The Wars to spread
Islam
On pages 66 and 67 Dr.
Abu Zayd confesses clearly, "The thing which compelled Abu Bakr
to invade Persia and the Byzantine Empire was not to seize their
abundance, but rather to spread Islam". This claim is based on
evidence that the generals of the Islamic armies used to call the
countries to embrace Islam before they started fighting them.
Khalid Ibn al-Walid sent a message to the princes of Persia
saying: "After all, accept Islam and you will be safe, or pay
the tribute; otherwise I will come to you with a people who desire
death as you desire drinking wine."
Yes and no, Dr. Abu
Zayd! Yes, we accept your confession that the war was to spread
Islam. We agree that spreading Islam was an essential incentive
for war. We are content with your unequivocal confession in regard
to this matter. We have written these pages in order to denote
these facts and nothing more—to prove that Islam was spread by
sword and that the Islamic wars were offensive wars. Your
confirmation and faithful narration of history in "The Rightly
Guided Caliphs" have helped us to prove this fact. Thank you.
Yet, we disagree with
you when you claim that material abundance was not another reason
for these wars. We will not allow you to conceal this obvious fact
because you yourself have unintentionally alluded to it when you
listed the reasons for the invasion of Egypt—among them were "the
abundance of Egypt and its yields". More than that, ponder what
the Qur’an says: "Allah (God) promises you much booty that you
will capture" [Qur’an 48:20].
Or let us listen to
Muhammad’s explicit statement in which he (after exhorting his
warriors to fight bravely) promised the plunder of the country.
Did you forget, Dr. Abu Zayd, what Muhammad said? Let me remind
you. Muhammad said, "You see, God will soon make you inherit
their land, their treasures and make you sleep with their women"
(Lit: make their women’s beds for you).
These plain,
disgraceful words are recorded by Ibn Hisham on page 182 Vol. II,
of his famous book, "Al Rod Al Anf", which all the researchers
regard as a reliable reference. Thus, when Muslims invaded a
certain land incited by the desire to possess the land, treasures,
and women, they were actually fulfilling God’s promise as it was
stated in the Qur’an and in Muhammad’s pledge.
"The Beginning and the End," by Ibn Kathir (vol. 7)
We would like to quote a few incidents from this book by Ibn
Kathir who is one of the ancient Muslim scholars and chroniclers
and a reliable source for all students of Islamic history. On page
2, we read the following, "At the inception of the year 13 of
the Hajira, Abu Bakr was determined to draft soldiers to send them
to Syria in compliance with the words of the Qur’an: Fight...
those who were given the Scripture (Chapter 9:9); and also follow
the example of the apostle of God who gathered the Muslims
together to invade Syria before his death."
He also adds on page
9: "When Abu Bakr sent Khalid to Iraq, Abu Hurayra, who was one
of Muhammad’s companions, he used to exhort Muslims to fight by
telling them: ‘Hasten to the Houris’ (fair, black-eyed women)."
Those Houris are the
nymphs of paradise who are particularly designated for the
enjoyment of Muslims.
"‘The Blood of the Byzantine is more delicious’, Khalid said!"
On page 10, Ibn
Khathir tells us that when the Byzantine leaders rejected Islam or
paying tribute, Khalid told them, "We are people who drink
blood. We were told that there is no blood that is more delicious
than the blood of the Byzantines."
Such words well suit
people like Khalid, Muhammad’s beloved friend and relative.
On page 13 we read the
following, "Gregorius, one of the great princes of the
Byzantines, said to Khalid: ‘What do you call us for?’ Khalid
answered him: ‘That you testify that there is no God but the only
God and that Muhammad is His messenger and apostle, and to
acknowledge all that Muhammad received from God (namely
pilgrimage, fasting of Ramadan, etc.).’ Gregorius said to him:
‘And if these are not accepted?’ Khalid responded, ‘Then pay the
tribute.’ Gregorius said to him: ‘If we do not give the tribute?’
Khalid said: ‘Then war!"’
Ibn Kathir
acknowledges (on page 21) that when the Muslims conquered
Damascus, they seized St. John’s church and converted it into the
largest mosque in Damascus today (The Umayyad Mosque). On page 55,
we read also about the invasion of Jerusalem. On page 123, he
states, "Umar Ibn al-Khattab wrote to Abdil-Rahman Ibn Rabi’a
ordering him to invade the Turks (Turkey today)."
The Second Invasion
of Africa
In page 165 Ibn Kathir
records for us that: "The second invasion of Africa was
accomplished because its people broke their pledge. That was in
year 33 of the Hajira (The Moslem Calendar)."
Of course, the people
of Africa broke the pledge because that pledge was imposed on them
by force in lieu of death. Yet Muslims killed thousands of them.
Ibn Kathir already mentioned in page 151 that, "’Uthman Ibn ’Affan
ordered ’Abdalla Ibn Sa’d to invade Africa. [He told him] ‘If you
conquer it take 1/25 of its booty.’ ’Abdalla Ibn Sa’d marched
towards it at the head of an army of 20,000 soldiers. He conquered
it and killed multitudes of people from among its inhabitants
until the remnant were converted to Islam and became subject to
the Arabs. ’Abdalla took his portion of the booty as ’Uthman told
him, then he divided the rest."
How unfortunate were
the African people! They were invaded by the Arabs who killed
thousands of them, divided the booty, and forced the remnant to
embrace Islam. When they broke the pact, the Muslims attacked them
again. But are the black African people the only unfortunate
people? Or are all the people of Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Iraq,
Iran, Egypt, Libya, all the Arab tribes, Spain, even the people of
China and India, Cyprus and the Kurds, all the unfortunate
peoples? All of these are unfortunate nations who became the
victims of Islamic Law which detests human rights and persistently
ignores their freedom.
The Invasion of Cyprus and the Kurds
Ibn Kathir tells us
that in the year 28 of the Hajira, the conquest of Cyprus was
accomplished after ’Abdulla Ibn al-Zubayr slaughtered a multitude
of people—as usual. Ibn Khaldun also tells the story of the Kurds.
In page 124 of Vol. II, he says, "Muslims met a number of
Kurds. They called them to embrace Islam or pay the tribute. When
they refused to do so they killed them and captured their women
and children, then divided the booty."
As we see, Ibn Khaldun
along with Ibn Kathir, al-Tabari and other chroniclers, ancient
and contemporary such as Dr. Abu Zayd, recorded all the Islamic
historical events in detail. Moreover, on every occasion Arab
newspapers allude boastfully to these memorial episodes of Islamic
history and shed light on these savage, wild offensive wars. For
instance, we read in the prestigious Ahram newspaper which is
published in Egypt, the following, "During the era of the
Caliph ’Umar Ibn ’Abdul-’Aziz, Ibn Qutayba in the year 88H, he
invaded some of the neighboring countries of Iran such as Bukhara,
and Samarq and marched close to the Chinese border" (refer to
the Ahram, Mary 26, 1986, p. 13).
In his book, "The
Beginning and the End" (part 9), Ibn Kathir narrates in detail the
history of this belligerent general, Ibn Qutayba. He records the
story of his campaigns and refers to his biography.
We would like to
conclude this chapter with a brief summary which Taqiy al-Din al-Nabahani
presents in his book, "The Islamic State" (pp. 121 and 122). He
summarizes the history of Islamic offensive wars against the
neighboring peaceful countries by saying, "Muhammad had begun
to send troops and initiate campaigns against the Syrian borders
such as the campaign of Mu’ta and Tabuk. Then the rightly guided
caliphs ruled after him and the conquest continued. (The Arabs)
conquered Iraq, Persia, and Syria whose faith was Christianity and
which were inhabited by the Syrians, Armenians, some Jews and some
Byzantines. Then Egypt and North Africa were conquered. When the
Umayyad took over after the rightly guided caliphs, they conquered
the Sind, Khawarizm, and Samarqand. They annexed them to the lands
of the Islamic state."
According to all
Muslim chroniclers, it is well documented that Armenia and Morocco
were conquered during the era of ’Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan. When his
son, al-Walid, assumed the throne, he invaded India and Andalusia.
Also, Dr. ’Afifi
Abdul-Fattah, the Muslim scholar, encapsulates the whole principle
in a few explicit, straightforward words, as he says (page 382 of
his famous book "The Spirit of the Islamic Religion"), "Islam
has acknowledged war in order to exalt the word of God. This is a
fight for God’s cause."
He also adds in p.
390, "Before the Islamic state declares war against another
state, it should give (the other state) the choice between Islam,
tribute or war."
We need not say
anything more than that. Maybe this is what Muslims mean when they
say, "We believe in human freedom and man’s right to choose
according to his own will! We present him with three options, and
he has the right to choose as he wishes — either to become a
Muslim and pay alms to the Caliph of the Muslims, or pay the
tribute and submit to Islamic rule, or we kill him."
Let the reader ponder
the Muslim contradiction that a man has the right to choose
whatever he wants within the Islamic context of individual
freedom.
Conclusion
These are the Islamic
offensive wars, my dear reader. We have already surveyed the
Qur’anic verses which were expounded by both the great ancient and
the contemporary Muslim scholars. We also alluded to the sayings
of Muhammad, his own deeds and his orders to his companions,
relatives and successors. We witnessed the bloody events of
Islamic history narrating for us what Muslims did after the death
of Muhammad and how they carried out his orders and the
commandments of the Qur’an—how they fought with the People of the
Book, the Jew and the Christian, until they paid tribute with
humiliation and defeat. We have witnessed how they plundered the
lands, killed the unfortunate, and captured women and children for
no reason.
Moreover, we have
already discussed all the matters pertaining to the death penalty
of an apostate who dares to relinquish the Islamic faith and to
embrace another religion, or to become an atheist. We also
referred to an abundance of evidences and interpretations of
Muslim scholars along with the deeds and sayings of Muhammad in
this respect. He himself gave orders to kill anyone who is an
apostate from Islam such as Umm Mirwan as the Azhar and all the
Chroniclers denoted, and all those apostates who fled to Mecca.
Regarding offensive
wars or imposing the Islamic religion on people by war, Muhammad
said: "I was commanded to fight people until they say there is
no God but the only God, and Muhammad is the apostle of God, and
they perform all the Islamic ordinances and rituals."
We also examined
Muhammad’s attitude towards the apostate. He made it clear that
the apostate must be sentenced to death. He said about those who
relinquish Islam: "Whoever changes his faith...kill him!"
Muhammad indicated
that is it unlawful to shed the blood of a Muslim except in three
cases: Unbelief after belief, adultery after integrity (or being
married) and killing a soul without any right. The first case
refers to the death penalty of the apostate and the oppression of
his freedom and right to embrace any religion other than Islam
Those are the clear claims of the Islamic religion as well as of
Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, who always uttered at the
beginning of every prayer or sermon, the following phrase, "In
the name of Allah—the Compassionate, the Merciful!"
We talked about
individual freedom and human rights! This is the prophet of
freedom, mercy, tolerance and human dignity!
Has the veil been
removed?
Is the deception over?
Judge for yourself.