Top Islamic Websites

Why did prophet Muhammed kill his prisoners of war?

There is a certain incident in the Islamic history that I could not quite understand. It is about two prisoners of wars who surrendered to prophet Muhammed during the battle (Badr). One of them was Nadr Ibn Al Harith, and the other was Akba Ibn Abu Mu'et. After capturing them, prophet Muhammed ordered both of them to be killed. One of them, Akba, asked prophet Muhammed for mercy and told him about his children and what should they do after his death, then prophet Muhammed simply said: "they go to hell"! The above incident is mentioned in most Islamic history books, including Ibn Hisham, Al Rawd Al Anf, Ibn Katheer...etc. http://sirah.al-islam.com/display.asp?f=... Did prophet Muhammed really do that? what was his reason for killing those prisoners of war?

Public Comments

1. Because Muhammed was brought up by christians and jews, and thats the type of thing they were doing at the time
2. No he didn't kill his prisoners of war
3. well he was trying to spread his religion one way or an other, but it was a different era, i mean so did christions
4. You can't separate actions from their historical time period. That's what people did to prisoners of war back then. That or make slaves of them. And Muhammad does encourage granting more human rights to POW slaves than virtually any one else during his time period, religious or otherwise.
5. Not one single prisoner was killed in his life time Peace Be Upon Him he was the most Nobel prophet the seal of all his messengers. God loved Muhammad and Muhammad loved God. The infallible prophet of God and his beloved servant. Peace be upon him and his progeny
6. Whats the alternative? Let them go? Keep them as slaves who can turn on you?
7. Yes --Mo certainly did. They were Infidels - they refused to SUBMIT to the demon allah - they had to die.
8. Ive never heard the Prophet saying "they go to hell"! - seems like another anti-muslim lie - simply because islam doesnt put the sins of parenst onto children nor did the Prophet necessirily know the future of the children Prisoners of War The historical legal principles governing the treatment of prisoners of war, in shar'iah, Islamic law, (in the traditional madhabs schools of Islamic jurisprudence), closely mirror the pre-existing norms of society during Muhammad's time[citation needed]. Men, women, and children may all be taken as prisoners of war under traditional interpretations of Islamic law. Generally, a prisoner of war could be (at the discretion of the military leader): freed, enslaved for the purposes of labor, or sold on the slave market. In earlier times, the ransom sometimes took an educational dimension, where a literate prisoner of war could secure his or her freedom by teaching ten Muslims to read and write. Muslim scholars have traditionally held that women and children prisoners of war cannot be killed under any circumstances, but that they may be freed, ransomed, or enslaved. However, there has been disagreement whether adult male prisoners of war must be executed, must not be executed, or may be executed at the discretion of the appropriate authority: One traditional opinion holds that executing prisoners of war is strictly forbidden; this is the most-widely accepted view, and one upheld by the Hanafi Maddhab. However, the opinion of the Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali and Jafari Maddhabs is that adult male prisoners of war may be executed at the discretion of the Islamic supreme leader, or those legally deputized by him.[citation needed] Conventionally, execution was conditional on the reasonable belief that male prisoners would pose a genuine and immediate threat to the Muslim community if allowed to live. This opinion was also upheld by the medieval Muslim judge, Sa'id bin Jubair (665-714 AD). Taken together, these two views account for virtually all reputable Islamic scholarship that has consider the issue. The above facts are attested to by a number of scholarly sources coming from medieval and modern, Muslim and non-Muslim sources: Imam Shafi, said the Imam (supreme leader of the Muslims) is given the choice of killing the prisoners, showing them mercy, ransoming them or keeping them in bondage. This issue has been confirmed and has been proven in our book 'Al Ahkam.' (Tafsir of the Qur'an by Ibn Kathir [4]) Slavery was not abolished by the Koran, but ... only children of slaves or non-Muslim prisoners of war can become slaves, never a freeborn Muslim. (Annemarie Schimmel. Islam: An Introduction. Albani: State University of New York Press, 1992, p. 67) It was the custom to enslave prisoners of war and the Islamic state would have put itself at a grave disadvantage vis-a-vis its enemies had it not reciprocated to some extent. By guaranteeing them [male POWs] humane treatment, and various possibilities of subsequently releasing themselves, it ensured that a good number of combatants in the opposing armies preferred captivity at the hands of Muslims to death on the field of battle. (Roger DuPasquier. Unveiling Islam. Islamic Texts Society, 1992, p. 104) ...that one can even...finish off the wounded, or kill prisoners who might prove dangerous to the Muslims...As for the prisoners who are led before the imam, the latter has the choice, as he pleases, of executing them, or making them pay a ransom, for the most advantageous choice for the Muslims and the wisest of Islam. The ransom imposed upon them is not to consist either of gold, silver, or wares, but is only in exchange for Muslim captives... As for the captives, the amir [ruler] has the choice of taking the most beneficial action of four possibilities: the first to put them to death by cutting their necks; the second, to enslave them and apply the laws of slavery regarding their sale and manumission; the third, to ransom them in exchange for goods or prisoners; and fourth, to show favor to them and pardon them. ('Abu Yusuf Ya'qub Le Livre de l'impot foncier,' translated from Arabic and annotated by Edmond Fagnan, Paris, Paul Geuthner, 1991, pages 301-302) Abu Yusuf (d. 798 CE) was a classical jurists from the Hanafi school of jurispudence). According to accounts written by Muhammad's followers, after the Battle of Badr, some prisoners were executed for their earlier crimes in Mecca, but the rest were given options: They could convert to Islam and thus win their freedom; they could pay ransom and win their freedom; they could teach 10 Muslims to read and write and thus win their freedom [5]. William Muir wrote of this period: "In pursuance of Mahomet's commands the citizens of Medina and such of the refugees as possessed houses received the prisoners and treated them with much consideration. 'Blessings be on the men of Medina', said one of these prisoners in later days, 'they made us ride while they themselves walked; they gave us wheaten bread to eat when there was little of it, contenting themselves with dates." [6] [edit] Modern rules The 20th Century Muslim scholar, Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi writes, "...the exegetists and jurists have drawn the principle that those who are non-combatants should not be killed during or after a war." "'No prisoner should be put to the sword' is a very clear and unequivocal instruction given by the Prophet...'The Prophet has prohibited the killing of anyone who is tied or is in captivity.'"[9] In regards to the property of the enemy, he writes, Muslims have been instructed by the Prophet not to pillage or plunder or destroy residential areas, nor harm the property of anyone not fighting. It has been narrated in the Hadith: "The Prophet has prohibited the Believers from loot and plunder" (Bukhari, Abu Dawood)...Booty of war from the battleground is altogether different. It consists of the wealth, provisions and equipment captured from the camps and military headquarters of the combatant armies and may legitimately be appropriated. Muslims have been prohibited from taking anything from the general public of a conquered country without paying for it. If the Muslim army occupies an area of the enemy country, it does not have the right to use the things belonging to the people without their consent. If the army needs anything, it should purchase it from the local population or should obtain permission from the owners. [10] Yusuf Ali is another 20th century Muslim scholar, while commenting on verse 2:190, outlines the basic rules of war, War is permissible in self-defence, and under well-defined limits. When undertaken, it must be pushed with vigour, but not relentlessly, but only to restore peace and freedom for the worship of Allah. In any case strict limits must not be transgressed: women, children, old and infirm men should not be molested, nor trees and crops cut down, nor peace withheld when the enemy comes to terms.[11] Also, Yusuf Ali writes in commenting verse 9:6 , Even those the enemies of Islam, actively fighting against Islam, there may be individuals who may be in a position to require protection. Full asylum is to be given to them, and opportunities provided for hearing the Word of Allah...If they do not see their way to accept Islam, they will require double protection: (1) from the Islamic forces openly fighting against their people, and (2) from their own people, as they detached themselves from them. Both kinds of protection should be ensured for them, and they should be safely escorted to a place where they can be safe. [12]
9. This is something I cannot answer. But, why do people keep turning on what Mohammad did? No one ever talks about what the Christians have done. Did you know that during the last Crusade, Richard the Lionheart had 3,000 of Saladin's soldiers beheaded when they were caught near Jaffa? That is where his name comes from---he had the heart of a lion.....the need to kill.
10. LIARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.PRISONERS OF WAR ARE TO BE TREATED JUSTLY AND WITH RESPECT.STOP LYING
11. If he did those things, he have his reasons. It should be noted that universally, prisoners of war are killed if they are considered to be too damaging to be alive. IF one said something like "I have surrendered myself to God and I accept what must be done", then maybe there's a good chance one might be considered to be trusted.