Is booty not regarded as plunder?
- According to what I have read, Muslims can grab the women, children, land and property of all unbelievers in war, whether they fight or not. It is permissible.
- In other words, all the property of not only those who fight but also those who do not fight is confiscated.
- Is it not regarded as plunder? If not, what is it?
Submitted by on Mon, 19/08/2024 - 11:52
Dear Brother / Sister,
What you have read is incomplete and wrong.
In Islam, if a place is obtained through war, the property and life of those who have not actually participated in the war and those who are unable to participate are untouched.
The property of the warriors and the state are transferred to the Islamic state. As a rule, the state takes one-fifth of it and shares the rest among the warriors.
If the state deems it inappropriate to distribute property other than movable property, especially land, to the warriors, the state will not distribute it; it can allow the former owners to use them in return for tax.
The Prophet (pbuh) and his Rightly-Guided Caliphs (r. anhum) ordered the commanders and soldiers who went to war not to touch “women, children, clerics who did not participate in the war and did not help, farmers and shepherds who were engaged in their work...” and that they should not be targeted while shooting.
Women and children on the battlefield are naturally captivated. Captives are treated humanely. Those who govern the state decide what will happen later, but those other than fighting men are not killed or enslaved.
It is necessary to distinguish between wars between tribes and wars between states regarding the issue. International agreements are generally observed in the latter. Let us take Fatih’s conquest of Istanbul as an example:
After this conquest, the people of Istanbul, other than those who fought, were not captured; neither their money, houses, and shops were taken away, nor were they turned into slaves or concubines.
Istanbul belonged to the conqueror state in terms of property and administrative rights, but as we have said, its people were not treated as booty.
The following statement is included in a source describing the conquest
“…Finally, after the 53-day siege, when the city fell into the hands of the Turks on the 54th day, Sultan Mehmed, the Conqueror, entered the city with a ceremony from Topkapı; he passed Atmeydanı and came in front of Hagia Sophia, and tried to calm the people who had gathered here by telling them that their lives and property were safe...” [Tarih Magazine, Issue 66 (2017 / 2), Istanbul 2017, pp. 63-76]
For additional information see:
- Abu Yusuf, al-Kharaj, p. 19-25.
- Mawardi, al-Ahkamus-Sultaniyya, Cairo 1973, pp. 131-134, 145.
- Muhammad Hamidullah, İslamda Devlet İdaresi (transl. Kemal Kuşçu), Istanbul 1963, pp. 110, 176, 200-204.
- Mustafa Fayda, Hz. Ömer Zamanında Gayr-ı Müslimler, Istanbul 1989, pp. 21-22, 26-36.- Hayreddin Karaman, Ana Hatlarıyla İslam Hukuku, Devletler Hukuku Bölümü.
Questions on Islam
- Is it true that churches were demolished, houses were destroyed and goods were plundered during the conquest of Istanbul?
- What is the apparent reason for and wisdom behind the fact that the Prophet gave glad tidings for the conquest of Istanbul, not another city?
- Is there a hadith stating that the enemy’s goods (belongings) are regarded as booty?
- Was sexual intercourse with female slaves of war (concubines) before they were divided up?
- Even though slavery and concubinage no longer exist today, can concubines (female slaves) be taken as booty in a war?
- How can the transformation of St. Sophia (a church) into a mosque be explained by freedom of religion and conscience?
- Is it permissible to kill children in war according to the example of Atiyya Qurazi?
- What are the purposes of wars that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) fought?
- Are women and civilians taken prisoners and treated as booty in war?
- Zubayr bin Awwam (r.a.)
