War,peace and Non-violence

Part Three : Non-violence in the Teachings of Islam

In this paper the author addresses the issue of non-violence as prescribed in the teachings of Islam; that violence is severely condemned and non-violence is encouraged. The author then goes on to c lassify violence, and non-violence, into three categories.

The author shows how non-violence produces the desired results in all aspects of life, and it is therefore incumbent for the Islamic reform movement to adhere to non-violence if they want to achieve reforms in their societies successfully. This paper is an ex tract from Imam Shirazi's book, The Islamic Government, pp 66-88, volume 102 of the "Al-Fiqh series.

Translated by Z. Olyabek

One of the most important princip les that the forthcoming Islamic government, as well as the Islamic movement, must adhere to is the condition of non-violence. A substantial body of the holy tradition and reports condemns violence as may be found in "The Shi'a Guide to Shari'ah (Islamic Law)"58 and "Supplement to The Shi'a Guide to the Shari'ah"59 .

It is also reported "Violence is also part of the army of ignorance". Furthermore, there is eq ually substantial evidence in the holy traditions and reports encouraging and promoting non-violence, leniency and kindness.

To show the correlation between violence and non-violence the following introduction is presented.

Ancient philosophers considered the universe to be composed of four elements; namely water, earth, fire and air. Furthermore all four elements were consid ered to be the derivatives of one entity called primordial matter. The four elements were considered to have interchangeable states, just as different shapes and structures can be made from clay whereas the basic substance, clay, remains the same.

Sociologists make similar statements in relation to power. To them power is an essence that may manifest itself in a tribe, wealth, knowledge, the natio n state, or public op inion and so on, all o f which may transform from one state to another.

For example the tribal chief may transfer his power and influence to the domain of public opinion, and from there to the nation state. As seen in the case of an individual who gains power through the support and vote of public opinion.

The legislators state a similar argument regarding law and custom. They are both of the same essence, and one may be transmuted into the other and vice versa. For example if it was a custom to drive on the right hand side of the road, members of parliament are pressured to make that convention a law.

On the other hand, if the traffic regulatio n states that cars must stop at the red traffic light, people would abide by that and it becomes common custom.

5 8 Compiled by Hassan al-Hurr al-Aameli as "Wasaa'el al-Shi'a le Tasheel Masaa'el al- Shari'ah". 5 9 Compiled by Mirza Hussain al-Noori as "Mostadrak al-Wasaa'el". As for Islamic law, Allah states; "Allah will change their evil (deed) into good."6 0

This is because the essence is one. Another example is the concept of the tree in heaven and in hell. They both are of the same essence but one gives dates and grapes and the other gives fire and fruits like the heads of demons.

The example of this (transmutability) in this world is: "Have you not seen those who have changed the favour of Allah into blasphemy?"6 1 where grapes are turned into wine or, on the other hand, wine is turned into vinegar.

Having given this introduction I would state that vio lence and non- violence are of the same essence. They reflect the human will in repelling harm and attracting good, whether in wealth, honour, or the self. The human will may be released either through violence or non- violence and the latter is the desirable of the two options.

Therefore it is imperative upon Islamist activists and the Islamic government to opt for non-violence to reach their objectives, which are the establishment of the Islamic government, as far as the activists are concerned, or its survival as far the established government is concerned, so that it (the state) may expand and develop quantitively and qualitatively.

As for the kind of non-violence that must be adopted, it must be the kind adopted 'by nature' and not that adopted 'by coercion'. Non-violence may be categorised in three classes:

Non-violence by nature

In this category an individual is by nature non-violent, just as he may have other character traits such as bravery, nobility, justness, chastity…

Non-violence by coercion

This is a kind of non-violence that is adopted by an individual due to his weakness. The weak person resorts to non-violence 6 0 The holy Qur'an: The Criterion (25): 70. 6 1 The holy Qur'an: Abraham (14): 28.

to achieve his objectives. Therefore if a bullying tyrant slaps an individual in the face, the latter would not respond because he is unable to do so as he is no match to the former. This is the worst kind of non-violence. This is similar to the case of one who refrains from swearing back since he is dumb.

Non-violence by design

In this case non-violence is adopted in preference to violence on the basis of priorities. In this case one is able to resort to violence, unlike the one in the second kind above, but non- violence is not his 'second nature' as in the first case. Here non-violence is preferred over violence since it serves as a strategy to achieve his ob jectives.

It may be argued that the second category should not be called non- violence as it is not applicable! For example, can we say that an infant baby who is unable to respond back if hit is a case of non-violence? The answer would be that this is not what it is meant by the second category. What is meant is the capacity for violence, where th e use of violence would bring about the downfall of one's aims. For example swearing at someone who had slapped him or slapping someone who had shot him.

Just as non-violence is defined in three categories, violence is also classified in three categories, according to the law of pairs. And given that the probability that nonentity is one, therefore there cannot be several nonentities versus many existences, absolute existence is opposed by absolute nihility. As for external existences, they are opposed by specific nihility. Therefore the existence of X is opposed by the non-existence of X, but not opposed by absolute nihility.

Just as absolute existence is opposed by absolute nihility and not the non- existence of X. Either of the two absolutes have respective entities; just as they (the absolutes) oppose one another, their entities do too.

Needless to say, two opposing entities should be equal in every aspect except in existence and non-existence. Therefore the existence of X is not opposed by the non-existence of Y. This is a philosophical debate that is beyond the scope of this writing.

The purpose of this debate is that it is imperative for the Islamic movement and government to be characterised by non-violence of the first category, i.e. non-violence by nature. This is because in addition to reaching the pleasant goal that will be characterised by continual existence, non-violence is a virtue that comforts the soul too. And what a difference there is between one who does something or refrains from something willingly and one who does so reluctantly.

It may be asked, "If this is the case, then why do we see that the prophets and imams engaged in violence, as stated in the Qur'an? "How many of the Prophets fought (in Allah's way), and with them (fought) large bands of godly men?"62 and "O Prophet! Fight the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, . . ."63 ,

And why did the imams Ali, Hassan and Hussain (A) participate in wars?" The reply to this is that this was based on a question of priorities. The issue was to choose the lesser of two evils; just as when a patient reluctantly agrees to undergo a surgical operation to amputate a limb in order to prevent greater harm to his body and health.

If the Messenger of Allah, (S), had ignored the pagans and their mischievous deeds and had left them to their own accords, that would have resulted in the loss of thousand s, if not millions, of lives, whereas the given resp onse of the Messenger of Allah (S) limited it to less than fourteen hundred.64 So on the one hand we have violence with tens of thousands or million s, and on the other violence with less than fourteen hundred. Clearly the latter would not be called violence compared to the first.

Acquiring a Non-violent Discipline

The virtue of non-violence requires a substantial and, very often, a strenuous psychological and character forming education and training. "None shall be accorded this rank except one blessed with great good fo rtune."65

Non-violence has many manifestations. It is not merely to refrain from swearing back at someone who swore at you, or to abstain from hitting

6 2 The holy Qur'an: The Family of 'Emran (3): 146. 6 3 The holy Qur'an: Repentance (9): 73. 6 4 This figure includes the casualties on both sides throughout the campaigns. 6 5 The holy Qur'an: Well-Expounded (41): 35.

back at whoever hit you or shot you. To stubbornly hold on to your views when amongst a group who have opposite views to yours, refusing the majority opinion, is also a manifestation of violence. Stubbornness is a kind of violence. Another kind of violence is to frown at others, and another is to pass by someone without greeting him.

All of these, amongst others, are manifestation of violence. Hence Islam actively encourages desirable behaviour and practices such as "making a bond with whoever severed with yo u, and giving generously to he who denied you". Examples of some of the reported traditions that encourage such virtues are as follows:

The Messenger of Allah (S) is quoted as saying, "Shall I inform you of the best morals of this world and the hereafter? (They are) To forgive he who oppresses you, to make a bond with he who severs from you, to be kind to he who insults you, and to give to he who deprives you."

Imam Zayn el-Abidin66 (A) is quoted as saying: "On the day of Judgement Allah the Almighty assembles all the people in one location and then it is announced, "Where are the noble people?" A group of people rise, who are then asked,

"What distinguishes you from the rest?" In reply they say: "We used to make bonds with he who broke off with us, We used to give to he who deprived us, We used to forgive he who used to oppress us." They are then told; "You have said the truth, so enter the heaven."

In another tradition, Imam Saadiq67 (A) is reported as saying: "Three noble qualities belong to this world and the hereafter: To forgive he who oppresses you, To make bonds with he who breaks off with you, To forbear when insulted."

In another tradition Imam Baaqir68 (A) is reported as saying: "Allah the Almighty gives nothing but honour and esteem to the Muslim who has three qualities: Forgiving he who has oppressed him, Giving to he who has deprived him, and Making bonds with he who has severed links with him."

6 6 Imam Zayn el-Aabedeen, also known as Imam al-Sajjad, is the fourth infallible imam of the Muslims after the Messenger of Allah (S). 6 7 Imam Saadiq is the sixth infallible imam of the Muslims after the Messenger of Allah (S). 6 8 Imam Baaqir is the fifth infallible imam of the Muslims after the Messenger of Allah (S).

In another tradition, Imam Ridha (A) quotes the Messenger of Allah (S) as saying: "Let it be a duty upon you to observe the most noble of ethics, for my Lord has sent me to teach them. Of them are: To forgive he who has oppressed you, To give to he who has deprived you, To make bonds with he who has severed from you, and to visit he (when ill) who does not visit you (when you are ill)"

Imam Ali69 (A) in his will to Muhammad ibn al-Hanafeyyah states: "Make sure that your brother is not stronger in his abandonment of you than your endeavour to keep your bond with him, and that he is not more persistent in his insult to you than your kindness to him." Imam Saadiq (A) is reported as saying: "The magnanimity of us the Ahl- ul-Bayt is to forgive he who oppresses us."

The above is a small sample of the enormous collection of traditions reported in this respect.

War Conducts: Islam vs. Others

As an insight into the "Islamic wars", with a view to study the violence or the non-violence of them, a quote is made from the book "The Phenomenon of the Spread of Islam".

The author of this book states: "History books which study the battles and wars over the course of history reveal that violence is an inherent phenomenon in wars. When the armies invade a country, atrocities are their normal practice. They know no mercy or compassion, they do not respect women, they do not distinguish the young from the old, and even animals and trees are not spared. This is because their aim is vengeance and revenge, and to quell any voice which opposes them. And these are not only the characteristics of invading armies, who act for economical and political objectives, but that kind of violence has even prevailed in some pre-Islamic religions.

In Deuteronomy 13:15-16 we read: 6 9 Imam Ali (A), also known by his exclusive title Amir-ul-Mu'mineen, is the first infallible imam of the Muslims after the Messenger of Allah (S).

"15 Thou shall surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. 16 And thou shall gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shall burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be a heap for ever; it shall not be built again."

And in Deuteronomy 20:11-16 we also find:

"11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. 12 And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shall besiege it:

13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shall smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:

14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shall thou take unto thyself; and thou shall eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.

15 Thus shall thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations. 16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy Go d doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shall save alive nothing that breathe:"

In chapter 58 of his momentous book "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", Edward Gibbon states:

"The First Crusade recorded, in the history of mankind, the most brutal prejudice not only against the Muslims, but also against the Eastern Christians and Jews. Once they took control of the holy city of Jerusalem, the Crusaders, who saw themselves as the servants of the Lord, decided to honour their Lord by offering a bloody sacrifice to the God of the Christians . . . they slaughtered more than 70,000 Muslims! In the process

neither age nor sex could mollify their implacable rage: the savage heroes of the cross indulged themselves three days in a promiscuous massacre; and the infection of the dead bodies produced an epidemical disease.

They smashed the heads of the children against the walls, threw the infants from the top of the city walls, grilled the men o n fire and the Jews had been burnt in their synagogue. They ripped the bellies of pregnant women to check if they had swallowed their gold. They did not stop until they were totally exhausted.

The papal envoy witnessed this genocide as he too took part in this victory."70 The famous historian, Ibn Atheer, 1160-1234, reports: "Th e Europeans slaughtered more than 70,000 in the al-Aqsa mosque. Many of those murdered were women and children, as well as many Muslim imams and scholars, worshipers and pilgrims who had come from far a field to this holy site. In the rampage, the Crusaders then plundered the mosque of its countless precious jewellery."

This kind of barbarity in war continues to this day. The wars of this (twentieth) century are gruesome examples of death and destruction. What happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are evidence to that, and the Zionists' atrocities in Palestine and the Lebanon are other proofs that in the mind of non-Muslims war means annihilation and destruction, which knows no mercy and kills the combatant and the civilian population alike.

As for the Muslims, the meaning of war and their understanding of it is based upon the teachings of their religion; the religion of brotherhood, equality, truth, justice and respect for the humanity of mankind.

Therefore, in their wars they - the Muslims - were furthest of all people from violence and destruction. This is because a true religion does not instruct its followers to practice vengeance and revenge, but it teaches them to defend themselves and their values within the limits of humanity. The Islamic history is full of examp les of Islamic ethics in war.

In these scenes one can see the manifestation of humanity in the full meaning of the word, and can see mercy in various forms. In fact those scenes were, amongst many others, the reasons that attracted the people to accept Islam in their 7 0 Edward Gibbon, 1737-1794, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", Chapter 58.

masses. See how the people of Jordan addressed the Muslim army when it arrived and camped in Jordan. They wrote:

"O Muslim folk! We prefer you to the Romans and like you more than them, despite the fact that they have the same religion as we do. You are more faithful to us and kinder to us than them. You are least oppressive and better guardian over us. But they (the Romans) invaded us and deprived us of our rights and of our houses."

The objective of the Muslims was not to force others to accept Islam, and if the Messenger of Allah (S) wanted to adopt such a policy, he would not have sanctioned treaties and signed agreements with the Jews in Medina. What would have prevented him (S) from forcing the Jews to accept Islam or from exterminating every one of them? He (S) was the head of state, and the Muslims were the strongest force in the Arabian Peninsula. There was nothing to prevent him from doing so except the divine instruction:

"There is no coercion in religion."71

When the Messenger of Allah (S) arrived in Medina he sanctioned a treaty with the Jews there which states: " . . . The Jews of 'Bani Awf' tribe are (part of) one community (together) with the (Muslim) faithful. The Jews practice their religion a nd the Muslims practice their own. For them shall be their own wealth, property and their persons. Except for he who has committed oppression or transgression . . ."

This is the freedom of belief in Islam, which is manifested in the conduct of the Messenger o f Allah (S). Another example is the pact that the Messenger of Allah (S) gave to the Christians of the Najraan district of Yemen.

According to this pact, the Messenger of Allah (S) promised them that they may live in the care of Allah and the protection of His messenger with their wealth, land, religion and selves fully safeguarded. Furthermore there will be no interference with the positions and appointments of bishops, monks, and ministers. In any dispute amongst themselves, if raised to the prophet, they will be dealt 7 1 The holy Qur'an: The Heifer (2): 256.

with according to fairness and justice without any injustice being incurred on any side.

One of the best proofs and strongest evidences that Islam spread through persuasion, conviction and through reason, and that the sword had no role to play in the spread of Islam, is the events of the seventh century Hijri (13 th century AD). These events destroyed the Islamic entity and existence and demolished the Islamic government. These were the consequences of the invasions of the Muslim state by the Moguls and the Ta tars.

They killed and mutilated whomever they came across, and plundered everything they could get their hands on. They destroyed every city, town, and village that they entered and annihilated every sign and symbol o f civilisation that the Islamic state had instituted. These colo ssal events were the greatest catastrophe ever seen by the Muslims if not b y humanity at large.

The famous historian Ibn Atheer, 1160-1234, states: "Several years passed by and I could not find the strength to write about the colossal catastrophe for it is not within the power of any writer to write about these atrocities. There are simply not enough words to describe these horrendous events.

It is not possible to give graphic details of these most horrific sufferings of Islam and Muslims. Is there anyone who can write about this? I wish I was not born or I wish I had died before this catastrophe.

However, many friends insisted that I write at least a few words about this greatest tribulation. I was hesitant at first, but I thought that ignoring their advice would be of no use, this attempt (to write) constitutes writing about a momentous event and an almighty catastrophe the like of which the days and nights would never see again.

It affected humanity in general and the Muslims in particular. If someone said that from the time that Allah created Adam until now the world had not suffered such genocide, he would be right. History books do not show any event which come anywhere near this mass murder and destruction."

Despite the fact that the Moguls slaughtered many millions of Muslim people and razed several hundred cities, towns and villages, they did not manage to quench the flame of Islam in the hearts of the remaining Muslims.

In fact, and this is the point of this article, these very Muslims, who had been severely defeated, managed to beat the Buddhist and Christian missionaries to win over the hearts and minds of those nomads who practiced Shamanism.72

It only took a few years filled with debates and discussion which took place between the supporters of each religions until those few whose power and might, and very existence had been b roken by the Moguls were able to attract to Islam those ferocious conquerors. In doing so they (the Muslims) destroyed all the myths and accusations propagated b y the adversaries of Islam that it is a religion th at spread and survived by the sword."