Continuing our series on war and peace in Islam, Islam categorically forbids treachery whether in peace or war. The Caliphate is not a treacherous state despite the attempts to malign Islamic history and the Islamic religion itself by the criminal acts of a tiny proportion of Muslims who contradicted the clear-cut rules of law in Islam.

The Islamic civilisation flourished for over 1300 years with the caliphate and Islamic governance playing a pivotal role in this. This civilisation could not have remained in power for such a long period of time if it was known for treachery, injustice and tyranny. If the Islamic state had conducted itself in the same way as the hated western colonial powers, then its peoples would have rebelled en mass against Islamic rule which never occurred. In fact, all the internal rebellions against the caliphal governments ended up implementing the exact same system albeit with a different ruling family. This is because the rebellion was about “who” should rule, not “what” should be implemented.

Islamic Spain is a stark example of this. Although it formally split from the Abbasid Caliphate in the mid-eighth century, it ruled by Islam, and the Islamic civilisation flourished producing some of the greatest scholars in history. Hugh Kennedy describes this, “Its rulers and administrators were always keenly aware that their land was part of a wider Muslim commonwealth and it was to this commonwealth, rather than to their northern neighbours^[1], that they looked for contacts and political ideas.”^[2]

International trade and the silk road would have ended if Muslim traders had the reputation of being dishonest and treacherous. In fact, the opposite occurred and these traders built outposts and mosques where they conducted their trade. This then led to the expansion of Islam within those societies. The largest Muslim population in the world today is in Indonesia which converted to Islam over the centuries primarily due to interactions with Arab Muslim traders.

What are Treason and Treachery?

In Arabic there are two words for treason and treachery: الغَدْرة (Al-Ghadrah) and الخِيانَة (Al-Khiyanah). Both are found in the Qur’an and Sunnah, and have similar meanings.

Al-Ghadrah

The root of الغَدْرة (Al-Ghadrah) is غدر which means water that remains behind i.e. a pool or pond (الغَدِير). “The core meaning is a fluid or loose residue from the source or origin that extends, i.e., remains: like those water pools and ponds.”[3] The reason one of its meanings is treachery is because “breaking the covenant (العَهْد) is nothing but abandonment and lack of adherence, as if it were falling behind in keeping up, and in it is also the laxity of negligence and lack of firmness – which is the truthfulness of the promise or oath, or the right of companionship.”[4]

Allah (Most High) says,

وَيَوْمَ نُسَيِّرُ ٱلْجِبَالَ وَتَرَى ٱلْأَرْضَ بَارِزَةًۭ وَحَشَرْنَـٰهُمْ فَلَمْ نُغَادِرْ مِنْهُمْ أَحَدًۭا

˹Beware of˺ the Day We will blow the mountains away, and you will see the earth laid bare. And We will gather all ˹humankind˺, leaving none behind (نُغَادِرْ).[5]

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said,

إِنَّ الْغَادِرَ يُنْصَبُ لَهُ لِوَاءٌ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ، فَيُقَالُ هَذِهِ غَدْرَةُ فُلاَنِ بْنِ فُلاَنٍ

“Indeed, a flag (liwaa’) will be raised for the traitor (الْغَادِرَ) on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said: This is the treachery (غَدْرَةُ) of so-and-so, son of so-and-so.”[6]

Al-Khiyanah

The root of الخِيانَة (Al-Khiyanah) is خون which means weakness and deficiency. Even in English it is said, his legs betrayed him and he was unable to walk. “The core meaning is a serious deficiency—whether subtle or subtle—in something internal or in a possession: such as the loss of sharpness of vision, strength in the legs or ropes, the loss of meat and fat from a camel, or the theft of money… Its meaning includes betrayal of covenants (العُهُود) and pacts (المَواثِيق), for failure to fulfil is a deficiency, just as completing the measure is fulfilment.”[7]

Allah (Most High) says,

وَلَا تُجَـٰدِلْ عَنِ ٱلَّذِينَ يَخْتَانُونَ أَنفُسَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ مَن كَانَ خَوَّانًا أَثِيمًۭا

Do not argue for those who betray their own souls: Allah does not love anyone given to treachery (خَوَّانًا) and sin.[8]

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to make the following du’a:

اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنَ الْجُوعِ فَإِنَّهُ بِئْسَ الضَّجِيعُ وَأَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنَ الْخِيَانَةِ فَإِنَّهَا بِئْسَتِ الْبِطَانَةُ

“O Allah, I seek refuge in Thee from hunger, for it is an evil bed-fellow; and I seek refuge in Thee from treachery (الخِيانَة), for it is an evil hidden trait.”[9]

Treachery is a major sin in Islam, and it is not tolerated from anyone residing in an Islamic state, Muslim country, non-Muslim country or even on the battlefield with an enemy in an active war (فِعْلاً).

English Law

In English law, “Treason was redefined by the Treason Act 1795 and the principal forms now include:

(1) compassing the death or serious injury of the sovereign or his (or her) spouse or eldest son;

(2) levying war against the sovereign in his (or her) realm, which includes any insurrection against the authority of the sovereign or of the government that goes beyond *riot or *violent disorder;

(3) giving aid or comfort to the sovereign’s enemies in wartime. The penalty for treason (fixed by law) was formerly death but is now life imprisonment.”^[10]

Treachery in English law means, “Conduct that assists an enemy. This was defined under the Treachery Act 1940 as an offence relating to World War II, which was punishable by death. There is now, however, no specific crime of treachery: acts of this sort are usually dealt with under the Official Secrets Acts or, in some cases, as treason.”^[11]

Due to the widening of the definition of terrorism to a point where even wearing a sticker[12] or saying remaining silent[13] makes you a terrorist, then there is a strong argument for dealing with first degree terrorism as treason. This is how an Islamic State would categorise such vile acts.

Crime

Violating the law of the land and not paying taxes whether in an Islamic state or outside is considered a criminal act and punished according to that country’s penal code. While crime is a serious matter and major sin in Islam with crimes such as murder and ‘terrorism’ being capital crimes in an Islamic state, they are not considered treason because the criminal is still a citizen of the country. This is why a dhimmi (non-Muslim citizen of an Islamic State) does not violate their dhimmah (covenant) by not paying the Jizyah tax, but would violate it if they took up arms against the state and rebelled.

Muhammad Khayr Haykal discusses this point, “abstaining from the Jizyah or refraining from submitting to the Islamic rule which are legitimate justifications for the Muslims to fight the Ahlu-dh-Dhimmah as was understood from the Averse of Al-Jizyah mentioned earlier, does not lead to the breaching of the ‘Ahd if the abstaining was not accompanied by taking up of arms or rebelling against the authority. This is because the Islamic authority by way of force can compel them to fulfil what their contract of Dhimmah committed them to just as it can compel Muslims by force to abide by what they are have been committed to perform or pay.

However, in the case where the Ahlu-dh-Dhimmah take up arms whilst abstaining from that which they have committed to, then the issue has become the Qitaal (fighting) of the Ahlu-dh-Dhimmah against the Muslims and the Islamic authority. In regards to this the Fuqahaa have agreed that their ‘Ahd is breached in this circumstance and case in which they possess Quwwah (power) and Man’ah (prevention) due to their taking up of arms and their fighting against the Sultah (authority).”[14]

The focus of this series with regards to treachery is war and peace. The issue of crime and criminal acts is dealt with elsewhere on the site.

Allah orders Muslims to fulfil their covenants

Allah (Most High) orders Muslims to fulfil their contracts and covenants,

يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ أَوْفُوا۟ بِٱلْعُقُودِ

“O believers! Honour your covenants.”^[15]

The definite article (alif-lam) on the word العُقُود (covenants) is mutlaq (unrestricted) which means it includes all types of contracts and covenants, such as citizenship and residency, employment and business and so on.

Al-Alusi comments on this verse, “Some commentators (mufasireen) have chosen to interpret this verse as encompassing all that Allah Almighty has obligated His slaves to do, including religious duties and rulings, and the contracts of trusts, transactions, and the like that they enter into among themselves, which must be fulfilled or are considered religiously good. The command is understood as an unrestricted (Mutlaq) request, whether recommended or obligatory, and it includes avoiding forbidden and disliked things. This is because [the command] is more in line with the generality of the expression, since it [العُقُود] is a plural noun with the definite article (alif-lam), and more complete in terms of the generality of the benefit.”^{^[16]}

The Prophet ﷺ said:

مَنْ قَتَلَ مُعَاهَدًا لَمْ يَرَحْ رَائِحَةَ الْجَنَّةِ، وَإِنَّ رِيحَهَا تُوجَدُ مِنْ مَسِيرَةِ أَرْبَعِينَ عَامًا

“Whoever kills a person with whom a covenant has been made (mu’ahid) will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, even though its fragrance can be found from a distance of forty years’ journey.”^[17]

Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar (d.1449) comments on the above hadith:

والمراد به من له عهد مع المسلمين سواء كان بعقد جزية أو هدنة من سلطان أو أمان من مسلم

“This refers to someone who has a covenant (‘ahd) with the Muslims, whether it be through a jizya contract, legal protection (dhimma) from a sultan, or a guarantee of safety (aman) from a Muslim.”^[18]

The Prophet ﷺ said:

أَدِّ الأَمَانَةَ إِلَى مَنِ ائْتَمَنَكَ وَلاَ تَخُنْ مَنْ خَانَكَ

“Fulfill your trust (Al-Amanah) to those who entrusted you with it, and do not betray those who betrayed you.”^[19]

The Prophet ﷺ also said:

وَالْمُسْلِمُونَ عَلَى شُرُوطِهِمْ إِلاَّ شَرْطًا حَرَّمَ حَلاَلاً أَوْ أَحَلَّ حَرَامًا

“Muslims are bound by their conditions, except for a condition that makes halal what is haram or makes haram what is halal.”^[20]

Therefore, compliance with the terms and conditions of any contract including a citizenship contract and residency visa is obedience to Allah.

What follows are some examples from the life of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that treason and treachery have no place in the religion of Islam.

The Battle of Badr – Not allowing two Muslim soldiers to fight

Hudhaifa bin al-Yaman said: “Nothing prevented me from being present at the Battle of Badr except this incident. I came out with my father Husail (to participate in the Battle), but we were caught by the disbelievers of Quraish. They said: “Do you intend to go to Muhammad?” We said: “We do not intend to go to him, but we wish to go back to Medina.” So they took from us a covenant in the name of Allah that we would turn back to Medina and would not fight on the side of Muhammad ﷺ. So, we came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and related the incident to him. He ﷺ said: “Both, of you proceed (to Medina); we will fulfil the covenant (‘ahd) made with them and seek Allah’s help against them.”^[21]

The Muslim army at the Battle of Badr was severely outnumbered by a ratio of 3:1. Loosing two soldiers was a big material loss yet the Prophet ﷺ fulfilled the ‘ahd. It is a well-established maxim in sharia that any masalaha (benefit) not in accordance with the Islamic texts is null and void.

The Treaty of Hudaibiyah – Refusing asylum to a believer

After the signing of the Treaty of Hudaibiyah in 6 Hijri, Abu Basir, who was one of the Muslims imprisoned in Makkah managed to escape and sought refuge in Dar al-Islam (Medina). The treaty between the Islamic State of Medina and the Quraysh in Makkah, “stipulated that anyone [men] from Quraysh who came to Muhammad without the permission of his guardian would be returned to them, and anyone who came to Quraysh from among those with Muhammad would not be returned to him.”^[22]

Quraysh sent a man from Banu Amir ibn Lu’ayy, along with his freed slave (mawla) to Medina seeking the return of Abu Basir. When the delegates arrived in Medina, the Prophet ﷺ handed Abu Basir back to them. This is not obedience to the disbelievers, rather this is obedience to Allah, Who orders compliance with ALL contracts and treaties as long as they do not involve sin and disobedience to Him.

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to Abu Basir: “O Abu Basir, we have given these people what you know, and treachery (الغَدْر) is not permissible in our religion. Allah will surely grant you and those with you who are oppressed relief and a way out. So go back to your people.” He said, “O Messenger of Allah, will you return me to the polytheists so they may tempt me away from my religion?” He said, “O Abu Basir, go, for Allah Almighty will surely grant you and those with you who are oppressed relief and a way out.”^[23]

Obedience to Allah will undoubtedly lead to good outcomes.

On their way back to Makkah, they stopped at Dhu al-Hulayfah and Abu Basir managed to kill one of his captors – the man from Banu Amir ibn Lu’ayy. The other captor – the freed slave escaped back to Medina. “The freed slave quickly went to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ while he was sitting in the mosque. When the Messenger of ﷺ saw him approaching, he said, “This man has seen something terrifying.” When he reached the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, he said, “Woe to you! What is the matter?” He replied, “Your companion has killed my companion.” By Allah, he had not left when Abu Basir appeared, sword drawn, and stood before the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. He said, “O Messenger of Allah, you have fulfilled your treaty (dhimmah), and Allah has rewarded you. You handed me over to the people, and I have protected myself from being tempted by my religion.” The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Woe to his mother! He is a fierce warrior! If only he had men with him!”[24]

Abu Basir then established a ‘state’ along with 70 Muslims who managed to escape Makkah, at al-Ays, near Dhu al-Marwa, on the coastal route which Quraysh used for their caravans to Syria. This was an independent ‘state’ not under the authority of the Prophet’s ﷺ state in Medina, and not bound by the Treaty of Hudaibiyah. In fact, it was forbidden for this ‘state’ to join Medina due to the treaty. Abu Basir’s ‘state’ then began attacking the caravans of Quraysh and seizing their wealth causing huge damage to the Makkan economy. It was then that Quraysh wrote to the Prophet ﷺ pleading with him to take them back to Medina so they were under his authority which he ﷺ did.[25] As with any contract or treaty, they can be renegotiated on terms acceptable to both sides.

Ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali (d.1223CE) comments on this story saying, “It is therefore permitted for the one who had embraced from the disbelievers to isolate themselves in an area and to fight whom they can from the disbelievers, take their wealth (or property) and to not be included within the treaty. Then if the Imam was to join them to him with the permission of the disbelievers, they would then enter under the terms of the treaty and killing the disbelievers and taking their wealth would become Haram upon them.”^[26]

Something similar occurred when pirates from the North African Barbary States (Algiers, Tripoli, Tunis) began attacking American and European ships in the Mediterranean. After a series of wars America signed a series of treaties with these states to bring the pirates under their control. A ‘Commerce and navigation’ treaty was also signed with the Ottoman Caliphate in 1830 to protect American ships in Ottoman waters.[27]

In 1899 Secretary of State John Hay approached Oscar Straus, the American ambassador to the Ottoman Caliphate to try and convince Abdul-Hamid II to use his religious authority as caliph to discourage Filipino Muslims from joining the rebellion against American rule. Abdul-Hamid II drafted a letter addressed specifically to the Moro Muslims of the Sulu Sultanate, directing them to submit to American authority and abstain from hostilities against U.S. forces which they did.[28]

Expedition to Khaybar – The Black Shepherd

In the year 7 Hijri, after the signing of the Treaty of Hudaibiyah, the Prophet ﷺ was able to finally deal with the treachery and danger of the belligerent tribes based in Khaybar. These tribes had been signatories to the Treaty of Medina (Sahifa) but had reneged on it time and time again.

“After the Prophet secured peace with the Quraysh, he could finally turn his attention inwards once more. A group of the previously expelled Banū Qaynuqāʿ and Banū Naḍīr still posed a constant and immediate threat that the Prophet could not address until now. After their expulsion, they relocated to Khaybar and organised the biggest army Medina ever faced in the Battle of the Trench. The Treaty of Ḥudaybiyyah allowed the Prophet to organise his efforts towards these belligerent tribes.

Immediately after Ḥudaybiyyah, the Prophet launched a pre-emptive attack on Khaybar before they had a chance to organise another attack on Medina. The Muslims marched continuously from Medina to Khaybar and camped overnight out of sight. They marched towards Khaybar after Fajr, catching them completely off-guard. Khaybar was comprised of a number of fortresses even more magnificent and imposing in stature than those of Medina. The vast fortresses were spread across acres of lush farmland. As they approached the first fortress, the inhabitants were leaving with their farming tools, preparing for the day’s work. When they saw the Muslim army, they scrambled back inside the fortress, yelling, “Muhammad and his army have arrived!” Despite launching a surprise attack, their response clearly indicates a level of expectation; a retaliation for their prior aggressions was foreseen.”[29]

There was a black Abyssinian slave who lived in Khaybar caring for sheep belonging to his master. When he saw that the people of Khaybar were taking up their weapons, he asked them, “What are you going to do?” They replied, “We are going to do battle with that man who claims to be a prophet.”

This reference to a prophet had an impact upon him and he took his sheep and approached the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, asking him, “To what do you invite?” He replied, “I invite you to Islam, to hear witness that there is no god but Allah, that I am the Messenger of Allah, and that you will not worship any other than Allah.” The slave then asked, “What will I get if I hear witness to that and believe in Allah?” The Messenger of Allah ﷺ replied, “Paradise, if you die believing that.”

The slave accepted Islam and said, “Prophet of Allah, these sheep I have is my trust (amanah).” The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, “Drive them out of our camp and throw pebbles at them, for Allah will fulfill your amanah.” He did so, and the sheep returned to their Jewish master, who realized that his slave had accepted Islam. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ then arose and addressed his men.^[30]

Even though Khaybar was Dar al-Harb Fi’lan (Land of active war), the Prophet ﷺ still followed the laws of war jus in bello and ordered the Muslims to fulfil their trusts. If the sheep had come to them after they had conquered the town through force, then they would be considered ghanima (war booty).[31] In the end Khaybar surrendered and made a treaty to give 50% of their produce to the Islamic state. The Muslims therefore did gain a huge amount of wealth but through halal means i.e. treaty and not through breaking a trust.

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ clearly outlined the stages of war in a famous hadith narrated by Buraida. “Fight in the name of Allah in the cause of Allah. Fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not commit treason (Ghadrah), do not mutilate, and do not kill a child. And when you meet your enemy from among the polytheists, call them to three courses of action. If they respond, accept them and refrain from attacking them.

1- Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. Then invite them to migrate from their lands to the land of the Muhajireen and inform them that, if they do so, they shall have all the privileges and obligations of the Muhajireen.

If they refuse to migrate, tell them that they will have the status of Bedouin (أَعْراب) Muslims and will be subjected to the Commands of Allah like other Muslims, but they will not get any share from the ghanima or Fai’ (spoils without fighting) except when they actually fight with the Muslims (against the disbelievers).

2- If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands.

3- If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.”[32]

These were followed during the battle of Khaybar with the leaders agreeing to point two i.e. to pay jizya.

The illegal occupation of Samarkand

Qutaybah bin Muslim was the Amir (Campaign Commander) in Central Asia who conquered Samarkand in the year 711-12CE under the Umayyad Caliph Al-Walid.[33] Instead of following the methodology of the Prophet ﷺ outlined above, he simply invaded the city and turned it in to a garrison town.

When Umar bin Abdul-Aziz became the caliph, the people of Samarkand saw an opportunity to gain justice so they met with the Central Asian governor Sulayman Abi as-Sarri and said, “Qutaybah has betrayed and wronged us by seizing our town. Allah has shown us justice and equity, therefore if we are allowed, we would like to send a delegation to the Amir al-Mu’minin to complain of our injustices and if we are within our rights, he will address our needs.”

Sulayman granted their request and a delegation of men represented their case to the Caliph. After speaking with the delegation Umar bin Abdul-Aziz wrote to Sulayman saying, “Indeed, the people of Samarkand have come complaining to me of the injustices inflicted upon them, stating that Qutaybah has unjustifiably stationed his army in the town in their midst and forced them to leave. Therefore, when my letter reaches you, appoint a tribunal to judge and settle the dispute between Qutaybah and the people of Samarkand. If the judgment of the tribunal goes against the army chief and his men are asked to vacate, they must do so at once and the people may return to the way they were before Qutaybah appeared on the scene.”

Sulayman appointed Jumay’a bin Hadir as the Qadi Mazalim over the case. Jumay’a ruled in favour of the people of Samarkand saying, “Sudden attack on them without warning was unlawful,” and the Muslim army had to withdraw. After witnessing this justice, Samarkand and neighbouring Soghd decided against fighting a war with the Muslims and agreed to live side by side with them under Islamic rule. Their influential scholars said, “We have mixed and lived side by side with those people. They are peaceful with us and we are with them. Should you decide that we are to return to war, it would be futile and we do not know whom the victory will belong to. We would only be bringing hostility upon ourselves.”[34]

The Islamic State is not a utopia, and there is no doubt that incidents will occur in an Islamic society which are not in accordance with sharia law. This has been true throughout Islamic history, starting with the first Islamic state established and ruled by the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.

What is important is to have effective state mechanisms in place to deal with any grievances (Al-Maẓālim المَظالِم) that may occur, and provide adequate redress and compensation to the victims, so they feel they have received justice.

Notes

[1] Christian Kingdoms

[2] Hugh Kennedy, ‘Muslim Spain and Portugal: A Political History of Al-Andalus,’ Routledge, 2014, xiv

[3] Muhammad Hassan Hassan Jabal, ‘The etymological dictionary of the words of the Holy Qur’an,’ https://tafsir.app/ishtiqaqi/%D8%BA%D8%AF%D8%B1

[4] Ibid

[5] Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Kahf, ayah 47

[6] Sahih al-Bukhari 6178, https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6178

[7] Muhammad Hassan Hassan Jabal, ‘The etymological dictionary of the words of the Holy Qur’an,’ https://tafsir.app/ishtiqaqi/%D8%AE%D9%88%D9%86

[8] Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Nisaa’, ayah 107

[9] Sunan Abi Dawud 1547, https://sunnah.com/abudawud:1547

[10] Jonathan Law, ‘A Dictionary of Law (Oxford Quick Reference),’ 10th edition, 2022

[11] Ibid

[12] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68286945

[13] Under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, individuals stopped at UK borders have no right to remain silent. You are legally required to answer questions, produce documents, and provide passwords for electronic devices. Refusal to comply is a criminal offence, punishable by up to three months in prison or a fine.

[14] Dr. Muhammad Khayr Haykal, ‘Al-Jihad wa’l Qital fi as-Siyasa ash-Shar’iyya’

[15] Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Ma’ida, verse 1

[16] Al-Alusi, Ruh Al-Ma’ani, https://tafsir.app/alaloosi/5/1 Note, this is paraphrased not an exact translation.

[17] Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 3166, https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3166

[18] Fath al-Bari 12/259, https://shamela.ws/book/1673/7246

[19] Sunan Abi Dawud 3534, https://sunnah.com/abudawud:3534

[20] Jami’ at-Tirmidhi 1352, https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:1352

[21] Sahih Muslim 1787, https://sunnah.com/muslim/32/121

[22] Ibn Hisham, https://shamela.ws/book/23833/1054

[23] Ibn Hisham, https://shamela.ws/book/23833/1060

[24] Ibn Hisham, https://shamela.ws/book/23833/1061#p1

[25] Ibid