Blogging the Qur’an: Sura 8, “Booty,” verses 31-75
posted at 8:00 am on November 4, 2007 by Robert Spencer
Share on Facebook | regular view
Verses 31-40 of Sura 8 discuss the perversity of the pagan Quraysh, whom the Muslims have just defeated in the Battle of Badr. They reject Muhammad’s preaching as “tales of the ancients” (v. 31) and keep the Muslims out of the Sacred Mosque in Mecca (v. 34). In verses 38-40, Allah tells Muhammad to call them to accept Islam, “and fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression [fitnah], and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do” (v. 39).
According to Ibn Abbas, Abu Al-`Aliyah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ar-Rabi` bin Anas, As-Suddi, Muqatil bin Hayyan and Zayd bin Aslam, the statement that Muslims must fight until there is no more fitnah means that they must fight “so that there is no more Shirk.” Shirk is the association of partners with Allah – i.e., calling Jesus the Son of God. So this verse, although it was revealed in the aftermath of a seventh-century battle between Muslims and pagans, has a universal application: the Tafsir al-Jalalayn glosses it this way: “And fight them until sedition, idolatry, is, exists, no more and religion is all for God, alone, none other being worshipped…” Muhammad himself said: “I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was guaranteed the protection of his property and life on my behalf except for the right affairs rest with Allah.”
Verses 41-44 concern the battle itself. After the Muslims’ victory, Allah directs the Muslims to give a fifth of the booty to Muhammad (v. 41). After one battle, Muhammad prayed “facing a camel from the war booty,” and then, holding some of the camel’s hair between his fingers, said to his men: “This is also a part of the war booty you earned. Verily, I have no share in it, except my own share, the fifth designated to me. Even that fifth will be given to you.” That indicated, according to the one telling this tale, the prophet’s generosity. Muhammad continued by exhorting the Muslims to turn over all the spoils of war to him for just distribution: “Therefore, surrender even the needle and the thread, and whatever is bigger or smaller than that (from the war spoils). Do not cheat with any of it, for stealing from the war booty before its distribution is Fire and a shame on its people in this life and the Hereafter. Perform Jihad against the people in Allah’s cause, whether they are near or far, and do not fear the blame of the blamers, as long as you are in Allah’s cause. Establish Allah’s rules while in your area and while traveling. Perform Jihad in Allah’s cause, for Jihad is a tremendous door leading to Paradise. Through it, Allah saves (one) from sadness and grief.”
Then Allah reminds Muhammad of various events before and during the battle, emphasizing how Allah controlled events and saved the Muslims (vv. 42-44).
Verses 45-63 address the believers, telling them not to imitate those who, like the “people of Pharaoh…rejected the Signs of Allah” (v. 52). (Here again, “signs” is ayat, the word used for the verses of the Qur’an.) For “the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: they will not believe” (v. 55) — another indication that unbelievers are worthy of no respect or consideration. If the Muslims “fear treachery” from unbelievers with whom they have a treaty, they should simply break the treaty (v. 58). Ibn Kathir says this means that Muslims should tell the unbelievers “that you are severing the treaty. This way, you will be on equal terms, in that, you and they will be aware that a state of war exists between you and that the bilateral peace treaty is null and void.” The Muslims should “make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies” (v. 60), while being ready to make peace if the enemy wishes to do so (v. 61). Some however, do not believe this truce should be indefinite in length. Qutb explains:
At the time when this surah was revealed, God instructed His Messenger to remain at peace with those groups who refrained from fighting him and the Muslims, whether they entered into a formal treaty with the Muslims or not. The Prophet continued to accept a peaceful relationship with unbelievers and people of earlier revelations until Surah 9 was revealed, when he could only accept one of two alternatives: either they embraced Islam or paid jizyah [a tax levied on non-Muslims, per Qur’an 9:29] which indicated a state of peace. Otherwise, the only alternative was war, whenever this was feasible for the Muslims to undertake, so that all people submit to God alone.
Verses 64-75 address Muhammad himself, giving him various instructions. Allah tells him that he will give pious Muslims more victories, even if they face odds even more prohibitive than those they had overcome at Badr, although this promise is almost immediately backtracked: originally a hundred would defeat a thousand unbelievers (v. 65), but this is almost immediately reduced to a hundred believers vanquishing two hundred unbelievers (v. 66). These became recurring themes of jihad literature throughout the centuries, up to the present day: piety will bring military victory, and the Muslims will conquer even against overwhelming odds.
According to the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, verse 67 – “It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land” — was revealed when the Muslims “ransomed those taken captive at Badr.” The Muslims had released some of the prisoners at Badr, but this was out of their base desire for material gain: the money they would receive in ransom. The tafsir continues: “You, O believers, desire the transient things of this world, its ephemeral gains, by ransoming, while God desires, for you, the Hereafter, that is, its reward, through your killing them.” In other words, they should have killed the captives rather than ransoming them. However, the Tafsir al-Jalalayn concludes by asserting that v. 67 was abrogated by 47:4, which allows for ransom. Ibn Kathir notes that “the majority of the scholars say that the matter of prisoners of war is up to the Imam. If he decides, he can have them killed, such as in the case of Bani Qurayzah. If he decides, he can accept a ransom for them, as in the case of the prisoners of Badr, or exchange them for Muslim prisoners.”
Next week: Sura 9, the only chapter of the Qur’an that does not begin with “In the name of Allah, the compassionate, the merciful” – and with very good reason.
(Here you can find links to all the earlier “Blogging the Qur’an” segments. Here is a good Arabic/English Qur’an, here are two popular Muslim translations, those of Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, along with a third by M. H. Shakir. Here is another popular translation, that of Muhammad Asad. And here is an omnibus of ten Qur’an translations.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
So, it’s a sin to steal … from the war booty … how ironic.
Tony737 on November 4, 2007 at 9:39 AM
Do any other religions provide instruction on the proper way to divide stolen property?
forest on November 4, 2007 at 9:51 AM
Robert Spencer, I almost never comment on your Blogging the Qur’an post, mostly because you cover most questions I would have. I do read them so please don’t think your post’s go unread just because they do not top 100 plus comments. BTW I enjoyed your speech at Dartmouth, and your answers to very stupid questions very much. “Shouldn’t we have a fascist CIA week?/s” Bawhahahah – moonbats?$*&*#*!
abinitioadinfinitum on November 4, 2007 at 10:10 AM
Abinitio is right, I also read Robert’s post every week but don’t usually ask questions because EVERYTHING is covered. So, like today, sometimes I leave a little sarcastic comment about the religion of pieces.
Most of our HotHeads already know a lot about islam from reading Robert’s books, I just wish he could get his message out to more of those who don’t normally pay attention or comment on blogs. The average person needs more education on our enemy. Too many people are fooled by the imams on tv who say things like “We don’t kill innocent people.” HotHeads know what “innocent” means in islam. That’s why I always recommend Robert’s books to those who don’t understand what we’re up against.
Thank you Robert, for our continuing free education.
Tony737 on November 4, 2007 at 10:45 AM
Same goes for me, read them every week. Keep up the good work Robert S.!
lowandslow on November 4, 2007 at 11:03 AM
In ancient times war booty might be the only payment received for fighting.
Giving it up for “just” distribution would certainly gall those who “earned” it.
Of course Muhammad sponsored war seems more like Blackbeard Piracy.
Speakup on November 4, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Yep, nothing here but peace…
Rick on November 4, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Thanks again Robert. Peace be upon you.
Mojave Mark on November 4, 2007 at 11:33 AM
Thank you for this valuable aid to the infidel.
Perhaps “20% Profit Muhammed” might be a better name for the evil genius.
BL@KBIRD on November 4, 2007 at 11:56 AM
“…nothing here but peace.” – Rick
Whattaya talkin’ about? Didn’t you see the part about ransom?
(sarcasm on top of sarcasm)
Tony737 on November 4, 2007 at 11:58 AM
BL@KBIRD on November 4, 2007 at 11:56 AM
maybe robert can explain if muhammed used this money to fund a lavish lifestyle with huge palaces etc, as blackbird thinks.
or did he live the life of a payper even as leader in medina?
zane on November 4, 2007 at 12:00 PM
pauper
zane on November 4, 2007 at 12:01 PM
“…Profit Muhammed…” BL@CKBIRD
Bwahahahaaa
If he were French, his name’d be “Count DeMonay” Thank you Mel Brooks!
Tony737 on November 4, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Wow. Chapter 8 was rather intense. I can’t wait for next week, the infamous “Ultimatum”
Jimmy the Dhimmi on November 4, 2007 at 12:24 PM
forest asks:
Read Numbers 31. I think that is as close as the Bible gets to that. It is pretty brutal stuff.
HeIsSailing on November 4, 2007 at 12:43 PM
That’s a good question, but I bet not.
Same here, I read, but rarely comment.
4shoes on November 4, 2007 at 12:40 PM
Thanks to all. I appreciate it. I do wonder sometimes if anyone is actually reading this, or finds it all as fascinating as I do. Maybe I should stick with the former and give up on the latter!
Anyway, Zane, Muhammad did not die an extraordinarily wealthy man. According to the traditions, he had devoted his resources to jihad.
Robert Spencer on November 4, 2007 at 2:43 PM
Not only do we read it, I for one, look forward to it, and recommend it to friends! I appreciate your responses as well. This is one of the most dynamic exchanges on the web, IMHO.
I think we are all a bit overwhelmed too by it all. We read and really think about what you are telling us and read the resources you provide.
CrimsonFisted on November 4, 2007 at 2:53 PM
As to 20%Profit Mo’s money being reinvested in Jihad. As the Pofit of Allah, who would deny him anything or let him want for anything? Who would ever need a dime in hard currency under those conditions?
And giving most of it back to Jihad is a wonderful example that would be emulated by aspiring booty wealthy ‘Slums. I find Muhammed to be more blackly brilliant the more I know of him.
BL@KBIRD on November 4, 2007 at 3:20 PM
These posts are so enlightening and in most cases..frightening. But the skull and cross bones and the instant classic “Surrender the Booty” tag are good comic relief.
BTW, if I ever win my dream date with the Chenbot I’m going to slay her with that line.
Alden Pyle on November 4, 2007 at 3:47 PM
Thus saith Robert Spencer:
Wrong – I find it equally as fascinating. I have long wanted to read the Quran, and this series gives me the incentive to do so. I read the assigned portion every Sunday. Your commentary and links to other commentaries are a huge help in that regard. In fact, I became a hotair member, just so I could participate in your Blogging the Quran series. Just for the record, I am an atheist, but am also a bit of a religion nut on an academic level. But in this day and age, it think it is very important to know what Muslims actually believe and this is the best way I know of to do that other than living under an Islamic regiem! Thanks again, Mr Spencer.
HeIsSailing on November 4, 2007 at 4:52 PM
I read. I enjoy. Thanx. Don’t have many questions ’cause the Q just isn’t that deep is it? Not like the Old and New Test. where you can have a huge debate about whether “Thou shalt not kill” applies to murder and war, or just murder. Christians really have to study their book, search their hearts. The followers of the Q just have to get in line and follow. I will say this, Islam is a fun religion for the twenty-something male. God tells you to rape and pillage, even how to divide the loot. It’s your duty, man! The fact that places like Gaza have had super-high birth rates for the last twenty years or so is something to ponder though.
I’ve been reading how the Barbary Pirates terrorized Europe for over four-five hundred years. They were given leave to prey upon all nonbeleivers by their religious leaders. They took over 1.5 mil Europeans captive in that time period. Hard to beleive but at one point they emptied out a village in Ireland! The U.S. Navy was born putting a end to their sahnanagians and if you follow the news, the Navy is still fighting the bloody Moors! GO NAVY!
dingbat on November 4, 2007 at 5:02 PM
Robert
In my reading of 8:39, it doesn’t look remotely different from 2:193, yet here, you seem to have a different explanation for 8:39 than you did for 2:193. We discussed the latter at length when you blogged that surah, and your conclusion then was that it’s consistent with 9:29. How did fitnah, shirk and idolatory come in here, and not there? I’ve always read these 2 verses as Islam’s mission statement – convert the world to Islam.
As for this column, I generally read it to see your explanation of verses I consider interesting – 2:190-193, 5:32-33, 8:39, 9:5,29,111, and another which states that only non-Muslims are liars (I forget which one it was at the moment, but will tell you whenever I find it).
Incidentally, how long will this exercise be? Do you plan to ever cover the hadiths as well?
infidelpride on November 4, 2007 at 7:15 PM
Several quick questions, Robert Spencer: Of the quraysh it is said, “They reject Muhammad’s preaching as ‘tales of the ancients’ (v. 31) and keep the Muslims out of the Sacred Mosque in Mecca (v. 34).
Is there any information on who these ancients might be that told the tales? And, when was the mosque in mecca built, and by whom? Had the muslim religion been around long enough to have such a structure built and then barricaded by the quraysh?
locomotivebreath1901 on November 4, 2007 at 8:41 PM
IP:
I don’t see any disagreement between what I said about 8:39 and what I said about 2:193. What difference do you see?
I intend to go through the entire Qur’an, but that’s it. There are many, many volumes of Hadith. It would take decades to go through it all. This will take long enough as it is, and I’m grateful to Michelle Malkin and all at Hot Air for hosting it as long as they already have, and for as long as the Qur’an will take.
Robert Spencer on November 4, 2007 at 8:41 PM
locomotive breath 1901
Most likely this is how the Jews and Christians of Arabia responded when Muhammad retold Bible stories.
The reference in sura 8 is to the Ka’ba, which was at the time still a pagan shrine. According to legend it was built by Abraham and Ishmael.
No. It was not a Muslim house of worship at that time.
Robert Spencer on November 4, 2007 at 9:12 PM
Keep up the good work Robert. You’re doing a great service through educating those of us who were ignorant of the details of Islam.
A sincere Thanks.
Ernest on November 4, 2007 at 9:13 PM
Robert
I wasn’t implying that the 2 explanations contradicted each other: I just thought that different, but consistent, explanations for the 2 verses were interesting in and of themselves. From your response, I’m concluding that both explanations apply to each.
One more thing – have you considered sometime spelling out the Islamic understanding of terms that in the Infidel world may be not only innocuous, but also good – things like truth, justice, fighting oppression, et al? (I recall a Quranic verse that explicitly states that only non-Muslims are liars, implying that the truthfulness of a person in normal life is verifyable by his/her acceptance of the shehada, which has its implications in shariah law where the evidence of infidels weighs less than that of Muslims)
infidelpride on November 5, 2007 at 2:17 AM
It is. But it doesn’t prescribe brutality in the name of their god as a standing and continuing action to be upheld for all time.
And that is the subtle yet crucial difference between the Bible and the Quran. Yes, the god of the Bible was a merciless and bloodthirsty god. But he shaped up. The god of the Quran did not.
And that is precisely why Islam is worse than Christianity. Period.
Loundry on November 5, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Robert,
I thank you for your hard word. You are the torch-bearer for legions who would be ignorant about the topic most crucial to the survival of Western civilization.
I chatted with a friend last night who told me that there are many peaceful Muslims who don’t conform to the “stereotype” of Muslims and that Christianity is “violent” as well. I told him that peaceful Muslims are merely lazy Muslims because Islam itself is not peaceful. He said, “I don’t know about that.” So I asked him, “If a jihadist said to a peaceful Muslim, ‘Your actions are un-Islamic. You MUST wage jihad and hate the unbeliever.’, then how could the peaceful Muslim disagree and have his disagreement be theologically-justified in the Quran, the Hadith, and the Sunnah?”
He replied, “I don’t know, and you’ve obviously more well-read about this than I am.”
And what he said is true only because of you. And I thank you for it.
Loundry on November 5, 2007 at 10:26 AM
hard work*
Loundry on November 5, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Robert,
Your scholarship and due diligence on the subject of Islam has been an amazing learning experience for me, and I have a Master’s in Religious Studies. Question: A young reporter for a local suburban paper wrote an article about her having been invited to a mosque and painted the experience in glowing terms. She ended her piece stating that ” like it or not, Islam is a part of our culture”. I wish to respond to her but am only allowed 250 words to editorialize. What points are key to refute her?
MNDavenotPC on November 5, 2007 at 5:14 PM
Thank you, Mr. Spencer, for the clarity you bring to the issue of Islam’s role in our world today. Your scholarship and your demeanor facilitate learning by all factions!
T J Green on November 7, 2007 at 5:08 PM
I also look forward to new installments. Thank you so much for taking the time to do these.
Asher on November 8, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Comment pages: