There are countless ahadith, besides the rules of war laid down in the Quran, forbidding and condemning the purposeful targeting of women, children and the elderly during battle. Muslims could however be confronted to a situation where the necessity of war in self defence and the particular circumstances of a battle make it hard or impossible to distinguish between fighters and innocent civilians. Just as initiating fighting in certain times and places is forbidden (months of hajj or within the inviolable precincts of Kaaba) but should the enemy attack first then one is left with no option but to respond, the ethical rules of engagement should not prevent the Muslims from defending themselves should they be attacked at first, even if it carries the risk of causing unintended collateral casualties
"The Prophet passed by me at a place called al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They are from them."Had there been a pattern by the Muslims of disregarding innocents in warfare, the question wouldnt have been presented to the prophet but the very fact that it was, shows that by default, the Islamic rule is to avoid civilians or any entity that does not pose a threat. In jihad the overarching principle is to always be proportional in retaliation
2:190"And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits".
Such war ethics are absent in biblical warfare.
Had a similar report been read with the Judeo-Christian pattern of behavior towards other religions in ancient times the case would have been different.
True prophets and men of God were divinely sanctioned to tear down pagan temples in all the land of Canaan and exterminate the natives, men, women, elderly, children, infants and animals 1Sam15. Contrary to the aforementioned report where no intentional targeting of innocents is meant, God in the HB allegedly commands the purposeful and indiscriminate killing of all that breathes. In addition, the hadith comes in the context of preemptive warfare, as already pointed while the situation in the HB is not one of hostility against the Israelites, rather to allow their establishment. The purpose of such measures was to avoid the Israelites' assimilation into the remaining pagan natives and adoption of their customs. And because the task was not thoroughly completed, with the Israelites intermarrying the natives, reverting to polytheism and worshipping in pagan temples, subsequent prophets and leaders were charged with destroying these rebuilt pagan temples once again and murder all their priests and false prophets. One notorious case is that of Elijah's mass slaughter of the false prophets of Baal.
Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Does the Bible Really Command Dashing Babies Against the Rocks?"
1-Reason for Ambiguous verses in the Quran (mubahala)
3-Acts17apologetics protest the divine practice; God allows bible corruption? (Muslims believe in the Psalms)
4-Apostate prophet is a book critic; why naming Abu Lahab in the Quran? (can prophets curse their enemies)
5-Apostate prophet incites the flames of hate; Abu lahab, who was it? (can prophets curse their enemies)
No comments:
Post a Comment