Pearson Edexcel Level 3 Advanced GCE in Religious Studies – Anthology
227
While, in early Islam, Muslim public opinion was not inc lined t o support an
imā m who himself seemed to have departed from the law, t he jurist-t heologians
seem to have gradually tended to support the authority of the imā m against any
element revolting against him. They upheld the theory that the imā m, even if he
committed an error, must be obeyed. The Ash'arīs and almost all t he later Sunnī
jurists supported authority against dissension and argued that rebellion is worse
than tyranny. To them onc e the bay'a (homage or fealty) was given to the new
imā m there was no legal way of taking it back. For, according to a Qur'ānic
injunc tion, the believers must "obey Allah and the Apostle and those in authority
among you"; if the Muslims differ from the imā m on an issue, "bring it before Allah
and the Apostle, if you believe in Allah and in the last day." But when Allah's
Apostle has died then the imā m takes his plac e. Thus in prac tic e the imā m has the
ultimate authority in the state, and he c an invoke the jihād to enforc e his
commands. It follows that baghī, in the sense of dissension, would c onstitute the
negation of the imā m's authority; henc e both imā m and his subjec t must oppose
t he dissent ers in order t o re-establish the unity of the imāma t e.
The rules governing the c onduc t of war against dissenters are somewhat
different from those of fighting the unbelievers; the main differences being that the
dissent er prisoners are not liable for killing nor t heir propert y for c onfisc at ion as
spoils. Their arms and armaments should be returned to them after their
submission to the imā m. Suc h destruc tive measures as burning the c attle or an
attack by the mangonels and fire should not be resorted to unless deemed
absolutely necessary.
The Jihād Against Deserters and Highway Robbers
Acts committed by deserters from the community of believers and highway
robbers are called the great theft. The law concerning t heir t reat ment is provided in
the Qur'ān as follows:
The punishment of those who c ombat Allah and His Apostle, and go about to
c ommit disorders on the earth, they should be slain or c ruc ified or have their hands
and their feet c ut off or be banished from t he land; t his shall be as a disgrac e for
them in this world, and in the next they shall have a great torment.^40
The jurists agree, on the basis of the foregoing Qur’ānic verse, that deserters
and highway robbers should be punished by the imā m; but they disagreed on the
degree of punishment. Some ordered slaying and c ruc ific ation; others c utting off
their hands and feet; still others were satisfied with banishment. The punishment
depended on the c harac ter of the c riminal as well as the seriousness of his act.
There was also a differenc e of opinion regarding banishment. Mālik c ontended that
the c riminal should be banished to the dār al-harb; other jurists insisted that he
should be kept in the dār al-Islām, but banished from his own town (ac c ording to
the Caliph 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Azīz) or thrown into prison (according to Abū Hanīfa).
In fighting suc h groups, the imā m has the c hoic e of treating them on the same
footing as the bughāt (singular, baghī) or being more lenient to them, depending
on the degree of the seriousness of their c onduc t.
(^40) Q. v. 37.