassinateMohammad as related by Ibn Sád, it was justified in self-defence. It wasa measure for retaliation, not one of mere revenge, but only a means ofprotective retribution, which is lawful under the military law. [232] [Footnote 205: Selections from the Kur-án by Edward William Lane, withan Introduction by Stanley Lane Poole. Intro. , p. Xliv: Trübner & Co. , London, 1879. ] [Footnote 206: Islam under the Arabs, by R. D. Osborn, p. 60, London, 1876. ] [Footnote 207: Wákidi's Campaigns of Mohammad, pp. 172 & 173: CalcuttaBaptist Mission Press; edited by A. Von Kremer. ] [Footnote 208: Sir W. Muir writes that "Hishami says, that Mahomet, being vexed by Asma's verses, said _publicly_, 'Who will rid me of thiswoman?'" But there is no such word in Ibn Hishám which may be rendered'_publicly_. '] [Footnote 209: Ibn Hisham, p. 994. Wakidi does not give this sentence. On the contrary, he says, Sálim had taken a vow to kill Abú Afak or diehimself. ] [Footnote 210: Ibn Sad Kátib Wákidí, pp. 186, 187. ] [Footnote 211: The Life of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Vol. III, pp. 147-148. ] [Footnote 212: In the collections of Bokhári in the Book of Campaigns;and in the Book of Jihád by Moslim. ] [Footnote 213: Mohammad-bin Sád Kátib Wakidi and Mohammad-bin Ishak. Thelatter in Ibn Hisham, p. 551. ] [Footnote 214: Vide _Osaba-fi Tamiz Issahába_; or, BiographicalDictionary of Persons who knew Mohammad, by Ibn Hajr-al-Askalani. PartI, No. 1021, p. 434. ] [Footnote 215: Ibn Abbás was only five years old at that time, and wasat Mecca. His evidence is consequently inadmissible. ] [Footnote 216: Yahya-bin Saeed al Ansaree, Ali-bin Abdullah-bin Abbás, Ibnal Mosayyab, Atá Ibrahim-bin Maisura, Mohammad-bin Sireen, Kásim, andAbdullah-bin Omar say that Ikrama was a liar. Vide _Mizánul Etedal_ ofZahabi, _Koukabi Durrári Sharah_, _Saheeh Bokhari_, by ShamsuddinKirmáni; and _Márafat Anwaá-ilm Hadees_, by Abu Omar-ad-Damishki. ] [Footnote 217: The Life of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Vol. III, p. 200. ] [Footnote 218: Elements of International Law, by Henry Wheaton, LL. D. Sixth edition, by William Beach Lawrence, Boston, 1855; Part IV, ChapterI, p. 374, quoting Bynkershoek; in p. 416, quoting Bynkershoek andWolff. ] [Footnote 219: _Ibid_, Chapter II, p. 470. ] [Footnote 220: The collections of Moslem _Apud_ Boreida, _vide_ Mishkat, p. 333. ] [Footnote 221: The collections of Abú Daúd in the Book of Jihád, Vol. II, p. 26. ] [Footnote 222: The Life of Mohammad based on Mohammad-ibn Ishak, byAbdel Malik-ibn Hisham, p. 714. ] [Footnote 223: The Life of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, p. 14. ] [Footnote 224: Or Yoseir-bin Razim. ] [Footnote 225: As Khyber was not yet conquered, neither Mohammad couldmake such a promise, nor the Jews could have been induced to believe it;therefore the story is a false one. ] [Footnote 226: The Life of Mohammad, by Abdel Malik-bin Hisham, pp. 980-981. ] [Footnote 227: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 16-17. ] [Footnote 228: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV. P. 20. ] [Footnote 229: The Life of Mohammad, by Abdel Malik-bin Hisham, pp. 992-993. The fighting was, according to Arab custom, in single combats. ] [Footnote 230: Mahomet and his Successors, by Washington Irving, p. 118, London, 1869. ] [Footnote 231: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 20, foot-note. ] [Footnote 232: Compare "Contributions to Political Science, " by FrancisLieber, LL. D. , Vol. II, p. 250. ] _The alleged Cruelties in executing the Prisoners of War and others_. [Sidenote: 57. Treatment of the prisoners of war. ] Some of the war prisoners had received the condign punishment ofexecution for their crimes in conformity with the laws of war. It hasbeen alleged by some European biographers of Mohammad that their (thewar prisoners') execution was cruel, and that they were accused of nocrime except their scepticism and political antagonism. [233] The persons executed were as follows:-- 1. Nadhr-bin-Harith. 2. Okba. 3. Abul Ozza. 4. Moavia-bin-Mughira. [Sidenote: The law of nations regarding the prisoners of war. ] Before reviewing the case of each prisoner, I must note, by way ofintroductory remarks, that, under the international or military law, aprisoner of war is a public enemy armed or attached to the hostile armyfor active aid, and who has fallen into the hands of the captor, eitherfighting or wounded, on the fields or in the hospitals, by individualsurrender or capitulation. All soldiers, of whatever species of arms;all men who belong to the rising _en masse_ of the hostile country; allthose who are attached to the army for its efficiency and promotedirectly the object of the war, except religious persons, officers ofmedical staff, hospital nurses and servants, all disabled men orofficers on the field, or elsewhere, if captured, all enemies who havethrown away their arms and asked for quarters, are prisoners of war, andas such exposed to the inconveniences as well as entitled to theprivileges of a prisoner of war. He is subject to no punishment forbeing a public enemy, nor is any revenge wreaked upon him by theinternational infliction of any suffering or disgrace, by cruelimprisonment, want of food, by mutilation, death, or any otherbarbarity. But a prisoner of war remains answerable for his crimescommitted against the captor's army or people before he was captured, and for which he has not been punished by his own authorities. Allprisoners of war are liable to the infliction of retaliatory measures. 1. --_Nadhr-bin-Harith_. [Sidenote: 59. The execution of Nadhr Ibn Harith. ] Nadhr (Nazr), one of the prisoners of war, was executed after the battleof Badr for his crime of severely tormenting the Moslems at Mecca. Musáb had distinctly reminded him of his torturing the companions ofMohammad, [234] so there was nothing of a cruel and vindictive spirit ofthe Prophet displayed towards his enemies in the execution of Nazr as itis made out by Sir W. Muir. [235] On the other hand, his execution isdenied by some critics, like Ibn Manda and Abú Naeem, who say, thatNazr-bin-Haris was present at the battle of Honain, A. H. 8, six yearsafter that of Badr, and was presented with one hundred camels byMohammad. Sir W. Muir himself puts down very quietly Nadhir Ibn alHarith's name in a foot-note (Vol. IV, page 151) as a recipient of onehundred camels at Honain. The same Nadhr-bin-Harith is shown among theearliest Moslem refugees who had fled to Abyssinia. These discrepanciesleave no doubt that the story of Nadhr's execution is not a fact. It isalso related by the narrators, who assert Nazr's execution at Badr, thathis daughter or sister came to Mohammad and addressed him severalverses, the hearing of which produced such a tender emotion in him, thathis eyes shed tears and said, he would not have issued orders for hisexecution had he heard these verses before. The following are two of theverses which Mohammad heard: _"Má kán Zarraka lao mananta va rubba mámannal fata va ho-al mughizul mohnihoo. "_ Thou wouldst no harm have seen to set him free, Anger how high for pardon has no plea. But Zobier-bin-Bakár says, he heard some learned men who objected tothese verses on the ground that they were all concocted; and I thinkthat the whole story of Nazr's execution is a spurious one. 2. --_Okba-bin-Mueit_. [Sidenote: 60. The execution of Okba. ] Another prisoner, named Okba, was executed after the battle of Badr fora crime similar to that of Nazr. It is related that while he was goingto be executed, he asked who would take care of his little girl. Mohammad replied, "Hell-fire!" This is altogether an apocryphal story, and owes its origin to the relation of Okba to the tribe of Banunnar, orthe "children of fire. " Wackidi does not give his authorities for thestory, and Ibn Is-hak gives only one immediately before him, which iscut short of another intervening link of authorities up to the scene ofoccurrence. Abu Daood narrates it from Masrook, who gave it on theauthority of Abdullah-bin-Mas-ood, who does not say he was present atthe scene or he heard it directly or indirectly from Mohammad. Besidesthe circumstances under which Masrook gave out this story are verysuspicious, and show that calumny was at work. Masrook was proposed byZohak to be entrusted with the administration of a certain district. Ommara, the son of Okba, objected to this, as Masrook was one of themurderers of Osman, the third Khalif. Masrook in reply said to Ommara, on the authority of Ibn Masood, that "when thy father was beingexecuted, he had asked the Prophet, who will take care of his littlegirl. " The Prophet replied, "Hell-fire. " Therefore, I am satisfied forthee with what the Prophet had chosen for thy father. [236] There is a discrepancy in the mode of Okba's execution as well as aboutthe person who executed him. Ibn Is-hak says, that it was Asim whokilled him, and Ibn Hisham, that it was Ali. Ibrahim is of opinion, thatOkba was executed at Taimee, [237] and Mohammad-bin-Khobeib Hashimi, [238]that he was crucified, from which others differ and say that he wasbeheaded. I have no belief in Okba's execution at all. [Sidenote: 61. Free liberty granted to Ozza, a prisoner of war. ] Abul Ozza, one of the prisoners of Badr, and who was one of thepersecutors of the Moslems at Mecca, had besought Mohammad to releasehim by way of compassion for his five daughters. Mohammad granted himhis life and his liberty. [239] This directly points to the universalgenerosity of the Prophet, and from this it will appear that the storyof Okba's execution runs contrary to his general character and conduct. On these grounds the execution of Okba might be rejected as a fiction. 3. --_Abul Ozza. _ [Sidenote: 62. Abul Ozza proved a traitor and was executed. ] Abul Ozza, one of the prisoners of Badr, was allowed his freedom withoutany ransom, on the condition that he would never again bear up arms inany war against the Prophet; but he proved a traitor. He exhorted theArabs to make war on Mohammad, and joined himself the invading army ofMecca. He was doomed to misfortune, he was caught at Hamra, and dulyexecuted. [240] This was in full accordance with the laws and usages ofwar (_vide ante_, para. 58). 4. --_Moavia Ibn Mughira. _ [Sidenote: The execution of Moavia Ibn Mughira. ] Moavia Ibn Mughira, also a prisoner of war, was granted three days'truce, on the condition that if he were found in Medina after theappointed time, he was to be executed. The period had passed, and he wasstill lurking at Medina. At length he was found out and killed by Zeidand Ammar on their return from Hamra-al-Assad, after five or six days. It is apparent that Moavia violated his truce, and his lurking in Medinamight be either as a spy[241] or scout secretly seeking information. [Sidenote: 64. Justification of Mughira's execution. ] Sir W. Muir, who calls him Othmân Ibn Mughîra, makes out a favourablecase in his behalf. He writes: He "incautiously lingered at Medîna tillthe last day of his term of grace, when he set out for Mecca. "[242] ButIbn Hisham distinctly writes that he "stayed at Medina after the threedays had passed and was found lurking there. " Even according to Wackidihe was caught on the fourth day. But this is far from truth, for, according to his own account, Mohammad was absent after the battle ofOhad for five days at Hamra-al-Assad; then how he (Ibn Mughira) couldhave endeavoured to avoid the returning Moslem force fromHamra-al-Assad, and lose his way, as Sir W. Muir gives it out, only onthe fourth day? One of the enemies, who had invaded Medina and attacked Mohammad, was, after being captured, allowed three days' truce on explicit conditionsthat he was to be killed there if found after three days, and was alsoprovided with a camel and provisions for the way, was discovered lurkingthereabout on the fifth or sixth day, in consequence of which he losthis life. This is called by Sir W. Muir as being "perished by a toogreat confidence in the generosity of his enemy, "[243]--_i. E. _, Mohammad. [Footnote 233: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 307. ] [Footnote 234: Wackidi Campaigns of Mohammad, p. 101, Calcutta, 1855. ] [Footnote 235: "It was at Otheil that the cruel and vindictive spirit ofMahomet towards his enemies first began to display itself. "--Muir's Lifeof Mohamet, Vol. III, p. 115. After this, the author narrates theexecution of Nazr. Ibn Is-hak. _Vide_ Ibn Hisham, p. 458; Wackidi, p. 108; Abu Daood, Vol. II, p. 10. This story is not given by Ibn Hishamand Ibn Sád. ] [Footnote 236: Abu Daood as before. ] [Footnote 237: Zorkánee, Vol. II, p. 541. ] [Footnote 238: Sírat Halabi, Vol. II, p. 371. ] [Footnote 239: Wackidi, 105. Insán-ul Oyoon or Sírat Halabí, Vol. II, p. 464. ] [Footnote 240: Wackidi, p. 105; Hishami, p. 591; Insán-ul-Oyoon or SíratHalabí, Vol. II, p. 464. ] [Footnote 241: Ibn Hisham, p. 591; Wackidi, pp. 324 and 325. ] [Footnote 242: The Life of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Vol. III, p. 185. ] [Footnote 243: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, 185. ] _The intended Execution of the Prisoners of Badr. _ [Sidenote: 63. The wrong version of Sir W. Muir. ] Sir W. Muir writes: "It would even seem to have been contemplated at theclose of the battle to kill all the prisoners. Mahomet is represented bytradition as himself directing this course. " In a foot-note he says, "Thus Mahomet said: 'Tell not Saîd of his brother's death'" (Mábad, aprisoner, see above, page 110 note); "but kill ye every man hisprisoner. "--(Wâckidi, 100. ) Again: "Take not any man his brotherprisoner, but rather kill him" (page 101). "I would not, however, laytoo much stress on these traditions. I am inclined rather to view themas called into existence by the passages quoted below from theCoran. "[244] The contemplated execution of the prisoners is not borneout by the traditions which Sir W. Muir himself looks upon as fabricatedones. The true translation of the passages in Wackidi referred to aboveis as follows:-- _First passage. _--"Tell not Said of his brother's killing (_i. E. _, beingkilled), so he will kill every prisoner in your hands. "--(Wackidi, page100. ) This obviously means, that do not let Saeed know that his brotherWáhid, who was made prisoner and killed by Omar or Abu Barda, waskilled. If you do so, he will, being enraged, kill every prisoner now inyour hands. It is very strange that Sir W. Muir translates the sentenceto mean "kill ye every man his prisoner!" _Second passage. _--"No body must take his brother's prisoner, so that hemay be killed, " meaning none of you should seize other person'sprisoner. If you do so, perhaps, the other person may kill the prisonerin the contest. Sir W. Muir has quite misunderstood the sentence. [Sidenote: 66. Mohammad never blamed in the Koran for relievingprisoners. ] There are some fictitious traditions on the subject that Mohammad wasreprimanded in the Koran (Sura, viii, 68, 69) for releasing theprisoners of Badr, meaning that he ought to have executed them. Theverse is translated thus:-- "It is not for a Prophet to take prisoners until (_hatta_) he hathslaughtered in the land. Ye wish to have the goods of this world, butGod wishes for the next, for God is Mighty, Wise! Were it not for a bookfrom God that had gone before, there would have touched you, for whichye took, a mighty punishment. " The verse 68, if it is rightly translated, will mean that prisonersshould not be executed. The word '_hatta_' means '_until_, ' and is alsoused as a causative word. I prefer the latter, and translate-- "It is not for any Prophet that prisoners may be brought to him _inorder_ that he may make slaughter in the land, " which means, that it isnot proper for a Prophet to take prisoners of war in order to slaughterthem. This meaning is in consonance with the other passage in the Koran(xlvii, 4), which restricts the treatment of the prisoners of war toeither free dismissal or ransom. In the first place, the verse rather reprimanded those who wished tokill the prisoners; and in the second, those who desired to exact ransomfor their liberty. They ought to have set them at liberty without anypecuniary advantage, if they knew any good in their deserving freeliberty. [Footnote 244: _Ibid_, p. 117. ] _Kind Treatment of the Prisoners of War by Mohammad. _ [Sidenote: 67. The Koran enjoins, the prisoners of war to be eitherfreely liberated or ransomed, but neither executed nor enslaved. ] The prisoners of war were always treated kindly by Mohammad, and theancient practice of killing and enslaving them was much discouraged andabolished by the Koran. "And when ye meet those who misbelieve, then strike off heads until yehave massacred them, and bind fast the bonds!" "Then either a free grant (of liberty) or a ransom until the war shallhave laid down its burdens. "--Sura, xlvii, 4 and 5. Regarding the prisoners of Badr Sir W. Muir writes: "In pursuance ofMahomet's commands, the citizens of Medina, and such of the refugees aspossessed houses, received the prisoners and treated them with muchconsideration. " "Blessing be on the men of Medina!" said these prisonersin latter days. "They made us ride, while they themselves walked; theygave us wheatened bread to eat, when there was little of it, contentingthemselves with dates. " It is not surprising that when, some time after, their friends came to ransom them, several of the prisoners who had beenthus received declared themselves adherents of Islam: and to such theProphet granted a liberty without the usual payment. [245] The prisoners of the Bani Mustalik were released without paying anyransom. [246] The Bani Hawazin were made prisoners of war at Honain, fought in theeighth year of the Hegira, but were all set free without any exaction ofransom from them. Mohammad first released his prisoners, and the men ofMecca and Medina cheerfully followed his example. [247] The prisonerswere six thousand in number. [248] A party of eighty, as related by Moslim in his _Saheeh_, or of forty orfifty Koreish, as narrated by Ibn Hisham (p. 745), went round aboutMohammad's camp while stationed at Hodeibia in A. H. 6, seeking to cutoff any stray followers, and having attacked the camp itself with stonesand arrows, they were caught and taken prisoners to Mohammad, who, withhis usual generosity, pardoned and released them. Khalid-Ibn-Waleed, in the year of his victory, A. H. 11, when he wassent to call the Bani Jazima to embrace Islam, had made them prisonersand ordered their execution. Some of the better-informed of the Moslemsof the injunctions of the Koran, of releasing prisoners either freely orby exacting ransom, interposed and accused him of committing an act ofthe Time of Ignorance. Mohammad, much displeased, grieved at theintelligence, and said twice, 'O God! I am innocent of what Khalid hathdone. '[249] [Footnote 245: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. II, pp. 122 and 123. ] [Footnote 246: _Ibid_, Vol. III, p. 243. ] [Footnote 247: _Ibid_, Vol. IV. Pp. 148 and 149. ] [Footnote 248: Ibn Hisham, p. 877. ] [Footnote 249: Ibn Hisham, pp. 833 and 835. ] _The Execution of the Bani Koreiza. _ [Sidenote: 68. High treason of the Bani Koreiza against Medina, andtheir execution. ] The Bani Koreiza, a Jewish tribe living in the vicinity of Mecca hadentered into an alliance with the Moslem Commonwealth to defend the cityof Medina from the attack of the aggressors. While Medina was besiegedby the ten thousand Koreish and other Bedouin tribes in A. H. 6, they(the Koreiza), instead of co-operating with the Moslems, defected fromtheir allegiance and entered into negotiations with the besieging foe. After the cessation of the siege, they were besieged in their turn, anda fearful example was made of them, not by Mohammad, but by an arbiterchosen and appointed by themselves. The execution of some of them wasnot on account of their being prisoners of war; they were war-traitorsand rebels, and deserved death according to the international law. Theircrime was high treason against Medina while it was blockaded. There hadno actual fighting taken place between the Bani Koreiza and the Moslems, after the former had thrown off their allegiance to the latter and hadaided and abetted the enemies of the realm. They were besieged by theMoslems to punish them for their high treason, and consequently theywere not prisoners of war. Even such prisoners of war suffer for hightreason. "Treating, in the field, the rebellious enemy according to the law andusages of war, has never prevented the legitimate Government from tryingthe leaders of the rebellion, or chief rebels for high treason, and fromtreating them accordingly, unless they are included in a generalamnesty. "[250] [Sidenote: 69. The whole of the Bani Koreiza was never executed. ] The whole tribe of the Bani Koreiza was not executed, nor all the maleprisoners were put to the sword. [251] The number slain was comparativelyvery small. That they were not executed at the commands of Mohammad, nor_all_ of them were killed, nor a divine sanction was alleged for it, isshown by the following verse of the Koran: "And he caused those of the people of the Book (the Jews) who had aidedthe confederates to come down of their fortresses, and cast dismay intotheir hearts: some ye slew; others ye took prisoners. "--Sura, xxxiii, 26. The slaying and taking of prisoners is attributed to them to whom theverse is addressed as their own act. [Sidenote: 70. The women and children of the Bani Koreiza were notsold. ] The rest of the Bani Koreiza, --male adults, women, and children, --wereeither liberated or got themselves ransomed. We read in Oyoon-al-Asar byIbn Sayyad-al-Nas some account of the ransom. Osman-bin-Affan gatheredmuch money by the transaction. But Sir W. Muir quotes from Hishamee, that the rest of the women and children were sent to be sold among theBedouin tribes of Najd, in exchange of horse and arms. [252] But there isno authority for this story. Abul Mo'tamar Soleiman, in his Campaigns ofMohammad, gives another account which is more probable. He writes:-- "Out of what was captured from Bani Koreiza Mohammad took seventeenhorses and distributed them among his people. The rest he divided intotwo halves. One-half he sent with Sád bin Obádd to Syria, and the otherhalf with Ans bin Quízí to the land of Ghatafán, and ordered that theymay be used there for breeding purposes. They did so, and got goodhorses. "[253] [Sidenote: 71. The exaggerated number of the persons executed. ] The number of male adults executed has been much exaggerated, though itis immaterial, when an execution duly authorized by the internationallaw of a country takes place, to consider the smallness or greatness ofthe number. I cannot do better than quote Moulvie Ameer Ali of Calcuttaon the subject, who has very judiciously criticised the same: "Passingnow to the men executed, " he says, "one can at once see how it has beenexaggerated. Some say they were 400; others have carried the number evenup to 900. But Christian historians generally give it as varying from700 to 800. I look upon this as a gross exaggeration. Even 400 wouldseem an exaggerated number. The traditions agree in making the warlikematerials of the Bani Koreiza consist of 300 cuirasses, 500 bucklers, 1, 500 sabres, &c. In order to magnify the value of the spoil, thetraditions probably exaggerated these numbers. [254] But taking them asthey stand, and remembering that such arms are always kept greatly inexcess of the number of fighting men, I am led to the conclusion thatthe warriors could not have been more than 200 or 300. The mistakeprobably arose from confounding the whole body of prisoners who fellinto the hands of the Moslems with those executed. "[255] Even 200 seems to be a large number, as all of the prisoners were putup for the night in the house of Bint-al-Haris, [256] which would havebeen insufficient for such a large number. [Footnote 250: Miscellaneous Writings of Francis Lieber, Vol. II. Contributions to Political Science, p. 273, Philadelphia, 1881. ] [Footnote 251: Some of the Koreizites were released, among whom we hearof Zobeir Ibn Batá, and Rifáa. They were pardoned by Mohammad. ] [Footnote 252: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 279. ] [Footnote 253: _History of Mohammad's Campaigns_: Edited by Von Kremer, p. 374. ] [Footnote 254: "Compare the remarks of Ibn-Khaldún (Prelégoménes d' IbnKhaldoun, traduits par M. De Slane, Part I, p. 14). "] [Footnote 255: A Critical Examination of the Life and Teachings ofMohammed, by Syed Ameer Ali, Moulvi, M. A. , LL. B. , of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law, p. 113: William and Norgate, London, 1873. ] [Footnote 256: Ibn Hisham, p. 689. Others say the males were kept in thehouse of Osman-bin-Zaed, and the females and children in the house ofBint-al-Haris. _Vide_ Insan-al-Oyoon, by Halabi. Vol. III, p. 93. ] _Some Miscellaneous Objections Refuted. _ 1. --_Omm Kirfa. _ [Sidenote: 72. The execution of Omm Kirfa for brigandage. ] The barbarous execution of Omm Kirfa, a female, who was notorious as themistress of a nest of robbers, by tying her each leg to a separate cameland being torn asunder, is not a fact. It is only mentioned by KatibWáckidi, and is not to be found in any other earliest account ofWáckidi, Ibn Is-hak, and Ibn Hisham. Even Katib Wáckidi does not saythat the execution was ordered by Mohammad, and it is not fair on thepart of Sir W. Muir to hold Mohammad an accomplice in the ferocious act, because he reads of no disapprobation expressed by the Prophet at suchan inhuman treatment. [257] But in the first place the narration is amere fiction; and secondly, the traditions are, as a rule, alwaysincomplete; in one place they are given shorter, and in another longer, according to the circumstances of the occasion on which they areoriginally recited. Ibn Hisham relates, that "Zaid-bin-Harisa orderedKays-bin-Mosahhar to execute Omm Kirfa, so he executed her with aviolent execution. " ('_Katlan Aneefan_, ' p. 980. ) He does not relatethat Mohammad was even informed of the execution after the party hadreturned from this terrible mission. I think the word '_aneef_'(_violent_ or _severe_), as used originally by the narrator, might havebeen the cause of the growth of the story of executing by tying up totwo camels, by way of a gratuitous explanation or glossary, as anothertradition relates that she was tied to the tails of two horses (_videKoostalanee_ in his Commentary on Bokharee, Vol. III, p. 307). 2. --_Urnee Robbers. _ [Sidenote: 73. The alleged mutilation of the Urnee robbers. ] Some _Urnee_ robbers, lately converted, had plundered the camels ofMedina and barbarously handled their herdsman, for they cut off hishands and legs, and struck thorny spikes into his tongue and eyes, tillhe died. The bandits were pursued, captured, and executed byKurz-bin-Jabir. "They had merited death, " says Sir W. Muir, "but themode in which he inflicted it was barbarous and inhuman. The arms andlegs of eight men were cut off, and their eyes were put out. Theshapeless, sightless trunks of these wretched Bedouins were then impaledupon the plain of Al Ghâba, until life was extinct. "[258] As the robbershad mutilated the herdsman, this gave currency to their having beenmutilated in retaliation. But in fact Mohammad never ordered mutilationin any case. He was so averse to this practice, that several traditionsfrom various sources emanating from him to the effect, prove that heprohibited mutilation lest he himself be mutilated by divinejudgment. [259] [Sidenote: 74. Amputation or banishment substituted temporarily in placeof imprisonment for want of a well-organized system of jails. ] Sir W. Muir continues:--"On reflection, Mahomet appears to have feltthat this punishment exceeded the bounds of humanity. He accordinglypromulgated a Revelation, in which capital punishment is limited tosimple death or crucifixion. Amputation of the hands and feet is, however, sanctioned as a penal measure; and amputation of the hands iseven enjoined as the proper penalty for theft, whether the criminal bemale or female. This barbarous custom has accordingly been perpetuatedthroughout the Mahometan world. But the putting out of the eyes is notrecognized among the legal punishments. "[260] These alternative punishments were prescribed for the heinous crimes ofhighway robbery, dacoity, and theft by house-breaking. They were (i)capital punishment, (ii) amputation, and (iii) banishment (Sura, v, 37, 42), according to the circumstances of the case. The last two were of atemporary nature substituted for imprisonment for want of an organizedsystem of jails and prisons. When the Commonwealth was in its infancy, the troubles of the invasions and wars of the aggressive Koreish andtheir allies had left neither peace nor security at Medina to take suchadministrative measures as to organize a system of building, guarding, and maintaining jails, their inmates and their establishments. As soonas jails were established in the Mohammadan Commonwealth, amputation andbanishment gave way to imprisonment. The prisoners of war, not beingcriminals, used to be made over by Mohammad to some citizens of Medina, as in the case of the prisoners of the battle of Badr, to keep them intheir houses as guests, on account of the want of prisons; but as forthe other criminals--the highway robbers, dacoits, andhouse-breakers--they could not be treated and entertained so hospitably. Thus there was left no alternative for them except either to banish suchcriminals, or to award them corporal punishment in the shape ofamputation. [261] 3. --_Torture of Kinana. _ [Sidenote: 75. Torture of Kinana. ] It is related by the biographers "that Kinana, chief of the Jews ofKhyber, and his cousin had kept back, in contravention of their compact, a portion of their riches. On the discovery of this attempt atimposition, Kinana was subjected to cruel torture--'fire being placedupon his breast till his breath had almost departed'--in the hope thathe would confess where the rest of his treasures were concealed. Mahometthen gave command, and the heads of the chief and his cousin weresevered from their bodies. "[262] The story of Kinana's being subjected to extortion and put to death forhiding some treasure, for which he had contravened his contract, isaltogether a spurious one. Kinana was executed in retaliation fortreacherously killing Mahmud, the brother of Mohammad-bin-Moslama, towhom he was made over for execution. There is one tradition, without anyauthority, to the effect, that Zobeir was producing fire on Kinana'sbreast by the friction of flint and steel. This, if it be a fact, doesnot show that it was done by Mohammad's direction and approval. On thecontrary, there are several traditions from the Prophet himself in whichhe has forbidden to punish any one with fire. It is related by Bokhareefrom Ibn Abbás, that Mohammad said, "God only can punish with fire. " Itis also related by Abu Daood from Abdullah, that the Prophet said, "Nobody ought to punish any one with fire except the Lord of thefire. "[263] 4. --_A Singing-Girl executed. _ [Sidenote: 76. The alleged execution of a singing-girl. ] "From general amnesty extended to the citizens of Mecca, Mahometexcluded ten or twelve persons. Of these, however, only four wereactually put to death. . . . The two next were renegade Moslems, who havingshed blood at Medina had fled to Mecca, and abjured Islam. They wereboth slain, and also a singing-girl belonging to one of them, who hadbeen in the habit of annoying the Prophet by abusive verses. " "Their names are Abdallah ibn Khalal and Mikyas ibn Subâba. The murdercommitted by the former is said to have been wilful, that of the latterunintentional. Abdallah had two singing-girls. Both were sentenced todeath, but one escaped and afterwards obtained quarter; the execution ofthe other appears to have been the worst act committed by Mahomet on thepresent occasion. "[264] Abdullah had committed cold-blooded murder, and most probably thesinging-girl belonging to him had taken a share in his crime. Herexecution was owing to her being an accomplice or abettor in the foulact which was justified by law. Then why should the execution beconsidered a worst act? Mohammad felt the deepest respect for the weakersex, and had enjoined during the warfares "not to kill women;" but thelaw makes no difference amongst the sexes, both sexes being liable topunishment according to their deserts. [Sidenote: 77. The charitable spirit of Mohammad towards his enemies. ] The magnanimity, clemency, forbearance, and forgiveness of Mohammad atthe time of his victory at Mecca were very remarkable. Mr. Stanley LanePoole with his usual acumen writes:--"But the final keystone was set inthe eighth year of the flight (A. D. 630), when a body of the Kureyshbroke the truce by attacking an ally of the Muslims; and Mohammadforthwith marched upon Mekka with ten thousand men, and the city, defence being hopeless, surrendered. Now was the time for the Prophet toshow his bloodthirsty nature. His old persecutors are at his feet. Willhe not trample on them, torture them, revenge himself after his owncruel manner? Now the man will come forward in his true colours: we mayprepare our horror, and cry shame beforehand. "But what is this? Is there no blood in the streets? Where are thebodies of the thousands that have been butchered? Facts are hard things;and it is a fact that the day of Mohammad's greatest triumph over hisenemies was also the day of his grandest victory over himself. He freelyforgave the Kureysh all the years of sorrow and cruel scorn they hadinflicted on him: he gave an amnesty to the whole population of Mekka. Four criminals, whom justice condemned, made up Mohammad's proscriptionlist when he entered as a conqueror the city of his bitterest enemies. The army followed the example, and entered quietly and peaceably; nohouse was robbed, no woman insulted. "[265] 5. --_Abu Basír. _ [Sidenote: 78. Abu Basír not countenanced by the Prophet incontravention of the spirit of the treaty of Hodeibia. ] Sir W. Muir says that "Abu Basír, the free-booter, was countenanced bythe Prophet in a manner scarcely consistent with the letter, andcertainly opposed to the spirit, of the truce of Hodeibia. "[266] It wasone of the articles of the treaty of Hodeibia between the Koreish andMohammad, that if any one goeth over to Mohammad without the permissionof his guardian, he shall be sent back to him. [267] A short time after, Abu Basír, a Moslem imprisoned at Mecca, effected his escape andappeared at Medina. His guardians, Azhar and Akhnas, sent two servantsto Mohammad with a letter and instructions to bring the deserter back tohis house. The obligation of surrender was at once admitted by Mohammad, though Abu Basír pleaded the persecution which he used to suffer atMecca as the cause of refusing to return, but Mohammad argued that itwas not proper for him to break the terms of the peace, and Abu Basírwas compelled to set out for Mecca. But he had travelled only a fewmiles when he treacherously seized the sword of one of his escorts andslew him. The other servant fled back to Medina, whither Abu Basír alsofollowed him. On the return of the latter, he contended that the Prophethad already fulfilled the treaty to its very letter in delivering himup, but the Prophet replied, "Alas for his mother! What a kindler ofwar, if he had with him any one!" When he heard this "he knew that theProphet was again going to send him back to his guardians, [268] theKoreish, so he went away to the seashore, where he, with others who hadjoined him after their flight from captivity at Mecca, used to waylaythe caravans from Mecca. " This story, which is also briefly narrated byIbn Is-hak, and more fully by Shamee, Zoorkanee and Ibn-al-Kyyim, doesnot show that Mohammad acted against the spirit and letter of the truceof Hodeibia. He himself never countenanced Abu Basír; on the contrary, he deliveredhim up in conformity with the terms of the treaty of Hodeibia, and whenhe had returned, Abu Basír had every reason to believe that Mohammadwould again despatch him to the quarters whence he had come. But itappears Abu Basír went away to the seashore, out of Mohammad'sjurisdiction, and it was not the duty of the Prophet to effect hisarrest and send him back to Mecca whilst he was not with him, or ratherout of his jurisdiction. Had he even kept him with himself at Medinaafter he had once made him over to the party sent forth to take chargeof him, and were no other demands made for his delivery, I do not thinkMohammad could be fairly blamed for it according to the internationallaw of the Arabs, or even according to the terms of the treaty ofHodeibia itself. 6. --_Employment of Nueim to break up the confederates who had besiegedMedina. _ [Sidenote: 79. Nueim not employed by the Prophet to circulate falsereports in the enemy's camp. ] When Medina was besieged for several days by the Koreish and theirconfederates, the army of Medina was harassed and wearied withincreasing watch and duty. Nueim, an Arab of a neutral tribe, represented himself as a secret believer, and offered his services tothe Prophet, who accepted them, and employed him to hold back theconfederates from the siege, if he could, saying "war verily was a gameof deception. " Nueim excited mutual distrust between the Jews and theKoreish. He told the Jews not to fight against Mohammad until they gothostages from the Koreish as a guarantee against their being deserted. And to the Koreish he said that the Jews intended to ask hostages fromthem. "Do not give them, " he said, "they have promised Mahomet to giveup the hostages to be slain. "[269] This is one tradition, and there is another to the effect that the Jewshad themselves asked for the hostages, but the Koreish had not repliedyet, when Nueim came to the Jews and said, he was there with Abu Sofianwhen their messenger had come for the demand of hostages, and that AbuSofian is not going to send them any. [270] A third tradition in Motamid Ibn Solyman's supplement to Wackidi's_Campaigns of Mohammad_ gives no such story at all. It has altogether adifferent narration to the effect, that there was a spy of the Koreishin the Moslem camp who had overheard Abdullah-bin-Rawaha saying, thatthe Jews had asked the Koreish to send them seventy persons, who, ontheir arrival, would be killed by them. Nueim went to the Koreish, whowere waiting for his message, and told what he had heard as alreadyrelated. [271] This contradicts the story given by Ibn Hisham and Mr. Muir. But anyhow the story does not prove that Mohammad had givenpermission to Nueim to speak falsehood or spread treacherous reports. [Sidenote: 80. Deception in way allowed by the international law. ] Sir W. Muir is not justified in his remarks when he writes, --"We cannot, indeed, approve the employment of Nueim to break up the confederacy byfalsehood and deception, but this perhaps would hardly affect hischaracter in Arab estimation;"[272] and further on he writes, --"WhenMedîna was beleagured by the confederate army, Mahomet sought theservices of Nueim, a traitor, and employed him to sow distrust among theenemy by false and treacherous reports: for, " said he, "what else is warbut a game at deception. "[273] The utmost that can be made out from theformer tradition quoted by Mr. Muir, and contradicted by anothertradition of equal force, is that Mohammad allowed deception in war byquoting the proverbial saying, that "war is a game at deception. " Inthis he had the sanction of the military law or the international law, as deception in war is a "military necessity, " and allowed by the lawand usages of war. A modern author on the international law says:-- "Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of_armed_ enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally_unavoidable_ in the armed contests of the war; it allows of thecapturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to thehostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows ofall destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels oftraffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of sustenanceor means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of whatever anenemy's country affords necessary for the subsistence and safety of thearmy, and of such deception as does not involve the breaking of goodfaith either positively pledged, regarding agreements entered intoduring the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to exist. "[274] [Sidenote: 81. Lecky's Standard of Morality. ] But supposing the modern morality does not approve of Mohammad whathardly "affected his character in Arab estimation, " are there nodiversities in moral judgments? The moral unity to be expected indifferent ages is not a unity of standard or of facts, but a unity oftendency. "That some savage kill their old parents, that infanticide has beenpractised without compunction by even civilized nations, that the bestRomans saw nothing wrong in the gladiatorial shows, that political orrevengeful assassinations have been for centuries admitted, that slaveryhas been sometimes honoured and sometimes condemned, are unquestionableproofs, that the same act may be regarded in one age as innocent, and inanother as criminal. Now it is undoubtedly true, that in many cases anhistorical examination will reveal special circumstances explaining orpalliating the apparent anomaly. It has been often shown that thegladiatorial shows were originally a form of human sacrifice adoptedthrough religious motives; that the rude nomadic life of savagesrendering impossible the preservation of aged and helpless members ofthe tribe, the murder of parents was regarded as an act of mercy both bythe murderer and the victim; that before an effective administration ofjustice was organized, private vengeance was the sole preservationagainst crime, and political assassination against usurpation; that theinsensibility of some savages to the criminality of theft arises fromthe fact that they were accustomed to have all things in common; thatthe Spartan law legalizing theft arose partly from a desire to fostermilitary dexterity among the people, but chiefly from a desire todiscourage wealth; that slavery was introduced through motives of mercyto prevent conquerors from killing their prisoners. All this is true, but there is another and a more general answer. It is not to beexpected, and it is not maintained, that men in all ages should haveagreed about the application of their moral principles. All that iscontended for is, that these principles are themselves the same. Some ofwhat appear to us monstrous acts of cruelty were dictated by that veryfeeling of humanity, the universal perception of the merit of which theyare cited to disprove; and even when this is not the case, all that canbe inferred is, that the standard of humanity was very low. But stillhumanity was recognized as a virtue, and cruelty as a vice. "[275] _The alleged permission to kill the Jews. _ [Sidenote: 82. Murder of Ibn Sanina. ] It is related by some of the biographers of Mohammad, eagerly recited byothers of Europe, that, "on the morning after the murder of Káb, Mahometgave a general permission to his followers to slay any Jews whom theymight chance to meet, "[276] and that the murder of Ibn Sanina, a Jewishmerchant, by Muheiasa, a Moslem, was the direct consequence of thisorder. "When Huweisa upbraided Muheiasa for killing his confederate theJew, and appropriating his wealth, --"By the Lord!" replied Muheiasa, "ifhe that commanded me to kill him commanded to kill thee also, I wouldhave done it. " "What!" Huweisa cried, "wouldst thou have slain thine ownbrother at Mahomet's bidding?"--"Even so, " answered the fanatic. "Strange indeed!" Huweisa responded. "Hath the new religion reached tothis pitch! Verily it is a wonderful Faith. " And Huweisa was convertedfrom that very hour. "[277] Ibn Is-hak says this story was related to him by a freedman of the BaniHárisa tribe from the daughter of Muheiasa, who had heard it from herfather. [278] (1) Now there is nothing known of this mysterious person, the freedman of the tribe of Háris, therefore no reliance can be put onhis story. (2) We have no knowledge of the daughter of the murdererMuheiasa, or Moheisa, as he is called by the biographer, Ibn Hisham. (3)Muheiasa himself has not that respectable character which can lend evena shadow of veracity to his narration. (4) And lastly, the story thatMohammad had given general permission to his followers to slay any Jewwhom they might chance to meet, and consequently Muheiasa killed IbnSanina, and Huweisa became a convert to Islam, is contradicted byanother counter-tradition in Ibn Hisham (pp. 554-555), who has relatedfrom Abú Obeida, who relates from Abú Omar-al-Madaní, that, "during theexecution of the Bani Koreiza (_vide_ para. 68), one Káb-bin-Yahooza wasmade over to Muheiasa for execution. When the latter executed hisvictim, Huweisa, his brother, who was still unbelieving, upbraidedMuheiasa. "If he, " responded Muheiasa, "that commanded me to kill himhad commanded me to kill thee also, I would have killed thee. " Huweisawas quite surprised at his brother's reply, and went away astonished. During the night he used to wake up repeatedly, and wonder at hisbrother's staunch devotion to his faith. In the morning, he said, "Bythe Lord! This is a wonderful faith, " and came to the Prophet to embraceIslam. These remarks show that the alleged permission to kill the Jews, and Ibn Sanina's murder, and Huweisa's conversion in consequencethereof, is all a mere concoction. [Sidenote: 83. Sir W. Muir quoted. ] Even Sir W. Muir, though very fond of collecting all such apocryphaltraditions reflecting on the character of the Prophet, doubts theveracity of this one, and declares its improbability and inexpediency. He writes:-- "But the order itself is a strange one, and must, one would suppose, have been accompanied by some conditions or reservations not here apparent. It was surely not expedient for the Prophet's cause at this time that the streets of Medîna should have flowed with blood by the strict execution of this command. Yet such is the distinct tenor of the best traditions. "The order was not an unlikely one to have issued at a time when Mahomet was irritated against the Jews by their treachery; and Hishâmi has a tradition that it was promulgated when Mahomet directed the massacre of all the males of the Coreitza, which would have been the more likely version, if the other tradition had not been so strong and positive. "[279] But the tradition quoted by him is by no means the best or strongest asI have shown above. Hishamee does not say that the order was promulgatedat the execution of the Bani Koreiza. He simply narrates the story ofMuheiasa and Huweisa to have taken place at that time. _The expulsion of the Bani Nazeer. _ [Sidenote: 84. The Bani Nazeer. ] The expulsion of the Bani Nazeer has been censured by Sir W. Muir, whosays: "The pretext on which the Bani Nadhîr were besieged andexpatriated (namely, that Gabriel had revealed their design against theProphet's life), was feeble and unworthy of an honest cause. "[280] A whole Sura in the Koran is devoted to the Bani Nazeer, but it doesnot hint at the alleged crime of their attempt on the life of theProphet or their expulsion for the same cause. The traditions on thesubject are unsupported, _ex parte_, and legendary. Had such a traditionbeen current at the time of Mohammad, or what is called Sadr Av-val (thefirst or Apostolic Age), we should certainly have had scores ofnarrators on the subject. [281] Their crime was treachery, [282] and theywere a dangerous element to Medina, for a combination, at any period, between the treacherous Jews and the aggressive Koreish, or otherenemies of Islam, would have proved fatal to the safety of Medina. Buttheir banishment was too mild a punishment. [Sidenote: 85. Fruit-trees not cut down. ] It is said that Mohammad cut down the surrounding date trees and burnedthe choicest of them during the siege of the Bani Nazeer, and justifiedhimself by publishing the verses of the LIX Sura of the Koran. [283] Butthe date trees cut down were neither bearing fruit, nor did they supplyany staple article of food to the Bani Nazeer, or the public in general. The _Leena_ mentioned in the verse referred to above is a tree withoutfruit. Thus no fruit trees were destroyed. (Zoorkánee Vol. II, page 98. )Trees not bearing fruits were only cut, which is also justified underthe Law of Moses. (See Deuteronomy XX, 20. ) _Females and the Treaty of Hodeibia. _ [Sidenote: 86. Females and the treaty of Hodeibia. ] Females were not included in the truce of Hodeibia. The stipulation forthe surrender of deserters referred only to the male sex. All women whowere to come over to Medina from Mecca during the period of the peacewere, by the dictates of Sura LX, 10, to be tried, and if theirprofession was found sincere, they were to be retained. They wereprohibited from marrying the unbelievers. The guardians of suchbelieving females were to receive from the Moslem commonwealth what theyhad spent upon their charges. Sir W. Muir understands from Sura LX, verse 10, that the women referred to therein were the wives of theMeccans, and says:--"The unbelief of their husbands dissolved theprevious marriage; they now might legally contract fresh nuptials withbelievers, provided only that restitution were made of any sums expendedby their former husbands as dower upon them. "[284] But there is nothingeither to show that the women had their husbands at Mecca, or to prove, that, on account of their husbands' unbelief, their marriages wereannulled. As marriage with women with husbands is forbidden in Sura IV, verse 28, and the verse LX, 10, under discussion, does not designatethem as married women, I fairly conclude that this verse treats only ofsuch as were not married. It is not the Law of the Koran that theunbelief of either party dissolves their previous marriage. It onlyenjoins neither to marry idolatresses, nor to wed Moslem daughters withidolaters until they believe. --(Sura II, 220. ) [Sidenote: 87. Stanley defended. ] Sir William Muir, after quoting Sura LX, 10-12, says, "Stanley onCorinthians (1 Cor. VII, 1-40) quotes the above passage, and says thatthe rule it contains "resembles that of the Apostle, " Vol. I, page 145. But there is really no analogy between them; the Gospel rule differs_toto coelo_ from that of Mahomet:--"If any brother hath a wife thatbelieveth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put heraway. --And similarly the case of a believing wife with an unbelievinghusband. (1 Cor. VII, 12-16. ) Whereas Mahomet declares the marriage bond_de facto_ annulled by the unbelief of either party, which indeed wasonly to be expected from his loose ideas regarding the marriagecontract. "[285] I think Stanley is quite correct, and the Gospel and theKoranic rule resemble each other in this respect. Because the order, "they (the believing women) are not lawful for them (unbelievers), norare the unbelievers lawful for these (believing women), " does not relateto the women already married; and the words, "do not retain any right inthe infidel woman . . . If any of your wives escape from you to theinfidels . . . " are to the same purport as 1 Cor. VII, 15, "But if theunbelieving depart let them depart. A brother or a sister is not underbondage in such cases. "[286] [Sidenote 88. Marriage a strict bond of union. ] Mohammad had no loose ideas regarding the marriage tie. He had made themarriage contract more firm and irrevocable, except under veryexceptional circumstances, than it was under the Arab society; andcalled it "a strict bond of union. "[287] Mohammad's own daughter, Zeinab, was the wife of an unbelieving husband and had fled to herfather at Medina under the persecution at Mecca after the Hegira. [288]Her marriage with her unbelieving partner was not cancelled by Mohammad, and on the conversion of the son-in-law, when he came after a period ofsix years after his wife had come to Medina, Mohammad rejoined themtogether under their previous marriage. Theirs was neither a freshmarriage nor a fresh dowry. (_Vide_ Ibn Abbas' tradition in thecollections of Ahmed, Ibn Abi Daood, Ibn Maja and Trimizee. )Safwan-bin-Omayya and Ikrama-bin Abi Jahl had believing wives at thetime of the conquest of Mecca, and their marriages were not dissolved byMohammad. (_Vide_ Ibn Shahab's tradition in _Movatta_ by Malik, and inthe _Tabakat_ of Ibn Sad Katib Wákidi. ) Similarly Ibn Sofian andHakeem-bin-Hizam had their unbelieving wives retained by them after theyhad themselves been converted to Islam, and their former connubialconnection was not severed by Mohammad. (_Vide_ the several traditionsin Baihakee to the above effect. ) It was only the legists andjuris-consults of a later age who wrongly construed the passage in SuraLX, 10, to mean that the unbelief of either party dissolved the marriagetie. [Footnote 257: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV. P. 13. ] [Footnote 258: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 19. In the collections of Bokharee the story is traced to Ans. But Ans couldnot be a witness to Mohammad's command for mutilation, as Ans did notcome until the expedition to Khyber; and the execution of those robberstook place before that. The story from Jábir in Ibn Mardaveih'scollections to the same effect is not authentic, as Jábir, who says hewas sent by Mohammad in pursuit of the robbers, and committed the act, was not a convert at that time. Koostalanee, the author of _Mooahib_, has declared the tradition of Ibn Jarir Tabari on the subject as anapocryphal, _i. E. _, "Zaeef. " _Vide_ Zoorkanee on Movahib, Vol. II, p. 211. ] [Footnote 259: Ibn Hisham (p. 463) relates from Ibn Is-hak that Omarasked permission to mutilate Sohail, but Mohammad replied, "I would notmutilate him; if I do, God will mutilate me, though I be a Prophet. "] [Footnote 260: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 19. ] [Footnote 261: This subject has been fully and judiciously discussed bythe Honorable Syed Ahmed Khan Bahadur, C. S. I. , in his "Commentary of theKoran;" Sura. Iv. Pp. 198-204. ] [Footnote 262: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 68. ] [Footnote 263: _Vide_ Mishkát Book of Retaliation, pp. 243-244. ] [Footnote 264: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 131, foot-note. ] [Footnote 265: Introduction to Lane's Selections from the Kur-án, byStanley Lane Poole, p. Lxvii. London: Trubner and Co. , 1879. ] [Footnote 266: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 308. ] [Footnote 267: _Ibid_, p. 35. ] [Footnote 268: _Vide_ Zoorkanee on _Movahib_, Vol. II, page 244; also_Zád-ul-Maád_, by Ibn-al-Kyyim, Vol. I, page 376, Cawnpore, 1298 A. H. ;and _Seerat-ul-Mohammadiya_, by Mohammad Karámat-ul-Ali of Delhi, inloco. The Life is compiled from _Seerat Halabi_ and _Seerat Shámee_ andwas lithographed in Bombay. ] [Footnote 269: Hishamee, page 681; Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 266. ] [Footnote 270: _Seerat Halabi_, or _Insan-al-Oyoon_, Vol II, page 79. ] [Footnote 271: History of _Mohammad's Campaigns_, by Wackidi, pp. 368-369: Edited by Von Kremer, Calcutta, 1856. ] [Footnote 272: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 282. ] [Footnote 273: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pages 308-309. ] [Footnote 274: Lieber's Miscellaneous Writings, Vol. II, page 250. ] [Footnote 275: History of European Morals, from Augustus to Charlemagne. By William Edward Hartpole Lecky, M. A. , Vol. I, pp. 101-102. ] [Footnote 276: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 148. ] [Footnote 277: _Ibid_, p. 149. ] [Footnote 278: Ibn Hisham, p. 554. ] [Footnote 279: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, pp. 148 & 149, _foot-note_. ] [Footnote 280: The Life of Mahomet, by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, page 308. ] [Footnote 281: The tradition that Mohammad had gone to Bani Nazeerasking their aid in defraying a certain price of blood, and theyattempted upon his life (Muir, III, 208-209) as related by Ibn Is-hak(in Ibn Hisham, page 652) is a _Mursal_ (_vide_ Zoorkánee, Part II, page95), and consequently was not current in the Apostolic Age. ] [Footnote 282: Ibn Ockba, an earliest biographer of Mohammad, died 140, says, --the cause of the expedition against the Bani Nazeer was this:that they had instigated the Koreish to fight against Mohammad, and hadreconnoitred the weak points of Medina. Ibn Mardaveih Abd-bin-Hameed, and Abdu Razzak have related traditions to the effect that, after theevent of Badr, the Koreish had written to the Jews of Medina to make warupon Mohammad, and the Bani Nazeer had resolved to break the compact. _Vide_ Zoorkánee, Part II, pp, 96-97. ] [Footnote 283: Compare Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, pp. 213 and302, _foot-note_. ] [Footnote 284: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 44. ] [Footnote 285: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 46, foot-note. ] [Footnote 286: The verses of the Koran are given below: 10. "O Believers! when believing women come over to you as refugees, then make trial of them. God best knoweth their faith; but if ye havealso ascertained their faith, let them not go back to the infidels; theyare not lawful for them, nor are the unbelievers lawful for these women. But give them back what they have spent. No crime shall it be in you tomarry them, provided you give them their dowers. Do not retain a rightin the infidel women, and demand back what you have spent and let themdemand back what they have spent. This is the ordinance of God which Heordaineth among you: and God is Knowing, Wise. " 11. "And if any of your wives escape from you to the infidels from whomyou afterwards take any spoil, then give to those whose wives shall havefled away, the like of what they shall have spent; and fear God in whomye believe. "--Sura LX. ] [Footnote 287: Sura IV, 25. Rodwell's translation. How Mohammad discouraged divorce and took several steps in the Koran toprohibit the facility of divorce prevailing in the Arab society has beenfully discussed by me in my book "The Proposed Political, Legal, andSocial Reforms under Moslem Rule, " pp. 129-143, Bombay Education SocietyPress, 1883. ] [Footnote 288: "Some of the baser sort from amongst the Coreish, hearingof her departure, went in pursuit, determined to bring her back. Thefirst that appeared was Habbâr, who struck the camel with his spear, andso affrighted Zeinab as to cause her a miscarriage. "--Muir's Life ofMahomet, Vol. IV, page 7. ] _The Popular Jihád or Crusade; According to the Mohammadan Common Law. _ [Sidenote 89. The Koran enjoined only defensive wars. ] Almost all the common Mohammadan and European writers think that areligious war of aggression is one of the tenets of Islam, andprescribed by the Koran for the purpose of proselytizing or exactingtribute. But I do not find any such doctrine enjoined in the Koran, ortaught, or preached by Mohammad. His mission was not to wage wars, or tomake converts at the point of the sword, or to exact tribute orexterminate those who did not believe his religion. His sole mission wasto enlighten the Arabs to the true worship of the one God, to recommendvirtue and denounce vice, which he truly fulfilled. That he and hisfollowers were persecuted, that they were expelled from their houses andwere invaded upon and warred against; that to repel incursions and togain the liberty of conscience and the security of his followers' livesand the freedom of their religion, he and they waged defensive wars, encountered superior numbers, made defensive treaties, securing the mainobject of the war, _i. E. _, the freedom of their living unmolested atMecca and Medina, and of having a free intercourse to the Sacred Mosque, and a free exercise of their religion: all these are questions quiteseparate and irrelevant, and have nothing to do with the subject inhand, _i. E. _, the popular _Jihad_, or the crusade for the purpose ofproselytizing, exacting tribute, and exterminating the idolaters, saidto be one of the tenets of Islam. All the defensive wars, and the versesof the Koran relating to the same, were strictly temporary andtransitory in their nature. They cannot be made an example of, or beconstrued into a tenet or injunction for aggressive wars, nor were theyintended so to be. Even they cannot be an example or instruction for adefensive war to be waged by the Mohammadan community or commonwealth, because all the circumstances under which Mohammad waged his defensivewars were local and temporary. But almost all European writers do notunderstand that the Koran does not teach a war of aggression, but hadonly, under the adverse circumstances, to enjoin a war of defence, clearly setting forth the grounds in its justification and strictlyprohibiting offensive measures. [Sidenote 90. The Common Law and Jihad. ] All the fighting injunctions in the Koran are, in the first place, onlyin self-defence, and none of them has any reference to make warfareoffensively. In the second place, it is to be particularly noted thatthey were transitory in their nature, and are not to be consideredpositive injunctions for future observance or religious precepts forcoming generations. [289] They were only temporary measures to meet theemergency of the aggressive circumstances. The Mohammadan Common Law iswrong on this point, where it allows unbelievers to be attacked withoutprovocation. But this it places under the category of a non-positiveinjunction. A positive injunction is that which is incumbent on everybeliever. But attacking unbelievers without any provocation, oroffensively, is not incumbent on every believer. The Hedaya has:--"Thesacred injunction concerning war is sufficiently observed when it iscarried on by any one _party_ or _tribe_ of _Mussulmans_; and it is thenno longer of any force with respect to the rest. "[290] [Sidenote 91. Jihad when positive. ] The Mohammadan Common Law makes the fighting only a positive injunction"where there is a _general summons_, (that is, where the infidels invadea _Mussulman_ territory, and the _Imâm_ for the time being issues ageneral proclamation, requiring all persons to stand forth to fight, )for in this case war becomes a positive injunction with respect to thewhole of the inhabitants, "[291]--this is sanctioned by the Law ofNations and the Law of Nature. [Sidenote: 92. The Hedaya quoted and refuted. ] The Hedaya, or a Commentary of the Mohammadan Common Law by Nuraddin Aliof Murghinan (died in 593, A. H. ) has:-- "The destruction of the sword[292] is incurred by the infidels, althoughthey be not the first aggressors, as appears from the various passagesin the sacred writings which are generally received to thiseffect. "[293] This assertion is not borne out by the sacred injunction of the Koran, and, on the contrary, is in direct contradiction to the same. There areseveral passages in the Koran already quoted in pages 16-25, whichexpressly forbid the taking of offensive measures, and enjoin onlydefensive wars. There are some other passages which are not soexpressive as the several others referred to above, or in other words, are not conditional. But the law of interpretation, the general scopeand tenor of the Koran, and the context of the verses and parallelpassages, all show that those few verses which are not conditionalshould be construed as conditional in conformity with other passagesmore clear, expressive, and conditional, and with the general laws ofscriptural interpretation. Now, the author of the Hedaya and otherwriters on the Common Law quote only those few passages from the Koranwhich are absolute or unconditional, and shut their eyes against thosemany conditional verses, and general scope and tenor of the Koran. Limited, or _Conditional_. |General, or _Absolute_. ---------------------------------+--------------------------------------- | Sura XXII, 39-42. |Sura II, 245, (read together with 247. ) Sura II, 186-189. |Sura IX, 124. " " 212. | " " 214. |The context, parallel passages Sura IV, 76, 77, 78, 86. |and their history, show them " " 91, 92, 93. |to be limited and conditional, Sura VIII, 39-41, 58-66. |in conformity with the general " " 73, 74. |scope of the Koran. Sura IX, 1-15. | " " 29, 36. | | _Quoted in pages_ 16-25, 35. | | [Sidenote: 93. Rule of interpretation. ] Now, there are only two verses in the Koran (Sura II, v. 245, and SuraIX, v. 124) containing an absolute or non-conditional injunction formaking war against the unbelievers. Perhaps you may be able to detachsome more sentences, or dislocate some half verses from amongst thosegiven under the head of conditional. But these absolute, as well asthose detached and dislocated parts of some other verses will not, byany rule of interpretation, show absolute injunction to wage war againstthe unbelievers without any provocation or limitation. There is a rulein the exegesis of the Koran, as well as in other Scripturalinterpretations, that when two commandments, one conditional, and theother general or absolute, are found on the same subject, theconditional is to be preferred, and the absolute should be construed asconditional, because the latter is more expressive of the views of theauthor than the general which is considered as vague in its expression. The rule is:--Where a passage which is ambiguous, or which contains anyunusual expression, or in which a doctrine is slightly treated, or is ingeneral terms, must be interpreted agreeably to what is revealed moreclearly in other parts, or where a subject is more clearly discussed. Asingle or general passage is not to be explained in contradiction tomany others restricted, conditional, and limited consistently with them, and with proper reservations. [Sidenote: 94. The Common Law and its commentators. ] It is not to be wondered that the Mohammadan legists or the compilers ofthe Common Law are wrong in this point. Because, as a rule, or as amatter of fact, they have compiled the Common Law from different sourcesirrespective of the Koran, and the commentators of the Common Law takethe trouble of vindicating its views, principles and casuistries, andjustifying the Moslem conquests under the Khalifs by the authority ofthe Koran. Then only they commit the unpardonable blunder of citingisolated parts of solitary verses of the Koran, which are neitherexpressive enough nor are in general terms. In doing so, they avoid themany other conditional and more explicit verses on the same subject. [Sidenote: 95. Kifaya quoted. ] The author of Kifaya, a commentary on the Hedaya, who flourished in theseventh century of the Hegira, remarks on the words of the text, "Thedestruction of the sword is incurred by the infidels, although they benot the first aggressors, " already quoted in the 92nd para. , and says;"Fighting against the infidels who do not become converts to Islam, anddo not pay the capitation-tax, is incumbent, though they do not attackfirst. " The author of the Hedaya has mentioned this aggressive measurespecially, because apparently the words of God, "if they attack you thenslay them, "[294] indicate that the fighting against the unbelievers isonly incumbent when they fight first, but, however, such is not thecase. It is incumbent to fight with them, though they be not theaggressors. [295] [Sidenote: 96. Further quotation. ] The same author writes in continuation of the above quotation, andattempts to reconcile his theory with the numerous precepts of theKoran, which do not permit the war of aggression:-- "Know, that in the beginning the Prophet was enjoined to forgive, andwithdraw from those who joined other gods with God. God said, 'whereforedost thou forgive with kindly forgiveness, and withdraw from those whojoin other gods with Me. '" "Then He enjoined him to summon the people to the faith by kind warningand kind disputation, saying, 'Summon thou to the way of thy Lord withwisdom and kindly warning: dispute with them in the kindest manner. '" "Then He allowed fighting, when they, the unbelievers, were theaggressors, and said:--'A sanction is given to those who have foughtbecause they have suffered outrages;' _i. E. _, they are allowed to fightin self-defence. And God said, 'If they attack you, then kill them' (II, 187); and also said, 'If they lean to peace, lean thou also to it. '(VIII. 63). " "Then he enjoined to fight aggressively during a certain period. Godsaid, 'And when the sacred months are passed, kill them who join othergods with God, wherever ye find them, and seize them' (IX. 5). " "After this He enjoined for fighting absolutely, at every time and inevery place. God said, 'And do battle against them until there be nomore (_fitnah_) persecution' (II. 189; VII. 40). "[296] [Sidenote: 97. The Kifaya refuted. ] Here the author of Kifaya has contrived to make out by way of subterfugeand sophistry five successive periods of the policy of the Koranregarding warfare against the unbelievers: | | First Period |Forgiveness and withdrawal | Sura XV, 85. VI, 106 ---------------+-------------------------------+------------------------- | | Second Period |Summoning | Sura XVI, 126. ---------------+-------------------------------+------------------------- | | Third Period |Fighting in self-defence | Sura XXII, 40. II, 187. | | VIII, 63. ---------------+-------------------------------+------------------------- | | Fourth Period |Fighting aggressively | Sura IX, 5. |during certain times | | | ---------------+-------------------------------+------------------------- | | Fifth Period |Aggressive fighting absolutely. | Sura II, 189. VIII, 40. | | He is wrong in history, chronology as well as in understanding thegeneral scope of the Koran and the tenor of the Suras. He does notregard even the context of the verses quoted. The verses containing injunctions for turning aside, shunning, forgiving, passing over, and withdrawing are found even in the laterperiod of the Medinite Suras. --(_Vide_ Sura II, 103; V, 16, 46; Sura IV, 66, 83; and VII, 198. ) They have nothing to do either with war or peace. The summoning of people to the faith of God was the chief duty of theProphetical office, and was not confined to any special period, and wasalike during times of war and peace. Even during the actual warfare itwas incumbent on the Prophet to give quarters to the enemy, if hedesired, to listen to his preachings. --(_Vide_ Sura IX, 6. ) [Sidenote: 98. S. IX, v. 5, discussed. ] The fifth verse of the ninth Sura is by no means an injunction to attackfirst or wage an aggressive war. This verse is one of the severalpublished at Medina after the Meccans had violated the treaty ofHodeibia and attacked the Bani Khozaa, who were in alliance withMohammad. The Meccans were given four months' time to submit, in defaultof which they were to be attacked for their violation of the treaty andfor their attacking the Bani Khozaa. They submitted beforehand, andMecca was conquered by compromise. The verses referred to above (SuraIX, 1-15, &c. ) were not acted upon. So there was no injunction to wagean aggressive war. This subject has been discussed at pages 51-55 ofthis work, and the reader is referred to them for fuller information. [Sidenote: 99. S. II, v. 189, discussed. ] The 189th verse of the second Sura is not at all an absolute injunctionto wage a war of aggression. The verses 186, 187, 188 and 189, if readtogether, will show that the injunction for fighting is only in defence. The verses are:-- 186. And fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you:but commit not the injustice _of attacking them first_; verily Godloveth not the unjust. 187. And kill them wherever ye shall find them; and eject them fromwhatever place they have ejected you; for (_fitnah_) persecution isworse than slaughter; yet attack them not at the sacred Mosque untilthey attack you therein, but if they attack you then slay them: such isthe recompense of the infidels! 188. But if they desist, then verily God is Gracious, Merciful-- 189. And do battle, against them until there be no more (_fitnah_)persecution and the only worship be that of God: but if they desist, then let there be no hostility, save against wrong-doers. [Sidenote: 100. S. II, 189, VIII, 40, are defensive. ] Besides, this verse as well as the fortieth verse of Sura VIII haveindications in themselves of their relating to a defensive war. As thetorture, aggression, in short, the persecutions suffered by the Moslemsfrom the Koreish, are very clearly indicated by the word _fitnah_ inthese two verses, the object of fighting or counterfighting by theMoslems is plainly set forth, which is to suppress the persecutions. They have clear reference to the persecution, to stop or remove whichthey enjoined fighting, and this was fighting in self-defence obviously. They also show that the Meccans had not desisted from persecuting andattacking the Moslems, and therefore a provision was made that if theydiscontinue their incursions, there will be no more hostility. This isquite sufficient to show that these verses relate to the defensive warsof Mohammad. [Sidenote: 101. All injunctions local and for the time being. ] Lastly, supposing the Koran permitted waging aggressive wars against theMeccans, who were the first aggressors, this does not corroborate thetheory or principle of the Common Law of making lawful aggressive warsin future on the authority of these verses, as all of them in the Koranon the subject of war relate only to Pagan Arabs, who had longpersevered in their hostility to the early Moslems or to the Jews, who, being in league with the Moslems, went over to their enemies, and aidedthem against the Moslems. These verses are not binding on other persons, who are not under the same circumstance as the Moslems were under, atMedina. [See para. 90. ] [Sidenote: 102. Ainee quoted and refuted. ] Another commentator of the Hedaya, Ainee[297] (who died in 855) followsKifaya already quoted, and mentions some other verses of the Koran onthe war of aggression, which the author of Kifaya has left uncited inhis work. They are as follows:-- ". . . Then do battle with the ringleaders of infidelity, --for no oathsare binding on them--that they may desist. "--(Sura IX, 12. ) "War is prescribed to you, but from this ye are averse. "--(Sura II, 212. ) "March ye forth, the light and heavy, and contend with your substanceand your persons on the Way of God. "--(Sura IX, 41. ) The first verse when it is complete runs thus:--"But if, after alliancemade, they break their oaths and revile your religion, then do battlewith the ringleaders of infidelity, --for no oaths are binding onthem--that they may desist;" and fully shows by its wording that itrelates to the war of defence, as the breaking of alliances, andreviling of the Moslem religion were the grounds of making war with theobject in view that the aggressors may desist. This verse is one ofthose in the beginning of the ninth Sura, which have already beendiscussed. --(_Vide_ pages 51-55. ) The second verse (II, 212) does not allow a war of aggression, as thenext verse (II, 214) expressly mentions the attacks made by theaggressors on the Moslems. It has been quoted at full length in page 18. The third verse (IX, 41) was published on the occasion of the expeditionof Tábuk, which was certainly a defensive measure, and has beendiscussed in pages 51 to 55. [Sidenote: 103. Sarakhsee quoted and refuted. ] Sarakhsee generally entitled _Shums-ul-a-imma_ (the Sun of the Leaders), who died in 671 A. H. , as quoted by Ibn Abdeen in his_Radd-ul-Muhtár_, [298] makes several stages in publishing theinjunctions for fighting. He writes:-- "Know thou, that the command for fighting has descended by degrees. First the Prophet was enjoined to proclaim and withdraw, 'Professpublicly then what thou hast been bidden and withdraw from those whojoin gods with God' (XV, 94). Then he was ordered to dispute kindly;'Summon thou to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and with kindly warning:dispute with them in the kindest warning' (XVI, 126). Then they wereallowed to fight, 'A sanction is given to those who are fought. . . . '(XXII, 40). Then they were allowed to fight if they (the unbelievers)attacked them, 'If they attack you, then kill them' (II, 187). Afterthis they were enjoined to fight on the condition of passing over thesacred months, 'And when the sacred months are passed, then kill thepolytheists' (IX, 5). After this they were enjoined to fight absolutely, 'And fight for the cause of God. . . . ' (II, 186, 245). And thus the matterwas settled. " There was no injunction for fighting absolutely or aggressively in theKoran. I have already explained the 5th verse of the ninth Sura as notallowing an offensive war. And the same is the case with the 186th verseof the second Sura, which has in itself the condition of fightingagainst those only who fought against the Moslems. The other verse, 245th, of the same Sura is restricted by the verse 186th, (and isexplained by the verse 245th), which refers to the defensive measures. This verse is quoted in page 19 of this work. [Sidenote: 104. Ibn Hajar quoted and refuted. ] Shahábudeen Ahmed-bin-Hajr Makki writes:-- "Fighting was prohibited before the Hegira, as the Prophet was enjoinedonly to preach and warn and to be patient in the persecutions of theunbelievers in order to conciliate them. After this, God gave sanctionto the Moslems for fighting, (after that had been prohibited in seventyand odd verses), when the unbelievers were the aggressors, and said, 'And fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you'(II, 187). And it is a genuine tradition from Zohri that the firstrevealed verse sanctioning it was, 'A sanction is given to those who arefought, because they have suffered outrages' (XXII, 40): that is asanction was given for fighting on the ground of the word 'fought. ' Thenthe war of aggression was made lawful in other than the sacred months, 'When the sacred months are over. . . . ' (IX, 5). After this, in the eighthyear of the Hegira, after the victory of Mecca, the fighting wasenjoined absolutely by the words of God; 'March ye forth, the light andthe heavy' (IX, 41); and 'attack those who join gods with God in all'(IX, 36). And this is the very verse of the sword, and some say thepreceding verse is the verse of the sword, while others think that bothbear on the same subject, _i. E. _, of the sword. "[299] [Sidenote: 105. Ibn Hajar refuted. ] I have already explained the several verses quoted by the author inpreceding paras. , but have only to pass remarks on the only verse, _i. E. _ (IX, 36), which the authors cited have not dared to mention, because it goes contrary to their assertion. Perhaps it is a slip in therapidity of Ibn Hajar remarks, for which he may be excused. But I willnot hesitate in saying that generally the Mohammadan legists, whilequoting the Koran in support of their theories, quote some dislocatedportion from a verse without any heed to its context, and thus cause agreat and irreparable mischief by misleading others, especially theEuropean writers, as it is apparent from the testimony of Mr. Lanequoted in para. 113 of this work. The verse referred to by the author mentioned in the last para. , IbnHajar Makki, is as follows: "Attack those who join gods with God in all, as they attack you in all. "--(IX, 36. ) This speaks evidently of thedefensive war, and has not the slightest or faintest idea of a war ofaggression on the part of the Moslems. This verse refers to theexpedition of Tábuk. [Sidenote: 106. Halabi quoted. ] Nooruddeen Ali al Halabi (died 1044 A. H. ), the author of_Insan-ul-Oyoon_, a biography of the Prophet, writes:-- "It is not hidden that the Prophet for ten and odd years was warningand summoning people without fighting, and bearing patiently the severepersecutions of the Meccan Arabs and the Medinite Jews on himself and onhis followers, because God had enjoined him to warn and to have patienceto bear the injuries by withholding from them, in accordance with Hiswords, 'Withdraw from them' (V, 46); and 'endure them with patience'(XVI, 128; XVIII, 27; XXXI, 16; LII, 48; and LXXIII, 10). He also usedto promise them victory. His companions at Mecca used to come to himbeaten and injured, and he used to tell them, 'Endure with patience, Iam not commanded to fight, ' because they were but a small party atMecca. After this, when he was settled at Medina after the Hegira andhis followers became numerous who preferred him to their fathers, children, and wives, and the unbelievers persisted in their idolatry, charging him with falsehoods, then God permitted his followers to fight, but against those _only_ who used to fight against them (the Moslems), and were aggressors, as he said, 'If they fight you, then kill them'(II, 187). This was in the year of Safar A. H. 2. . . . Then the whole Arabhost marched against the Moslems to fight against them from everydirection. The Moslems passed whole nights in arms, and during the daythey were in the same state, and longed to pass peaceful nights withoutfear from anybody except from God. Then it was revealed, 'God hathpromised to those of you who believe and do the things that are right, that he will cause them to succeed others in the land, as he gavesuccession to those who were before them, and that He will establish forthem that religion which they delight in, and after their fears He willgive them security in exchange' (S. XXIV, 54). After this to attackfirst was allowed against those who had not fought, but in other thanthe sacred months, _viz. _, _Rajab_, _Zulkada_, _Zulhijja_, and_Mohuram_, according to the precept, 'And when the sacred months arepassed, kill those who join gods with God . . . ' (IX, 5). Then the orderbecame incumbent after the victory of Mecca, in the next year, to fightabsolutely without any restriction, without any regard to any conditionand time, by the words of God, 'Attack those who join gods with God inall' at any time (IX, 36). So it is known that the fighting wasforbidden before the Hegira up to the month of Safar in its second year, as the Prophet was in this period ordered to preach and warn without anyfighting, which was forbidden in seventy and odd verses. Then it waspermitted to fight against _only_ those who fought against them. Then itwas allowed to fight against those who fought aggressively in other thanthe sacred months. After this it was enjoined absolutely to wage waragainst them whether they did or did not fight, at all times, whetherduring the sacred months, or others of the year. "[300] [Sidenote: 107. Halabi refuted. ] Neither the fifth verse of the ninth Sura, nor the thirty-sixth of thesame, allowed war of aggression. Both of them were published on theoccasions of defensive wars, and the party against whom they weredirected were the aggressors. All the verses quoted by Halabi, bearingon the subject, have been discussed and explained in the foregoingpages, from 92 to 106. [Sidenote: 108. Ainee again quoted and refuted. ] Ainee, the author of the commentary on the Hedaya, called _Binayah_, injustifying the war of aggression against the unbelievers, quotes twoverses from the Koran, [301] and two traditions from the Prophet, [302]and says, --"If it be objected that these absolute injunctions arerestricted by the word of God, 'if they attack you, then kill them' (II, 187), which shows that the fighting is only incumbent when theunbelievers are the aggressors in fighting, as it was held by Souri, thereply is that the verse was abrogated by another, 'So fight against themuntil there be no more persecution' (II, 189), and 'fight against thosewho do not believe in God. ' (IX, 29). "[303] But he is wrong in assertingthat the verse II, 187 was abrogated by II, 189, and IX, 29. There is noauthority for such a gratuitous assumption. And besides, both theseverses (II, 189, and IX, 29) relate to defensive wars as it has beenalready explained in paras. 96-99. [Sidenote: 109. Continuation of the above. ] The verse 189 shows by its very wording the existence of _fitnah_ orpersecution, torture, and fighting on the part of the aggressors. Bysuppressing the Meccans' persecution, the Moslems had to regain theircivil and religious liberty, from which they were so unjustly deprived. And this war of the Moslems to repel the force of their aggressors wasthe war of defence and protection enjoined in the verse. The 29th verseof the ninth Sura appertains to the expedition of Tábuk if not to thatof Khyber. These expeditions were of a defensive character. _Vide_ pages37 and 41. [Sidenote: 110. Traditions quoted and refuted. ] The jurists further quote a tradition from the compilation of Abú Daoodthat the Prophet had said, "The Jihád will last up to the day of theResurrection:" But in the first place, Jihád does not literally andclassically mean warfare or fighting in a war. It means, as used by theclassical poets as well as by the Koran, to do one's utmost; to labour;to toil; to exert one's-self or his power, efforts, endeavours, orability; to employ one's-self vigorously, diligently, studiously, sedulously, earnestly, or with energy; to be diligent or studious, totake pains or extraordinary pains. _Vide_ Appendix A. In the second place, Yezid bin Abi Shaiba, a link in the chain of thetradition, is a _Mujhool_, [304] _i. E. _, his biography is not known, therefore his tradition can have no authority. There is also another tradition in Bokháree to the effect that theProphet had said, "I have been enjoined to fight the people until theyconfess that there is no god but the God. " This tradition goes quitecontrary to the verses of the Koran which enjoin to fight indefence, --that is, until the persecution or civil discord wasremoved. --(_Vide_ Sura II, 189; VIII, 40. ) Thus it appears that eitherthe whole tradition is a spurious one, or some of the narrators werewrong in interpreting the words of the Prophet. [Sidenote: 111. Early Moslem legists quoted against Jihád. ] That the Koran did not allow war of aggression either when it wasrevealed, or in future as the early jurisconsults did infer from it, will be further shown from the opinions of the early Moslems; legists ofthe first and second century of the Hegira, like Ibn (son of) Omar thesecond khalif, Sotian Souri, Ibn Shobormah, Atá and Amar-bin-Dinar. Allthese early legists held that the fighting was not religiously incumbent(_wájib_), and that it was only a voluntary act, and that only thosewere to be fought against who attacked the Moslems. [305] [Sidenote: Biographical sketches of the legists. ] I will give here short biographical sketches of the legists namedabove-- (1. ) "Abű Abd-ur-Rahman Abdullah ibn Omar ibn-al Khattab was one of themost eminent among the _companions_ of Muhammad by his piety, hisgenerosity, his contempt of the world, his learning and his virtues. Though entitled by birth to aspire to the highest places in the empire, he never hearkened to the dictates of ambition; possessing a vastinfluence over the Moslims by his rank, his instruction, and his holylife, he neither employed nor abused it in favour of any party, andduring the civil wars which raged among the followers of Islamism, heremained neutral, solely occupied with the duties of religion. For aperiod of thirty years persons came from all parts to consult him andlearn from him the Traditions. . . . He died at Mekka A. H. 73 (A. D. 692-3)aged 84 years. . . . "--[_Tabakat al Fokaha_, fol. 5. ] (2. ) Atá Ibn Abi Rabah. --"He held a high rank at Mekka as ajuris-consult, a _Tâbî_, and a devout ascetic; and he derived (_hisknowledge of the law and the Traditions_) from the lips of Jábir Ibn AbdAllah al-Ansárí, and Abd Allah Ibn Abbas, Abd Allah Ibn Zubair, and manyothers of Muhammad's companions. His own authority as a traditionist wascited by Amr ibn Dinár, Al-Aamash, Al-Auzái, and a great number ofothers who had heard him teach. The office of _Mufti_ at Mekka devolvedon him and on Mujáhid, and was filled by them whilst they lived. . . . Hedied A. H. 115 (A. D. 733-4); some say 114 at the age of eighty-eightyears. "--[_Ibn Khallikan's Biographical Dictionary, translated from theArabic by Baron MacGuckin De Slane; Vol. II, pp. 203-204. London, MDCCCXLIII. _] (3. ) Amr Ibn Dinár. --"He is counted among the most eminent of the Tábisand considered as a traditionist of very highest authority. He was onlyone of the Mujatahid Imáms. Died A. H. 126, (A. D. 743-4), aged eightyyears. "--[_Tab-al-Fokaha_]. (4. ) "Abd Allah Ibn Shuburma ibn Tufail ad Dubbi, a celebrated Imám, andTábi was an eminent jurisconsult of Kufa. He learned the Traditions fromAns, As-Shabi, and Ibn Sírín, and his own authority was cited forTraditions by Soffian Ath-Thauri, Sofyan ibn Oyaina, and others. Hisveracity and his eminence as a doctor of the law was universallyacknowledged. He was an abstemious, intelligent, devout, generous, of ahandsome countenance, and possessing a talent for poetry. He acted underthe Khalif Al-Mamun, as kadí of the cultivated country (Sawád) aroundKufa. Born A. H. 92, (A. D. 710-11); died A. H. 144 (A. D. 761-2). "--[_Tabal-Fak. Al-Yáfi. _] (5. ) "Sofyan Ath-Thauri (As-Sauri) was native of Kúfa and a master ofthe highest authority in the Traditions and other sciences; his piety, devotion, veracity, and contempt for worldly goods were universallyacknowledged, and as an Imám, he is counted among the _Mujtahids_. . . . Sofyan ibn Oyaina declared that he did not know a man better informedthan Soyfan Ath-Thauri respecting what was permitted and what wasforbidden by the law. . . . Sofyan was born A. H. 95 (A. D. 713-4). Otheraccounts place his birth in 96 or 97. He died A. H. 161 (A. D. 713-4) atBasra. . . . It has been stated by some that Sofyan died A. H. 162, but thefirst is the true date. "--[_Ibn Khallikan's Biographical Dictionary, translated from the Arabic by Baron MacGuckin De Slane, Vol. I, pp. 576-8. London, MDCCCXLIII. _] [Sidenote: 113. European writers' mistake. ] That it is a mistake on the part of the European writers to assert thatthe Koran allows wars of aggression, or in other words, to wage waragainst the unbelievers without any provocation, is shown by thetestimony of Mr. Urquhart and Mr. Edward William Lane. The latterwrites: "Misled by the decision of those doctors, and an opinionprevalent in Europe, I represented the laws of 'holy war' as more severethan I found them to be according to the letter and spirit of theKur-án, when carefully examined, and according to the Hanafee code. I amindebted to Mr. Urquhart for suggesting to me the necessity of revisingmy former statement on the subject; and must express my conviction thatno precept is to be found in the Kur-án, which, taken with the context, can justify unprovoked war. "[306] [Sidenote: 114. Sir William Muir quoted. ] I will quote several remarks of European writers, including clergymenand Indian missionaries, to show how astray they go in attributing tothe Koran and Mohammad the wars of aggressions and compulsoryproselytizing. Sir William Muir represents the principles of Islam asrequiring constant prosecutions of war, and writes-- "It was essential to the permanence of Islam that its aggressive courseshould be continuously pursued, and that its claim to an universalacceptance, or at the least to an universal supremacy, should beenforced at the point of the sword. Within the limits of Arabia the workappeared now to be accomplished. It remained to gain over the Christianand idolatrous tribes of the Syrian desert, and then in the name of theLord to throw down the gauntlet of war before the empires of Rome andPersia, which, having treated with contempt the summons of the Prophetaddressed to them in solemn warning four years ago, were now rife forchastisement. "[307] The occasion to which Sir W. Muir refers here was to wipe out the memoryof the reverse at Muta. The expedition to Muta was occasioned by themurder of a messenger or envoy dispatched by Mohammad to the Ghassŕnideprince at Bostra. A party was sent to punish the offending chief, Sharahbil. This could, by no means, be maintained as a warlike spirit oran aggressive course for the prosecution of war, or for enforcing theclaim of universal supremacy at the point of the sword. [Sidenote: 115. Islam not aggressive. ] That Islam as preached by Mohammad was never aggressive has been fullyshown in several places of the Koran. During the whole time of hisministry, Mohammad was persecuted, rejected, despised and at last madean outlaw by the Koreish at Mecca, and a fugitive seeking protection ina distant city; exiled, attacked upon, besieged, defeated, and preventedfrom returning to Mecca or visiting the Holy Kaaba by the same enemiesat Mecca and other surrounding tribes who had joined them, and even fromwithin Medina plotted against by the Jews who were not less aggressivetowards him than their confederates of Mecca, the Koreish, whom they hadinstigated to make war on him and had brought an overwhelming army, hadproved traitors, and, even more injurious than the Koreish themselves. Consequently, he was constantly in dangers and troubles, and under suchcircumstances it was impossible for him to be aggressive, to get time oropportunity to pursue any aggressive course, or enforce, at the point ofthe sword, any attempt of his for universal acceptance, or universalsupremacy even if he had designed so. But it was far from his principlesto have cherished the object of universal conquest. "That Islam everstepped beyond the limits of Arabia and its border lands, " admits Sir. W. Muir in his Rede Lecture for 1881, just twenty years after he hadwritten the passage I am dealing with, "was due to circumstances ratherthan design. The faith was meant originally for the Arabs. From first tolast, the call was addressed primarily to them. " He writes in a footnoteof the same lecture (page 5): "It is true that three or four years before, Mahomet had addressed dispatches to the Kaiser, and the Chosroes, and other neighbouring potentates, summoning them to embrace the true faith. But the step had never been followed up in any way. "[308] [Sidenote: 116. Mr. Freeman quoted. ] Mr. Freeman writes regarding Mohammad:-- "Mahomet had before him the example of Mosaic Law, which preached a farmore rigorous mandate of extermination against the guilty nations ofCanaan. He had before him the practice of all surrounding powers, Christian, Jewish, and Heathen; though, from the disaffection of Syriaand Egypt to the orthodox throne of Constantinople, he might havelearned how easily persecution defeats its own end. . . . Under hiscircumstances, it is really no very great ground to condemnation that hedid appeal to the sword. He did no more than follow the precedents ofhis own and every surrounding nation. Yet one might say that a man ofsuch mighty genius as Mahomet must have been, might have been, fairlyexpected to rise superior to the trammels of prejudice andprecedent. "[309] Mohammad never professed to have followed the footsteps of Moses andJoshua in waging war of extermination and proselytism. He only appealedto the sword in his and his followers' defence. Never he seems to havebeen anxious to copy the practice of the surrounding nations, Christians, Jews, and Egyptians. His wars of defence, as they certainlyall were, were very mild, specially with regard to the treatment ofchildren, women, and old men who were never to be attacked; and aboveall, in the mildness shown towards the captives of war who were eitherto be set free or ransomed, --but were never to be enslaved, --contrary tothe practice of all the surrounding nations. This virtual abolition ofslavery (_vide_ Sura XLVII, 5, and Appendix B) has been a great boon tomankind in general as a beneficial result of Mohmamad's wars of defence. [Sidenote: 117. The Revd. Stephens quoted. ] The Reverend Mr. Stephens writes:-- "In the Koran, the Mussulman is absolutely and positively commanded tomake war upon all those who decline to acknowledge the Prophet untilthey submit, or, in the case of Jews and Christians, purchase exemptionfrom the conformity by the payment of tribute. The mission of theMussulman, as declared in the Koran, is distinctly aggressive. We mightsay that Mahomet bequeathed to his disciples a roving commission topropagate his faith by the employment of force where persuasion failed. 'O Prophet, fight for the religion of God'--'Stir up the faithful towar, ' such are commands which Mahomet believed to be given him by God. 'Fight against them who believe not a God, nor the last day, ' 'attackthe idolatrous in all the months, ' such are his own exhortations to hisdisciples. "[310] The Reverend gentleman is very much mistaken in his assertions againstthe Koran. There is no absolute or positive command in the Koran for awar of aggression or compulsory proselytism. The sentences quoted by Mr. Stephens are but mutilated verses forcibly dislocated from theircontext. A disjointed portion of a verse, or a single sentence of itcannot be brought forth to prove any doctrine or theory. Due regard mustbe made for the context, the general scope, and parallel passages. Theverses referred to by Mr. Stephens are Sura IV, 86, and Sura IX, 29, 36. All these have been quoted in full and discussed elsewhere. [311] Theyrelate only to defensive wars. [Sidenote: 118. Mr. Bosworth Smith quoted. ] Mr. Bosworth Smith says:-- "The free toleration of the purer among the creeds around him, which theProphet had at first enjoined, gradually changes into intolerance. Persecuted no longer, Mohammed becomes a persecutor himself; with theKoran in one hand, the scymitar in the other, he goes forth to offer tothe nations the threefold alternative of conversion, tribute, death. "[312] Mohammad never changed his practice of toleration nor his own teachingsinto intolerance; he was always persecuted at Mecca and Medina, but, forall we know, he himself never turned a persecutor. The three-foldalternative so much talked of, and so little proved, is nowhere to befound in the Koran. This subject has been fully discussed in paras. 34-39. [Sidenote: 119. Mr. G. Sale quoted. ] Mr. George Sale, in his celebrated preliminary discourse to thetranslation of the Koran, writes, referring to the thirteenth year ofMohammad's mission:-- "Hitherto Mohammed had propagated his religion by fair means, so thatthe whole success of his enterprise, before his flight to Medina, mustbe attributed to persuasion only, and not to compulsion. For before thissecond oath of fealty or inauguration at al Akaba, he had no permissionto use any force at all; and in several places of the Korân, which hepretended were revealed during his stay at Mecca, he declares hisbusiness was only to preach and admonish; that he had no authority tocompel any person to embrace his religion; and that whether peoplebelieved or not, was none of his concern, but belonged solely to God. And he was so far from allowing his followers to use force, that heexhorted them to bear patiently those injuries which were offered themon account of their faith; and when persecuted himself chose rather toquit the place of his birth and retire to Medina, than to make anyresistance. But this great passiveness and moderation seems entirelyowing to his want of power and the great superiority of his oppressorsfor the first twelve years of his mission; for no sooner was he enabledby the assistance of those of Medina to make head against his enemies, than he gave out, that God had allowed him and his followers to defendthemselves against the infidels; and at length, as his forces increased, he pretended to have the divine leave even to attack them, and todestroy idolatry, and set up the true faith by the sword; finding byexperience that his designs would otherwise proceed very slowly, if theywere not utterly overthrown, and knowing on the other hand thatinnovators, when they depend solely on their own strength, and cancompel, seldom run any risk; from whence, the politician observes, itfollows, that all the armed prophets have succeeded, and the unarmedones have failed. Moses, Cyrus, Theseus and Romulus would not have beenable to establish the observance of their institutions for any length oftime had they not been armed. The first passage of the Korân, which gaveMohammed the permission of defending himself by arms, is said to havebeen that in the twenty-second chapter: after which a great number tothe same purpose were revealed. "That Mohammed had a right to take up arms for his own defence againsthis unjust persecutors, may perhaps be allowed; but whether he oughtafterwards to have made use of that means for the establishing of hisreligion, is a question which I will not here determine. How far thesecular power may or ought to interpose in affairs of this nature, mankind are not agreed. The method of converting by the sword gives novery favourable idea of the faith which is so propagated, and isdisallowed by every body in those of another religion, though the samepersons are willing to admit of it for the advancement of their own;supposing that though a false religion ought not to be established byauthority, yet a true one may; and accordingly force is as constantlyemployed in these cases by those who have the power in their hands as itis constantly complained of by those who suffer the violence. "[313] I do not agree with these words of Mr. George Sale regarding Mohammad, "and at length, as his forces increased, he pretended to have the divineleave even to attack them, and to destroy idolatry, and set up the truefaith by the sword;" he never attacked the Koreish or others except inhis own defence. The destruction of idolatry was the chief mission ofMohammad, and that even was not resorted to by force of arms. There wereneither compulsory conversions nor his history points to any extirpationof the idolaters at the point of sword from their native countries, asthe chief objects of his mission. The persecutions and civil discordwere to be removed or put a stop to, and force was used to repel force, but nothing more. Conversion by the sword was not enforced on anyproselyte by Mohammad. [Sidenote: 120. Major Osborn quoted. ] Major Osborn has drawn a very dark picture of what he calls "TheDoctrine of Jehad, " in his _Islam under the Arabs_. [314] The defensivewars of Mohammad are explained by him as "means of livelihood congenialto the Arab mind, and carrying with it no stain of disgrace orimmorality. This was robbery. Why should not the faithful eke out theirscanty means by adopting this lucrative and honourable profession, whichwas open to everyone who had a sword and knew how to use it?. . . Surely, to despoil these infidels and employ their property to feed the hungryand clothe the naked among the people of God, would be a work wellpleasing in His sight. . . . And thus was the first advance made in theconversion of the religion of Islam with the religion of the sword"(pages 46-47). After this the Major writes again: "The ninth Sura isthat which contains the Prophet's proclamation of war against thevotaries of all creeds other than that of Islam" (page 52). Then hequotes several verses, some of them half sentences, violently distorted, from the eighth and ninth Suras, in a consecutive form, without givingthe numbers. These are Sura IX, 20, 34, 35, 82, 121; Sura VIII, 67; SuraIX, 36, 5, 29, 19; Sura XLVII, 4; Sura IX, 5; and Sura VIII, 42. Lastly, the learned Major concludes by saying, --"Such was the character of theSacred War enjoined upon the Faithful. It is Muhammad's greatestachievement and his worst. When subjected himself to the pains ofpersecution he had learned to perceive how powerless were tormentsapplied to the body to work a change of conviction in the mind. 'Letthere be no violence in religion' had then been one of the maxims he hadlaid down. 'Unto every one of you, ' he had said in former days, speakingof Jews and Christians, 'have we given a law, and an open path; and ifGod had pleased He had surely made you one people; but He hath thoughtfit to give you different laws, that he might try you in that which Hehath given you respectively. Therefore, strive to excel each other ingood works; unto God shall ye all return, and then will He declare untoyou that concerning which ye have disagreed. ' But the intoxication ofsuccess had long ago stilled the voice of his better self. The agedProphet standing on the brink of the grave, and leaving as his lastlegacy a mandate of universal war, irresistibly recalls, by force ofcontrast, the parting words to his disciples of another religiousteacher that they should go forth and preach a gospel of peace to allnations. Nor less striking in their contrast is the response to eithermandate;--the Arab, with the Koran in one hand and the sword in theother, spreading his creed amid the glare of burning cities, and theshrieks of violated homes, and the Apostles of Christ working in themoral darkness of the Roman world with the gentle but irresistible powerof light, laying anew the foundations of society, and cleansing at theirsource the polluted springs of domestic and national life. " [Sidenote: 121. Major Osborn refuted. ] The learned author quoted above has either misunderstood the characterof the wars of the Prophet of Islam, or has grossly misrepresented it. He errs in two points: First, he makes the wars as wars of conquest, compulsion, and aggression, whereas they were all undertaken in thedefence of the civil and religious rights of the early Moslems, whowere, as I have said before, persecuted, harassed, and tormented atMecca for their religion, and after a long period of persecution withoccasional fresh and vigorous measures, were condemned to severer andharder sufferings, were expelled from their homes, leaving their dearrelations, and religious brethren to endure the calamities of thepersecution, and while taking refuge at Medina were attacked upon bysuperior numbers, several of the surrounding tribes of Arabs and Jewsjoining the aggressive Koreish, making ruinous inroads and threateningthe Moslems with still greater and heavier miseries. From this statementit will appear that these wars were neither of conquest nor ofcompulsory conversion. The second great mistake under which Major Osbornseems to labour is that he takes the injunctions of war against theMeccans or other aggressors as a general obligation to wage war againstall unbelievers in the Moslem faith. In fact, these injunctions wereonly against those aggressors who had actually committed greatencroachments on the rights and liberties of the early Moslems, and hadinflicted very disastrous injuries on them. These injunctions had andhave nothing to do with the future guidance of the Moslem world. [Sidenote: 122. The IXth Sura of the Koran. ] It is a great misrepresentation on the part of Major Osborn to assertthat "the ninth Sura is that which contains the Prophet's proclamationof war against the votaries of all creeds other than that of Islam. " Nostatement could be farther from truth than this of his. The ninth Sura, or, more correctly, the beginning or opening verses of it, contain theProphet's proclamation of war against those of the Meccan idolaters, who, in violation of the treaty of Hodeibia, had attacked theMoslems. --(Sura IX, 4, 8, 10, 12 & 13, _vide_ pages 23-25. ) They wereallowed four months' time (IX, 2, 5) to make terms. They submitted, andMecca was taken by compromise, in consequence of which the threatenedwar was never waged. Those who had not broken their treaties wereespecially mentioned, with whom the proclamation or the period allowedfor peace had no connection. --(_Vide_ Sura IX, 4, 7, quoted above, pages23-24. ) Thus it is quite clear that the proclamation of war was onlyagainst the violators and aggressors, and not against the votaries ofall creeds other than that of Islam. I have further discussed the ninthSura in para. 40 of this work. The other verses of this Sura refer tothe expedition of Tabúk, which was purely defensive in its nature as hasbeen described in para. 33 of this book. (See also para. 42. ) [Sidenote: 123. The Reverend Wherry quoted. ] The Reverend E. M. Wherry, M. A. , in his note on Sale's PreliminaryDiscourse, says:-- "Though Muhammad undoubtedly took Moses as his pattern, and supposedhimself following in his footsteps when he gave the command to fightagainst the infidels, yet there is no comparison between them whateverso far as warring against infidels is concerned. The Israelites werecommanded to slay the Canaanites as divinely ordained instruments of_destruction_; but Muhammad inaugurated war as a means of proselytism. The Israelite was not permitted to proselytize from among theCanaanites, (Exod. XXIII. 27-33), but Muslims are required toproselytize by sword-power. "[315] Mohammad never had said that he did follow the footsteps of Moses ingiving the command of fighting in self-defence, and in repelling forceby force. There could be no comparison whatsoever between the wars ofMoses, which were merely wars of conquest, aggression, extermination, and expatriation, and those of Mohammad waged only in self-defence. Mohammad did not inaugurate his career by prosecuting war as a means ofproselytism, and never did proselytized any one by the sheer strength ofthe sword. Mr. T. H. Horne, M. A. , writes regarding the extirpation of theCanaanites:-- "After the time of God's forbearance was expired, they had still thealternative, either to flee elsewhere, as in fact, many of them did, orto surrender themselves, renounce their idolatries, and serve the God ofIsrael. Compare Deut. XX. 10-17. "[316] This was certainly compulsoryconversion and proselytizing at the point of the sword. [Sidenote: 124. Example cited from the Jewish history. ] There is only one instance in the Koran in which an example is cited forthe war of defence by Mohammad, from the Jewish History. It is theasking of the children of Israel their prophet Samuel to raise up a kingfor them to fight in their defence against the Philistines, who had verymuch oppressed the Israelites. Saul was appointed king over theIsraelites, and David killed Goliath, called _Jálut_ in the Koran, whichwas in defence of the Israelites. I have quoted the verses relating tothe above subject from the Koran (Sura II, 247 and 252) in page 19th ofthis work. "Hast thou not considered the assembly of the children of Israel after_the death_ of Moses, when they said to a prophet of theirs, --'Raise upfor us a king; we will do battle for the cause of God?' He said, 'May itnot be that when fighting is ordained you, ye would not fight?' Theysaid, 'And why should we not fight in the cause of God, since we aredriven forth from our dwellings and our children?'. . . . This shows that what the Koran or Mohammad took as an example from thehistory of the Jews was only their defensive war. [Sidenote: 125. Mosaic injunctions. ] It is very unfair of the Christians to make too much of the wars ofMohammad, which were purely of a defensive nature, and offer apologiesfor the most cruel wars of conquest and extermination by Moses, Joshuaand other Jewish worthies under the express commands of God. --(_Vide_Numbers XXXI; Deut. XXI, &c. ) But see what Mr. Wherry says. He writes inhis comments on the 191 verse of the second Sura of the Koran. "(191). _Kill them, &c. _ Much is made of expressions like this, by someChristian apologists, to show the cruel character of the Arabianprophet, and the inference is thence drawn that he was an impostor andhis Qurán a fraud. Without denying that Muhammad was cruel, we thinkthis mode of assault to be very unsatisfactory to say the least, as itis capable of being turned against the Old Testament Scriptures. If theclaim of Muhammad to have received a divine command to exterminateidolatry by the slaughter of all impenitent idolaters be admitted, I cansee no objection to his practice. The question at issue is this. Did Godcommand such slaughter of idolaters, as he commanded the destruction ofthe Canaanites or of the Amalekites? Taking the stand of the Muslim, that God did so command Muhammad and his followers, his morality in thisrespect may be defended on precisely the same ground that the moralityof Moses and Joshua is defended by the Christian. "[317] [Sidenote: 126. The Revd. T. P. Hughes quoted. ] The Revd. T. P. Hughes in his Notes on Muhammadanism writes:-- "Jihád (lit. 'an effort') is a religious war against the infidels, as enjoined by Muhammad in the Qurán. " Súrat-un-Nisa (VI. ) "Fight therefore for the religion of God. " * * * * * "God hath indeed promised Paradise to every one. But God hath preferred those who _fight for the faith_. " (IV, 97. ) Súrat-ul-Muhammad (XLVII). "Those who _fight in the defence of God's true religion_, God will not suffer their works to perish. " (XLVII, 5. )[318] The first verse quoted by Mr. Hughes appertains to the war of defence. The verse in itself has express indications of its relating to the warof defence, but Mr. Hughes was not inclined, perhaps, to copy it infull. He merely quotes half a sentence, and shuts his eyes from otherwords and phrases of the same verse. The verse has been quoted in page20. It is as follows:-- "Fight then on the path of God: lay not burdens on any but thyself; andstir up the faithful. The powers of the infidels, God will haplyrestrain; for God is stronger in prowess, and stronger topunish. "--(Sura IV, 86. ) The severe persecution, the intense torture and mighty aggression ofthe Meccans and their allies is referred to in the original word _Báss_, rendered _prowess_ into English and referred to in the previous verse77, which shows that the war herein enjoined was to restrain theaggressions of the enemy and to repel force by force. It is very unfair on the part of the Revd. T. P. Hughes to twist ordislocate half a sentence from a verse and put it forth to demonstrateand prove a certain object of his. [Sidenote: 127. Meaning of Jihad. ] The second verse quoted by the same author is a mere mistranslation. There is no such word in the original which admits of being rendered as"fighting. " The true translation of the sentence quoted above from SuraIV, verse 97, is as follows:-- "Good promises hath he made to all. But God hath assigned to the_strenuous_ a rich recompense above those who sit still at home. " The word rendered "_strenuous_" is originally "mojahid" (plural"Mojahidin, " from Jihád), which in classical Arabic and throughout theKoran means to do one's utmost, to make effort, to strive, to exert, toemploy one's-self diligently, studiously, sedulously, earnestly, zealously, or with energy, and does not mean fighting or warfare. It wassubsequently applied to religious war, but was never used in the Koranin such a sense. (_Vide_ Appendix A. ) [Sidenote: 128. Sura XLVII, v. 5. ] The third instance quoted by Mr. Hughes is also a mistranslation of asentence in verse 5, Sura XLVII. The original word is "_kotelú_, " whichmeans "those who are _killed_, " and not "those who _fight_, " asexplained and translated by the author. The correct rendering of thesentence is this: "And those who are killed, their work God will notsuffer to miscarry. " Some read the word "_kátalú_, " which means "those who fought, " but thegeneral and authorized reading is "_kotelú_, " _i. E. _, "those who arekilled. " Even if it be taken for granted that the former is the correctreading, it will be explained by several other verses which meanfighting in defence, and not fighting aggressively, which not only hasbeen never taught in the Koran but is always prohibited (II, 186). Theverse to that effect runs thus:-- "And fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you; butcommit not the injustice of attacking them first. Verily God loveth notthe unjust. "--(II, 186. ) This verse permitted only defensive war and prohibited every aggressivemeasure. All other verses mentioned in connection with fighting on thepart of the Moslems must be interpreted in conformity with this. [Sidenote: 129. The Rev. Mr. Malcolm MacColl quoted. ] The Rev. Malcolm MacColl writes:-- "The Koran divides the earth into parts: Dar-ul-Islam, or the House ofIslam; and Dar-ul-Harb, or the House of the enemy. All who are not ofIslam are thus against it, and it is accordingly the duty of the TrueBelievers to fight against the infidels till they accept Islam, or aredestroyed. This is called the Djihad or Holy War, which can only endwith the conversion or death of the last infidel on earth. It is thusthe sacred duty of the Commander of the Faithful to make war on thenon-Mussulman world as occasion may offer. But Dar-ul-Harb or thenon-Mussulman world, is subdivided into Idolaters and Ketabi, or 'Peopleof the Book, '--_i. E. _, people who possess divinely inspired Scriptures, namely, Jews, Samaritans, and Christians. All the inhabitants ofDar-ul-Harb are infidels, and consequently outside the pale ofSalvation. But the Ketabi are entitled to certain privileges in thisworld, if they submit to the conditions which Islam imposes. Otherinfidels must make their choice between one of two alternatives--Islamor the sword. The Ketabi are allowed a third alternative, namely, submission and the payment of tribute. But if they refuse to submit, andpresume to fight against the True Believers, they lapse at once into thecondition of the rest of Dar-ul-Harb and may be summarily put to deathor sold as slaves. "[319] I am very sorry the Rev. Gentleman is altogether wrong in his assertionsagainst the Koran. There is neither such a division of the world in theKoran, nor such words as "Dar-ul-Islam" and "Dar-ul-Harb" are to befound anywhere in it. There is no injunction in the Koran to the TrueBelievers to fight against the infidels till they accept Islam, failingwhich they are to be put to death. The words "Dar-ul-Islam" and"Dar-ul-Harb" are only to be found in the Mohammadan Common Law, and areonly used in the question of jurisdiction. No Moslem magistrate willpass a sentence in a criminal case against a criminal who had committedan offence in a foreign country. The same is the case in civilcourts[320]. All the inhabitants of Dar-ul-Harb are not necessarilyinfidels. Mohammadans, either permanently or temporarily by obtainingpermission from the sovereign of the foreign land, can be theinhabitants of a Dar-ul-Harb, a country out of the Moslem jurisdiction, or at war with it. [Sidenote: 130. The untenable theories of the Common Law andconclusion. ] It is only a theory of our Common Law, in its military and politicalchapters, which allow waging unprovoked war with non-Moslems, exactingtribute from "the people of the Book, " and other idolaters, except thoseof Arabia, for which the Hanafi Code of the Common Law has nothing shortof conversion to Islam or destruction by the sword. As a rule, ourcanonical legists support their theories by quotations from theMohammadan Revealed Law, _i. E. _, the Koran, as well as from the Sonnah, or the traditions from the Prophet, however absurd and untenable may betheir process of reasoning and argumentative deductions. In this theoryof waging war with, and exacting tribute or the capitation-tax from, thenon-Moslem world, they quote the 9th and other Suras. These verses havebeen copied and explained elsewhere in this book. The casuisticsophistry of the canonical legists in deducing these war theories fromthe Koran is altogether futile. These verses relate only to the warswaged by the Prophet and his followers purely in their self-defence. Neither these verses had anything to do with waging unprovoked war andexacting tributes during Mohammad's time, nor could they be made a lawfor future military conquest. These were only temporary in theiroperations and purely defensive in their nature. The Mohammadan CommonLaw is by no means divine or superhuman. It mostly consists of uncertaintraditions, Arabian usages and customs, some frivolous and fortuitousanalogical deductions from the Koran, and a multitudinous array ofcasuistical sophistry of the canonical legists. It has not been heldsacred or unchangeable by enlightened Mohammadans of any Moslem countryand in any age since its compilation in the fourth century of theHejira. All the _Mujtahids_, _Ahl Hadis_, and other non-Mokallids hadhad no regard for the four schools of Mohammadan religiousjurisprudence, or the Common Law. [Sidenote: Sura XLVII, 16, and Sura XLVII, 4 and 5. ] Sura XLVIII, 16, is not generally quoted by the canonical legists insupport of their theory of Jehád, but by some few. It is not in theshape of a command or injunction; it is in a prophetical tone:-- "Say to those Arabs of the desert who stayed behind, Ye shall be calledforth against a people of mighty valour; Ye shall do battle with them, or they shall submit (_Yoslemoon_)[321]. . . . " The verses 4 and 5 of Sura XLVII, like all other verses on the subject, appertain to the wars of defence, and no one has ever quoted them forwars of aggression. These verses have already been quoted at page 85. The abolition of the future slavery as enjoined in the 5th verse hasbeen treated separately in Appendix B. The Arabs, like other barbarousnations round them, used either to kill the prisoners of war or toenslave them; but this injunction of the Koran abolished both of thesebarbarous practices. The prisoners henceforward were neither to bekilled nor enslaved, but were to be set at liberty with or withoutransom. [Footnote 289: Ata, a learned legist of Mecca, who flourished at the endof the first century of the Hegira, and held a high rank there as ajuris-consult, (_vide_ para. 112) held, that Jihad was only incumbent onthe Companions of the Prophet, and was not binding on any one else afterthem. See para. 112, and _Tafsír Majma-ul-Bayán_ by Tabrasee under SuraII. 212. ] [Footnote 290: The _Hedaya_ or Guide; or, A Commentary on the MussulmanLaws, translated by Charles Hamilton; Vol. II, Book IX, Ch. I, page 140London, MDCCXCI. ] [Footnote 291: The _Hedaya_ or Guide; or, A Commentary on the MussulmanLaws, translated by Charles Hamilton; Vol. II, Book IX, Ch. I, page141. ] [Footnote 292: "Arab _Kattâl_; meaning war in its _operation_, such as_fighting_, _slaying_, " &c. ] [Footnote 293: The _Hedaya_, Vol. II, 141. ] [Footnote 294: Sura II, 187. ] [Footnote 295: The Hedaya, with its commentary called Kifaya, Vol. II, p. 708. Calcutta Medical Press, 1834. As a general rule the Mohammadan authors do not refer to the verses ofthe Koran by their number. They generally quote the first sentence, oreven a portion of it. The No. Of verses are mine. I have followedFluegel and Rodwell's numbers of verses in their editions andtranslations of the Koran. ] [Footnote 296: Kifaya as before. ] [Footnote 297: _Binayah_, a commentary of the _Hedaya_, by Ainee. Vol. II, Part II, page 789. ] [Footnote 298: Part. III, page 219. ] [Footnote 299: _Tuhfatul Muhtáj fi Sharah-al-Minhaj_, Part IV, page137. ] [Footnote 300: _Insan-ul-Oyoon_, Part II, pp. 289, 291. Chapter on"Campaign. "] [Footnote 301: Sura IX, 5 and 12. These verses have been discussed atpages 51-55. ] [Footnote 302: "The Jihád will last till the day of the Resurrection. " "I have been enjoined to fight the people until they confess there is nogod but the God. " For these traditions see the next para. ] [Footnote 303: _Vide_ Ainee's Commentary of the _Hedaya_, Vol. II, PartII, p. 790. ] [Footnote 304: _Vide_ Ainee's Commentary of the _Hedaya_, Vol. II, PartII, p. 798. ] [Footnote 305: _Vide_ Kázee Budrudeen Mahmood bin Ahmed Ainee's (whodied in 855 A. H. ) Commentary on the _Hedaya_ called _Binayah_, andgenerally known by the name of Ainee, Vol. II, pp. 789-90, "Book ofInstitute. "] [Footnote 306: The Modern Egyptians, by Edward William Lane; Vol. I, p. 117, _note_: fifth edition, London, 1871. ] [Footnote 307: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 251-252. ] [Footnote 308: The Early Caliphate and Rise of Islam, being the RedeLecture for 1881, delivered before the University of Cambridge by SirWilliam Muir, K. C. S. I. , LL. D. , page 5, London, 1881. ] [Footnote 309: The History and Conquests of the Saracens, by Edward. A. Freeman, D. C. L. , LL. D. , pp. 41-42; London, 1877. ] [Footnote 310: Christianity and Islam; The Bible and the Koran; by theRev. W. R. W. Stephens, London, 1877, pp. 98-99. ] [Footnote 311: _Vide_ paras. 17, 29, 126. ] [Footnote 312: Mohammed and Mohammedanism. Lectures delivered at theRoyal Institution of Great Britain in February and March 1874, by R. Bosworth Smith, M. A. , Second Edition, page 137; London, 1876. ] [Footnote 313: The Koran, by George Sale. The "_Chandos Classics_. " ThePreliminary Discourse, Section II, pp. 37-38. ] [Footnote 314: London: Longmans, Green & Co. , 1876, pp. 46-54. ] [Footnote 315: A Comprehensive Commentary on the Qurán; comprisingSale's Translation and Preliminary Discourse, with additional Notes andEmendations, by the Revd. E. M. Wherry, M. A. , page 220; London: Trübner &Co. , 1882. ] [Footnote 316: An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge ofthe Holy Scripture, by Thomas Hartwell Horne, Esq. , M. A. Vol. II, page524; London. 1828. ] [Footnote 317: Commentary on the Qurán by the Revd. Wherry, page 358. ] [Footnote 318: Notes on Muhammadanism; being outlines of the ReligiousSystem of Islam, by the Revd. T. P. Hughes, M. R. A. S. , C. M. S. , Missionaryto the Afghans, page 206; Second Edition, 1877. ] [Footnote 319: The Nineteenth Century; London, December 1877, page 832. ] [Footnote 320: This subject has been fully treated in my "The ProposedPolitical, Legal, and Social Reforms in Moslem States, " pp. 22-25:Bombay Education Society Press, 1883. ] [Footnote 321: Sir W. Muir, with other European translators of theKoran, translates the word "they shall profess Islam" (The Life ofMahomet, Vol. IV, p. 39, _footnote_). It ought to be translated "theyshall submit. " There is a difference of opinion among the commentatorsand canonical legists in this word. Some translate the word _Yoslemoon_"shall profess Islam, " and others "shall submit. " This difference in theinterpretation of the same word is merely of a sectarian nature, eachparty wishing to serve their own purpose. Those legists who held thatthe polytheists and idolaters may either be fought against or besubmitted to the authority of Islam by being tributaries, took the wordin its proper sense of submission. Those who held that "the people ofthe Book" ought only to be made tributaries, while all other idolatersand polytheists should be compelled either to perish or to embraceIslam, interpret the word technically to mean the religion of Islam. Butas the verse is not a legal command, we condemn at once the casuisticsophistry of the legists. ] Appendix A ON THE WORD "JIHAD" AS OCCURRING IN THE KORAN AND WRONGLY TRANSLATED"WARFARE. " [Sidenote: Jihád or Jihd does not mean war or crusade. ] 1. The popular word _Jihád_ or _Jihd_, occurring in several passages ofthe Koran, and generally construed by Christians and Moslems alike asmeaning hostility or the waging of war against infidels, does notclassically or literally signify war, warfare, hostility or fighting, and is never used in such a sense in the Koran. The Arabic terms forwarfare or fighting are _Harab_ and _Kitál_. [Sidenote: Classical meaning of Jihád, &c. ] 2. The words _Jahada_, and _Jáhada_ signify that a person strove, laboured or toiled; exerted himself or his power, or efforts, orendeavours, or ability employed himself vigorously, diligently, studiously, sedulously, earnestly or with energy; was diligent orstudious, took pains or extraordinary pains[322]; for example, the term_Jáhada fil-amr_ signifies that a person did his utmost or used hisutmost powers, or efforts, or endeavours, or ability in prosecuting anaffair. [323] The infinitive noun _Jihádan_ also means difficulty orembarrassment, distress, affliction, trouble, inconvenience, fatigue, orweariness. [324] Jauharce, a lexicologist of great repute, whose work isconfined to classical terms and their significations, says in his Siháhthat _Jáhada fi Sabeelillah_ or _Mojáhadatan_ and _Jihádan_ and also_Ajtahada_ and _Tajáhada_ mean expending power and effort. Fayoomee, author of _Misbahel Moneer_, which contains a very large collection ofclassical words and phrases of frequent occurrence, also says that_Jáhada fi Sabeelillah Jihádan_ and _Ajtahada fil Amr_ mean he expendedhis utmost efforts and power in seeking to attain an object. [Sidenote: Post-classical or technical meaning of Jihád. ] 3. It is only a post-classical and technical meaning of _Jihád_ to usethe word as signifying fighting against an enemy. Mr. Lane says, "_Jahada_ came to be used by the Moslems to signify generally _hefought_, _warred_ or waged war against _unbelievers_ and _the like_. "This signification is now given by those lexicologists who do notrestrict themselves to the definition of classical terms orsignifications, like the author of Kámoos. Mr. Lane, the celebratedauthor of _Maddool Kámoos_ an Arabic-English lexicologist, clearly showsthat the definition of _Jihád_, as the act of waging war, is only ofMoslem origin and is not classical. And I will show in sequence that theMoslem usage of _Jihád_, as signifying the waging of war, is apost-Koranic usage, and that in the Koran it is used classically andliterally in its natural sense. [Sidenote: The Classical tongue and Arabian poets. ] 4. What is called the classical language of Arabia or the _loghat_, andis an authority for the genuineness of the Arabic terms and theirsignifications, is the language which was spoken throughout the whole ofthe Peninsula previous to the appearance of Mohammad. After the death ofMohammad the language was rapidly corrupted by the introduction offoreign words. This was doubtless owing to the great extension of theMohammadan power at this period. The classical poets are those who diedbefore these great conquests were effected, and are the most reliableauthorities for Arabic words and their significations, and they arecalled _Jáhilí_. Next to the classical poets are the post-classical, or_Mokhadrams_, _Islámi_ and _Mowallads_. Mokhadram is a poet who livedpartly before and partly after Mohammad, and who did not embraceIslámism during the life of the Prophet. The Islámi poets are theMohammadan poets of the first and second centuries of the Hejira, andMowallads, the poets of the fourth rank, followed the Islámis. Theearliest classical poets date only a century before the birth ofMohammad, and the latest, about a century after his death. The period ofthe Islámi poets is the first and second centuries, --_i. E. _, those wholived after the first corruption of the Arabic language, but before thecorruption had become extensive. The Mowallads co-existed with the general and rapid corruption of thelanguage from the beginning or middle of the second century. [Sidenote: The conjugation and declension of _Jahd_ and _Jihád_] 5. The words _Jahd_ and _Jihád_ and their derivations, amounting tofourteen in number, occur in the following passages in the Koran:-- 1. "Jâhada" Chapter xxix, 5; ix, 19. 2. "Jáhadáka" Do. Xxxi, 14, xxix, 7. 3. "Jáhadoo" Do. Ii, 215; viii, 73, 75, 76; ix, 16, 20, 89; xlix, 15; iii, 136; xvi, 111; xxix, 69. 4. "Yojáhido" Do. Xxix, 5. 5. "Yojáhidoona" Do. V, 59. 6. "Yojáhidoo" Do. Ix, 44, 82. 7. "Tojáhidoona" Do. Lxi, 11. 8. "Jihád" Do. Xxv, 54; xxii, 77; ix, 24; lx, 1. 8. * "Jahd" Do. V, 58; vi, 109; xvi, 40; xxiv, 52; xxxv, 40. 9. * "Johd" Do ix, 80. 10. "Jáhid" Do. Ix, 74; lxvi, 9. 11. "Jâhidhoom" Do. Xxv, 54. 12. "Mojáhidína" Do. Iv, 97; bis. Xlvii, 33. 13. "Mojáhidoona" Do. Iv, 97. 14. "Jáhidoo" Do. V, 39; ix, 41, 87; xxii, 77. [Sidenote: The number of instances in which they occur in the Koran. ] 6. There are altogether 36 verses in the Koran containing the wordsnoted above, in the following chapters and verses:-- Chapter ii, 215. Do. Iii, 136. Do. Iv, 97. Do. V, 39, 58, 59. Do. Vi, 109. Do. Viii, 73, 75, 76. Do. Ix, 16, 19, 20, 24, 41, 44, 74, 80, 82, 87, 89. Do. Xvi, 40, 111. Do. Xxii, 77. Do. Xxiv, 52. Do. Xxv, 54. Do. Xxix, 5, 7, 69. Do. Xxxi, 14. Do. Xxxv, 40. Do. Xlvii, 33. Do. Xlix, 15. Do. Xl, 1. Do. Xli, 11. Do. Xlvi, 9. [Sidenote: In what sense they are used in the Koran. ] 7. Out of the above, the verses containing the words "Jahd" and"Johd, "--_i. E. _, v, 58; vi, 109; xvi, 40; xxiv, 52; xxxv, 40; and ix, 80, marked *, are altogether out of dispute, as in all the formerpassages, except the last one, its obvious meaning is _most_ or _utmost_solemn oaths, [325] or most _energetic_ oaths or _strongest_ or mostforcible oaths, [326] and the latter signifies small provisions uponwhich a man possessing a little property can live with difficulty. Therest are of two kinds--_first_, the verses occurring in the MeccanSuras. As then the Moslems had not resorted to arms in their defence, though suffering from persecutions, Mohammadan commentators and juristsand Christian writers are unanimous in construing _Jihád_ in its naturalsense of exertion, effort, energy, and painstaking. Secondly, the versescontaining the same words occurring in the Medina Suras, which wererevealed or published when the Moslems had taken arms in their defence. As regards this period, the words are considered to have an entirely newand an altogether fortuitous meaning, _viz. _, a religious war ofaggression. Even some verses of this period are rendered by Mohammadansand Christians in the literal sense of the word. [Sidenote: Conventional significations of _Jihád_. ] 8. I fully admit that in the post-classical language of theArabs, --_i. E. _, that in use subsequent to the time of Mohammad, when thelanguage was rapidly corrupted, the word "Jihád" was used to signify"warfare" or fighting, but this was in a military sense. Since thatperiod the word has come to be used as meaning the waging of a war or acrusade only in military tactics, and more recently it found its way inthe same sense into the Mohammadan law-books and lexicons of laterdates. But the subsequent corrupt or post-classical language cannot beaccepted as a final or even a satisfactory authority upon the point. "It was decided by common consent, " says Mr. Edward William Lane, in his Arabic-English Lexicon (Preface, pp. Viii and ix), "that no poet, nor any other person, should be taken as an absolute and unquestionable authority with respect to the words or their significations, the grammar, or the prosody of the classical language, unless he were one who had died before the promulgation of El-Islám, or who had lived partly before and partly after that event; or, as they term it, unless he were a 'Jáhilee' or a 'Mukhadram, ' or (as some pronounce it) 'Mukhadrim, ' or 'Muhadram' or 'Muhadrim. ' A poet of the class next after the Mukhadrams is termed an 'Islámee:' and as the corruption of the language had become considerable in his time, even among those who aimed at chasteness of speech, he is not cited as an authority absolutely and unquestionably like the two preceding classes. A poet of the next class, which is the last, is termed 'Muwelled;' he is absolutely post-classical; and is cited as an unquestionable authority with respect only to the rhetorical sciences. The commencement of the period of the Muwelleds is not distinctly stated: but it must have preceded the middle of the second century of the Flight; for the classical age may be correctly defined as having nearly ended with the first century, when very few persons born before the establishment of El-Islám through Arabia were living. Thus the best of the Islámi poets may be regarded, and are generally regarded, as holding classical rank, though not as being absolute authorities with respect to the words and the significations, the grammar, and the prosody of the classical language. " Mr. Thomas Chenry, M. A. , writes:[327]-- "Within a century of Mohammad's flight from Mecca, the Moslem empire stretched from Kashgar and Mooltan to Morocco and the Pyrenees, and the Arab man of letters was exposed to the corrupting propinquity of men of very different races. Only a poet of Ignorance, that is, one who died before the preaching of Islam, or a Mokhadram, that is, who was contemporary with it, was looked upon as of paramount and unquestionable authority. An Islámi, that is, one who was born after the rise of Islam, was of least consideration, and after the first century, the poets are called Muwalladún and are only quoted for their literary beauties, and not as authorities for the Arab tongue. " [Sidenote: Mohammadan commentators, &c. , quoted. ] 9. All commentators, paraphrasts, and jurisconsults admit that theprimary and original signification of the words "_Jahad_" and "_Jihád_"is power, ability, and toil, and that its use, as making wars orcrusades, is conventional and figurative. Ibn Attiah says regardingverse 69, Chapter XXIX, that it is Meccan, and was revealed before theenjoining of the _Orfee_ or conventional _Jihád_ (_vide_ Fat-hul bayanfi maquasidil Koran, Vol. II, page 517, by Siddik Hussan). KhateebKoostlane, in his _Irshadussari_, a paraphrase of Bokhari, says that"_Jihád_ is derived from _Jahd_, which means toil and labour, or from_Johd_, which means power. And in technical language it means fightingwith infidels to assist Islam" (Vol. V, page 26). Mohammad Allauddin AlHaskafi (died 1088 A. H. ), the author of Dur-ral-Mukhtár, a commentary onTanviral Absár, by Sheikh Mohammad Al Tamartáshi (died 1004), says inthe chapter on _Jihád_, that "in the classical language it is theinfinitive noun of _Jáhada fi Sabil-Allah_, and in the language of thelaw it means inviting the infidels to the true faith and fighting withhim who does not accept it. " And Ibn Ábidin Shámi, in his annotation onthe above work, says: "The infinitive noun of _Jáhada_ means to do one's utmost, and that it is general, and includes any person who supports all that is reasonable and forbids what is wrong. " [Sidenote: When the word Jihád was diverted from its originalsignification to its figurative meaning of waging religious war?] 10. It is admitted by all lexicologists, commentators, and jurisconsultsthat _Jihád_ in classical Arabic means to labour, strive earnestly, andthat the change of its meaning or the technical signification occurredonly in the post-classical period, _i. E. _, long after the publicationof the Koran. It is obviously improper, therefore, to apply thepost-classical meaning of the word where it occurs in the Koran. Thisfact is further admitted by all the Mohammadan commentators and Englishtranslators of the Koran, who render the word in its original andliteral meaning in all the Meccan and in the early Medinite Suras orChapters of the Koran. [328] It is only in a few of the latest chapters of the Koran published atlater dates at Medina, that they (the commentators and translators)deviate from the original meaning, and prefer the subsequent unclassicaland technical signification of waging war or crusade. [Sidenote: All verses of the Koran containing the word Jihád and itsderivation quoted and explained. ] 11. I herein place in juxtaposition the several English translations ofthe word "_Jihád_, " together with its etymological derivation andseveral grammatical forms, to show, in the first place, that Mr. GeorgeSale and the Rev. J. M. Rodwell and other European authors generally givethe literal, original, and classical meaning; and in the second place, to show how they differ in giving various meanings, literal andtechnical, in some passages to the same word in the same verses. It will be observed from a perusal of the statement, that the Rev. Mr. Rodwell, M. A. , is more correct than the earliest English translator ofthe Koran, Mr. George Sale, and the latest, Mr. W. H. Palmer. The latteris the most unsatisfactory of all in this respect, as everywhere, exceptin six places--XXIX, 7; V, 39, 59; IV, 97; and IX, 74, 89--he translates_Jihád_ as meaning fighting--a circumstance which not unnaturally leadsto the supposition that he had paid but slight heed to the context. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- |Serial No. | | No. Of the Chapter and the Verse of the Koran. | | | Original Words. ---------------------------- | | | | George Sale's Translation. } ENGLISH | | | | | Rev. Rodwell's Translation. } | | | | | | Henry Palmer's Translation. } TRANSLATIONS. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- | 1 | | | XXXI. 14 | | | "Jáhadáka" | | | | "Strive" | | | | | "Endeavour to prevail" | | | | | | "Strive. " | 2 | | | XXV. 54 | | | "Jáhid, " "Jihádan. " | | | | "Oppose them herewith with strong opposition. " | | | | | "By means of the Koran strive against them with | | | | | a mighty strife. " | | | | | | "Fight strenuously; strenuous fight. " | 3 | | | XXII. 77 | | | "Jáhidoo" | | | | "Fight in the defence of God's religion. " | | | | | "Do valiantly" | | | | | | "Fight strenuously. " | 4 | | | XVI. 111 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Have since sought _in the_ defence of the true religion. " | | | | | "Fought" | | | | | | "Fought strenuously. " | 5 | | | XXIX. 5 | | | "Jáhada" | | | | "Striveth" | | | | | "Maketh efforts" | | | | | | "Fight strenuously; fight strenuously. " | 6 | | | XXIX. 7 | | | "Jáhadáka" | | | | "Endeavour" | | | | | "Strive" | | | | | | "Strive. " |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- |Serial No. | | No. Of the Chapter and the Verse of the Koran. | | | Original Words. ---------------------------- | | | | George Sale's Translation. } ENGLISH | | | | | Rev. Rodwell's Translation. } | | | | | | Henry Palmer's Translation. } TRANSLATIONS. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- | 7 | | | XXIX. 69 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Utmost endeavour" | | | | | "Made efforts" | | | | | | "Fight strenuously. " | 8 | | | XVI. 40 | | | "Jahd" | | | | "Most solemnly" | | | | | "Most sacred" | | | | | | "Most strenuous. " | 9 | | | XXXV. 40 | | | "Jahd" | | | | "Most solemn" | | | | | "Mightiest" | | | | | | "Most strenuous. " | 10 | | | II. 215 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Fight in God's cause" | | | | | "Fight" | | | | | | "Wage war. " | 11 | | | III. 136 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Those who fought strenuously. " | | | | | "Did valiantly" | | | | | | "Fought well. " | 12 | | | VIII. 73 | | | "Jáhadoo be-am-walhim-w-anfosa-him. " | | | | "Employed their substance and their persons in fight for | | | | the religion of God. " | | | | | "Spent their substance and themselves for the cause | | | | | of God. " | | | | | | "Fought strenuously with their wealth and | | | | | | person. " |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- |Serial No. | | No. Of the Chapter and the Verse of the Koran. | | | Original Words. ---------------------------- | | | | George Sale's Translation. } ENGLISH | | | | | Rev. Rodwell's Translation. } | | | | | | Henry Palmer's Translation. } TRANSLATIONS. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- | 13 | | | VIII. 75 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Have fought for God's true religion. " | | | | | "Fought" | | | | | | "Fought strenuously. " | 14 | | | VIII. 76 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Have fought with you. " | | | | | "Fought" | | | | | | "Fought strenuously. " | 15 | | | VI. 109 | | | "Jahd" | | | | "Most solemn" | | | | | "Most binding" | | | | | | "Most strenuous" | 16 | | | XLVII. 33 | | | "Mojáhidína" | | | | "Who fight valiantly" | | | | | "Valiant" | | | | | | "Fought strenuously. " | 17 | | | LXI. 11 | | | "Jáhidoo" | | | | "Defend God's true religion with your substance and in | | | | your person. " | | | | | "Do valiantly" | | | | | | "To fight strenuously. " | 18 | | | IV. 97 | | | 1st. "Mojáhidína" | | | | 1st. "Those who employ their fortune and their persons | | | | for the religion of God. " | | | | | 1. "Defend God's true religion valiantly. " | | | | | | 1. "Strenuous. " | | | 2nd. "Mojáhidina. " | | | | 2nd. "Those who employ their fortune and persons. " | | | | | 2. "Contend earnestly. " | | | | | | 2. "Strenuous. " | | | 3rd. "Mojáhidina. " | | | | 3rd. "Those who fight" | | | | | 3. "Strenuous" | | | | | | 3. "Strenuous. " |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- |Serial No. | | No. Of the Chapter and the Verse of the Koran. | | | Original Words. ---------------------------- | | | | George Sale's Translation. } ENGLISH | | | | | Rev. Rodwell's Translation. } | | | | | | Henry Palmer's Translation. } TRANSLATIONS. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- | 19 | | | XXIV. 52 | | | "Jahd" | | | | "Most solemn" | | | | | "Most solemn" | | | | | | "Most strenuous. " | 20 | | | LXVI. 9 | | | "Jáhid" | | | | "Attack the hypocrites with arguments. " | | | | | "Make war" | | | | | | "Fight strenuously. " | 21 | | | IX. 74 | | | "Jáhid" | | | | "Wage war" | | | | | "Contend" | | | | | | "Strive strenuously. " | 22 | | | LXI. 1 | | | "Jihadan" | | | | "To fight in the defence of my religion. " | | | | | "To fight" | | | | | | "Fighting strenuously. " | 23 | | | XLIX. 5 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Who employ their substance and their person in the | | | | defence of God's true religion. " | | | | | "Contend with their substance and their person. " | | | | | | "Fight strenuously with their wealth and their | | | | | | persons. " | 24 | | | IX. 16 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Those among you who sought for his religion. " | | | | | "Valiantly" | | | | | | "Fought strenuously. " |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- |Serial No. | | No. Of the Chapter and the Verse of the Koran. | | | Original Words. ---------------------------- | | | | George Sale's Translation. } ENGLISH | | | | | Rev. Rodwell's Translation. } | | | | | | Henry Palmer's Translation. } TRANSLATIONS. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- | 25 | | | IX. 19 | | | "Jáhada" | | | | "Fighteth" | | | | | "Fighteth" | | | | | | "Strenuous. " | 26 | | | IX. 20 | | | "Jáhadoo" | | | | "Fought for his religion. " | | | | | "Do valiantly" | | | | | | "Fought strenuously. " | 27 | | | IX. 24 | | | "Jihádan" | | | | "Advancement" | | | | | "Efforts" | | | | | | "Fighting strenuously. " | 28 | | | IX. 41 | | | "Jáhidoo" | | | | "Employ your substance and your person for the advancement | | | | of God's religion. " | | | | | "Contend with your substance and with your person. " | | | | | | "Fight strenuously with your wealth and your | | | | | | persons. " | 29 | | | IX. 44 | | | "Yojáhidoo" | | | | "Employing their substance and their persons for the | | | | advancement of God's true religion. " | | | | | "Contending with your substance and your person. " | | | | | | "Fighting strenuously. " | 30 | | | IX. 82 | | | "Yojáhidoo" | | | | "Employ their substance and their persons for the | | | | advancement of God's true religion. " | | | | | "Contending with their riches and their persons. " | | | | | | "Fighting strenuously with their wealth and | | | | | | their persons. " |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- |Serial No. | | No. Of the Chapter and the Verse of the Koran. | | | Original Words. ---------------------------- | | | | George Sale's Translation. } ENGLISH | | | | | Rev. Rodwell's Translation. } | | | | | | Henry Palmer's Translation. } TRANSLATIONS. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- | 31 | | | IX. 87 | | | "Jáhidoo" | | | | "Go forth to war" | | | | | "Contend" | | | | | | "Fight strenuously. " | 32 | | | IX. 89 | | | "Jáhidoo" | | | | "Expose their fortunes and their lives. " | | | | | "Contend with purse and persons. " | | | | | | "Strenuous with their wealth and with their | | | | | | person. " | 33 | | | V. 39 | | | "Jáhidoo" | | | | "Fight for his religion. " | | | | | "Contend earnestly" | | | | | | "Be strenuous. " | 34 | | | V. 58 | | | "Jáhd" | | | | "Most firm" | | | | | "Most solemn" | | | | | | "Most strenuous. " | 35 | | | V. 59 | | | "Yojahidoona" | | | | "They shall fight for the religion of God. " | | | | | "Will they contend" | | | | | | "Strenuous. " |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- |Serial No. | | No. Of the Chapter and the Verse of the Koran. | | | Original Words. ---------------------------- | | | | George Sale's Translation. } ENGLISH | | | | | Rev. Rodwell's Translation. } | | | | | | Henry Palmer's Translation. } TRANSLATIONS. |----+-----+----+----+----+--------------------------------------------- 12. The above verses quoted with remarks. I will now proceed to give acorrect translation of all the verses of the Koran referred to above, inthe chronological order of the chapters of the Koran as far as it isascertained together with my observations and remarks on them, andquotations from Mohammadan commentators when necessary. I. --THE MECCAN SURAS. [Sidenote: (1) Lokman, XXXI, 14. ] 13. "But if they exert their utmost (Jáhadáka) to make thee to join that with Me of which thou hadst no knowledge, obey them not. " Chapter XXXI is one of the oldest of the Meccan Suras, having beenrevealed between the sixth and tenth year of the Prophet's mission. Theadmonition relates to a man's behaviour to his parents. He is enjoinedto treat them with kindness, but not to obey them if they lead him topolytheism. Here "_Jáhadá_" means "if they two (parents) task or toil thee, or makeefforts and endeavour (that thou shouldst associate any god with God), "and none of the translators and commentators take the word to mean themaking of war or hostilities or fighting. [Sidenote: (2) Furkan, XXV, 53, 54. ] 14. "Moreover had We pleasured We had certainly raised up a warner in every city. " "Do not then obey the unbelievers, but by means of this (_Jáhid_) exert with them with a (_Jihadan kabirá_) strenuous exertion (or labour with great labour). " This evidently relates to the Koran, or the warning mentioned in thepreceding verse, and it is wrong to translate "_Jihád_" as meaning tofight strenuously with them, or as inciting to strenuous fighting astranslated by Henry Palmer (Vol. II, p. 88). Mr. Sale and the Rev. Mr. Rodwell do not translate it fighting, and so Mohammadan commentators. Fakhr-ud-din Razi (died 606 A. H. ), the Imam, in his great commentarysays: "Some say _Jáhid hoom bihí Jihádán Kabirá_ means to make efforts in preaching, but some say it meant fighting, and others say it meant both; but the former is nearer the truth, as the chapter was revealed at Mecca, and the command for fighting was issued after the Flight, some time afterwards" (Vol. VI, p. 490). [Sidenote: (3) The Pilgrimage, [329] XXII, 76, 78. ] 15. "Believers! bow down with worship your Lord and work righteousness, haply ye may prosper. " "And ('_Jáhidoo_') make efforts in God, as (_Jihádehi_) your making efforts is His due, He hath elected you, and hath not laid on you any hardship in religion, the Faith of your father Abraham. He hath named you the Muslims. " Messrs. Sale and Palmer translate the word here as meaning fighting, which is wrong, as it is unclassical and not literal. Rodwell translatesit "do valiantly, " and Sir William Muir says it is used in the moregeneral sense (Vol. III, p. 32). This verse is a brief and concise version of the great maxim in Deut. VI. 5; Mark XII. 30; and Luke X. 27, -- "Thou shalt love thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength. " See also Luke XIII. 24: "Strive to enter in at the straight gate. " [Sidenote: (4) The Bee, XVI, 108, 111. ] 16. "Whoso after he hath believed in God denieth Him if he were forced to it, and if his heart remain steadfast in the faith, shall be guiltless; but whoso openeth his heart to infidelity--on them, in that case, shall be wrath from God, and a severe punishment awaiteth them. " "To those also who after their trials fled their country, then (_Jáhadoo_) toiled and endured with patience. Verily, thy Lord will afterwards be forgiving, gracious. " Dr. Sprenger (Life of Mohammad, p. 159) explains this verse of the sevenslaves purchased and manumitted by Abu Bekr. They had been tortured forprofessing Islam, shortly after Mohammad assumed the prophetic office. The flight referred to in verse 111th is the early Abyssinian flight. These verses relate to the persecutions endured by humble and needyMoslems from their townspeople of Mecca. These Moslems, after beingpersecuted and forced as far as denying God, while their remainingsteadfast in the faith, had to flee elsewhere, and then suffered much intheir wanderings; but they endured their labours and fatigues, losses, disadvantages both in body and mind, patiently. There is no allusion tofighting or waging war. The Rev. Mr. Rodwell and Mr. Palmer are bothwrong in translating '_Jáhadoo_' as fighting. Sale is right in nottranslating it as fighting, but he is too paraphrastic when hetranslates, "and who have since fought _in defence of the truereligion_, " as their "Jihád" was only their great exertion and toil insuffering from persecutions. [Sidenote: (5) The Spider, XXIX, 5. ] 17. "And whoso ('_Jáhada_') labours ('_Yojáhido_') toils for his own good only. Verily God is independent of all the worlds. " Mr. Palmer is wrong in making _Jáhada_ and _Yojáhido_ to mean fightingstrenuously. Mr. Sale and the Rev. W. Rodwell are right in translatingby "striveth" and "efforts" respectively, and so is Sir W. Muir intaking it into, what he styles, the general sense of the verse (The Lifeof Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 32). [Sidenote: (6) The Spider, XXIX, 7. ] 18. "Moreover We have enjoined on man to show kindness to parents, but if they (_Jáhadá_) strive with thee in order that thou join that with Me of which thou hast no knowledge, then obey them not. To Me do ye return, and I will tell you of your doings. " None of the commentators take the word _Jâhadâ_ in this passage to meanfighting or crusade, and it is difficult, therefore, to understand whythe word should have been distorted from its proper literal andclassical meaning in other places of the same book. [Sidenote: (7) The Spider, XXIX, 69. ] 19. "And those who (_Jâhadoo_) made efforts for Us, in our path will we surely guide; for verily God is with those who do righteous deeds. " Mr. Palmer translates the word here as meaning "fought, " contrary to Mr. Sale, the Rev. Mr. Rodwell, and Sir William Muir, who translate it"endeavour, " "effort, " and "strive. " The conventional term Jihád, meaning crusade or warfare, was not in use in the time of the revelationof the Koran. [Sidenote: (8) The Bee, XVI, 40. ] 20. "And they swear by God with their (_Jahd_) utmost oaths that 'God will never raise him who once is dead. ' Nay; but on Him is a promise binding though most men know it not. " Sale renders the word "most solemnly;" Rodwell, "most sacred oath;"Palmer, "most strenuous oath. " [Sidenote: (9) Creator, XXXV, 40. ] 21. "They swore by God with their (_Jahd_) utmost oath that should a preacher come to them they would yield to guidance more than any people: but when the preacher came to them, it only increased in them their estrangement. " Sale's rendering is "most solemn oath, " Rodwell's, "mightiest oath, " andPalmer's, "most strenuous oath. " II. --THE MEDINITE SURAS. [Sidenote: (10) The Cow or Heifer, II, 215. ] 22. "But they who believe, and who fly their country, and (_Jahadoo_) exert their utmost in the way of God, may hope for God's mercy, and God is Gracious and Merciful. " Mr. Sale and the Rev. Mr. Rodwell translate _Jahadoo_ as those who_fight_, and Mr. Palmer as those who _wage war_; but there is no reasonto change the proper meaning of the word. Sir William Muir translatesthe verse thus:-- "But they that believe and they who emigrate for the sake of their faith and strive earnestly in the way of God, let them hope in the mercy of God, for God is forgiving, merciful. "[330] In a footnote he says:--"The word Jihâd is the same as that subsequentlyused for a religious war; but it had not yet probably acquired its fixedapplication. It was employed in its _general_ sense before the Hejira, and probably up to the battle of Badr. "[331] I have only to add that theword never acquired its fixed application during the lifetime of theProphet, nor is it used as such in any chapter of the Koran eitherbefore or after the Hejira. The connection of flight mentioned in the verse as put together withJihád, shows that it means the labour, toil, and distress which befelthe fugitives in leaving their families unprotected in the hands oftheir persecutors on their expulsion from their country. [Sidenote: (11) A'l Amrŕn, III, 136. ] 23. "Do ye think that ye could enter Paradise without God taking knowledge of those among you who (_Jáhadoo_) have toiled and of those who steadfastly endured. " The Rev. Mr. Rodwell translates _Jáhadoo_, "did valiantly, " and does notagree with Sale and Palmer, who translate it, "fought strenuously, " or"fought well. " By the connection of enduring patiently, the word _Jáhadoo_ probablymeans those who toiled and suffered in their exile from Mecca. [Sidenote: (12) The Spoils, VIII, 73. ] 24. "Verily, they who believe and have fled their homes and (_Jáhadoo_) toiled with their substance and themselves in the way of God, and they who have taken in and have helped, shall be near of kin the one to the other. And they who have believed, but have not fled their homes, shall have no rights of kindred with you at all, _until_ they too fly their country. Yet if they seek aid from you, on account of the faith, your part is to give them aid, except against a people between whom and yourself there may be a treaty. And God beholdeth your actions. " Sale renders the word _Jihád_ (or _Jáhadoo_) in this passage as meaning "employed their substance and their persons in fighting. " Rodwell . . . "Spent their substance and themselves. " Palmer . . . "Fought strenuously with their wealth and person. " As the word _Jihád_ has been applied here to both one's-self and hissubstance or wealth, it cannot mean "fighting, " even if taken in thetechnical signification. [Sidenote: (13) The Spoil, VIII, 75. ] 25. "But as for those who have believed and fled their country and (_Jáhadoo_) took pains in the way of God, and have been a refuge or help, these are the faithful, mercy is their due and a noble provision. " Sale . . . "Fought. " Rodwell . . . "Fought. " Palmer . . . "Fought strenuously. " There is nothing in this passage to warrant a departure from the literaland proper signification of the word _Jáhadoo_, and using it in apost-Koranic sense. [Sidenote: (14) The Spoil, VIII, 76. ] 26. "And they who have believed and have since fled their country, (_Jáhadoo_) toiled with you, these also are of you. Those who are united by the ties of blood are the nearest of kin to each other. This is in the Book of God. Verily God knoweth all things. " Sale . . . "Fought. " Rodwell . . . "Fought. " Palmer . . . "Fought strenuously. " There is no valid excuse here for changing the signification of the word_Jáhadoo_ into that which is never used in the Koran or in the classicalArabic. [Sidenote: (15) The Cattle, VI, 109. ] 27. "With their (_Jahd_) most binding oath have they sworn by God. . . . " Sale . . . "Most solemn oath. " Rodwell . . . "Most binding oath. " Palmer . . . "Most strenuous oath. " [Sidenote: (16) Mohammad, XLVII, 33] 28. "And We will surely test you until We know (_Mojáhideena_) who did their utmost, and who were the steadfast among you; and We will test the reports. " Sale . . . "Who fight valiantly. " Rodwell . . . "Valiant. " Palmer . . . "Fought valiantly. " "_Mojáhid_" is not synonymous with "_Mokátil_" [Sidenote: (17) Battle Array, LXI, 11. ] 29. "Believe in God and His Apostle and (_Jáhidoo_) do strive in the way of God with your wealth and your persons!" Sale . . . "Who fought valiantly. " Rodwell . . . "Who fought valiantly. " Palmer . . . "Fight strenuously. " Devotion or worship has been divided into two kinds, --bodily, which alsoincludes mental; and pecuniary or monetary, and the believers areexhorted here to worship God both bodily and mentally. [Sidenote: (18) Women, IV, 97. ] 30. "Those believers who sit at home free from trouble and those who (1, _Mojáhidoona_) toil in the way of God with their substance and their persons shall not be treated alike. God has assigned to those who (2, _Majáhadoona_) strive with their persons and with their substance a rank above those who sit at home. Goodly promises hath He made to all; but God hath assigned to those (3, _Mojáhadína_) who make efforts a rich recompense above those who sit at home. " Sale: _1st_ . . . "Those who employ their fortune and their substance for the religion of God. " _2nd_ . . . "Those who employ their fortune and their substance. " _3rd_ . . . "Those who fight. " Rodwell: _1st_ . . . "Those who fight valiantly. " _2nd_ . . . "Contend earnestly. " _3rd_ . . . "Strenuous. " Palmer: _1st_ . . . "Strenuous. " _2nd_ . . . "Strenuous. " _3rd_ . . . "Strenuous. " I have already explained the two sorts of worship or service ofGod--bodily and mental. The same applies here too. [Sidenote: (19) Light, XXIV, 52. ] 31. "And they swore by God with their utmost oath. . . . " Sale . . . "Most solemn oath. " Rodwell . . . "Most solemn oath. " Palmer . . . "Most strenuous oath. " [Sidenote: (20) The Forbidding, LXVI, 9. ] 32. "O Prophet, (_Jáhid_) do thy utmost with the unbelievers and hypocrites, and be strict towards them. " Sale . . . "Attack the infidels with arms and the hypocrites with arguments. " Rodwell . . . "Make war. " Palmer . . . "Fight strenuously. " [Sidenote: (21) The Immunity, IX, 74. ] 33. The same verse, word for word. Sale . . . "Wage war. " Rodwell . . . "Contend against. " Palmer . . . "Strive strenuously. " The word _Jáhid_ is the same in both the passages, yet the translatorsdiffer in their interpretation of it. As there had been no war againstthe hypocrites, the word cannot be held to bear the construction theyput on it, even if we deprived it of its proper signification. In oneplace Sale takes _Jáhid_ to mean "attacking with arms, " and in anotherhe takes it in the sense of attacking with arguments. There is no signification of "attacking" in _Jihád_, but only that of"exerting, " and the verse simply means, "exert thyself in preaching to, and remonstrating with, the unbelievers and hypocrites, and also bestrict towards them, "--_i. E. _, not to be smooth with them, nor to bebeguiled by them. [332] [Sidenote: (22) The tried, LXI. ] 34. "O Ye believers! take not my foe and your foe for friends: ye show them kindness although they believe not that truth which hath come to you: they drive forth the Apostle and yourself because ye believe in God your Lord! If ye have come forth[333] (_Jihádan_) labouring in my cause, and from a desire to please Me, ye show them kindness in private, then I well know what ye conceal and what ye discover! And whoso of you doth this hath verily, therefore, gone astray from the even way. " Sale translates _Jihádan_ as meaning "to fight in the defence of my religion. " Rodwell . . . "To fight on my path. " Palmer . . . "Fighting strenuously. " The translators quoted above say that Hátib had informed the Meccans ofan intended surprise of Mecca on the part of Mohammad with the view ofmaking terms for his own family, which had been left there. On thisoccasion the passage was revealed. This shows that the campaign of Meccais termed _Jihád_. But Sir William Muir does not agree with them. Hesays in a footnote:--"The opening verses of the sixtieth Sura are saidto refer to Hâtib; but they appear to have a general bearing against toogreat intimacy with the Coreish during the truce and to be, therefore, of a prior date. "[334] 35. Hátib's story. The story regarding Hátib's revelation of theintended attack upon Mecca by Mohammad, is not supported by authenticand trustworthy traditions. The authentic tradition of Bokhari[335] onlystates that the occasion of the verse being revealed was in the case ofHátib, but does not say that it was during the campaign of Mecca, northat the information contained anything about the intended campaign. Theauthentic tradition only says that the report contained informationregarding some of the affairs of the Prophet. Besides this, it is wrong to translate _in kun tum kharajtum Jihadan fiSabili_, as "if ye go forth to fight in defence of my religion, " or "ifye go forth to fight on my path, " or "if ye go forth fightingstrenuously in my cause. " It simply means, "if you have come outstriving in my cause, " and the sentence is a complement or correlativeof the verse, meaning, if you have come out of Mecca, striving, or tostrive, in my cause, suffering from exile and undergoing the afflictionsand distresses of living homeless, leaving your family and propertyunprotected, and all these pains (_Jihád_) you have taken to please me, then you should not make friends with my foes and your foes, who do notbelieve in the truth which has come to you, and have driven out theProphet and yourselves (from Mecca, your home) only for the reason thatyou believe in God your Lord. [Sidenote: (23) The Apartment, XLIX, 15. ] 36. "The true believers are those only who believe in God and his Apostle and afterwards doubt not; and who (_Jáhadoo_) strive with their substance and their persons on the path of God. These are the sincere. " Sale here translates _Jáhadoo_ those "who employ their substance and their persons in the defence of God's true religions. " Rodwell . . . "Contend with their substance and their persons. " Palmer . . . "Fight strenuously with their wealth and persons. " See my observations under No. 17, para. 28. [Sidenote: (24) The Immunity, IX, 16. ] 37. "Think not that ye shall be forsaken and that God doth not yet know those among you who (_Jáhadoo_) do their utmost and take none for their intimate friends besides God and His Apostles and the faithful. But God is well apprised of your doings. " Sale . . . "Fought for his religion. " Rodwell . . . "Fought valiantly. " Palmer . . . "Fought strenuously. " [Sidenote: (25) _Ibid_, 19. ] 38. "Do ye place the giving drink to the pilgrims and the visitation of the sacred temple on the same level with him who believeth in God and the last day, and (_Jáhada_) taketh pains in the way of God. They are not held equal by God, and God guideth not the unrighteous. " Sale . . . "Fighteth. " Rodwell . . . "Fighteth. " Palmer . . . "Is strenuous. " [Sidenote: (26) The Immunity, IX, 20. ] 39. "They who have believed and fled their homes and (_Jáhadoo_) toiled with their substance and with their persons on the path of God are of the highest degree with God, and these are they who shall enjoy felicity!" Sale . . . "Employ their substance and their persons in the defence of God's true religion. " Rodwell . . . "And striven with their substance and with their persons in the path of God. " Palmer . . . "Been strenuous in the way of God with their wealth and their persons. " [Sidenote: (27) _Ibid_, 24. ] 40. "Say, if your father and your sons and your brethren and your wives, and your kindred and wealth which ye have gained, and merchandise which ye fear may be unsold, and dwellings wherein ye may delight be dearer to you than God and His Apostle and (_Jihádan_) toiling in My cause, then wait until God shall Himself enter on His work; God guideth not the impious. " Sale . . . "Advancement of his religion. " Rodwell . . . "Efforts on his path. " Palmer . . . "Fighting strenuously. " [Sidenote: (28) _Ibid_, 41. ] 41. "March ye forth light and heavy and (_Jáhidoo_) toil with your substance and persons on the way of God. This, if ye knew it, will be best for you. " Sale . . . "Employ your substance and your persons for the advancement of God's true religion. " Rodwell . . . "Contend with your. . . . " Palmer . . . "Fight strenuously with your wealth and persons. " [Sidenote: (29) The Immunity, IX, 44. ] 42. "They who believe in God and in the last day will not ask leave to be exempt from (_Yojáhadoo_) toiling with their substance and their persons. But God knoweth them that fear Him. " Sale . . . "Employ their substance and their persons for the advancement of God's true religion. " Rodwell . . . "Contending with their substance and persons. " Palmer . . . "Fighting strenuously. " [Sidenote: (30) _Ibid_, 82. ] 43. "They who were left in their homes were delighted behind God's Apostle and were averse from (_Yojáhidoo_) exerting with their riches and their persons for the cause of God, and said, 'March not out in the heat. ' Say, a fiercer heat will be the fire of hell! Would that they understood this. " Sale . . . "Employ their substance and their persons for the advancement of God's true religion. " Rodwell . . . "Contending with their riches and their persons. " Palmer . . . "Fighting strenuously with their wealth and their person. " [Sidenote: (31) _Ibid_, 87. ] 44. "Moreover when a Sura was sent down with 'Believe in God, and (_Jáhidoo_) toil in company with his Apostle, ' those of them who are possessed of riches demanded exemption, and said, 'Allow us to be with those who sit _at home_. '" Sale . . . "Go forth to war. " Rodwell . . . "Contend. " Palmer . . . "Fight strenuously. " [Sidenote: (32) The Immunity, IX, 89. ] 45. "But the Apostle, and those who share his faith (_Jáhadoo_) exerted with their substance and their persons, and these ! good things await them and these are they who shall be happy. " Sale . . . "Expose their fortune and their lives. " Rodwell . . . "Contend with purse and person. " Palmer . . . "Are strenuous with their wealth and with their persons. " [Sidenote: (33) The Table, V, 39. ] 46. "O ye who believe! fear God and desire union with Him and (_Jáhidoo_) toil on His path. It may be that you will obtain happiness. " Sale . . . "Fight. " Rodwell . . . "Contend earnestly. " Palmer . . . "Be strenuous. " [Sidenote: (34) _Ibid_, 58. ] 47. "And the faithful will say, 'Are these they who swore by God 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, God will then raise up a people whom He loveth, and who love Him, lowly towards the faithful, lofty to the unbelievers (_Yojáhidoona_) striving in the path of God, and not fearing the blame of the blamer. This is the Grace of God; on whom He will He bestoweth it, and God is all-embracing, Omniscient!" Sale . . . "They shall fight for the religion of God. " Rodwell . . . "For the cause of God will they contend. " Palmer . . . "Strenuous in the way of God. " [Sidenote: _Jihád_ does not mean the waging of war. ] 49. These are all the verses of the Koran which contain the word"_Jahd_" or "_Jihád_, " or any derivations from them. I believe that Ihave clearly shown by means of a careful comparison between thetranslators and commentators and the original passages in the Koran, that the word _Jahd_ or _Jihád_ in the classical Arabic and as used inthe Koran does not mean waging war or fighting, but only to do one'sutmost and to exert, labour or toil. The meaning which has come to beascribed to the word is undoubtedly a conventional one, and is one thathas been applied to it at a period much less recent than the revelationof the various chapters of the Koran. [Sidenote: _Katal_ and _Kitál_. ] 50. I do not mean to contend that the Koran does not contain injunctionsto fight or wage war. There are many verses enjoining the Prophet'sfollowers to prosecute a defensive war, but not one of aggression. Thewords "_katal_" and "_kitál_" distinctly indicate this. [Sidenote: Conclusion. ] 51. I have already analysed all the verses containing these words(_katal_ and _kitál_) in this book. What I have aimed at in the Appendixis to show that those authors and translators who cite certain verses ofthe Koran containing the word _Jahd_ or _Jihád_ and its derivations insupport of their assertion, and that the Mohammadan religion sanctionsthe waging of war and the shedding of blood, are altogether in thewrong. [Footnote 322: The Siháh of Jouhari (who died 397 or 398), the Asás ofZamakhshire (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 Misbáh by Fayoomee (finished 734 A. H. ), _vide_ Lane'sArabic-English Lexicon, Book I, Part II, page 473. ] [Footnote 324: Siháh, Asás, Ibnel Atheer Jezree, author of Nihayeh (died606), the Mughrib of Almotarrazi (born 536, died 610), the Misbáh andKámoos, _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 Assemblies of Al Hariri, translated from the Arabicby Thomas Chenry, M. A. , Vol. I, Introduction, p. 67. William andNorgate, 1867. ] [Footnote 328: In the treaty of Medina, which was made as early as thesecond year of the Hejira, the word Jihád is used, regarding which SirW. Muir says:--"This word came subsequently to have exclusively thetechnical signification of Jihád or _crusade_ or _fighting_ for theFaith. If we give it this signification here, it would involve theclause in the suspicion of being a later addition; for as yet we have nodistinct development of the intention of Mahomet to impose his religionon others by force: it would have been dangerous, in the present stateof parties, to advance this principle. The word is sometimes used in themore general sense in the Coran; Sura XXIX, 5, 69; XX, 77, and a fewother places. "--Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, p. 32. Again he sayswith reference to Sura II, v. 215, which also contains the same word:"The word (_Jihád_) is the same as that subsequently used for areligious war, but it had not yet probably acquired its fixedapplication. 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 atMecca, 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 Surasof 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 Meccansin your persecution. ] [Footnote 334: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, p. 114. ] [Footnote 335: _Kitabul Jihád_, _Magházi_ 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 allowsenslavement of the captives of war, and sanctions female captives to theconquerors' embrace, or, in other words, female captives are madeconcubines on the field of battle. There is not a single sentence in theKoran allowing either of the above allegations. Sir W. Muir, in his"Life of Mahomet, " could neither quote any verse of the Koransanctioning the enslavement of the captives of war or servileconcubinage, nor was he able to relate any instance of them during theseveral battles described therein. Yet, in a recent work, [336] he refersboldly, but vaguely, to the Koran; and regarding the battle of Walajafought by Khálid against the Persians in A. H. 12 writes, after quotingKhálid's oration on gaining the victory:-- "Now, also, the cunning device of the Corân, with respect to the other sex, 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, Khálid did not refer thebelievers to the so-called "cunning device" of the Koran? By referringto this imaginary device of the Koran to the lawfulness of femalecaptives "to the conquerors' embrace, " he might have struck a chord, atwhich every Bedouin heart would have leapt with joy, instead ofreferring, 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_. TheKoran took several measures to abolish future slavery. Its steps for itsabolition were taken in every moral, legal, religious, and politicaldepartments. The liberation of slaves was morally declared to be a workof piety and righteousness--(Sura XC, 13; II, 172). [337] Legally theslaves were to be emancipated on their agreeing to pay a ransom--(SuraXXIV, 33). [338] They were to be set at liberty as a penalty for culpablehomicide--(Sura IV, 94);[339] or in expiation for using an objectionableform of divorce--(Sura LVIII, 4);[340] and also they were to bemanumitted from the Public Funds out of the poor-taxes--(Sura IX, 60). [341] They were religiously to be freed in expiation of a false oathtaken in mistake--(Sura V, 91). [342] These were the measures for theabolition of existing slavery. The future slavery was abolished by theKoran by putting hammer deep unto its root and by annihilating its realsource. The captives of war were, according to the clear injunctions ofthe Koran contained in the 5th verse of the 47th Sura, to be dismissedeither by a free grant or by exacting a ransom. They were neither to beenslaved 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 futureslavery, and do not require any further remarks. Moreover they wereacted 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, ofKatan 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 (Hawázin)A. H. 8, [345] was enslaved. All, without an exception, were set freeeither by way of free dismissal, or by exacting ransom (in cash or inexchange of Moslem prisoners) in strict conformity with the dictates ofSura 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. ] 4. Some will contend regarding the Bani Koreiza that their women andchildren were made slaves, and as such sold in Najd. Sir W. Muir quotesthe judgment of Sád in the case of the Bani Koreiza, --"That the femalecaptives and the children shall be sold into slavery, " and that it wasapproved of by Mohammad. He writes further:-- "A fifth of the booty was, as usual, reserved for the Prophet, and the rest divided. From the fifth Mahomet made certain presents to his friends of female slaves and servants; and then sent the rest of the women and children to be sold among the Bedouin tribes of Najd in exchange for horses and arms. "[347] I have shown in para. 30 of this book (pages 37 and 38) that Mohammadnever appreciated the judgment of Sád. And I have further to add thatthe said judgment, according to true reports, did not contain theillegal verdict of enslaving the women and children of the Bani Koreiza, as this might have gone directly against the Koran and the precedents ofthe Prophet. In the collections of Bokhari, Book of Campaigns, Chapteron Bani Koreiza, there are two traditions cited on the subject. Both ofthem quote the words of Sád to the effect that "the women and childrenbe imprisoned. " The same is the case in Bokhari's other chapters (Bookof _Jihád_, Chapter on the Surrender of Enemy, Book of _Manákib_, Chapter on the Merits of Sád). It is not a fact that Mohammad made certain presents to his friends ofthe female slaves out of the captives of Bani Koreiza. The captives werenot made slaves, therefore it is wrong to confound captives with slaves. There is no proof to the effect that they were enslaved. The Korandistinctly says that they were prisoners (Sura XXXIII, 26). In fact, the women and children were not guilty of treason, anddeserved no punishment. Sád's judgment must be either wrong regardingthem, or applied only to those who were guilty. "One woman alone, "according to Sir W. Muir, "was put to death; it was she who threw themillstone from the battlements" (Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 277). Iconclude, therefore, that all the women and children were releasedafterwards; some ransomed themselves, others went off with theirfreedom. But nobody was ever sold in slavery. The assertion of Hishamee, quoted by Sir W. Muir, that the women and children were sent to be soldamong the Bedouin tribes of Najd in exchange for horses and arms (Vol. III, page 279), is void of all authority, and is in direct contradictionof what Abul Mo'tamar Soleiman bin Tarkhan (died 143 A. H. And was priorto Hishamee) says, and whose account seems to be more probable. Hisversion is that the horses of Bani Koreiza were sent by Mohammad toSyria and Najd for the purpose of breeding, and that they got bighorses. _Vide_ Wákidi Campaigns of Mohammad, page 374, Calcutta, 1855. This shows that only horses, and not women and children, were sent toNajd. The words of Hishamee (page 693) are "_sabáya min sabáya BaniKoreiza_. " _Sabáya_, plural of _sabi_, applies to both person andproperty, as they say _sabal adúvva vaghairohu_, he made captive, captured or took prisoner the enemy, and other than an enemy. (_Vide_Lane's Arabic Dictionary, page 1303, col. 1. ) So probably Hishamee hadin view only the horses captured of the Bani Koreiza and sent to Najd, but not the women and children of the captives of Koreiza. [Sidenote: Rihána. ] 5. Rihána, a woman of the captives of Koreiza, is said by Sir W. Muir tohave been taken by Mohammad "for his concubine. " He always confoundsprisoners with slaves, and female captives as well as slaves withconcubines. There are several conflicting and contradictory traditionsregarding Rihána. Mohammad bin Sád Kátib Wakidi has related varioustraditions from Omar-bin-al Hakam, Mohammad bin Káb, and from othervarious sources that Mohammad had married Rihána. The Kátib says "thistradition is held by learned men. But he has also heard some onerelating that she was his concubine. "[348] But Sir W. Muir chooses thelatter uncertain and unauthentic traditions. He writes in a footnote:-- "She is represented as saying, when he offered her marriage and the same privileges as his other wives: 'Nay, O Prophet! But let me remain as thy slave; this will be easier both for me and for thee. '"[349] Even if this tradition be a genuine one, he is not authorized in hisremarks in the text, where he says-- "He invited her to be his wife, but she declined; and chose to remain (as indeed, having refused marriage, she had no alternative) his slave or concubine. " She was neither enslaved, nor made a concubine. It is to be regrettedthat the writer of the "Life of Mahomet" most absurdly confounds slaveryand concubinage. [Sidenote: Omar, the second Khalif, liberated all the Arab slaves. ] 6. During the sovereignty of Omar, the second Khalif, in accordance withthe injunctions of Mohammad to abolish slavery, all the existing Arabslaves were set free. It will appear that the wishes of Mohammad to thateffect were but partially carried out. In ages that succeeded the deathof Mohammad, they were altogether lost sight of, and even Arabs wereallowed to be enslaved by the later jurists. Sir W. Muir, in his latestwork, entitled "The Annals of the Early Caliphate, " says:-- "Yet great numbers of the Arabs themselves were slaves, taken prisoner during the apostasy, or in the previous intertribal warfare, and held in captivity by their fellow-countrymen. Omar felt the inconsistency. It was not fit that any of the noble race should remain in bondage. When, therefore, he succeeded to the Caliphate, he decreed: 'The Lord, ' he said, 'hath given to us of Arab blood the victory, and great conquests without. It is not meet that any one of us, taken in the days of Ignorance, [350] or in the wars against the apostate tribes, should be holden in slavery. ' All slaves of the Arab descent were accordingly ransomed, excepting only such bondmaids as had borne their masters' children. Men who had lost wives or children now set out in search, if haply they might find and claim them. Strange tales are told of some of the disconsolate journeys. Ashŕth recovered two of his wives taken captive in Nojeir. But some of the women who had been carried prisoners to Medîna preferred remaining with their captors. "[351] Even this speech of Omar shows that no one was enslaved during the warsof Mohammad, as he only refers to the captives of the days of Ignorancebefore the Prophet, and those taken in wars against the apostate tribesafter him having been enslaved. [Sidenote: Concubinage. ] 7. The Koran has never allowed concubinage with female captives. Andafter the abolition of future slavery enjoined in the Koran, there is nogood in discussing the subject of concubinage, which depends on thelegality or otherwise of slavery. The Koran had taken early measures forpreventing the evil directly and indirectly, positively and negatively. In the first place, it recognizes marriage as the only legal conditionof the union of both sexes. Marriage was also enjoined with the existingfemale slaves. (_Vide_ Sura IV, 3, 29; and XXIV, 32, 33. ) The preventionof concubinage is set forth in plain terms in Sura V, 7. The verses runthus:-- 3. "And if ye are apprehensive that ye shall not deal fairly with orphans, then of _other_ women who seem good in your eyes marry, _but_ two or three or four, and if ye _still_ fear that ye shall not act equitably, then (marry) one only; or (marry) the slaves whom ye have acquired. This will be more proper that ye may not have numerous families or households. And give women their dowry as a free gift; but if of their own free will they kindly give up aught thereof to you, then enjoy it as convenient _and_ profitable. " 29. "And whoever of you is not rich enough to marry free-believing women, then let him marry such of your believing maidens as have fallen into your hands as slaves. God well knoweth your faith. Ye are sprung, the one from the other. Marry them then with the leave of their masters, and give them a fair dower; but let them be chaste and free from fornication, and not entertainers of lovers. "--Sura IV. 32. "And marry those among you who are single, and your good servants and your handmaidens. If they are poor, God of his bounty will enrich them. And God is all-bounteous, knowing. And let those who cannot find a match live in continence till God of his bounty shall enrich them. " 33. "And to those of your slaves who desire a deed of _manumission_, execute it for them, if ye know good in them, and give them a portion of the wealth of God which He hath given you. "--Sura XXIV. "And _you are permitted to marry_ virtuous women, who are believers, and virtuous women of those who have been given the Scriptures before you, when you have provided them their portions, living _chastely with them_ without fornication, and not taking concubines. "--Sura V. The 28th verse of the fourth Sura does by no means sanction concubinage. It has nothing to do with it. It only treats of marriage. It, togetherwith its preceding verse, points out whom we can marry and whom not. Itsnext verse interdicts concubinage when it enjoins marriage with the thenexisting slaves. [Sidenote: Maria the Coptic. ] 8. I will here take the opportunity of noticing Maria the Coptic, who isalleged to have been a concubine-slave of Mohammad, although she doesnot come under the category of prisoners made slaves. According to SirW. Muir, the Roman Governor of Egypt had written to Mohammad:--"I sendfor thine acceptance two damsels, highly esteemed among the Copts. "[352]The writer converts them at once into "two slave-girls, " and remarks, "astrange present, however, for a Christian Governor to make. "[353] Shewas neither a captive, nor a slave, nor was she described as such in theGovernor's letter. I am at a loss to know why or how she has beentreated by the biographers of the Prophet as a slave or a concubine. (1) I have great doubts regarding the truth of the story that Mokowkasthe Governor had sent two maids to Mohammad, and taking it for grantedthey were so sent, that one of them was the alleged Maria; (2) it is nota fact that she was a slave; (3) nor a concubine-slave of the Prophet;(4) nor she as such bore a son to him; (5) and lastly, the notoriousscandal about her much talked of by European writers is a mere calumnyand a false story. It will be a very tedious and irksome task to copy the varioustraditions bearing on the above subjects and to discuss theirauthenticity, and criticise their genuineness, on the principles of thetechnicalities peculiar to the Science of Traditions, as well as on thebasis of scientific and rational criticism. Therefore I will notice onlybriefly each of the above subjects. [Sidenote: Dispatch to Mokowkas. ] 9. (1) That Mohammad had sent a dispatch to Mokowkas, the Roman Governorof Egypt, and that in reply he had sent Maria the Coptic maid, togetherwith other presents, to Mohammad, is not to be found in the traditionscollected by the best critics of Mohammadan traditions like Bokhari andMuslim, who had sifted the whole incoherent mass of genuine andapocryphal traditions regarding the Prophet, and had picked up but avery small portion of them which they thought to be relatively genuine. We can fairly conclude that such a tradition, which is related by othernon-critics and story-tellers, who have indiscriminately narrated everytradition--whether genuine or apocryphal--like Wákidi and Ibn Sád, wassurely rejected by these Imams (Doctors in the Science of Tradition) ashaving not the least possibility of its genuineness. Even Ibn Ishak(died 150), [354] Hisham-bin-Abdul Malik (died 213 A. H. ), [355] and AbulMo'tamar Soleiman (died 143 A. H. [356])[357] have not inserted theportion of the tradition of Maria the Coptic maid being sent by theEgyptian Governor to Mohammad. The tradition narrated by Ibn Sád--(1)through Wákidi and Abd-ul-Hamíd from Jáfar, (2) and Abdullah bin AbdurRahmán bin Abi Sásáta--is undoubtedly apocryphal, Wákidi andAbd-ul-Hamíd are of impeached integrity, or no authority at all. IbnKhallikan, in his Biographical Dictionary, translated by Slane, writesregarding Wákidi:--"The Traditions received from him are considered offeeble authority, and doubts have been expressed on the subject of his(_veracity_. )"[358] Ibn Hajar Askalání writes regarding Wákidi in his_Takrib_, that "he has been struck off as an authority (literally leftout), notwithstanding his vast knowledge. " Zahabi's opinion of Wákidiin Mizán-al-Etedal is that Ahmed bin Hanbal said "he was the greatestliar. " Bokhari and Abú Hátim say he is struck off (or left out as anauthority). Regarding Abd-ul-Hamíd, Zahabi writes that Abu Hátim said he is notquoted as an authority, and Sofián said he was a weak authority. Jáfar and Abdullah bin Abdur Rahmán bin Abi Sásáta are of the middleperiod in the Tabaeen's class, and do not quote their authority on thesubject. [Sidenote: Maria neither a slave;] 10. (2) Supposing that the Governor of Egypt had sent two Coptic maids, with other presents, to Mohammad, it does not follow necessarily thatthey were slave-girls. It is never stated in history that they werecaptives of war, or, if they were so, that they were enslavedsubsequently. There is no authority for a haphazard conjecture that theywere slave-girls. [Sidenote: nor a concubine-slave. ] 11. (3) Even if it be admitted that Maria the Coptic was a slave-girl, there is no proof that she was a concubine-slave. It is a stereotypedfabrication of traditionists, and the unpardonable blunder on the partof European writers, that they almost always confound female-slaves, andeven sometimes captives, with concubine-slaves. None of the six standardcollectors of traditions--Imams Bokhari (died 256 A. H. ), Muslim (died261 A. H. ), Aboo Daood (died 275 A. H. ), Tirmizee (died 279 A. H. ), Nasáee(died 303 A. H. ), and Ibn Mája (died 273 A. H. )--has narrated that Mariathe Coptic was a concubine-slave of the Prophet. Even the earlybiographers--Ibn Ishak (died 150 A. H. ) and Ibn Hisham (died 213 A. H. )have not made any mention to this effect. It is only Mohammad bin Sád, the Secretary to Wákidi, who narrates the tradition, --firstly throughWákidi, Abd-ul-Hamíd, and Jáfar, and secondly through Wákidi, Yakoob binMohammad, and Abdullah bin Abdur Rahmán bin Abi Sásáta. These bothascriptions are apocryphal. I have already quoted my authorities againstWákidi and Abd-ul-Hamíd. Yakoob bin Mohammad has been impeached by AbuZaraá, a critic in the Science of Traditions. [359] Jáfar and Abdullahboth flourished after the first century. Their evidence to the supposedfact about a century ago is inadmissible. In the Biographical Dictionaries of the contemporaries of the Prophet, there are three persons named Maria. [360] One is said to have been ahousemaid of the Prophet; the second was a housemaid whose _kunniat_(patronymic) is given as Omm Rabab (mother of Rabab). The third iscalled Maria the Coptic. It appears there was only one Maria; she mayhave been a female servant in the household of the Prophet. Thenarrators have, by citing different circumstances regarding them, madethem three different persons, and one of them a concubine-slave, as theycould not think a house or family complete without a slave-girl or aconcubine-slave. The biographers often commit such blunders. In givingdifferent anecdotes of really the same persons, they make as manypersons as they have anecdotes. That anyone of the Marias was aconcubine-slave is a mere conjecture, or a stereotyped form oftraditional confusion in mixing up maidservants with slaves orconcubine-slaves. [Sidenote: Maria had no son. ] 12. (4) Those who have converted Maria into a slave or a concubine-slavehave furnished her--the creature of their own imagination--with a son. There are various traditions as to the number and names of the Prophet'ssons, all of whom died in infancy. Some traditions give different namesto one, and others give as many sons as the names are reported. Theremight have been a son of Mohammad by the name of Ibrahim, but that hewas born of Maria the Coptic is a perfect myth. This piece of the storyis the continuation of the traditions of Ibn Sád, which I have alreadycriticized in paras. 9 and 11. Ibn Sád has related another traditionthrough Omar bin Asim and Katáda to the effect that Mohammad's sonIbrahim was born of a captive woman. Asim has been condemned by AbuHatim, a doctor and critic in the Mohammadan traditionalliterature;[361] and Katáda (died 117 A. H. ) was not a contemporarywitness of what he relates. Thus he fails in giving any authority to hisnarration. There are two more traditions in Ibn Sád from similarauthorities like Katáda, namely, Zohri (died 124 A. H. ) and Mak-hool(died 118 A. H. )--not contemporaries of Mohammad, but of the class ofTabaeen--to the effect that Mohammad had said, "Had Ibrahim lived, thecapitation-tax would have been remitted to every Copt!" and that "HadIbrahim lived, his maternal uncles would never have been enslaved!" Theydo not say who was Ibrahim! Another and the last tradition in Ibn Sád through Yahia bin Hammád, AbuAvána, Soleiman-al-Aamash, Muslim, and Bara is to the effect thatIbrahim was born from a Coptic maid of the Prophet. The narratorSoleiman-al-Aamash was a _modallis_ (_Takrib_ in loco), or in otherwords, a liar. Besides the whole chain of the narration is _Mo-an-an_. In none of the canonical collections of traditions like those ofBokhari, Muslim, and others Ibrahim is said to have been born of Maria. Therefore any of their traditions regarding Ibrahim is not against us. It is also related in some genuine traditions that an eclipse of the suntook place on the day of Ibrahim's death. [362] The historians haverelated only one eclipse, which occurred in the sixth year of theHejira, when Mohammad was at Hodeibia. This shows that Ibrahim could notbe Maria's son. She only could come to Arabia a year later, as thedispatches to several princes were sent only in the seventh year. Yáfaee, in his history _Mirát-uz-Zamán_, has noted that the sun waseclipsed in the sixth year of the Hejira. In the tenth year, hesays, --"A genuine tradition has that the sun was eclipsed on the day ofIbrahim's death, and it has been stated above that it was eclipsed inthe sixth year. There is some difficulty. It was noted once only duringthe time of the Prophet. If it occurred twice, there is no difficulty;and if not, one of these two events must be wrong, either the eclipsetook place in the tenth year, or the Prophet's son died in the sixthyear. " But historically the eclipse was noticed only in the sixth year. There are different dates of Ibrahim's death reported by thebiographers--the fourth, tenth, and fourteenth of lunar months, but innone of them can an eclipse take place. [Sidenote: The story of Haphsa and Maria a spurious one. ] 13. (5) Lastly, I have to notice the infamous calumny against Mohammadconcocted up by his enemies, that Haphsa surprized the Prophet in herown private room with Maria. "She reproached her lord bitterly, andthreatened to make the occurrence known to all his wives. Afraid of theexposure and anxious to appease his offended wife, he begged of her tokeep the matter quiet, and promised to forego the society of Mariaaltogether. " But he afterwards released himself from it by a specialrevelation--(Sura LXVI, 1). Sir W. Muir remarks:-- "As in the case of Zeinab, Mahomet produced a message from Heaven, which disallowed his promise of separation from Mary. . . . " The passage in the Koran relating to the affair is as follows:-- "O Prophet! Why hast thou forbidden thyself that which God hath made lawful unto thee, [363] out of desire to please thy wives; for God is forgiving and merciful?"[364] [Sidenote: The affair not noticed in the early biographies. ] 14. Now this is perfectly a fictitious story. Neither there was any suchaffair, nor is there anything on this head mentioned in the Koran. It isvery strange that Sir W. Muir has abruptly left aside, in this instance, all his principal authorities, the Arabian biographers, Ibn Ishak, Wákidi (his secretary), and Tabari. The story is not to be found in anyof these biographies, nor in the canonical collections of Bokhari, Muslim, and Tirmizee. Sir W. Muir had himself laid down the rule thatonly these original authorities are to be depended upon, and the laterauthors are to be rejected. He writes:-- "To the three biographies by Ibn Hishám, by Wackidi his secretary, and Tabari, the judicious historian of Mahomet will, as his original authorities, confine himself. He will also receive with a similar respect such traditions in the general collections of the earliest traditionists--Bokhari, Muslim, Tirmizi, &c. --as may bear upon his subject. But he will reject as _evidence_ all later authors, to whose so-called traditions he will not allow any historical weight whatever. "[365] [Sidenote: Sir W. Muir's authorities not valid. ] 15. But in this instance, Sir W. Muir, being anxious to quote hisfictitious story to calumniate Mohammad, has ceased to be a judicioushistorian, and deviates from his self-imposed rule. He does not rejectthe story as he ought judiciously and conscientiously to have done, asit is not to be found in any of the earliest and original authoritiesmentioned by him; on the contrary, he compromises himself bycondescending to quote from secondary and later authors. He writes in afootnote without quoting his original authority:-- "The version given in the text is accredited by Jelálood-deen, Yahia, Beizawi, and Zamakshari, &c. " (Vol. III, page 163. ) These authors were neither biographers nor historians, and are thereforeno authorities at all. Zamakshari and Beizawi were commentators in thesixth and seventh centuries respectively. They give two stories, oneregarding Maria and another to the effect that the oath or promise ofMohammad had been to the effect that he would not again partake of aspecies of strong-scented honey disliked by his wives. Jelal-ud-deenMahalli was a commentator of the ninth century of the Hejira. Yahia isnot known among the commentators. He may be one of the latest authors. The commentators are generally no authority in the matter of traditionalliterature. "To illustrate allusions in the Coran, they are always readywith a story in point, but unfortunately there are almost alwaysdifferent tales, all equally opposite to the same allusion. Theallusion, in fact, was often the father of the story. What wasoriginally, perhaps, a mere conjecture of supposed events that mighthave given rise to an expression in the Coran, or was a single surmisein explanation of some passage, by degrees assume the garb of fact. Thetradition and the facts which it professes to attest thus, no doubt, often rest on no better authority than that of the verse or passageitself. "[366] [Sidenote: The best commentators and traditionists refute the story. ] 16. Those commentators who are well versed in the Science of Traditions, as well as doctors in the traditional literature, have rejected thestory of Maria as the subject-matter of Sura LXVI, as apocryphal. Baghvi, the author of _Misbah_ (the text of Mishkat), says that the Surawas revealed on the subject of honey, and not in the case of Maria. Thelatter story is neither in the _Sahihain_ (Bokhari and Muslim), nor hasit been narrated in any authentic way. Háfiz Ishmael Ibn Kaseeral Qarashi, as quoted by Kustlánee (notes onBokhari, Vol. VII, page 313), says that the Sura was certainly in thecase of honey. Imam Noávee, in his notes on Muslim, (Vol. I, page 463, ) says:--"In factit was revealed in the case of the honey, and not in the case of Maria. " [Sidenote: The story not accredited by the Koran. ] 17. Sir W. Muir himself admits that the earliest biographers do notrelate the story, but gives a false excuse for his not following theirexample. He writes:-- "The biographers pass over the scene in decent silence, and I should gladly have followed their example, if the Coran itself had not accredited the facts, and stamped them with unavoidable notoriety. "[367] The allegation is absurdly false, as everybody can satisfy himself byreferring to the Koran, which does not contain the fictitious andspurious story. [Sidenote: The story when fabricated. ] 18. The currency of the story did neither take place during the time ofMohammad, its proper age, nor during the lifetime of the companions. Itwas fabricated and imposed on some of the _Tabaee_ of weak authority inthe second century. [368] There is no doubt that the whole story is asheer fabrication from beginning to end. [Sidenote: Zeinab's case. ] 19. In conclusion, I will offer a few remarks in passing regarding SirW. Muir's reference here to Zeinab's case. He writes:-- "The charms of a second Zeinab were by accident discovered too fully before the Prophet's admiring gaze. She was the wife of Zeid, his adopted son and bosom friend; but he was unable to smother the flame she had kindled in his breast, and by _divine_ command she was taken to his bed. "[369] The story is from the beginning to end all untrue. Mohammad knew Zeinabfrom her infancy, she was his cousin; and he had himself arranged hermarriage with Zeid. When Zeid divorced her, she was thirty-five yearsold, and possibly could have no charms to fascinate even a stranger. Hadshe been charming or fair to look upon, Zeid should not have separatedhimself from her. There is no historical authority for this, or for anyother version of the story. The Koran, while treating the subject, hasnot the slightest reference to any of the stories afterwards made out tothe effect that Mohammad had been to Zeid's house, and, havingaccidentally seen the beauty of Zeinab's figure through the half-openeddoor; or that the wind blew aside the curtain of Zeinab's chamber, anddisclosed her in a scanty undress, was smitten by the sight. [370] [Sidenote: The story a spurious one. ] 20. These stories, and I believe a few more varied accounts of the same, like those of the story of Maria the Coptic, were originally mereconjectures of supposed events that might have given rise to anexpression in the Koran (Sura XXXIII, verse 37)--if not wilfulmisrepresentations of story-tellers and enemies of Islam--which theEuropean writers represent in the garb of facts. The words of the Koranwhich have been the father of the story are:-- "And when thou saidst to him unto whom God had shewn favour, and unto whom thou also hadst shewn favour, 'keep thy wife to thyself, and fear God, ' and thou didst hide in thy mind what God would bring to light, and thou didst fear men; but more right it had been to fear God. " This shows Mohammad dissuaded Zeid from divorcing his wife, notwithstanding the great facility of divorce common at that time inArabia. Sir W. Muir is not justified in copying these stories from Tabari. Theyare not related by earliest biographers from any authentic and reliablesource. He ought to have rejected them as spurious fabrications underhistorical criticism, as he rejects other traditions which are on abetter footing of truth than these false and maliciously forged stories. [Sidenote: Sir W. Muir's conjectures not justified. ] 21. Sir W. Muir has exceeded the limit he himself had marked out for ajudicious historian of Mohammad when he abounds in his wild fancies, andobserves-- "Zeid went straightway to Mahomet, and declared his readiness to divorce Zeinab for him. This Mahomet declined: 'Keep thy wife to thyself, ' he said, 'and fear God. ' _But Zeid could plainly see that these words proceeded from unwilling lips, and that the Prophet had still a longing eye for Zeinab. _"[371] Now this is a mere libellous surmise. He goes on still with hisdefamatory conjectures, and writes:-- "Still the passion for Zeinab could not be smothered; it continued to burn within the heart of Mahomet, and at last bursting forth, scattered other considerations to the wind. "[372] Mohammad never professed to have received a divine command to marryZeinab. It was not necessary for him to have done so. The outcry raisedby the Pagan Arabs was not because they suspected an intrigue on theProphet's part to secure a divorce, but because they looked upon anadopted son in the light of a true son, and considered, therefore, themarriage with Zeinab, after her divorce from Zeid, as falling within theprohibited degrees. This adoptive affinity was already abolished in theKoran (Sura XXXIII, 4): "God hath not made your adopted sons as your ownsons. " Sir W. Muir gravely mistakes in his remarks when he says:-- "The marriage caused much obloquy, and to save his reputation, Mahomet had the impious effrontery to sanction it by special Revelation from on high, in which the Almighty is represented as formally recording a divine warrant for the union. "[373] He quotes verse 36, Sura XXXIII. But he has himself admitted (Vol. III, page 229 footnote) "that this verse is rather in a recitative style of apast event, " and not a divine command to marry Zeinab. The words "wejoined thee in marriage unto her" in the verse do not mean a command formarriage. They simply mean that the marriage had taken place. The phrase"we joined thee in marriage unto her" is a mere form of expression. Almost all human actions are attributed to God in the Koran, andwhatever occurs in the world by the ordinary course of nature, and bythe free agency of men, is referred in the Koran to the immediate agencyof God. [Sidenote: A wrong translation of Sir W. Muir. ] 22. In the next verse--"There is no offence chargeable to the Prophet inthat which God hath enjoined upon him"--he wrongly translates _Faraza_as enjoined, and thus conveys an idea of a divine command. _Faraza_means he made (a thing) lawful or allowable. [See Lane's ArabicDictionary, Bk. I, Pt. VI, page 2373. ] In giving the above meaning Mr. Lane quotes this very verse. [374] Such unions were made lawful not onlyto Mohammad, but for all the Moslems, and there was nothing partaking ofa special prerogative for him. No special sanction is conveyed by theseverses. No special revelation from on high was brought forward to securehis own object or to give him an exceptional privilege. It was merelysaid that no blame attached to the Prophet for doing what was lawful. The word "_Amr_, " translated "command" and "behest, " in XXXIII, 37 and38, by Sir W. Muir and others, in fact means here and in other similarpassage (XIX, 21; IV, 50; XI, 76; and VIII, 43, 46), --God'sforeknowledge of future contingencies and not a legal command. The sameis the case with the word "_Qadr_" in XXXIII, 38, as well as in XV, 60, and LXXIII, 20, which means God's prescience and not a predestinateddecree. [Sidenote: In Zeinab's case no exceptional privilege was secured. ] 23. In conclusion, Sir W. Muir remarks:-- "Our only matter of wonder is that the Revelations of Mahomet continued after this to be regarded by his people as inspired communications from the Almighty, when they were so palpably formed to secure his own objects, and pander even to his evil desires. We hear of no doubts or questionings, and we can only attribute the confiding and credulous spirit of his followers to the absolute ascendency of his powerful mind over all who came within its influence. "[375] The verses 37 and 38 of the thirty-third Sura had not in any way"secured the objects of Mohammad, much less pandered to his evildesire. " As his marriage with Zeinab had taken place long before theywere published, they could not be said to confer any exceptionalprivilege upon him. [Sidenote: The false story traced to Mukátil. ] 24. The story copied by commentators that Mohammad had accidentally seenZeinab and admired her is traced to Mukátil, [376] a commentator of theKoran in the second century, who died at Basra 150 A. H. "The doctors(_in traditions_), " writes Ibn Khallikan in his Biographical Dictionary, translated by Slane, "differ in opinion respecting Mukátil: some declarethat, as a traditionist, he was worthy of confidence, and others accusedhim of falsehood. " . . . Ahmed bin Saiyár says:-- "Mukátil Ibn Suláimán, a native of Balkh, went to Marw, whence heproceeded to Irák. His veracity is suspected; his Traditions should beleft aside and declarations should be rejected. Speaking of the divineattributes, he said things which it would be sinful to repeat. " IbráhímIbn Yákúb-al-Juz-Jáni called Mukátil an audacious liar. Abu Abdar-Rahmán an Nasái said:--"Liars notorious for forging Traditions andpassing them off as coming from the Prophet were four in number: Ibn AbiYahya, at Medína; Al-Wákidi, at Baghdad; Mukátil Ibn Suláimán, inKhorásán; and Muhammad Ibn Saíd, surnamed _Al-Maslúb_, in Syria. " WakíIbn al-Jarráh said of Mukátil that he was a confirmed liar. Abu Bakral-Ajurri said: "I asked Abú Dáwúd Suláimán Ibn al Asháth concerningMukátil, and he answered:--'All Traditions given by him should berejected. ' According to Omar Ibn al-Ghallás, Mukátil Ibn Suláimán was aliar, and his traditions were to be rejected. " "As for Mukátil IbnSuláimán, " said Al-Bukhári, "pass him over in silence. " In anotherplace, he says of him: "He is just nothing at all. " Yahya Ibn Moíndeclared that Mukátil's traditions were of no value; and Ahmad IbnHanbal said: "As for Mukátil Ibn Suláimán, the author of the Commentary, I should not like to cite anything on his authority. " "His Traditionsare to be rejected, " said Abú Hátim ar-Rázi. According to Zakariya IbnYahya as-Sáji, people said of Mukátil Ibn Suláimán, the native ofKhorásán, "that he was a liar, and that his traditions should berejected. "[377] [Sidenote: Ikrama. ] Ikrama (died 107 A. H. ), another liar, had only surmised before Mukátilthat Mohammad might have admired Zeinab. His words, as related by thetraditionists, Abd bin Hamíd and Ibn-al-Munzar, are "as if she hadfallen deep in his mind. "[378] But Mukátil has converted this hazardousconjecture into a fact. Abd Allah Ibn al-Harith relates as follows:-- "I went to visit Ali, the son of Abd Alláh Ibu Abbás, and I saw Ikrama tied up at the door of a privy, on which I said: 'Is it thus that you treat your slave?' To which he replied. 'Know that that fellow has told lies of my father. '"[379] [Sidenote: Mohammad bin Yahya. ] Mohammad bin Yahya bin Habbán[380] (died 121 A. H. ) has also given thetradition of Mohammad's admiring Zeinab at Zeid's house, but does notgive his authority. He was not a contemporary narrator, therefore hisnarration is apocryphal and technically _Mursal_. [Sidenote: Katádá's conjectural interpretation not warranted. ] 25. All these silly fables, wild romances, and scandalous conjectureshave their origin in Katáda's improper interpretation of these words, "and thou didst hide in thy mind what God would bring to light" (SuraXXXIII, 37). Katáda (died 117 A. H. ) conjectured that the Prophetconcealed his desire that Zeid should divorce Zeinab. But all otherauthors[381] have found fault with Katáda in his surmise, which is notsupported by any word in the text or by any contemporary evidence. Thisinterpretation of Katáda is contradicted by the very words of Mohammadto Zeid in the same verse: "Keep thy wife to thyself and fear God. " [Sidenote: Other conjectures. ] 26. Many have been the conjectures as to what did Mohammad hide in hismind. There is one by Katáda already explained. Another is this, that heknew Zeid would divorce her, but concealing this in his mind, heinterdicted Zeid from doing so. A third conjecture is this, that heconcealed in his mind that if Zeid, contrary to his (Mohammad's) advice, were to divorce her (Zeinab), he (Mohammad) would marry her. Theseconjectures are all far-fetched and arbitrary, but it appears moreprobable that the social inharmony and domestic disturbances betweenZeid and Zeinab, and their resolve of separation, were withheld from thepublic by Mohammad, fearing the scandal it might give rise to among hisenemies. This is the only secret referred to in the verse so oftencited. [Footnote 336: _Annals of the Early Caliphate_. By Sir W. Muir, K. C. S. I. , LL. D. , D. C. L. , page 75, London, 1883. ] [Footnote 337: "It is to ransom the captive. "--XC, 13. "There is no piety in turning your faces towards the east or the west, but he is pious who believeth in God and the Last Day, and the Angelsand the Scriptures and the Prophets; who for the love of God disbursethhis wealth to his kindred and to the orphans and the needy, and thewayfarer and those who ask; and for ransoming, " &c. --II, 172. ] [Footnote 338: "And to those of your slaves who desire a deed of_manumission_, execute it for them, if ye know good in them, and givethem a portion of the wealth of God which He hath given you. Force notyour female slaves into sin, in order that ye may gain he casualfruitions of this world, if they wish to preserve their modesty. Yet ifany one compel them, then verily, after their compulsion, will God beForgiving, Merciful. "--XXIV, 33. ] [Footnote 339: "A believer killeth not a believer but by mischance: andwhoso killeth a believer by mischance shall be bound to free a believerfrom slavery, " &c. --IV, 94. ] [Footnote 340: "And those who _thus_ put away their wives, andafterwards would recall their words, must free a captive before they cancome together _again_, " &c. --LVIII, 4. ] [Footnote 341: "But alms are only _to be given_ to the poor and theneedy, and those who collect them, and to those whose hearts are won _toIslam_, and for ransoming and for debtors, and for the cause of God, andthe wayfarer, " &c. --IX, 60. ] [Footnote 342: "God will not punish you for a mistaken word in youroaths; but He will punish you in regard to an oath taken seriously. Itsexpiation shall be to feed ten poor persons with such middling _food_ asye feed your families with, or to clothe them; or to set free a captive:but he who cannot find the means shall fast three days. This is theexpiation of your oaths when ye have sworn. Keep then your oaths. ThusGod maketh his signs clear to you. Haply ye will be thankful. "--V, 91. ] [Footnote 343: _Vide_ Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 223. ] [Footnote 344: According to Hishámi, p. 745, a party of fifty or fortyKoreish went round about Mohammad's camp at Hodeibia, seeking to cut offany stray followers; and having attacked the camp itself with stones andarrows, they were caught and taken to Mohammad, who pardoned andreleased them. --_Vide_ Muir's Life of Mahomet, IV, p. 31, _f. N. _; andMoslim's collection of genuine traditions _Kitab-ul Jihad vas-Siyar_, chapter on _Tanfeel_ and _Ransom_. ] [Footnote 345: All the prisoners of Hawázin at Honain were releasedwithout taking any ransom and were not made slaves. See Muir's Life ofMahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 148-149. That Mohammad had presented three femaleslaves to Ali, Othman, and Omar from the captives of Bard Hawázin, asstated by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, p. 149, is void of all truth. Thecaptives were not enslaved. They were mere prisoners, as Sir W. Muirhimself calls them so (_ibid_, pp. 148-149); yet he styles these threeof them "female slaves. " The captives together with the captured campwere removed to the valley of Jierána, pending negotiations (_ibid_, p. 142). At the end of the negotiations the prisoners were released. Thusthere could be no distribution of prisoners to anyone. ] [Footnote 346: Sir W. Muir writes:--"Hishámee says that from the time ofKheibar _slaves_ became very plentiful among the Moslems, p. 333. I donot find that, excepting the family of Kinâna, any mention is made ofslaves taken at Kheibar. But money, which the victors obtainedplentifully at Kheibar, could purchase them cheaply in any part ofArabia. " (The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 73-74, and _footnote_. ) Butthe word originally used by Hishamee, "_sabaya_, " means captives andproperty captured, and not slaves, though captives, if not ransomed, were used to be made slaves under the Arab International Law. Besidesthis even the family of Kinána was never enslaved. Kinána was takencaptive and executed, because he had killed Mahamúd bin Muslama. _Vide_para. 75 of this book. The story that Mohammad immediately on Kinána'sexecution sent for her and cast his mantle over her, signifying that shewas to be his own, and consummated his marriage with her, and that herdower was her freedom (_vide_ Muir, _ibid_, pp. 68-69), is not genuineand authentic. His family, by which is meant Sofia and her cousin, wasnot enslaved, and there is no tradition, genuine or apocryphal, tocorroborate it. I here take the opportunity of quoting a speech ascribedto Mohammad while addressing Sofia, the widow of Kinána, copied by AbulMo'tamar Soleiman (died A. H. 143) in his "Campaigns of Mohammad. "Mohammad addressed her thus:--"I give thee choice either of Islam, or ofJudaism. If thou acceptest Islam, perhaps I may keep thee for myself. But if thou preferest Judaism, I may perhaps liberate thee, and jointhee to thy family. " _Vide_ Wákidi's "Campaigns of Mohammad, " page 393, Calcutta, 1856. This speech shows amply that Mohammad had no intentionof enslaving Sofia. The story of Mohammad's marriage with Sofia after her being given to andpurchased from Dihya, emanates from Anas, who cannot be relied upon. Anas had very recently been associated with Mohammad. He enteredMohammad's service only the other day when he started for the expeditionof Khyber, and was but a boy only a dozen-years old at that time. It isrelated by Bokhari from Anas himself, who said that the Prophet hadasked Abu Tulhah to get him a boy to serve him during the Khyberexpedition. So he took me to him, and I was a boy close to maturity(_Bokhari-Kitabul Jihad_). Anas has given two contradictory accountsabout Sofia; in one he says, "Dihya asked Mohammad's permission for acaptive girl, and took Sofia. When Mohammad heard about Sofia, he askedDihya to take another one; and having liberated Sofia married her, andher freedom was her dower. " In another tradition, Anas relates that"Sofia fell to the lot of Dihya, and Mohammad purchased her from him forseven camels. " He says:--"The people did not know whether he had marriedher, or had made her a concubine-slave, but when she rode on a camel, and Mohammad put veil round her, the people knew from this that she washis wife. " Both these traditions are narrated from Anas by Moslem in his_Saheeh_ (Book on Marriage). The idea that Mohammad married Sofia under the circumstances noted aboveis not satisfactorily established. It was only the fancy of the people, or was a conjecture of Anas. Yet Sir W. Muir has the effrontery toremark against Mohammad that: "Indeed, he is not free from the suspicionof being influenced in the destruction of Kinána by the desire ofobtaining his wife. " (The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, page 68, _footnote_. ) Kinána was executed for killing Mahmood bin Muslama, andSofia was neither enslaved nor married by Mohammad. Even if it be shownthat Mohammad married her afterwards under some other circumstances, it(Sir W. Muir's presumption) is an idle guess unwarranted by anyreasonable argument. The traditionists, Anas and others, have probably confounded Sofia, theaunt of Mohammad, who was with him during the expedition of Khyber(_vide_ Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, page 66, _footnote_), withKinána's widow of the same name, whom they fancied Mohammad might havemarried and carried with him on the same camel. The lady for whomMohammad lowered his knee to help her to ascend the camel (_ibid_, page70) was most probably Sofia, his aunt. ] [Footnote 347: Vol. III, pp. 278-279. ] [Footnote 348: _Vide_ The Biographical Dictionary of Persons who knewMohammad, by Ibn Hajar. In _Biblotheca Indica_. A collection of orientalSeries, published by the Asiatic Society, Bengal, No. 215, Vol. IV. Fasciculus 7, Calcutta, 1866; Art. Rehana, No. 444. ] [Footnote 349: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 278. ] [Footnote 350: "The days of Ignorance, that is, the period precedingIslam. "] [Footnote 351: "Two such are named by Tabari, I, page 248. " "A light ransom was fixed for each Arab slave--seven camels and sixyoung ones. In the case of some tribes which had suffered most severely(as the Beni Hanifa, the Beni Kinda, and the people of Omán discomfitedat Dabá) even this was remitted. " Annals of Early Caliphate. By Sir W. Muir, K. C. S. I. , LL. D. , D. C. L. , London, 1883, pp. 63, 64. ] [Footnote 352: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, page 56. ] [Footnote 353: _Ibid_, page 57, footnote. ] [Footnote 354: _Vide_ Hishamee, page 972. ] [Footnote 355: _Ibid_, page 971. ] [Footnote 356: _Vide Takrib_ by Ibn Hajar. ] [Footnote 357: _Vide_ History of Muhammad's Campaigns by Wákidi; editedby Von Kremer, Calcutta, 1856, from p. 360 to the end. ] [Footnote 358: Vol. III, page 62. ] [Footnote 359: _Vide_ Mizán-ul-Etedál by Zahabí. ] [Footnote 360: _Vide_ Nos. 976, 977, and 978 in the BiographicalDictionary of Persons who knew Mohammad, by Ibn Hajar, published by theAsiatic Society, Bengal, Calcutta, 1870, Vol. IV, pp. 779, 780, and781. ] [Footnote 361: _Vide_ Mizán, by Zahabí. ] [Footnote 362: "An eclipse of the sun occurred on the same day, and thepeople spoke of it as a tribute to the death of the Prophet's son. Avulgar impostor would have accepted and confirmed the delusion; butMahomet rejected the idea. "--"The Life of Mahomet" by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, page 166. ] [Footnote 363: "Meaning the company of his female slave. "] [Footnote 364: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, pp. 161 and 162. Taking concubine-slaves was an established and recognized institution ofthe Arab society, until Mohammad abolished it. Practically the customhas prevailed up to the present time. No blame attached to suchalliances in the social system of the Arabs. "The Caliphs of the Houseof Abbas were all of them the children of concubines except as--Saffah, Al-Mahdi, and Al-Amin" (History of Caliphs. By Sayúte. Translated byMajor Jarret, page 20, Calcutta, 1880). If the story regarding Mohammadbe true, there was no fear of exposure or offending the wives. ] [Footnote 365: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. I, Introduction, page ciii. ] [Footnote 366: "The Calcutta Review, " Feby. 1868, page 374. ] [Footnote 367: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. IV, page 160. ] [Footnote 368: Zeid bin Aslam (in _Tabrani_), who narrates the story, though he does not mention Maria, is a Tábaee (died A. H. 136), and doesnot quote his authority. Besides, his authority itself is impeached;_vide_ Ibn Adi in his Kámal. Masrook (in Saeed bin Mansoor) only came to Medina long after Mohammad'sdeath; therefore his narration, even if it be genuine, is not reliable. Zohak Ibn Muzahim (in _Tabrani_), also a Tábaee and of impeachedauthority, narrates it from Ibn Abbás, but he never heard any traditionfrom him, nor had he even seen him (_vide Mzŕn-ul-Etedal_, by Zahabi, and _Ansáb_, by Sam-áni). His narration must be hence considered asapocryphal. The ascription of Ibn Omar's (died 73 A. H. ) story, not strictly to thepoint, is untrustworthy. Abu Hurera's narration is also admitted as apocryphal; _videDur-rul-mansoor_, by Soyutí. All these traditions are noted by Soyutí in his _Dur-rul-mansoor_. The tradition by Nasáee (died 303 A. H. ) from Anas (died 90 A. H. )regarding the affair of a slave is equally contradicted by the traditionfrom Ayesha, the widow of the Prophet, narrated by the traditionistNasáee in the same place of his collection of traditions. This is thestory of the honey. _Vide_ para. 16, _ubi supra_. Ayesha's tradition ismore trustworthy than that of Anas. Hammád bin Salma, a narrator in theascription of Anas, has been impeached owing to the confusion of hismemory in the later days of his life (_vide Tekreeb_). Sabit, anotherlink in the same chain, was a story-teller by profession (_vide Zahabi'sTabakát_, ) and cannot be depended upon. And Nasáee himself has rejectedthe tradition ascribed to Anas, and is reported to have said thatAyesha's tradition has good ascription, while there is nothing valid inthat regarding Maria; _vide_ Kamálain's Annotations on _Jelálain inloco_. ] [Footnote 369: The Life of Mahomet by Sir W. Muir, Vol. IV, page 310. ] [Footnote 370: _Ibid_, Vol. III, page 228, and _footnote_ at pp. 229 and230. ] [Footnote 371: The Life of Mahomet by Sir W. Muir, page 228. The_italics_ are mine. ] [Footnote 372: Muir's Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 229. The traditionquoted by Sir W. Muir in this page is apocryphal and technically_Mursal_. ] [Footnote 373: _Ibid_, p. 230. ] [Footnote 374: "(T. A. ) _he made_ [a thing] _lawful_, or _allowable_, tohim (Jel in XXXIII, 38, and Kull in page 275 and T. A. *) relating to acase into which a man has brought himself (Kull): this is said to be themeaning when the phrase occurs in the Kur:" An Arabic-English Lexicon, by Edward William Lane, page 2375. ] [Footnote 375: The Life of Mahomet, Vol. III, page 231. ] [Footnote 376: Vide _Seerat Halabi_; or, _Insan-ul-Oyoon_, Vol. II, page402. ] [Footnote 377: Ibn Khallikan's Biographical Dictionary, Vol. III, pp. 409-410. ] [Footnote 378: Vide _Dur-rul-mansoor_, by Sayútí, _in loco_. ] [Footnote 379: Ibn Khallikan's Biographical Dictionary, Vol. II, page207. ] [Footnote 380: Narrated by Ibn Sád and Hákim. ] [Footnote 381: _Vide_ Abdur Razzák. Abd bin Hamíd, Ibn Jarír, Ibn-al-Monzar, Ibn Abi Hátim, and Tabráni's Collections of Traditions. ] Appendix C. The references to the particular events and circumstances relating tothe defensive wars mentioned in the Koran, quoted and referred by me inthis work, may be classified as follows:-- I. --The Persecutions of the Koreish at Mecca (B. H. 10-1). Sura xvi, 43, 44, 111. Sura ii, 210, 214, 215. Sura iii, 194. Sura iv, 97, 99, 100. Sura xxii, 57. Sura lx, 8, 9. Sura xlvii, 14. Sura xlviii, 25. Sura ix, 40, 48, 95. II. --The Aggressions of the Koreish at Medina, as well as those of theInhabitants thereof (A. H. 10). Sura ii, 214; Sura viii, 72; Sura ix, 13, 48, 72. III. The Wars of Defence against the Koreish and the Arabs, &c. , withseveral References to their Aggressions (A. H. 1-8). Sura xxii, 39-42. Sura ii, 186-189, 214, 215, 245, 247, 252. Sura iv, 76-78, 86, 91, 93. Sura viii, 19, 39-41, 58-66, 73, 74. Sura ix, 10, 13. IV. --The Various Battles, &c. (1) _The Battle of Badr_ (A. H. 2). Sura iii, 11, 119; Sura viii, 5-19, 39-52, 66-72; Sura xlvii, 4, 15. (2) _The Battle of Ohad_ (A. H. 3). Sura iii, 117-122; 134-154; 159-162. (3) _The Second Battle of Badr_ (A. H. 4), and _The Expulsion of the Bani Nazeer_ (A. H. 4). Sura iii, 167; and Sura lix, 2-14. (4) _The Battle of Ahzáb_ (A. H. 5). Sura xxxiii, 9-25. (5) _The Jews, Bani Koreiza, &c. _ (A. H. 5). Sura viii, 58-66; Sura xxxiii, 26-27. (6) _The pilgrimic Expedition to Hodeibia_ (A. H. 6). Sura xlviii, 1-3, 10, 11, 24, 25; Sura lx. (7) _The Expedition to Khyber_ (A. H. 7). Sura xlviii, 17, 20-22. (8) _The breach of the truce of Hodeibia by the Koreish_ (A. H. 8). (_a_) Before the Conquest of Mecca. Sura ix, 1-15. (_b_) After the Conquest of Mecca, Sura ix, 16-24. (9) _The Battle of Honain_ (A. H. 8). Sura ix, 25-27. (10) _After the Battle of Honain_ (A. H. 9). Sura ix, 28. (11) _The Expedition to Tabuk against the Christians (Romans) and their Jewish Allies_ (A. H. 9). (_a_) Exhortation to go to war in defence. Sura ix, 29-41, 124. (_b_) Backwardness reproached. 42-52, 56-57, 82-90. (_c_) Exhortations for contribution. 53-55, 58-60, 81. (_d_) The disaffected chided. 65-76, 121, 122, 125-130. (_e_) The Bedouins reprobated. 91-102. (_f_) The penitents forgiven. 103-107, 118. _THE END. _ INDEX. A. Aámir, lii. Aamir bin Tofeil, chief of Bani Aamir, xlvi. Abbas, 34. Abd-bin Hamid, 109 _f. N. _, 222. Abd bin Kosayy, xxxiii. Abd Monat, xvii _f. N. _ Abd Shams, xxviii, 7. Abdel Malik ibn Hisham, 72 _f. N. _, 73 _f. N. _ Abd-ud-Dar, xxxiii. Abd-ul-Kays, xlvi, lii. Abdul Hamid, 206, 208. Abdul Rahman, Mohammad's instruction to him, xxvii. Abdullah, 96, 97. Abdullah bin Abdur Rahaman bin Abi Sasta, 206, 208. Abdullah bin al Harith, 222. Abdullah bin Jahsh, 31, 56. Abdullah bin Khalal, 96. Abdullah bin Omar, 68 _f. N. _ Abdullah ibn Abbas, 135. Abdullah ibn Masood, 79, 80. Abdullah ibn Oneis, 69, 73. Abdullah ibn Rawáha, 72, 102. Abdullah ibn Shuburma, ibn Tufail ad Dubbi, 136. Abdullah ibn Zubair, 135. Abdur Razzak, 110 _f. N. _ Abs, xxxiv, xli, xlii, xlvi. Abű Abd-ur-Rahman Abdullah ibn Omar ibn-al Khattab, 135. Abu Abd-ur Rahman an Nasai, 221. Abu Afak, 61, 64, 65. Abu Avana, 210. Abu Bakr, vi, lix, 9, 179. Abu Bakr al Ajurri, 221. Abu Barda, 83. Abu Basir, 98, 99, 101. Abu Bera Amr ibn Malik, a chief of Bani Aamir, xlvi. Abu Cobeis, 6. Abu Daood, his book of Jihad, 71 _f. N. _, 78 _f. N. _, 79, 80 _f. N. _, 96, 133, 207. Abu Hattim, 207, 209. Abu Hurera, 215. Abu Jahl, 7, 55. Abu Naeem, 78. Abu Obeida, 107. Abu Omar-ad-Damishki, 68 _f. N. _ Abu Omar-al-Madni, 107. Abu Rafe, chief of the Bani Nazeer, 61, 71-72. Abu Sofian, viii, 7, 11, 14, 31, 32, 34, 53, 55, 56, 74, 75, 76; attempted assassination of, 61. Abu Talib, 6; his death, 7. Abu Yola, xxii. Abu Zara, 208. Abul Bakhtari, 34. Abul Hukeik, the chief of Bani Nazeer, 39. Abul Mo'tamar Soleiman, 89, 197, 200, 206. Abul Ozza, 76, 80, 81. Abwa, Expedition of, 29, 56. Abyssinia, The emigration of the Moslems to, v, xxxiii, 5; the two emigrations of, 11; Nadhir ibn Hareth's flight to, 78, 179. Age, The Apostolic, 109. Ahl Hadis, 160. Ahmas, liii. Ahmed bin Hanbal, 221. Ahmed ibn Abi Daood, 113. Ahmed Khan, Syed; his Commentary of the Koran, 95 _f. N. _ Ahzab, vii, xxii, xxiii, 10, 197. Ainee, a Commentary of the Hedaya, 125, 132, 134 _f. N. _ Ajtahada, 164. Ajtahada fil Amr, 164. Akhnas, 99. Al-Aamash, 135. Al-Amaran, 182. Al-Amin, 212 _f. N. _ Al-Auzai, 135. Ali, 9, 80, 196. Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbas, 68. Al-Is, 57. Al-Lat, 7. Allah, 38. Allauddin Al Haskafi, 170 Almotarrazi, 164. Al-Mamun, Khalif, 136. Al Yafi, 136. Amalekites, 153. Amar, commissioned to fight with Abu Sofian, 74, 81, 219. Amar-bin-Dinar, 134, 135, 136. Ameer Ali, Moulvie, quoted, 90. Amr, 64. Amr bin Saasaa, xxxiv, xli. Amru ibn Omerga, 75. Anaza, lii. Annajmus Saqib (star of piercing radiance), xxxvi. Annals of the Eastern Caliphate quoted, 193, 202. Ans, 93 _f. N. _, 136, 197-198, 215. Ans bin Qizi, 89. Ansab, 215. Ansars, people of Medina, 32, 41. Apartment, The (Sura), 188. Arabs, their society, ii, 26; pagan, 125. Arafat, xlviii. Arqam, Mohammad sought refuge in the house of, xxxiii. Asad, xii, xiii, xxxiii, xlvi, lii. Asas of Zamakhshire, 163 _f. N. _, 164. Ashar, xvi. Ashja, xii, xiii, xlii, xliii, xlv. Ashraf, 66. Asim, 80. Aslam, xliii. Asma bint Marwán, 61, 62-64. Assemblies of Ali Hariri, translated by Thomas Chenry, 169. As Sauri, 137. As Shabi, 136. Astromancy of the Jinns, xxxvi. Ata, 68, 116 _f. N. _, 134. Ata ibn Abi Rabah, 135. Autas, xxiii, 16. Aws Allah, xxxix. Aws Tribes (The), xxxix, xlii, xliv. Ayesha, 215, 216. Ayla, the Christian chief, xix. Azd, xlv, lii. Azdite Tribes (The), xxxix, xlv. Azhar, 99. Azruh, The Jews of, xix. B. Badr, vi, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xxii, xli, xlii, 10; the battle of, 11, 32, 34; Nadhir executed at, 78, 110 _f. N. _, 170, 181, 196. Baghdad, 221. Baghvi, 214. Bahrein, li. Baihakee, his traditions, 114. Balca, 40. Balkh, 22. Bahila, lii. Bahra, lii. Bajila, lii. Bakka, xxxiv, lii. Bakr, xvii, xxviii, xli, xlii, lii, 15, 22, 53. Bali, xlvi, liv. Bariq, liv. Baus, Meaning of, xxi. Bir Mauna, xii. Boas, Battle of, xlii. Bokharee, xxii, 96, 134, 199, 207. C. Calcutta Review (The) quoted, 213. Campaigns of Mohammad by Wackidi, 78 _f. N. _, 102, 197, 198. Canaan, 140. Canaanites, 153. Capitation-tax, 120, 159. Cattle, The (Sura), 183. Caussin de Perceval, xxvii. Cazenove, Dr. , xxvii. Chaldean, xxxv. Chenry, Thomas, quoted, 169. Chosroes, 140. Christians, 141, 142, 147, 157. Code, The Hanafee, 137, 159. Commentary of the Koran, 154. Commentary on International Law, xxx. Concubinage not allowed by the Koran, 193; of Rihana with the Prophet not proved, 201; of Maria the Coptic, 204-211; of Haphsa and Maria, 211. Coppée's (Henry) History of the Conquest of Spain by the Arabs quoted, xxix. Corinthians, 1, vii, 12-16; vii, 15, 112. Cow, The (Sura), 181. Creator, The (Sura), 181. Cushite Tribes (The), xxxv. Cyrus, 145. D. Dahis, The war of, xli. Daniel, The Book of, xxxv. Daree, liv. Dar-ul-Harb, 157, 158. Dar-ul-Islam, 157, 158. David, 152. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, xxiv. Descriptive Astronomy by Chambers quoted, xxxvi. Deutronomy, xx, 20, 110. Ditto, xx, 10-17, 152. Ditto, xxi, 153. Ditto, vi, 5, 178. Dhumra, 30. Dictionary, Biographical, by Ibn Khallikan quoted, 135-137, 206, 230. Dictionary, Biographical, of persons who knew Mohammad, 208. Dihya sent by Mohammad to the Roman Emperor, xiii, 197. Ditch, Battle of the, 13, 35. Dods, Dr. , quoted, lx, lxxiii, lxxxiii. Dous, xlv. Duma, The Christian chief of, xix, 12. Dumatal Jandal, xii. Dur-rul-Mansoor, 215. Dur-rul-Mukhtár, 170. Dzu Nowâs, xxxix. E. Early Caliphate and rise of Islam, by Sir W. Muir, 140. Egypt, 140; Governor of, 205, 206. Exodus, xxiii, 27-33, 151. Extraordinary Popular Delusions, by Charles Mackay, quoted, xxxviii. F. Fadak, 15 _f. N. _, 39. Fakhr-ud-deen Razi, 178. Faraza, 219. Farwa, liv. Fasád, The war of, xliii. Fayoomee, Author of Misbahel Moneer, 164. Females in connection with the treaty of Hodeibia, 110-112. Fezara, xiii, xxxiv, xlii, xlv, xlvi, liv, 35, 39; executed by Abu Rafe, 71. Fitnah (Persecutions), ii, xvii, 17, 18, 44, 45, 122, 133. Fluegel, Translation of the Koran by, 120. Forbidding, The (Sura), 185. Freeman, Dr. , quoted, 140, 141. Fruit-trees, 109-110. Furkan, 177. Fyrozabadee, 163 _f. N. _ G. Ghaba, Al, 93. Ghafiq, liv. Ghanim, liv. Ghassan, The tribes of, xxxiv, xlii, xlvi, liv. Ghassanide, Prince at Bostra (The), xxxix, 16, 139. Ghatafan, xii, xiii, xli, 12, 35, 39; tribes of, 72, 89. Ghaus, xliii. Ghazavat, Meaning of the word, xxi. Ghifar, xliii. Ghussan, 40. Gibbon quoted, xxiv, 26, 49 _f. N. _ Green, The Revd. Samuel, quoted, xxiii-xxiv. H. Habbar, 113 _f. N. _ Hafasa, xxxiv. Hafiz Ishmael ibn Kaseer-al-Qarashi, 214. Hakeem-bin-Hizam, 114. Halabi, 30; Insan-al-Oyoon of, 91; quoted and refuted, 129-132. Hall's (William Edward) International Law, xxix. Hallam, lxiii, lxv. Hamadan, liv. Hammad bin Salma, 215. Hamra, Abul Ozza caught at, 81, 82. Hamza, 29, 55. Hanafee Code (The), 137, 159. Hanifa, xxxiv, xxxix, liv, lv, 203. Haphsa, 211. Harb (Warfare), 163. Harb-fijar, Battle of, xli. Haris, xxxiii, xxxiv, xlii, lv, 48 _f. N. _, 64, 106. Harith of Najrân, xxxix. Harith ibn Amir, 34. Hashim, xxxiv, 34. Hashimites (The), xxxiii, 6. Hatib's story, 187. Hawazin, xlii, xliii, xlvi, xlviii, 16, 39, 86, 196. Hazaramaut, li. Hedaya (The), 116; quoted, 117, 118, 120, 125. Hegira (The), 8. Hilal bin Amr, bin Saasaa, lv. Hims, 40. Himyar, xliii, xlvi, lv. Himyarite stock, xlv. Hinzala Tribe (The), xxxiv. Hira, The Kingdom of, xli. Hisham, 34. Hishami, xxxiii, 74, 81 _f. N. _, 89, 196, 197, 200. Hisham-bin-Abdul Malik, 206. History and Conquest of the Saracens quoted, 140, 141. History of European Morals quoted, 105. History of Mohammadanism (The), quoted, xxviii. History of the Conquest of Spain by the Arabs, xxix. History, The Jewish, 152. Hodeibia, Truce of, xi, xiv; violation of the truce, xvi, xxvi, xliii, xlix, 15, 22, 86; one of the articles of the treaty of Hodeibia, 99; females in connection with it, 110, 196. Honain, xviii, xxii, xlvii, 16; Nadhir ibn Harith present at the Battle of, 78, 86, 196. Horne, T. H. , 151. Hughes, The Revd. T. P. , quoted, 154. Huweisa, 106, 107. I. Ibn Abbas; his evidence, 68, 96, 113, 215. Ibn Abdeen, 127. Ibn Abi Yahya, 221. Ibn Adi, 215. Ibn Al Athir, 30, 164 _f. N. _ Ibn Ky-yim, 100. Ibn al Mosayyib, 68. Ibn Attiah, 170. Ibn Hajr al Askalani, 63, 206, 208; quoted and refuted, 128, 129. Ibn Hisham, xv, xxii, xxxvi, xlvii, 30, 63, 64, 68 _f. N. _, 69, 71, 74, 78, 80, 82, 86, 91, 92, 93 _f. N. _, 102, 106, 107, 109 _f. N. _, 207, 214. Ibn Ishak, xxii, 30, 64, 69, 71, 73, 74, 79, 80, 91, 93 _f. N. _, 100, 106, 109 _f. N. _, 206, 207. Ibn Jarir Tabari, 93 _f. N. _ Ibn Khaldun, 90. Ibn Khallikan's Biographical Dictionary quoted, 136 _f. N. _, 137, 206, 220. Ibn Maja, 113, 207. Ibn Manda, 78. Ibn Mardaveih, 93 _f. N. _, 109 _f. N. _ Ibn Mas-ood, 79, 80. Ibn Mokrram, 163 _f. N. _ Ibn Ockba, 109 _f. N. _ Ibn Omar, 215. Ibn Omeya, 74. Ibn Sad Katib Wakidi, xxii, 63, 69, 74, 75, 78, 114, 206, 208, 210. Ibn Saniua, 106, 107. Ibn Sayyad al Nas, 89. Ibn Shahab, 113. Ibn Shobormah, 134. Ibn Sirni, 136. Ibn Sofian, 114. Ibrahim, 80. Ibrahim, the son of Mohammad, 209, 210. Ibrahim bin Maisura, 68 _f. N. _ Ibrahim ibn Yakub al Juz Jani, 221. Idolatry, Mohammad's abhorence of, 6. Ignorance, Time of, 87, 169, 202. Ikrama bin Abi Jahl, his lying character, 68, 113, 222. Imam (The), 117; the Mujtahid, 136, 206. Immunity, The (Sura), 185, 188, 189, 190, 191. Insan-ul-Oyoon, 30, 80 _f. N. _, 81 _f. N. _, 91 _f. N. _, 102, 129, 131 _f. N. _ International Law, by W. E. Hall, quoted, xxix. Intolerance of the Koreish, 8; allegation on Mohammad, xxxi, 42, 51. Introduction of the Book, p. I. Introduction of the critical study and knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, by T. H. Horne, quoted, 151, 152. Irak, 221. Irshadussari, 170. Irving, W. , quoted, 74. Islam, the first propagation at Mecca, xxxii-xli; the impediments it received on account of internecine wars, xl. Islam under the Arabs, by Major R. D. Osborn, quoted, 146, 148. Islami poets, 165, 169. Israel, 152. Israelites commanded to slay the Canaanites, 151. Istizan, 38. J. Jaad, lv. Jaafir bin Kelab ibn Rabia, lv. Jabir, xxii. Jabir ibn Abdullah, 68, 135. Jabra, The Jews of, xix. Jadila, xliii. Jafar, 206, 208. Jahad, 170, 192. Jahada, 163, 166, 170, 191. Jahada fil Amr, 163. Jahada fi Sabeel Allah, 164, 170. Jahadaka, 166, 173. Jahadoo, 166, 173, 179, 180, 181, 182, 188, 189, 191. Jahd, 166, 167, 170, 181, 183. Jahid, 166, 173, 185. Jahid-hom, 166. Jahidoo, 166, 173, 175, 176, 180. Jahili, 165, 168. Jálút (Goliath), 152. Jarret's (Major) Translation of History of Caliphs by Sayúte, 212. Jazima, 87. Jedda, The abode of Bani Ashar, xlv. Jeifer bin al Jalandi, lvi. Jelalud-Deen Mahalli, 213. Jews (The) of Medina, iv, 34-40, 73; excited to take up arms by Nueim, 107, 125, 139, 141, 142, 147, 157. Jierana, The valley of, 196. Jihad, The popular, 114-161; meaning defined, 155; does not mean war or crusade, 163; classical meaning of Jihad, &c. , 163; post-classical or technical meaning of Jihad, 164; the classical tongue and Arabian poets, 165; the conjugation and declination of Jahd and Jihad, 166; the number of instances in which they occur in the Koran, 166; in what sense they are used in the Koran, 167; conventional significations of, 168; Mohammadan commentators quoted, 170; when the word 'Jihad' was diverted from its original signification to its figurative meaning, of waging religious war, 170; all the verses of the Koran containing the word Jihad and its derivatives quoted and explained, 171-192. Jihádan, 164, 170, 175, 186. Jinn, Tribe of, xxxiv-xxxviii. Jizya, 35. Johd, 167, 169. Joheina, xlii, xliii, xlvi, lvi. Jomahites (The), xxxiii. Joshua, 141, 153. Jouhari, 163 _f. N. _, 164. Judzam, xiii, xlvi, 40. Jufi, lvi. Juzam, _see_ Judzam. K. Kaaba, viii; Moslems prevented from, xlv, 5, 139; stripped of its idols, xlix, l. Kab, xxxiv, lvi. Kab bin Yahooza, 107. Kab ibn Ashraf, 61, 66-68, 106. Kahins, xxxv, xxxvi, xxxviii; Kahinite stock (The), xlv. Kahlanite stock, xxxix, xlv, xlvi. Kainuka, xlii, 34, 35. Kalb, xxxiv, lvi. Katib Wakidi, xlvi. Kent's Commentary on International Law, xxx. Khalid ibn Waleed, 87, 193. Khasafa, xlvi. Khas-am bin Ammar, lvi. Khaulan, lvi. Khazraj tribes, xxxix, xlii, xliv. Khozaá, xii, xvi, xvii, xliii, 123. Khozeimah, xxxiv. Khushain, xlv. Khyber, xiii, xviii, xxii, xxiii, 37 _f. N. _ Kifaya, 122, 125. Kiláb, lii. Kinana, Tortures of, lvi, 95; Bani, lii. Kinda, xxxiv, xlii, lvi. Kitab-ul-Maghazi, xxii. Kital (Warfare), 163, 192, 193. Koostlánee, his Commentary of Bokharee, xxii, 92, 93, 170. Koran does not enjoin compulsory conversion, xxxi. Everywhere preaches tolerance of every religion, xxxii. Koreish, ii, iii, iv, v, vi, vii, ix, x, xi, xii, xiii, xxiv, xxxiii, xxxix; the heavy persecutions of, l; their embassy to the Court of Abyssinia, 5; send scouts to search for Mohammad, 9; their severity to fugitives, _id. _; their maltreatment of children and women, _id. _; become more and more hostile, 11; joined by the Bani Mustalik, 12; their anxiety to postpone hostilities, 13; besiege Medina once more, 14; violate the treaty of Hodeibia, xvi, 15; their intolerance, 27; excited to take up arms by Nueim, an Arab, 101, 139, 187. Koreishite persecution, xxxiv; caravans alleged to be intercepted, 55, 56, 57. Koreiza, The Jewish tribes of, xiii, xix, xxii, xlii, 14, 34; execution of, 87-94, 196-200. Kotelu, 156. Koukabi Durrari Sharah, 68. Kozaáite Tribe (The), xliii, xlvi. Kufa, 136; the abode of Bani Shaitan, xxxiv. Kulab, xlii. Kunniat (patronymic), 208. Kurz-bin-Jabir, a Koreish, commits a raid upon Medina, xi, 11, 92. Kustalani, _vide_ Koostalanee. L. La-Arjomonnaka (I will assuredly say of thee), xxxviii. Lahyan, xii, 12, 69. Lakhm, 40. Lane, E. W. , quoted, 137-138 _f. N. _, 168-169. Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon, xxxviii, 163 _f. N. _, 164, 167, 200, 219. La-taatadú (do not attack first), xxvii. Law, The common, in connection with Jihad, 116-117; its commentators, 119-120, 158. Law of Moses (The), 110, 140. Law of Scriptural interpretations; limited or conditional, general or absolute, 118. Law of the Koran with regard to unbelievers, 111. Law, The Mohammadan Revealed, or the Koran, 159. Lecky, his standard of Morality, 104-105. Lecture, The Rede, quoted, 140. Leena, 110. Legists, The early Moslem, against Jihad, 134; their biographical sketches, 135-137. Leith, 15 _f. N. _ Lieber Francis quoted, 33, 76, 88; on Military necessity, 104. Life of Mahomet, founder of the Religion of Islamism, by the Revd. S. Green, xxiv. Life of Mohammad by Dr. Sprenger quoted, xxiv. Light, The (Sura), 185. Lisanul-Arab of Ibn Mokarram, 163. Loghat, or The Classical Tongue of Arabia, 165. Lokman, 177. Luke, x, 27; and xiii, 124, 178. M. MacColl, The Revd. Malcolm, quoted, 157. Macna, The Jews of, xix. Maddool Kamoos, by Mr. Lane, 164. Maghazi, 38, 187 (accounts of the Campaigns of Mohammad), xliv. Mahmud, killed by Kinana, 95. Mahmud bin Muslama, brother of Mohammad bin Muslama, 95, 197. Mahrah, lvi. Mak-hool, 209. Malak, 38. Malik, 38. Manakib, 199. Marafat, Anwáa ilm Hadees, 68. Maria the Coptic, 204; sent by the Roman Governor to Mohammad, 205; neither a slave nor a concubine, 206-208; had no son, 209; the spurious character about her story, 211, 214, 216. Mark, XII, 30, p. 178. Marr-al Zahran, xlviii. Marriage, a strict bond of union in the Koran, 113. Marw, 221. Marwan, 62. Masrook, 79, 215. Mecca, xvi, xxii, 7. Meccans, iii, 9; their invasion of Medina, 10, 32. Medina, 100; Koreish march upon, vi, vii, xiii; the flight of Mohammad to, 5. Mesopotamia, xxxv, xlviii. Mikyas ibn Subaba, 96. Mill's (Charles) History of Mohammadanism quoted, xxviii. Mirat-uz-Zaman, 210. Misbah-ul-Moneer of Fayoomee, 164, 214. Mishkat (Book of Retaliation), 71 _f. N. _, 96 _f. N. _ Mizan-ul-Etedal, 68, 208, 210, 215. Moadd, xlvi. Moaddite stock (The), xxxiv, xliii, xlvii. Mo-an-an, 210. Moavia ibn Mughira, 76, 81-83. Modallis, 210. Modern Egyptians of Lane, 137, 138. Mohajirin (Refugees), 32. Moharib, xxxiv, lvi. Moharram, 23 _f. N. _, 53. Mojahadatan, 164. Mojahadina, 184. Mojahadoona, 184. Mojahid, 155, 184. Mojahiddin, 155. Mojahidina, 166, 174, 184. Mojahidoona, 166, 174, 184. Moleil bin Zamra, xliii. Mohammad, his incapacity to undertake offensive wars against his enemies, the Koreish, pp. Ii, iv, v; had no intention to waylay the caravans at Badr, viii-x; his singular toleration and his wars of self-defence, xiv; the number of his wars, xx, xxiii; considered a sanguinary tyrant by the Revd. M. Green, xxix; defence of his allegation, xxiv-xxv; a second view of the wars of Mohammad, xxviii-xxx. His imprisonment, his preaching at Tayif, xxxiv; his followers persecuted, 1; insults offered him, 5; prevented from offering his prayers, _id. _; his preaching against idolatry, 6; his insecurity at Mecca, 7; sets off to Tayif, _id. _; proscribed by the Koreish, 9; hides himself for three days in a cave, _id. _; gains the battle of Badr, 10; defeated and wounded at Ohad, 12; fights the battle of the Ditch, 14; undertakes the lesser pilgrimage of Mecca, _id. _; encamps at Hodeibia, 15; marches to defend the Bani Khozaá, 16; his wars purely defensive, 17-26; was justified in taking up arms, 27; his attacks mere acts of retaliation, 33; gives quarters to his enemies, and enters into a treaty with the Jews, 34-40; his last war with the Romans, 41; never taught intolerance, 43; the object of his wars, 50-51; his alleged interceptions of the Koreish caravans, 55-57; the alleged interceptions proved impossible, 58; the assassinations said to have taken place at his own instructions, 60-76; his alleged cruelty in executing the prisoners of war, 76-83; represented as directing the execution of the prisoners of Badr, 83-85; his kind treatment of the prisoners of war, 85-87; had no share in the execution of a singing girl as alleged by his biographers, 96-97; never refused Abu Basir from going back to his guardian, 99; his adherence to the treaty of Hodeibia, 100; never gave any permission for the murder of Sanina, 106-107; his Koran never teaches aggressive wars, 125; Freeman Stephens, Bosworth Smith, George Sale, Major Osborn, the Revd. Wherry, the Revd. Hughes, and the Revd. MacColl, on the wars of Mohammad, 146-161. Mohammad (Sura), 184. Mohammad bin Ishak, 68. Mohammad bin Kobeib Hashimi, 80. Mohammad bin Muslama, 95. Mohammad bin Sad Kalib Wakidi, 68, 201, 207. Mohammad bin Sireen, 68. Mohammad bin Yahya bin Habban, 222. Mohammad, Buddha and Christ, by Dr. Dods, quoted, lxxiv. Mohammad Karamat-ul Ali of Delhi, 100 _f. N. _ Mohammad and Mohammadanism, by B. Smith, quoted, 143. Mokatil, 184, 220-221. Mokhadrams, poets, 165, 169. Mokowkas, the Roman Governor, 205. Moleil-bin-Zamra, xliii. Mooahib of Koostlanee, 93 _f. N. _ Mooltan, 169. Morad, lvi. Morocco, 169. Mosaic injunctions, 153. Moses, The law of, 110, 140, 141, 145, 150, 152, 153. Mosheim, Dr. , quoted, lxi, lxiii, lxv. Moslems forced to resort to arms in pure self-defence, 10; threatened by Abu Sofian with an attack, 7, 13. Moslim, his collections, 71 _f. N. _, 86, 196, 198, 210, 214. Movatta, by Malik, 114. Mowallads, poets, 165. Mozar, xlvi. Mozeina, xlii, xliii. Muallafa Qolubohum (those whose hearts are to be won over), xlviii. Mudlij, lv; a tribe of Kinana, iv, 30. Mufti, 136. Mughrib of Almotarrazi (The), 164 _f. N. _ Muheiasa, the murderer of Ibn Sanina, 106, 107. Muir's (Sir W. ) Life of Mahomet quoted, i, vi, viii, ix _f. N. _, xxvii, xxviii, xxxi, xxxii, xxxiv, xxxix, xliii, xlvi, xlviii, xlix, l, lxvi, lxvii, lxx, lxxii, lxxviii, lxxx, 9 _f. N. _, 27, 29 _f. N. _, 30 _f. N. _, 39, 43, 46, 47, 49 _f. N. _, 51, 52, 56, 58 _f. N. _, 64 _f. N. _, 65, 67, 68 _f. N. _, 69, 72, 73, 75, 76, 78, 82, 83, 85, 89, 91, 93, 97, 98, 99, 102, 106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 _f. N. _, 138, 140, 160 _f. N. _, 170, 178, 180, 181, 187, 188, 193, 196, 197, 198, 200, 201, 205, 210, 212, 214, 216, 217, 218, 219. Mujanna, xlviii. Mujhool, 134. Mujtahid, 137, 160. Mukwhumites (The), xxxiii. Muntafiq, lvi. Muraisia, xviii. Murra, xiii, xlv, xlvi, lvi, 15, 39. Mursul, 109 _f. N. _ Musa-bin-Akba, xxii. Musab, 78. Mustalik, xii, xviii; a branch of Khozaá, xxiii, 12; released without ransom, 86, 196. Muta, Expedition to, 138. Mut-im, 7. N. Nadhirbin Harith, 76, 77-78. Naeem, 13. Najashee, xxxiii. Najd, xii, 12; the Bedouin tribes of, xli, xlii, xliii, 89, 196, 199, 200; celebrated for Bani Tamim, xlvii. Najran, The Christians of, xxxiii, 37, 48. Nakha, lvi. Nakhla, the Jinns converted at, xxxv, xxxvi, 30, 56. Nasaee, 207, 215, 216. Nations, The battle of, 13. Nazeer treasoned against Medina, xii, xlii, 34, 66, 71; its chief, 72; the expulsion of, 108-110. Nazr, xxxiv, 78. Nihayeh of Ibn-al-Atheer, 164 _f. N. _ Nineteenth century (The) quoted, 158. Nineveh, xxxv. Nisibin, xxxv. Noavee, 214. Nohd, lvi. Notes on Muhammadanism, by Revd. T. P. Hughes, 154. Nueim, his alleged employment to break up the confederates who had besieged Medina, 101-105. Numbers, xxxi, 153. Nuraddin Ali-al-Halabi quoted and refuted, 129-132. O. Obada-bin-Samat, 58 _f. N. _ Obeida, 29, 55. Ohad, Battle of, vii, xii, xviii, xxii, xlii, xlvii, 10, 11, 34, 69, 197. Okaz, xlviii. Okba bin Mueit, 76, 79-81. Oman, li. Omar, 83, 196, 202. Omar bin Asim, 209. Omar ibn al Ghallas, 209. Omar ibn al Hakam, 201. Omeir, 62, 63. Omeya bin Khalf, 56. Omiyyiads, xxxiii. Omm Kirfa, 91. Omm Rabab, 208. Ommara, 80. Oneis, 73. Orfee, 170. Orna, 69. Osaba-fi-Tamiz Issahába, 68 _f. N. _ Osborn, R. D. , Major, quoted, 42, 62; refuted, lxviii, lxxxv, lxxxvii, lxxxviii, lxxxix, 146-149. Oseir ibn Zarim, the chief of Nazeer of Khyber, 39, 61, 72-73. Osheira, Expedition of, 29, 56. Osman, the Moslem envoy to Mecca, xv. Osman, 80, 196. Osman bin Affan, 89. Osman bin Zaed, 91 _f. N. _ Otheil, 78 _f. N. _ Oyoon-al Asar, 89. Ozra, xxxiv, lvi, lvii. P. Palmer's (H. ) Translation of the Koran quoted, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191. Patriarchal form of Government at Mecca, iii. Pargod (Veil), xxxviii. People of the Book (Kitabi), 157. Persia, The Empire of, 138. Persecution of the early Moslems, 1; noticed in the Koran, 2-4; their historical summary, 5; of the Medina converts, 9; of the Moslems by the Koreish after their flight from Mecca, 9; of the Koreish at Mecca, 225. Philistines, 152. Pilgrimage, 14, 178. Pilgrims, 8. Poets Jahili, Mokhadrams, Islami, and Mowallads, 165. Poole, S. L. , quoted, lxxxv, 61, 97-98. Prisoners of war defined, 76. Puffendorf, 70. Punishment, Forms of primitive, 94-95. Pyrenees, 169. Q. Qadr, 220. Qalqashandi's Dictionary of Arab tribes, xxxiv. Qarashi, 214. R. Rabia, The Bani Abd-ul-Kays, the descendants of, xlvii. Radd-ul Muhtar of Ibn Abdeen, 127. Raha, lvii. Rahrahan, Battle of, xli. Raid of a Koreish chief upon Medina, 11. Of Bani Asad and Bani Lahyan, 12. Of Bani Duma, 12. Rajab, 56. Raji, xii, 12, 39, 74. Rajm, Meaning of, xxxviii. Ramzan, 23 _f. N. _, 32, 53. Rawasa, lvii. Red Sea, 5. Reforms, The proposed, political, social, and legal, 113 _f. N. _, 158 _f. N. _ Resurrection, The day of, and Jihad, 133. Rifáa, a Koreishite, 88 _f. N. _ Rihana, 201. Ril, a clan of Bani Aamir, xlvi. Robbers, The Urnee, 92-95. Rodwell's Translation of the Koran quoted, 120 _f. N. _, 167, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191. Rojúm (conjecture), xxxviii. Romans, The expedition against them, 40-41. Rome, The Empire of, 138. Romulus, 145. S. Saad, xiii, xlii. Saad Hozeim, lvii. Saad ibn Bakr, xiii, xl, xliii, xlv. Sabaya, 197-200. Sabit, 215. Sad, 35; his judgment, 37-38, 55, 198, 199. Sad bin Obadah, 89. Sadif, lvii. Sadoos, lvii. Sadr Av-val (the Apostolic Age), 109. Saeed, 83. Saeed bin Mansoor, 215. Saffah-al-Mahdi, 212. Safra, 31. Safwan bin Omayya, 113. Saheeh, 198. Saheeh Bokharee, 68. Saheeh of Moslim, 86. Sahim, lvii. Sahm, xxxiii _f. N. _ Sakeef, lvii. Sakifites (The), xviii, xxxvi. Salaba, xlvi. Salámáni, lviii. Sale, G. , his Translation of the Koran, xxix; quoted, 143-146, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 184, 185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191. Saleim, xii, xiii, 15 _f. N. _ Salim, 65 _f. N. _ Sallam ibn Abul Hokeik, Abu Rafe, 71. Sam-áin, 215 _f. N. _ Samaritan, 157. Samuel, 152. Saraya, Meaning of, xxi. Sawad, 136. Sayúte's History of Caliphs, 212 _f. N. _, 215 _f. N. _ Schedim (Demons), xxxviii. Secker, Archbishop, quoted, 27. Seerat Halabi, 80 _f. N. _, 81 _f. N. _, 100 _f. N. _, 102 _f. N. _ Seerat Shamee, 63, 100 _f. N. _ Seerat-ul-Mohammadiya, 100. Seleucas, xxxv. Self-defence, Right of, xxv. Shaban, 53. Shahbudeen Ahmed bin Hajr Makki, quoted and refuted, 128-129. Shaiban, lviii. Shaitain, Battle of, xxviii, xlii. Shamee, 100. Shamsuddin Karmani, 68 _f. N. _ Sarakhsee Sums-ul-Aimma (the sun of leaders), 126-128. Shaw-wal, 23. Sheb, the quarter of Abu Táleb, 6. Sheb Jabala, Battle of, xli. Sheikh Mohammad Al Tamartashi, 170. Sihab of Jouhari, 163, 164. Slane, De, Baron MacGuckin, 135-137. Slavery and concubine-slaves as concomitant evils of war, 193-224; slavery and concubinage not allowed in the Koran, 193; Sir W. Muir quoted, 193; measures taken by Mohammad in the Koran to abolish slavery, 194-196; none of the prisoners of war was enslaved, 197-198; the Bani Koreiza not enslaved, 198-200; Omar the second Khalif liberated all Arab slaves, 202-203. Smith, Bosworth, quoted, i, xxvii, 143. Smith's (W. ) Dictionary of the Bible, xxxvi. Sodaa, lviii. Soffian Ath-Thauri, 136-137. Sofia, 197, 198. Sofian ibn Khalid, 61, 69-71. Sofian ibn Oyaina, 136, 137. Sofian Sowri, 134. Sohail, 93 _f. N. _ Soleiman-al-Aamash, 210. Spider, The (Sura), 180. Spoils, The (Sura), 182, 183. Sprenger, Dr. , Life of Mahomet quoted, xxix, xxxiii, 179. Stanley defended, 112. Stephens, The Revd. , quoted, lxxv, 141-142. Stobart quoted, lxviii, 2, 52. Strabo, xxxv. Suleim, xii, xiii, xlii, xlv, xlvi, 12. Sura II, xvi, xxvi, xxvii, 3, 10, 18-19, 42 _f. N. _, 44, 49, 50, 51, 111, 116 _f. N. _, 118, 120 _f. N. _, 121, 122, 123, 124, 126, 127, 128, 130, 132, 133, 134, 152, 156, 166, 171 _f. N. _, 173 _f. N. _, 181, 194, 225. Sura III, xii, 3, 50, 166, 174, 182, 225, 226. Sura IV, xv, xl, 4, 10, 19-21, 50, 95, 111, 113, 118, 122, 142, 154, 155, 166-167, 172, 174, 184, 195, 203, 204, 219, 225. Sura V, xxvi, xxxiii, 42 _f. N. _, 50, 122, 130, 166, 167, 191, 195, 203, 204. Sura VI, 122, 154, 166, 167, 174, 176, 183. Sura VII, 122. Sura VIII, viii, ix, x, xv, xvi, xxvi, 5, 21, 22, 35-36, 45, 51, 118, 121, 122, 124, 134, 147, 166, 167, 174, 182, 183, 219, 225, 226. Sura IX (Sura Barát), xi, xvii, xix, xx, 1, 4, 16, 22, 25, 36-37, 42 _f. N. _, 51-55, 118, 121, 122, 123, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 143, 147, 149-150, 159, 166-167, 172, 173, 175, 176, 185, 188, 189, 190, 191, 195, 225, 226, 227. Sura XI, 219. Sura XV, xxxvi, xxxvii, xxxviii, 122, 127, 220. Sura XVI, 2, 3, 122, 127, 130, 166, 167, 173, 180, 225. Sura XVIII, xxxviii, 42 _f. N. _, 130. Sura XIX, xxxviii, 219. Sura XX, 171 _f. N. _ Sura XXII, vi, 1, 3, 17, 118, 122, 127, 128, 166, 167, 173, 178, 225. Sura XXIV, iv, xviii, 50, 131, 166, 167, 185, 194, 203, 204. Sura XXV, 166, 167, 173, 175, 177. Sura XXVI, xxxvii, xxxviii. Sura XXIX, 166, 167, 170, 171 _f. N. _, 172, 173, 179, 180. Sura XXXI, 130, 166, 167, 173, 177. Sura XXXII, xxxvii, xxxviii. Sura XXXIII, 37, 89, 199, 216, 218, 219, 220, 222, 226. Sura XXXV, 166, 167, 173, 181. Sura XL, 167. Sura XLI, xxxviii, 167. Sura XLVI, xxxv, 167. Sura XLVII, xxvii, 85, 141, 147, 154, 156, 160, 161, 166, 167, 174, 184, 195, 196, 197, 225, 226. Sura XLVIII, xv, xvi, xl, 160, 225, 226. Sura XLIX, 166, 167, 173, 175, 188. Sura LII, 130. Sura LVIII, 195. Sura LIX, 110, 226. Sura LX, 4, 110, 111, 112 _f. N. _, 166, 225, 226. Sura LXI, 166, 173, 175, 184, 186. Sura LXVI, 166, 185, 211, 214. Sura LXVII, xxxvii. Sura LXXII, xxxvi, xxxvii, 186 _f. N. _ Sura LXXIII, 130, 220. Sura LXXXV, 50. Sura LXXXVI, xxxvi. Sura XC, 194. Sura XCVI, 5. Suras, Meccan, 177-181. Suras, Medinite, 181-191. Surat-al-Mohammad, 154. Surat-un-Nisa, 154. Syed Ameer Ali Moulvie, M. A. , LLB. , 91 _f. N. _ Syria, viii, 30, 40, 89, 140, 200. T. Tabaeen, 209, 215-216. Tabakát al Fokaha, 135-136. Tabakát of Ibn Sád Kátib Wakidi, 114. Tabari 30, 212. Tabi, 135, 136. Tabikha, The ancestors of Bani Tamim, xlvii. Table, The (Sura), 191. Tabuk, xix, 37 _f. N. _; the last expedition of Mohammad against, 40. Tafseer Majma-ul-Bayan Tabarásee, 116 _f. N. _, 187. Taghlib, lviii. Taimee, Okba executed at, 80. Tajahada, 164. Tajeeb, lviii. Takreeb, 210, 215. Tamim (The), xxvii, xxxiv, xli, xlvi, lviii. Tanfeel, 7, 196. Tanvir-al Absár, 170. Tariq (Comet or night comer), xxxvi. Tay, xxxix, xliii, lviii. Tayif, xxii; Mohammad preaches at, xxxiv; sacrilegious war at, xli. Taym bin Morra, xxxiii. Testament, The Old, 153. Thakeef, lvii, 16. Theseus, 145. Tirmizee, 113, 207. Tojahidoona, 166. Tradition (a mursal), 109 _f. N. _ Traditions quoted and refuted, 133. Tried, The (Sura), 186. Tuhfat-ul-Muhtaj fi Sharah-al-Minhaj, 129 _f. N. _ Tuleiba, chief of Bani Asad bin Khozeima, xlvii. U. Urnee Robbers, 92-95. Urquhart, 137. Us Tayif, xxxvi. Usseya, a clan of Bani Aamir, xlvi. Uyeina, the chief of the Bani Fezara, xiii, xlvi. V. Vans Kennedy, Major, quoted, 28. Von Kemer's History of Mohammad's Campaigns, 90 _f. N. _, 102. W. Wady-al-Koraá, The Jews of, xiii, xliii. Wahid, 83. Wajib (Legal), Jihad not, 134. Waki ibn al-Jarrah, 221. Wakidi, 29 _f. N. _, 30, 63, 64, 74, 78 _f. N. _, 80 _f. N. _, 31 _f. N. _, 91; Campaigns of Mohammad, xliii, 102, 197, 200, 201, 205, 206, 208, 212, 221. Wars of Mohammad, their defensive nature, ii. Weil, Dr. , 63. Wheaton's International Law, 70 _f. N. _ Wherry, The Revd. E. M. , quoted, 150-152, 154 _f. N. _ Wolff, 70 _f. N. _ Woman, The (Sura), 184. Y. Yafa-ee, 210. Yahya, 213. Yahya bin Hammad, 210. Yahya bin Moin, 221. Yahya bin Saeed al Ansaree, 68. Yakoob bin Mohammad, 208. Yemama, li. Yenbo, the abode of Bani Joheina, xliii. Yemen, xxxix, li. Yezid bin Abi Shaiba, 133. Yojahido, 166, 179. Yojahidoo, 166, 176, 190. Yojahidoona, 166, 176, 191. Yoseir bin Razim (Oseir bin Zarim), 72 _f. N. _ Yoslemoon, 160. Z. Zád-al-maád of Ibn al Kyyim, 100 _f. N. _ Zahabi, 215. Zakawán, a clan of Bani Aamir, xlvi. Zalkada, 14, 23 _f. N. _, 53. Zamaá, 34. Zamra, iv. Zamakhshire, 163, 213. Zat-al-Rikaa, xii, 196. Zat Atlah, 15 _f. N. _ Zeid killed Moavia, 81. Zeid, the adopted son of Mohammad, and his connection with Zeinab, 215, 216, 217, 218, 222. Zeid bin Arqam, xxii. Zeid bin Aslam, 215. Zeid bin Haris, seized and plundered by the Bani Fezara, xiii. Zeid Monat, xxxiv. Zeinab, 113, 211; her story, 215-216; the story of Mohammad's amour, a spurious one, 216; Sir W. Muir's conjectures about her, not justified, 218; in her case no exceptional privilege was secured to Mohammad, 220; the false story traced to Mukátil, 222. Zu Towa, the Koreish encamped at, xv. Zil Kassa, a party of Moslems slain at, xiii. Zobeid, lviii. Zobeir, a Koreishite, 88, 96. Zobian, xli, xlii, xlvi. Zohak, 80. Zohak ibn Muzahim, 215. Zohra, xxxiii. Zohri, 128, 209. Zorkanee, 80 _f. N. _; on Mooahib, 93, 100, 109 _f. N. _, 110 _f. N. _ Zu-kar, Battle of, xli. Zulhij, 23 _f. N. _, 53. Zul-Kada, xiii, 23 _f. N. _ Zul-Majáz xlviii. _Calcutta; December, 1887. _ THACKER, SPINK & CO. 'S LAW PUBLICATIONS. _THIRD EDITION IN PREPARATION. _ THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, ACT XIV OF 1882, _WITH NOTES, APPENDICES, &c. _ By the Hon'ble J. O'KINEALY, _One of the Judges of Her Majesty's High Court of Judicature, Bengal. _ * * * * * _Third Edition. Royal 8vo. , cloth. Rs. 12; Post-free, Rs. 12-6. _ THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, And other Laws and Acts of Parliament relating to the CriminalCourts of India. With Notes, &c. Third Edition. By the Hon'ble J. O'KINEALY, _One of the Judges of Her Majesty's High Court of Judicature, Bengal. _ * * * * * _Second Edition. Just Published. Royal Octavo, cloth. Rs. 18. _ THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, ACT X OF 1882, TOGETHER WITH Rulings, Circular Orders, Notifications, etc. , of all the HighCourts in India; and Notifications and Orders of theGovernment of India and the Local Governments. _EDITED WITH COPIOUS NOTES AND FULL INDEX. _ By WILLIAM FISCHER AGNEW, Esq, . _Barrister-at-Law_, and GILBERT S. HENDERSON, Esq. M. A. , _Barrister-at-Law, __Author of "A Treatise on the Law of Succession in India. "_ Second Edition, By GILBERT S. HENDERSON "To judge from the style in which their present work is edited, thenumber of cases cited bearing upon the various sections, the ample notesappended where any explanation is necessary, and the full and completeindexes to the cases cited, we have little hesitation in saying that, while undoubtedly it is at present the best work on the subject, it needfear no competition in the future. "--_Englishman. _