Laws of Warfare in Shariah VS Modern International Law: What the Non-Muslim Scholars say?

American scholar Roger C. Algase, in his thesis comparing the laws of Warfare in Shariah with modern international law, states that the laws of Shariah:

“strikes a balance between military necessity and respect for human life in a manner which gives a higher priority to saving the lives of non-combatants than does modern international law…the Islamic law dealing with the conduct of war is in a better position than modern theory to develop an effective approach to the problems involved in the law of war crimes…”

“The growth of the legal literature in the early centuries of Islam which attempted to anticipate every possible situation which could arise in any area of human conduct leaves perhaps less room for uncertainty as to what the law is than the modern case method…

[Roger Algase, ‘Protection of Civilian Lives in Warfare: A Comparison Between Islamic Law and Modern International Law Concerning the Conduct of Hostilities’]

Islamic Laws VS Geneva Convention with Regards to Prisoners of War:

Troy S. Thomas concludes in his thesis on the Laws of Shariah with regards to prisoners of war that:

“Finally, it [i.e. the thesis] argues that the (Islamic) laws governing the treatment of POWs are at least as equally benevolent as the Geneva Convention and are in some specific cases broader in scope. Ultimately, they carry a more convincing sanction.” 

[Jihad's Captives: Prisoners of War in Islam by Troy S. Thomas]

Islamic Laws of Warfare vs European International Law:

German Scholar Hans Kruse states in his seminal thesis on Islamic International Law that:

“the positive international law of Europe had more than eight centuries later not yet reached the high degree of humanitarianization with which the Islamic law of war was imbued.”

[Hans Kruse in his ‘Die Institution des Djihâd im islamischen Völkerrecht’. English Translation of Title: The Institution of Jihad in Islamic International Law]

How the Early Muslims Treated the Conquered Lands:

The famous French political scientist, historian and thinker, Gustave Le Bon, states in his detailed study of the conquests of the early Muslims: 

“...history has never known a merciful and a just conqueror as the Arabs…Few are the nations that excelled the Arabs in civility….The conduct of the Commander of the Believers, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattâb, in Jerusalem (Bayt al-Maqdis) proves how kindly the Arab conquerors dealt with the conquered peoples, the opposite of what was done by the Crusaders in Jerusalem many centuries later…”

“The forbearance and toleration that characterized the Arab conquerors, of which historians were ignorant, seemed to explain to what extent they were able to expand their conquests… They used to show mercy to the weak, be kind towards the conquered and abide by the conditions they imposed upon themselves, to the end of those good traits… whichever region they invaded, if Syria or Spain, they treated the people with utmost gentlesness by leaving them their laws, their institutions and their religion…. Never before had the world known conquerors with such tolerance or with such gentle a religion.”

[Gustave Le Bon in his French work ‘La Civilisation des Arabes’ (The Civilization of the Arabs)]

Did the Muslims Forcibly Convert People?

The English historian, Sir Thomas Walker Arnold, mentions in his detailed study of the early conquests of the very first generations of Muslims:

“Of forced conversion or anything like persecution in the early days of the Arab conquest, we hear nothing. Indeed, it was probably in a great measure their tolerant attitude towards the Christian religion that facilitated their rapid acquisition of the country….

"Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of action [i.e. extermination or forced conversions], they might have swept away Christianity as easily as Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made Protestantism penal in France or as the Jews were kept out of England for 350 years … the very survival of these churches to the present day is a strong proof of the generally tolerant attitude of the Mohammedan governments towards them…” 

[The Spread of Islam in the World]

"Take the good, leave the bad" - A clarification

Question

Some scholars say ‘Take the good, leave the bad.’

What is its reference?

I have read Mashayikh advising to avoid reading things from people of batil due to spiritual darkness in their writings/speeches, how does this reconcile with the former mentioned quote/principle?

Answer

This statement is actually an understood principle among the Scholars. It is not a Hadith, but actually a logical conclusion.

Who does this apply to?

However, it is crucial to understand who this applies to.

There are essentially two groups of people;

- Those who have vast amounts of knowledge and understanding.

- Those who don’t.

Those who have sound understanding (the first group) will be able to easily sift out ‘the good from the bad’ without being affected by the bad. However, they too read such works with caution, only at times of need.

Don’t fall prey to falsehood

An under qualified or ill equipped reader easily falls prey to the bad, since he has no concept of it being wrong.

Therefore the seniors always caution against reading the works of the people of falsehood (ahlul batil), since most of the readers are ill equipped to sift the good from the bad in such books. Hence such a reader will be undoubtedly misled.

Furthermore, even if one reads only good in the book of an innovator, one will still subtly be affected by the writers ideology in one way or another.

Imam Muhammad Ibn Sirin (rahimahullah) had given the Ummah a golden piece of advice when he said:

‘Indeed this knowledge is your religion, so check who you take your religion (Din) from.’

(Muqaddimah Sahih Muslim)

In fact Ibn Sirin (rahimahullah) also explained the practice of the Sahabah (radiyallahu’anhum) and Tab’un (rahimahumullah): ‘Initially they would not question the source. When innovations began, they would ask: tell us your source. Thereafter only the narrations from the Ahlus Sunnah would be accepted, and those from the ahlul bid’ah people of innovation (ahlul bid’ah) would be rejected.’

(Muqaddimah Sahih Muslim)

And Allah Ta’ala Knows best,

Answered by: Moulana Muhammad Abasoomar

https://hadithanswers.com/take-the-good-leave-the-bad/

Twisted Morality of the Modern Society - by Ashraf Ali Thanawi رحمه الله

Certain fundamentally reprehensible behaviors are now praised under seemingly positive names:

"Progress" is often just greed for money and status.

"Honour" is frequently just pride or arrogance.

"Love for One's Nation" is reduced to a blind, tribal fanaticism that ignores right and wrong.

"Statesmanship" is simply deceit and cunning.

"Keeping Up with the Times" is often just hypocrisy.

"Boldness" is plain shamelessness.

"Being clever" is just ability to cheat.

Virtues Condemned as Vices 

Conversely, truly commendable attitudes are now dismissed and viewed negatively:

Contentment is mistaken for lack of initiative.

Acceptance of God's Will is condemned as idleness or lack of ambition.

Firmness of Faith is labeled as dogmatism or fanaticism.

Courtesy and Humility are seen as meanness or pettiness of mind.

Piety and Fear of God are mocked as mere whimsicality.

Avoiding unnecessary social mixing is considered anti-social.

Vices Practiced Openly

Finally, there are vices that haven't been renamed but are now practiced openly as if they were virtues, including:

Falsely imputing motives to others.

Injustice toward and neglect of the rights of the poor.

Humiliating and showing lack of respect for others.

Malicious gossip, slander, and picking faults, especially targeting religious or pious people.

Vanity, exhibitionism, and squandering money.

Indifference to spiritual and afterlife concerns.

(Taken from Al Intibahaat al Mufeeda by Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanawi رحمه الله )

Social Benefits of Belief in Taqdeer

Along with the Spiritual benefits to Muslims, the belief in Taqdeer (divine destiny) which is one of the six pillars of Imaan, yields several social benefits, profoundly influencing how individuals interact within families, communities, and broader society.

Social Harmony and Reduced Conflict

Belief in Taqdeer fosters contentment, patience, and acceptance when facing adversity or interpersonal challenges, reducing blame, envy, and rancor between individuals.

When people attribute outcomes to Allah’s decree rather than individual efforts alone, social comparisons diminish, which curbs jealousy and rivalry, enhancing community harmony.

Humility and Compassion

Individuals who embrace Taqdeer tend to show humility, recognizing that achievements result from divine will as much as personal effort.

Such humility leads to greater compassion for others, as people recognize that fortune and misfortune are allotted by a higher power, making them less likely to look down on others facing difficulty or boast over their own success.

Trust, Cooperation, and Mutual Support

Communities with a strong belief in Taqdeer emphasize mutual support, understanding that life’s challenges are shared tests from Allah.

People are more likely to console, encourage, and help each other, building networks of trust and interdependence.

The attitude of not blaming oneself or others harshly over setbacks helps prevent social divisions and promotes collaboration.

Resilience, Positivity, and Social Stability

When faced with social or economic hardships, belief in Taqdeer encourages enduring patience and hope, resulting in resilient, optimistic communities.

The attitude of “trying one’s best and accepting results” discourages negative behaviors like fraud, slander, or unlawful actions to secure personal gain at the expense of community welfare.

People become more focused on constructive action, knowing ultimate outcomes are in Allah’s hands.

These social benefits enable families and communities to remain united, compassionate, and harmonious, especially in the face of collective challenges.

How Prophet Muhammad ﷺ Revolutionised the Society:

Some of the ways Prophet Muhammad ﷺ revolutionised the Society:

1. Gave an unchanging, objective and practical moral code which covers all aspects of life for all and properly balances the interests of the individual and the society. 

2. Connected all people directly to God and God's message, thus removing the possibility of spiritual and other forms of exploitation by the priestly class.

3. Freed society from superstition and ignorant practices that had long enabled exploitation by corrupt religious figures (priests, fake clergy, babas & gurus).

4. Encouraged literacy and acquiring knowledge for all people, including the poor and the slaves and within a few years converted an illiterate, lawless, uncivilised and deeply ignorant people into a highly moral, law-abiding and cultured society.

5. Achieved 100% successful ban on female infanticide. Even today India is not able to control the killing of female fetuses.

6. Gave Inheritance, ownership & transactional rights for women. 

7. Made Marriage subject to consent & mutually agreed socio-legal contract, with dowry to be compulsorily given by the man to the bride. This abolished the marriage-related exploitation of girls' families.

8. Divorce: Gave an honourable, step by step method of dealing with failed marriages including provision for divorce, which was not present in any other religion.

9. Made it lawful for slave masters to marry slaves. Something that the laws in the USA and other countries never allowed. Even after slavery was abolished in America in 1865, inter racial marriage was illegal for more than a century after that (till 1967).

10. Made charity compulsory on all Muslims except the poor and devised a system for more equitable and just distribution of wealth in society.

11. Banned interest based exploitation and enslavement. India banned bonded labour in 1976 but still the practice is seen in many areas.

12. Established an economic system based on justice, fair-play and having necessary safeguards against exploitation of farmers and poor by the rich classes.

13. Rooted out all forms of corruption from society.

14. Made justice equal for all races, castes, classes & tribes. This is a relatively new concept as there were always different scales of justice for rich and poor, rulers and the ruled and upper and lower castes.

15. Independent Judiciary: Made judiciary independent of the rulers and even the legislative power is in the hands of totally independent jurists and legal experts (Fuqaha) who have the power and ability to interpret the Shariah laws. 

16. Permanent Divinely protected rights: Even the parliament or supreme court cannot take away the rights given to the people in the Shariah laws. This system is superior to even the modern democratic systems where any party with brute majority in parliament can amend the constitution and take away the guaranteed rights as they please even against the will of the affected people.

17. No dictatorship: Rulers to be chosen by free selection process based on pure merit. 

18. Autonomy to religious minorities: Non-muslims are free to manage their Cultural, Social and Religious affairs according to their own beliefs and to choose their own representatives. This concept was unique in history, till recently.

19. Prohibition of alcohol: Eradicated alcoholism - the root cause of many crimes, social, economic and Health problems - within a few years from a heavily alcoholic society. Many countries have tried and failed, including the USA.

20. Promoted Modesty and chastity and outlawed extra-marital affairs, which strengthens the institution of family and Protects the society from many marital, emotional, social and health problems (STDs).

21. Eradicated all forms of gambling which is destroying lives and ruining countless families world-wide even today.

22. Promoted a simple and natural way of life and strongly discouraged lavish and luxurious living and prohibited wastage of resources. Taught responsible usage of natural resources and prohibited polluting them.

23. United and Transformed the desert Bedouin tribes who were perpetually fighting and killing amongst themselves and were never united before in their entire history - into one of the most powerful civilisations which defeated the two superpowers of the time. 

24. Humanised the battlefield by prohibiting killing of non-combatants, forbade destruction of trees and crops and other strict codes of conduct. In all the battles fought by the Prophet ﷺ during which he conquered the entire Arabia, only a few hundreds were killed in wars on both sides!

25. Almost eradicated all the crimes in a totally lawless tribal society by inculcating moral and spiritual discipline in individuals, tackling the causes of crimes and strictly implementing the divine laws without fear or favour, which made the society almost crime-free within a few years.

26. Ensured the full integration and rehabilitation-with-dignity of the widows, divorces, orphans, abandoned children, disabled people and other neglected groups in the society.

27. Put an end to cruelty towards animals and encouraged planting trees.

If anyone in today's world could achieve even one of the above reforms, that person will be seen as a great reformer worthy of all the praise and awards in this world.  

Lamartine, the renowned historian speaking on the essentials of human greatness wonders: 

"If greatness of purpose, smallness of means and astounding results are the three criteria of human genius, who could dare to compare any great man in modern history with Muhammad?"

"Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images, the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is MUHAMMAD. As regards all the standards by which Human Greatness may be measured, we may well ask, IS THERE ANY MAN GREATER THAN HE?" (Lamartine, HISTOIRE DE LA TURQUIE, Paris, 1854, Vol. II, pp 276-277)

MICHAEL H. HART in his recently published book on ratings of men who contributed towards the benefit and upliftment of mankind writes:

"My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels." (M.H. Hart, THE 100: A RANKING OF THE MOST INFLUENTIAL PERSONS IN HISTORY, New York, 1978, p. 33)

George Bernard Shaw, the Irish playwright and philosopher said,

“If a man like Muhammad were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much-needed peace and happiness.”

(The Genuine Islam Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936)

May Allah enable us to reconstruct our lives, our societies and the whole world according to these golden foundations for the benefit and salvation of the entire humanity. Aameen.

God's Power and Logical Absurdities - The Necessity of Logical Principles While Discussing God

 The Necessity of Logical Principles Before Discussing God

Before we even begin discussing God and His actions, we must recognize an important truth: logical axioms and first principles are the foundation of reality.

The law of non-contradiction (something cannot exist and not exist at the same time).

The law of identity (a thing is itself and not something else).

The principle of sufficient reason (everything that exists has a reason for its existence).

These principles are not human inventions. They are the very structure of reality itself. Without them, we cannot make sense of anything. Words, sentences, and even thoughts would lose their meaning.

Now, if someone says:

> “God transcends these principles, so He can do things that break logic.”

This creates a huge problem:

If logic doesn’t apply, then reality itself becomes unintelligible.

Words like “God,” “power,” “create,” and “exist” stop meaning anything because they depend on logical coherence to make sense.

Even asking a question about God like “Can God do X?” becomes impossible because the framework needed to ask and understand the question has already collapsed.

In other words:

> If reality is no longer grounded in logical principles, then asking about God’s nature or actions is meaningless.

Questions like:

“Can God create a stone He cannot lift?”

“Can God cease to exist?”

“Can God make 2+2=5?”

…are not just strange, they are nonsense. They attempt to discuss something while simultaneously destroying the very conditions that make discussion possible.

If reality itself could change arbitrarily, if square circles and existing/non-existing simultaneously were possible, then all reasoning, language, and knowledge would collapse. In that case, the discussion about God wouldn’t just be difficult; it would be impossible.

God's Power and Logical Absurdities

God's actions being bound by logical rules does not limit His omnipotence. Rather, logical consistency is part of God's nature, not a constraint outside Him.

Why This Is Not a Limitation

Logical contradiction is not a "thing" to be done:

Surah al-Baqarah 2:106: "Indeed, Allah is over all things competent."

Omnipotence means God can do all "things". But logical contradictions are not "things" at all. They are not a real entity to begin with. For example:

"Creating a square circle"

"Making 2+2 equal 5"

"Existing and not existing at the same time"

These are not tasks—they are meaningless combinations of words, a linguistic illusion. So, not doing them is not a limitation on His omnipotence. They're like asking: “Can God make blue smell louder than justice?”

It is more appropriate to say that such things cannot be done than to say that God cannot do them, because they are not properly ‘things’. 

You can’t say: “Can God draw a square circle?” or “Can God make Himself cease to exist?”

That’s not a test of omnipotence, it’s a misuse of language.

Meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix them with the words ‘God can.’

Because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.

Analogy:

Suppose someone says:

"Can the most powerful painter paint a color that is not a color?"

That’s not a limitation of the painter. It’s just a nonsense request.

 So, God not doing the logically impossible is not a weakness; it’s a reflection of the coherence of His nature.

Misunderstanding 'Power':

"Can God create another god?" or "Can God cease to exist?" is a false question because it involves denying God's necessary nature, which is irrational and not possible.

The idea that God’s power is ‘limited’ because He does not do impossible things is a misunderstanding of what power means.

Because, logical contradictions are not "entities" (ashya’) for power to act on. They don't exist, so power doesn't apply to them. 

He is called omnipotent because He does what He wills, not because He suffers what He does not will.

For the things that cannot be ascribed to His actions are those that are not signs of power but of weakness and hence incompatible with God.

Limitation implies a higher standard:

Saying God is limited by logic only makes sense if logic is outside or greater than God. But theologians argue:

Logic is grounded in God’s nature.

God doesn’t conform to logic; rather, logic flows from His own rational, perfect essence.

So, God is not under logic—He is the source of rational order.

----------

Here’s a simplified rational proof common in kalām theology:

 Premise 1: Omnipotence (al-qudra) is the capacity to bring about things (ashyā’).

 Premise 2: A thing (shay') must be conceivable (maʿqūl) and not self-contradictory.

Example: A square circle is not a “thing”; it is a contradiction in terms.

 Premise 3: Logical contradictions are not real things, because their very definitions negate themselves.

"Can God create a rock He can’t lift?" is like saying:

“Can God be weak and strong in the same sense at the same time?”

→ This is not a "thing" but a linguistic illusion.

 Conclusion:

God’s power applies to all things (kulli shay’ mumkin), but logical contradictions are not “things”, so not doing them does not limit God.

--------

Effects on the Concepts of Reality and Existence

If one believes that God can do illogical things, it has profound and complex effects on the concepts of reality and existence, primarily by challenging the foundational role of logic in understanding the universe. Basing on the above discussion, here's a breakdown of the implications:

1. On the Nature of Reality (Metaphysics):

 * Undermining Universal Laws: If God can defy logic, then the very laws of nature and the principles governing existence become contingent and potentially arbitrary. For instance, if God can make a square circle, then the concept of a square or a circle, and the mathematical principles that define them, lose their inherent meaning.

 * Arbitrary Creation: A God who can do illogical things implies a reality that isn't necessarily coherent or understandable through reason. The universe could operate on principles that are unfathomable to human intellect, or it could change in unpredictable, illogical ways. However, from what we know about the world, this isn't the case. 

2. On the Nature of Knowledge (Epistemology):

 * Limits of Human Reason: If God's actions are not bound by logic, then human reason becomes inherently insufficient to comprehend the reality God created. Our logical frameworks, which are the basis of science and philosophy, would be revealed as limited or even fundamentally flawed when applied to the ultimate nature of existence.

* Skepticism and Nihilism: If reality itself can be illogical, it could lead to profound skepticism about the possibility of any meaningful knowledge. If "anything goes," then the pursuit of understanding through consistent principles might seem futile, potentially leading towards nihilism.

3. On Ethics:

* An "illogical God" could command contradictions (e.g., "always tell the truth and always lie"). This would make ethical reasoning impossible.

In essence, believing God can do illogical things will render meaningless how we understand reality, existence, knowledge, and truth and make them all arbitrary leading to Ontological and Epistemological chaos. Hence it's important to keep in mind logical principles while discussing God and His actions.

(The first section on 'The Necessity of Logical Principles Before Discussing God' was added by Dr. Asim sb)

How reliable is "scientific research"

Those who put all their faith in "scientific research" and hence question Islam based on those "research studies" need to wake up from their 'scientism'....

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1182327/#pmed-0020124-b6

"There is increasing concern that in modern research, false findings may be the majority or even the vast majority of published research claims."

The above is also the problem with lots of medical "research".
See this article titled:
'There is a worrying amount of fraud in medical research'
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/02/22/there-is-a-worrying-amount-of-fraud-in-medical-research

"In 2009 PLOS ONE published a round-up of 18 surveys of scientists, mostly in America, that had asked about fraud. Though only 2% of respondents admitted falsifying data themselves, 14% said they knew someone who had. Similarly, a third of those asked confessed to other questionable research practices, such as dropping inconvenient data points based on “gut feeling”, or making important changes to a study’s protocol while it was in progress. But they pointed the finger at 72% of their colleagues."

Also see this article in the reputed journal 'Nature' titled:
Medicine is plagued by untrustworthy clinical trials.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02299-w
"How many studies are faked or flawed?
Investigations suggest that, in some fields, at least one-quarter of clinical trials might be problematic or even entirely made up, warn some researchers.
By studying the IPD spreadsheets, he judged that 44% of these trials contained at least some flawed data: impossible statistics, incorrect calculations or duplicated numbers or figures, for instance. And 26% of the papers had problems that were so widespread that the trial was impossible to trust"

Preserving the Ideological Gains of Ramadan: How Ramadan Impacts our World View

-Dr Habeeb Haris

Ramadan is not only a time of spiritual reset but also of ideological reset. It provides an antidote to the poisonous effects of modernity that are destroying our Aqeeda, Iman and ideology and are corrupting our world view.

It's important to note that ideology and spirituality are both dependent on one another. A change in one impacts the other too.

Modernist world view:

-Revolves around fulfilling the desire for food and sex, making man a slave of his stomach and genitals.

-Encourages a culture of instant gratification.

-Reduces the human being to just his physical body and it's needs while ignoring or suppressing his Soul and it's needs (Materialism over Spirituality).

-Teaches anthropo-centrism and sidelines God.

Ramadan's effects on world view: 

-Frees the Muslim from slavery of his desire for food and sex.

- Strengthens the Soul and makes it the master over his body and it's pleasures.

-Teaches patience and delaying gratification for higher purpose.

-Fights materialistic and naturalistic tendency by enhancing belief in the Unseen and strengthening Spirituality. 

-Takes a person from anthropo-centrism to Theo-centrism and from being Duniya-oriented to Akhirah-oriented.

We need to protect this ideological purity gained in Ramadan by safeguarding our world view from modern ideologies and dominant societal trends and by continuing to strengthen our Spirituality.

Counselling the Patients who Cannot Fast in Ramadan:

Dr. Habeeb Haris

Proper counselling of Muslim patients for whom fasting is contraindicated is important to ensure compliance.
Doctors / family members should console the patients for whom Ramadan fasting is contraindicated that they should not feel guilty about it as they are not doing anything sinful by not fasting. They can tell the patients that Allah has excused them and they will be rewarded inshaAllah for accepting His will with Sabr. 

The Prophet (SAWS) said: “When a slave falls ill or travels, he gets a reward similar to that which he gets for the good deeds he usually performs when at home [not travelling] and in good health." (Bukhari)

Imam Ibn Hajar writes in Fath Al-Bari, the authoritative commentary of Sahih Bukhari: “This applies to the one who is used to performing acts of obedience, but he was prevented from it, while his intention was to do it had he not been prevented.”
And the rewards of the missed Ramadan fasts can be acquired by observing the Qadha Fasts after they recover, or by offering the Fidya if they are terminally sick patients. Moreover, these patients can do all other acts of worship in Ramadan to compensate for the spiritual gains they think they are missing out by not fasting. 

Ultimately, Allah sees our intentions and rewards accordingly.