Table of Contents
Introduction
The eighth article in the series “The Era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs” focuses on the ethics of combat in Islam, drawing on significant historical examples from the time of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. It emphasizes the humanitarian values and noble principles that set the Muslims apart in their wars and conquests, whether against external enemies or during internal conflicts. Click here to explore the full series.
The Islamic Battle Ethics During the Era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs
The poet eloquently states:
“We ruled, and justice was our natural disposition,
But when you ruled, valleys flowed with blood.
You killed your captives, while we
Would pass by prisoners, showing mercy and forgiveness.
This difference between us is sufficient,
For every vessel spills what it contains.
As mentioned in a previous article, those who hold power can impose their ideas, and power is essential to protect the truth. Without power, truth becomes captive, defeated, and oppressed under falsehood.
This article discusses the ethics of battle. The Rightly Guided Caliphs faced three major fronts: the first was the battle against apostates, the second was the Islamic conquests, and the third was the struggle against extremists and rebels.
The Apostates and the Refusal to Pay Zakat: Challenges During the Era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs
The first front—the apostates’ front—emerged shortly before the death of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him). As is common in human nature, some Arabs, seeking to replicate the success of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him), believed that by claiming prophethood, they could dominate the Arabs and unite them under their leadership, much as Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) had done.
These attempts to imitate were driven by humans trying to recreate successful experiences. However, they were a shallow, weak, and misguided interpretation of the Prophet’s message and actions (Peace be upon Him). After the Prophet’s death (Peace be upon Him) the movement of apostasy and false prophethood grew stronger, and alongside it, a new movement emerged—one that refused to pay Zakat.
The first movement threatened the unity of the Islamic state and the stability of the system that had been established during the Prophet’s time (Peace be upon Him) which united the Arabian Peninsula. Meanwhile, the second movement—the refusal to pay Zakat—threatened the core practices of Islam.
Those who rejected paying Zakat viewed it merely as a form of wealth collection, similar to the actions of kings and sultans who exploited conquered peoples or colonized lands to increase their power and expand their capitals. They failed to understand that Zakat is a right ordained by ALLAH, the Blessed and Exalted, a duty upon the wealthy to help the poor, and that the role of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him) and His caliphs was to collect Zakat from those obligated to pay it and distribute it to those entitled to receive it.
These two movements posed a significant challenge during the era of Abu Bakr (may ALLAH be pleased with him) as he had to confront both a threat to the state—the movement of apostates and false prophets—and a threat to the religion—the refusal to pay Zakat.
The Victorious Campaigns: Confronting Apostasy and Securing Unity
Abu Bakr (may ALLAH be pleased with him) raised a bold and lasting slogan, declaring: “Should the religion be diminished while I am alive?” In response to those who sought to withhold Zakat, he proclaimed: “By ALLAH, if they withhold from me even a camel’s rope that they used to give to the Messenger of ALLAH, I will fight them over it“.
To confront the apostates and those refusing to pay Zakat, he sent eleven armies across the Arabian Peninsula—east, north, and south. These forces worked tirelessly to restore the unity of the Islamic state and the completeness of the Islamic faith, ensuring that people once again brought their charities to the Caliph of the Messenger of ALLAH (Peace be upon Him).
This was the first front. The second front focused on the conquests. After the apostasy, some Persians began assisting the Arab apostates. The initial support came from the Persians, and it was our master Al-Muthanna ibn Haritha Al-Shaibani (may ALLAH be pleased with him) who began pursuing the remnants of the Persians that had aided the apostate tribes. He relentlessly tracked and chased them.
Upon hearing of these developments, Al-Muthanna sent word to Abu Bakr (may ALLAH be pleased with him). Once Abu Bakr had dealt with the apostasy, he prepared an army under the leadership of our master Khalid ibn Al-Walid (may ALLAH be pleased with him), and another under the leadership of our master Iyad ibn Ghanm Al-Fihri (may ALLAH be pleased with him), to initiate the Persian conquests.
With remarkable speed, our master Khalid ibn Al-Walid fought fifteen battles in just fourteen months, purging the entire region west of the Euphrates from Persian control. This marked the beginning of the Islamic conquests on the Persian front.
Months later, Abu Bakr prepared four armies, along with a fifth, to open the Roman front. The armies were led by Abu Ubaidah ibn Al-Jarrah, Shurahbil ibn Hasanah, Yazid ibn Abu Sufyan, and Amr ibn Al-As, with Khalid ibn Sa’id ibn Al-As commanding the rear division.
These campaigns marked the beginning of the conquest of the Romans, and within just two years, the Levant front—part of the Roman Empire—was cleared of Roman forces. Both the Persian and Roman empires fell simultaneously, and the Muslims achieved a remarkable historical victory.
Confronting Tribulations: The Leadership of Ali ibn Abi Talib During Challenging Times
These conquests continued through the era of Abu Bakr, then Umar, and for most of Uthman’s era (may ALLAH be pleased with them all). This marked the second front.
The third front emerged during the era of our master Ali ibn Abi Talib (may ALLAH be pleased with him) and involved addressing the challenges posed by extremists and rebels. Ali was uniquely equipped for this role, as ALLAH had blessed him with both profound knowledge and exceptional military expertise. He was among the foremost jurists of the companions and had been a skilled army commander since the time of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him). He was the conqueror of Khaybar, the commander of several armies, and the one who killed Amr ibn Abd Wud during the Battle of the Trench.
Through these experiences, ALLAH, the Blessed and Exalted, prepared him for the monumental task of managing the trials that required a balance of wisdom and warfare. When Ali assumed the caliphate, it was under extremely challenging circumstances. His approach, rooted in wisdom, sought to calm tensions and prevent further strife within Muslim lands.
This policy, however, was misunderstood by some companions who opposed him. They sought swift retribution for the murder of Uthman (may ALLAH be pleased with him) and did not grasp Ali’s strategy of pacification. As a result, several tribulations arose during his caliphate (may ALLAH be pleased with him).
The Battles of the Rightly Guided Caliphs: The Campaigns of Ali ibn Abi Talib Against Internal Division
The first tribulation—the Battle of the Camel—was an unintended conflict, one that arose without prior planning or arrangement from either side. The situation escalated, and those seeking to stir strife intensified the tensions, ultimately leading to the battle.
The second tribulation was the Battle of Siffin, which took place between our master Ali and Muawiyah (may ALLAH be pleased with them both). The truth was with Ali, as Muawiyah refused to pledge allegiance to him unless Ali first took retribution against Uthman’s killers. Ali’s stance was correct, as the allegiance should come first, and the unity of the Islamic state and the Muslim community should be preserved, even when it involves implementing one of ALLAH’s prescribed punishments.
Both parties, however, were motivated by religious principles. One side sought the unity of the Islamic state and the Muslim nation under one legitimate caliph, while the other sought to implement one of ALLAH’s prescribed punishments and uphold the teachings of the Noble Quran.
The complexity of this tribulation is what led to it being called a “fitnah” (tribulation), as it left many confused. Had there not been explicit guidance from the Prophet (Peace be upon Him) on this matter, we would still be debating the details of this tribulation—uncertain about which side was more correct and which was wrong.
The reality is that our master Ali (may ALLAH be pleased with him) faced many companions in both the Battle of the Camel and the Battle of Siffin. After these battles, a faction within Ali’s own army broke away. They became extreme in their religious views, developing fanatical interpretations to the point where they declared other Muslims as disbelievers—including Ali and his companions. They even went as far as declaring anyone who did not align with them as disbelievers, and started applying the ruling of apostasy to them, killing them and deeming their wealth and blood permissible.
In response, Ali (may ALLAH be pleased with him) confronted them in the Battle of Nahrawan, which was against the Kharijites. This marked the third front—the fight against extremists and rebels—undertaken by Ali, and he approached it with sound jurisprudence. From his actions and decisions, the Muslim nation derived its rulings on how to deal with conflicts and tribulations that arise between Muslims.
Understanding Islamic Battle Ethics Through Historical Context
To truly grasp the ethics of battle in Islam, it is essential to understand the context of what existed before Islam and what followed afterward. If we examine the wars between the Persians and Romans, for instance, we see how the Persians treated Christians under Roman rule, and how the Romans responded to Jews who had collaborated with the Persians during their invasion.
Consider the pre-Islamic wars, such as the Wars of Dahis and Al-Ghabra, or the Wars of Al-Basus—conflicts fought over the most trivial and insignificant reasons, where no sanctity was observed, and no mercy was shown. These wars were brutal, driven by personal and tribal grievances with no regard for human life.
In contrast, if we look at the history of wars before Islam, or even the wars that followed the collapse of the Islamic state, the picture remains grim. Even in modern times, contemporary wars involve immense destruction, the use of powerful weapons—some of which are internationally prohibited—and yet millions of victims fall, while the global community, despite its capacity for action, remains largely indifferent.
The truth is that comparing the nature of wars before Islam with those that followed, and even with contemporary conflicts, helps us understand the remarkable ethics that Islam introduced to warfare. As the saying goes: “Things become distinct through their opposites“.
The Leadership of Khalid ibn Al-Walid: Victory, Debate, and Ethical Considerations
At the time when our master Khalid ibn Al-Walid (may ALLAH be pleased with him) was securing great victories over the apostates, a debate was taking place in Medinah between Abu Bakr and Umar regarding Khalid. They were deliberating whether the wars Khalid was waging were in accordance with Islamic law, or if some transgressions had occurred. These were transgressions for which Khalid had interpretations—he had his own reasoning behind them.
Umar (may ALLAH be pleased with him) was insistent that Khalid be dismissed, while Abu Bakr (may ALLAH be pleased with him) felt that dismissal would be too harsh, as Khalid’s victories were undeniable, and his mistakes could be explained by his perspective and interpretation.
The remarkable point here is that such a scene would not be found in any other pre-Islamic civilization. The idea that leaders in the capital would debate the fate of a victorious commander—one who had achieved victory after victory—simply because of some errors or differences in interpretation, is something unique to Islamic governance. The discussion was not about the defeat or failure of Khalid, but about whether his actions, given the context of his victories, warranted dismissal.
Islamic Ethical Guidelines in Warfare: Instructions from Abu Bakr and Umar ibn Al-Khattab
When our master Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq sent Yazid ibn Abu Sufyan—one of the commanders of the Levant armies—he gave him these timeless instructions in Islamic law:
“I advise you with ten things: Do not kill a child, nor a woman, nor an elderly person, nor a monk in his monastery. Do not destroy a building, do not cut down a fruit tree, do not slaughter a camel except for food, do not be treacherous, and do not be cowardly“
What is remarkable about these instructions is that the leader of the Islamic state was advising the commander of the army—who was about to engage in a major war, a conquest against the world’s dominant power at the time—with these principles of mercy and respect. This was possible only because Islam had transformed these Arabs into a people who valued the sanctity of life and cared for human beings, animals, and even the environment.
Later, we see our master Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may ALLAH be pleased with him) sending a letter to his armies in Persia, saying:
“It has reached me that a man among you pursues a ‘ilj’ (non-Muslim Persian) until he flees to the mountains, then tells him, ‘Don’t be afraid,’ but when he catches up to him, he kills him. By ALLAH, if I hear that anyone among you does this, I will strike his neck“.
This statement highlights the importance of honoring security and promises. If a non-Muslim sought refuge or security, it was forbidden to violate that trust. One of the distinctive features of the Islamic conquests was the manner in which Muslim envoys would approach people in pre-battle negotiations. They would present the people with three options: to embrace Islam, to pay the jizyah (tax), or to face battle. After offering these choices, they would say: “Listen to our advice, for by ALLAH, your acceptance of Islam is more beloved to us than taking your lands“, or “more beloved to us than your spoils“.
Islamic Conquests: Compassionate Leadership and the Unique Practice of Returning the Jizyah
These conquerors carried with them the spirit of the preacher, one who was compassionate and genuinely concerned for the people, not the spirit of an invader seeking to plunder and loot. The Islamic conquests were marked by a distinct ethos, particularly on the Roman front, where Heraclius, the Roman emperor, confronted the Muslim armies with military logic.
When the Muslims advanced toward the Levant, Heraclius would send his own forces southward to encircle the Islamic armies and cut off their supply lines, using strategies akin to modern tactics of warfare. This would force the Muslims, after conquering cities in the north, to retreat southward more than once in order to regroup into a unified force.
An exceptional aspect of the Islamic conquests was that when Muslims conquered a city and were later forced to withdraw, they would return the jizyah—an extraordinary gesture. This was a unique characteristic of the Muslim armies: they would willingly give back wealth they had already collected while engaged in a major battle. This practice was rooted in their law, which commanded them to return the jizyah if they were unable to protect the lands they had once gained.
The Wisdom and Restraint of Ali ibn Abi Talib in Internal Conflicts and Civil Wars
The reality is that Muslims presented a unique civilizational model in terms of battle ethics, standing apart from all other civilizations. This was particularly evident in the actions of our master Ali ibn Abi Talib (may ALLAH be pleased with him) in his dealings with rebels and extremists. He provided a distinctive approach to civil wars and conflicts among Muslims.
In the Battle of the Camel, the Battle of Siffin, and the Battle of Nahrawan, Ali set clear guidelines for his forces: “Do not pursue one who flees“, meaning that anyone fleeing the battle should not be chased. He also instructed: “Do not finish off the wounded“, meaning that those who were injured should not be killed. Additionally, he commanded: “Do not take women captive and do not seize property“. Even after defeating his opponents, Ali’s forces allowed them to retain their property, and they could return to reclaim it. He further declared: “Whoever enters his house and closes his door is safe“.
Even in the face of enemies, Ali’s approach was characterized by wisdom and restraint. When asked about the Kharijites, it was said to him: “Are they disbelievers?” He replied: “From disbelief, they fled“. When asked, “Are they hypocrites?” he responded: “The hypocrites remember ALLAH but little, but these people remember ALLAH much“. When asked what to say about them, he said: “They are our brothers who transgressed against us“, or, “They are our people who transgressed against us, so we fought them“.
This is the justice in dealing with the opponent, in how they are evaluated, and then the justice in war itself—where the purpose of war is to end fitnah (strife), to resolve conflict, and not to seek revenge or harbor bitterness. These are the principles Islam has presented, exemplified by our master Ali ibn Abi Talib (may ALLAH be pleased with him). It is based on these principles that Muslims have historically shaped their judgments and approaches in matters of war and conflict.
Islamic Battle Ethics and the Testimony of Non-Muslim Scholars
Indeed, the ethics of battle in Islam are historical facts, testified even by non-Muslim scholars and orientalists. One notable example is Thomas Arnold, a well-known British orientalist, whose book The Preaching of Islam traces the spread of Islam across various regions. Arnold, being fluent in several languages, including ancient ones, had access to numerous historical documents and sources, and he was convinced that Islam did not spread by force. His work serves as a significant testimony to the nature of the Islamic conquests.
Similarly, the famous French orientalist Gustave Le Bon made a well-known statement:
“History has never known conquerors more merciful than the Arabs, nor a religion like their religion“
One of the most remarkable contributions of Islamic civilization to battle ethics was its elevation of these ethics to the level of religious duty. The Prophet (Peace be upon Him) emphasized this in several sayings. He declared:
“The people who will receive the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection are: a man who was killed by a Prophet or who killed a Prophet, an Imam (leader) who led others astray, and one who mutilates“1—meaning those who mutilate the bodies of their opponents in war.
In this, the Prophet (Peace be upon Him) equated the crime of mutilation with the grave offense of killing a Prophet.
Furthermore, the Prophet (Peace be upon Him) clarified that the title of mujahid (fighter in the path of ALLAH) is reserved only for those whose intentions align with the cause of ALLAH. He was asked about a man who fought for tribal loyalty, another who fought out of bravery, and a third who fought to be seen. The Prophet (Peace be upon Him) responded:
“Whoever fights so that the word of ALLAH is supreme, he is in the path of ALLAH“2
Conclusion
The great achievement in the matter of battle ethics is that they became an integral part of worship for the Muslim. The mujahid feared that his intentions might become corrupted or stray from the true purpose of Jihad, which is to serve ALLAH’s will. Therefore, battle ethics were deeply ingrained in the conscience of the Muslim mujahid, and were not merely formal agreements, treaties, or international documents that could be disregarded or ignored.
We ask ALLAH, the Blessed and Exalted, to teach us what benefits us, to benefit us from what HE has taught us, and to increase us in knowledge.
Sources:
- Mohamed Elhamy. محمد إلهامي | عصر الخلافة الراشدة | 8. أخلاق القتال في الحضارة الإسلامية. YouTube Video.
