Hindu Vivek Kendra
«« Back
The Quranic concept of war by Brigadier S.K. Malik

The Quranic concept of war by Brigadier S.K. Malik

Author: Review by A. Ghosh

This is a close up view of what the Pakistani Mohammedans (actually, all Mohammedans) deem as legitimate war and a valid reason to wage it. As we go on, we will see radical departure from the Geneva Convention of today when comparing Pakistani codes of war. If the Pakistanis had not used the 'Quranic concept of war' in their wars in the past, that was because the Pakistanis were not capable of giving shape to their intentions. They were too weak both in organizational and military capabilities. What they lacked in their competence in war-making activities, they tried to make up by the crudeness of the executions; and thus we are faced with gruesome murders by mutilations of the captive enemy soldiers. Mindless slaughter of captive soldiers or airmen by gouging out eyes or point- blank shooting. Admittedly, there was a time when such conventions did not exist and anything went. One has only to open the pages of history books of any country where past wars have been truthfully described as they had been fought.

This particular book (namely, THE QURANIC CONCEPT OF WAR) is of importance to us Hindus of India as since the time of the first Mohammedan invasions from the Northwest, the philosophy expounded in this book by Brig. S.K. Malik has been carefully adhered to by the Mohammedans anywhere and totally neglected by the victim Hindus.

A few words on the book itself. The book was first published by Wajid Alis Ltd. in Lahore, Pakistan prior to 1986. The first Indian reprint appeared in 1986. The Indian reprint was published by the Himalayan Books of New Delhi 110 013. At that time, the book could be obtained from The English Book Store, 17-L, Connaught Place, New Delhi 110 001. Now apparently, the book has disappeared from the Indian market. Quite possibly, the idea is to keep the Indian public ignorant of the contents of the book. It is the same with all important parts of the Koran. Everything is thus submerged under the doctrine of 'Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava'.

Only recently, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan wrote in the Times of India Daily (of July 28, 1999) an article titled: PEACE, MERCY AND LOVE IN ISLAM, in which this Maulana, a resident of India, tells us that the Koran is full of messages of peace and love to one and all. He wrote, among other things: "A perusal of the Koran followed by a study of latter-day Muslim history will reveal a blatant contradiction between the two - that of principle and practice...and all such hogwash". It is hard to imagine that this Maulana happens to be currently the advisor of the Hindu forces such as the RSS. No doubt with such a scenario, ignorance will continue to survive and knowledge submerged, as far as Hindus are concerned and all to the great harm of India and its poor people.

The author S.K. Malik, has quoted the following text from the Koran's Baqara: 30-33 in the first page:

"Behold, thy Lord said to the angels, 'I will create a viceregent on earth'. They said, 'Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood? - whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)? He said, 'I know what ye know not'.

And he taught Adam the nature of all things; then He placed them before the angels and said, 'Tell Me the nature of these if ye are right'.

They said, 'Glory to Thee: of knowledge we have none, save what Thou has taught us: in truth it is Thou who are perfect in knowledge and wisdom'.

He said, 'O Adam! tell them their natures'. When he had told them, Allah said, 'Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of heavens and earth, and I know what ye reveal and what ye conceal?" Baqara: 30-33

The foreword of the book was written by General Mohammed Zia-ul-Haq. He was then the Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) but not yet the president of Pakistan.

In his Foreword, Zia wrote:
"I write these few lines to commend Brigadier Malik's book on 'The Koranic Concept of War' to both soldier and civilian alike. JEHAD FI- SABILILLAH is not the exclusive domain of the professional soldier, nor is it restricted to the application of military force alone."

"This book brings out with simplicity, clarity and precision the Koranic philosophy on the application of military force, within the context of the totality that is JEHAD. The professional soldier in a Muslim army, pursuing the goals of a Muslim state, CANNOT become 'professional' if in all his activities he does not take on 'the color of Allah'. The non-military citizen of a Muslim state must, likewise, be aware of the kind of soldier that his country must produce and the ONLY pattern of war that his country's armed forces may wage."

"I have read this book with great interest and believe that it has a useful contribution to make toward this understanding that we jointly seek as citizens of an Islamic State, soldier or civilian. I pray and trust that this book will be read by many. For a task so sincerely undertaken and so devotedly executed, the author's reward is with his Lord."

Chief of the Army Staff

The preface of the book has been written by one Allah Bukhsh K. Brohi of 76 Moslemabad of Karachi. It is necessary to cite the high points of the preface for the benefit of non-Mohammedan readers. The subject might appear rather abstruse to them but to a Mohammedan, they are very important and are meant to be carried out on this earth, all in the name of Allah.

Islam is nearly 1400 years old and comments are being made by some already that Qiyamat (the Day of Judgment) may be very near. However, apparently no such book had appeared till now in the entire Islamic literature. Writes Allah Bukhsh K. Brohi: 'As far as I am aware there are hardly any books in the forensic literature of Islam that have dealt with the problem from the perspective from which the learned has attempted to deal with in his treatise. The annexures exhibit some special features of Holy Prophet's military campaigns and more specifically, the case studies that have a bearing on the battles of Badr (I am pleased to announce that soon a substantive article by Anwar Shaikh of Cardiff, titled JEHAD AND CIVILIZATION - 1, will appear on our web-site to clarify a great deal of hogwash that is being freely distributed in the media by India's Mohammedan writers in order to keep the ignorance level of the general public on the true nature of Islamic warfare at an all time high. - A. Ghosh), Ohad and Khandaq, tend to show the author's deep insight into the way the Koran deals with the issues of war and peace...He has also included a general bibliography and incorporated all the Koranic references in the light of which he has attempted to present his thesis'.

Seen in the Koranic setting, man's role here below is one of 'struggle', or striving and of energetically combating forces of evil or what may be called, "counter-initiatory" forces which are at war with the harmony and the purpose of his life on earth. The most glorious word in the vocabulary of Islam is JEHAD, a word which is untranslatable in English but broadly speaking, means, 'striving', 'struggling', 'trying to advance the Divine causes or purposes'.

It is a duty of a believer to carry forward the message of Allah and to bring it to the notice of his fellow-men in handsome ways. But if someone attempts to obstruct him from doing so, he is entitled, as a measure of defense, to retaliate. The problem of war in Islam, therefore, strictly speaking, is controlled by one master desire, namely, of pleasing Allah and of defending the lawful interests of those who, having believed in Him, are not being allowed to carry on the obligations imposed on them by their religion.

JEHAD also is a means of discovering the truth, of finding out what man should do in order to fulfil the law. Even search for knowledge is an aspect of JEHAD and has been ranked as a JEHAD-E-AKBAR, that is to say, it is regarded as a greater struggle as contra- distinguished from JEHAD BIL-SAIF (striving with sword) which is described as a JEHAD-E-ASGHAR, that is, Jehad on the minor scale.

There are some meanings that have to be understood of the vocabulary of JEHAD. The term 'you' in the context of JEHAD indicates 'the whole body of believers' and it is in this sense that Islam is TOTAL. Everybody who is a believer is to contribute his share toward the waging of war. In this connection, the name of the first Caliph Abu Bakr is mentioned. He is the only Caliph (as opposed to other Caliphs) who had spoken against slaughtering of women and children but not necessarily against enslaving them. Thus the name of Abu Bakr is often mentioned as a humanitarian in Islamic lores. It is mentioned at one place: 'as your advance progresses, you will meet religious men who live in monasteries and who serve God in prayer: leave them alone, do not kill them or destroy their monasteries.' Obviously, the monasteries at Nalanda and other places did not qualify because the God mentioned here has to be the one and only Allah.

The war aims of any armed Muslim force engaged in fighting have also been stated in Sura Mohammed, verses 1 and 4:

"Those who disbelieve and hinder (men) from the path of Allah, their deeds will Allah render away (from their mark)...Therefore, when you meet the unbelievers smite their necks; at length, when you have thoroughly subdued them build a barrier against them; thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom, until war lays down its burden." It is thus clear the two opposing camps, the darul Islam and the darul harb, have to fight out. Allah will of course help those of the darul Islam while the final defeat of the darul harb is predestined.

"Naturally, many western scholars have contended that the world of Islam is in a state of perpetual struggle against the non-Muslims. Islam does not agree to this conclusion and puts the blame and consequent responsibility on those that do not believe in Allah. It is said that in Islam the believer is admonished to invite (Readers, of our web-site, please note!) non-believers to the fold of Islam by employing the power of his persuasion. The first duty in Islam is to extend 'Dawa' or invitation to Allah's path and shun their false ways. It is only after they refute this 'Dawa' that a situation arises where the believers have no option but to fight in sheer self- defense. This is where the perpetual problem remains". (The Islamic reasoning is that the non-believers do NOT have even the right to refuse the invitation to change their faith!)

Islam does not lend itself to the concept of territorial state. This raises problems with respect to Mohammedan minorities in a non- Muslim country. There is nothing known as valid territorial loyalty in Islam other than loyalty to Allah. Thus in a future war between India (a non-Muslim country) and Pakistan (a Muslim state) it will be fully legitimate for the minority Muslims of India to undertake measures of sabotage against India. This is a factor that our men at the helm of affairs seem to ignore at great risk. It has been so all throughout Indian history and there is no sign of a change to that treasonous conduct, all in the name of Islam and its peculiar codes.

In this connection one should familiarize oneself with the terms Ummah, Qaum and Millat. Each of these terms is a manifestation of the application of principle of synthesis or integration under the overall umbrella of Islam. The word qaum signifies a group of people who constitute a nation by appeal to the principle of geographical contiguity. Millat on the other hand indicates consanguinity or blood related bond. Ummah is associated with the root word, the mother. People of the same maternal roots are members of the Ummah.

Here is a survey of the special features of the Law of Islam concerning the problems of war.

1. "Armed hostilities oppose systems, not people"; the ultimate result of such reasoning is wholesale and forced conversion of the defeated people because it is by conversion only the people can survive and hostilities end. But such conversion affects only the unbelievers because the unbelievers do not insist upon the believers' change of faith.

2. "Strictly forbidden are excesses of any kind"; this is more often flouted than adhered to by the believers. Examples: Mutilation, public impaling and slaughter by breaking of limbs of the defeated enemy, skinning alive and so on.

3. "All reprisals which constitute violation of basic human rights"; this does not protect the unbelievers for the simple reason that in Allah's domain, the unbelievers have no rights at all.

4. "A distinction between combatants and non-combatants"; in India, in olden times, non-combatants signified farmers, workers, teachers and students and so on. On the other hand, in Islamic society all men, soldiers and civilians are considered fighters for Allah and everyone is supposed to fight against the infidel enemy. This explains why during Islamic invasions in India, the entire population, even non-combatant civilians were subjected to slaughter by the Mohammedans;

5. "Non-permissibility of collective punishment"; this is a misnomer. It needs defining the word 'punishment'. Hindus and all other non-believers were burdened with the Jaziya (please read up JEZIA AND ITS FULL IMPLICATIONS from the archives of our old version of the Sword of Truth); and some sultans, specially in Hyderabad, had taken it in their heads that the slaughter of 100,000 Hindus a year was required to receive Allah's mercy. Nadir Shah had slaughtered all the 100,000 in one single day;

6. "Decent treatment of prisoners"; this again is meant for the consumption of the non-believers and their leaders. As the believers are concerned, this clause does not mean a thing. The Pakistani army proved it in full measure when they slaughtered all Indian soldiers on the western front in captivity while Indians fed, clothed and provided the Koran for reading to 93,000 Pakistani captives of war in Indian hands during the Bangladesh war.

7. "Collaboration with the enemy on all humanitarian projects"; we still have to see one such instance in actual practice;

8. "Even rebels (internal enemies) will enjoy a de jure recognition and not held responsible for death or destruction caused by their acts of war". One has to look at the 40,000 Hindu slaves, that are chained at nights and employed in hard work during the day and their womenfolk raped and sodomized openly while the NGO's do nothing in Sind, Pakistan.

This book of only 159 pages tells us things which conflict head on with today's Geneva conventions. The book spells out clearly the difference in Islamic approach from all others. In fact, today's Islamists do not go for international stipulations of the Geneva Conventions. Theoretically, they are even against Pakistan's UN membership! All legal laws binding Islamic countries have to flow from the laws enunciated in the Koran only and that is the end of the matter!

Those among our readers who have read the Prophet's handling of the Treaty of Hudaibiyya will soon detect that the Koranic concept of war derives its full impact from the Treaty of Hudaibiyya. The Prophet had clearly stated at that time: "What is war but a game of deception?". And this is deception which is the hallmark of Islamic war, not so much with an overly powerful enemy like the United States or Russia but with enemies of comparable strength, such as India, weakened by its misguided notions of right and wrong and the presence inside the country of a huge belligerent, rapidly proliferating and malevolent minority. In Islam, as long as the purpose of warfare is seen in the cause of Allah, then everything is forgiven and accepted. It is quite clear why Pakistan does not want to go by the Simla Pact or even Lahore pact. That is because Simla and Lahore have no 'Islamic' content. This thin line of separation leads the unbeliever astray.

The repercussions of such rules of war had far reaching effects. In 629 A.D. the victorious Roman armies defeated the Muslims in the battlefield of 'Muta'. It is here that the Prophet introduced the 'Muta' marriage code among the Mohammedans. There were a great dearth of women and by Islamic law, no one could have sex with women outside 'nikaah'. And what would one do in a battle field with a married wife or wives? So, the Prophet, by order of Allah of course, introduced the 'muta marriage codes' by which a Muslim could 'marry' a woman for a specified time, say a few hours, days or weeks after which the muta-marriage automatically ended even sans the three pronouncements of the word 'talaaq'. Since then this method of marriage has been widely practiced in Iran and by the Mughal families, specially Jahangir and his kinsmen as well as in brothels in Islamic countries today where whoring is banned by their religion. Sexual unions in such outfits are by nature 'muta marriages' and no one has committed a sin. Can there be any religion more customized than that?

It is not for nothing that people consider the trinity of Treachery, Butchery and Lechery, the hallmark of Islamic characteristics. If India's Vajpayee falls prey to Sharif's ruses for a new Lahore pact, he is bound to regret and our jawans would pay heavily once again for such misadventure with their lives. More mutilated bodies will be sent from the battlefield and their photographs suppressed by the Indian government.

Those who have eyes to see, ears to hear and a head to put two and two together can already see that what has happened in Kargil is only the first round of a long-standing forthcoming war with Pakistan. The only one way to erase this menace is to subdue the Islamic state of Pakistan totally like US did to Nazi Germany even though later on they brought in the Marshal Plan to revive its economy.

Let me quote from a forthcoming treatise on Jehad by Anwar Shaikh: "Jehad is a perpetual war against infidels. According to this doctrine, a person's biggest crime is to deny Allah and Muhammad's exclusive right to be believed and adored. Therefore, this is a sufficient cause for a Muslim state to raid and subjugate non-Muslim territories. What is amazing is the fact that Allah bribes the Muslims to wage Jehad by declaring murder, arson, rape and enslavement of non-Muslims as the greatest piety whereas even an ordinary human thinks of them as the most heinous atrocities and acts of utter moral degradation...

"...The all-knowing Allah, responding to the prayers of his devotees revealed through Muhammad, the doctrine of Jehad i.e. murdering non- Muslims for possessing their wealth, property and women.

"In essence, there was nothing new in it because the Arabs were customarily used to plundering the commercial caravans. To exploit this vice, Islam cleverly renamed brigandage and killing as Jehad, which was to be carried out to glorify Allah, the Great. By reshaping common robbery into a Divine pursuit, it inspired the lust for plunder with the spirit of untold devotion, discipline and desire that turned the looters into crusaders, who carried out their atrocities with greatly enhanced enthusiasm; in fact, they became ferocious robots who thought of pillage as piety and equated murder with melody".

Back                          Top

«« Back
  Search Articles
  Special Annoucements