Video ISIS burns Jordanian pilot alive (GRAPHIC!!)


Junior Member
Assalamu alaikum brother Abu Juwairiya,

I would have expected a real proponent ISIS to write a few line in the favour of that incident. But you are taking a position, which is almost in the middle. Let us see, if we can successfully stop you to favour ISIS in your mid-way.

Thank you for agreeing, that he was a prisoner of war. That alone should give him the rights, given to him in the following verse of Surah Muhammad:


So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command]. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah - never will He waste their deeds.

In the light of the above verse, nobody would have shed any tear, if they had killed him together with his war plane and no matter if the carosine oil of the plane had treated his body the same way, they have treated.

But he was not killed during that operation. He was taken as a prisoner of war in a state of mightlessness. At that moment, he was not a combatant anymore. According to these verses, he should have been left after accepting ransom or without ransom as a means of favour. These are the only two choices Quran is giving us.

The verses are quite clear and so is also the practice of the Prophet of Allah. In the following thread, I had discussed, why it was wrong to create a third option of enslaving them for ever, besides those two options given in these verses.

What you are proposing is then the fourth option, which I thought was never there. Nevertheless, I know, where you are coming from. Let us discuss it here. I am well prepared to defend all the measures taken by our Prophet SAW with the testimony of Quran, no matter, what certain riwayaat say. I am well prepared to defend the honour of our Prophet from all those translations, which inflict an insult on him. You and I know very well, why I am writing this. Then let us discuss it here and provide me with the opportunity to be a soldier of the honour of our Prophet.

Wassalamu alaikum.
Last edited:

Abu Juwairiya

Junior Member
Assalammu Alaikum Brother Saif and Jazakallah Khayrun for the reply.I will PM you a more suitable response later, but for the time being, I will say a few words here.

First, I am trying to be impartial here and not take sides as you have graciously accepted my position to be and for that I am thankful.

Second, the Qur'an and Ahadith have different perspectives on treatment of prisoners including those captured and what to do with them and each ruling is based on the circumstances of the war itself, the hostility between the sides at war with one another and once more the scholars of Islam from earlier times who I describe as the Classical Mufassireen also differ on several points of strict interpretation of Qur'anic injunctions and the Prophet's instructions.

To the layperson (namely myself) as long as it is there in the Qur'an, the verses are clear and can be applied in all, most or major circumstances. To this I would add when the Qur'an speaks of two warring opponents, one of whom is a side where there is a presence of a Prophet, can it strictly be applied to all war of later generations including today and tomorrow.

The problem with this argument is that it presupposes one side is clearly in the right and on the truth one hundred per cent, yet those who are opposing IS are the US and its variety of Christian allies among western nations who hate Islam, the Shia government of Iraq, a large assembly of nationalist, secular and mixed religions of Kurds and the Alawi Kafir administration of Syria. Hence, we have a problem.

Third, if IS are wrong [and lets say for sake of argument say they are], will have an Islamic government in each of those nations or at least a non oppressive one, the answer as you all know is we are likely to have a similar one to the ones in place right now, so in that respect none of the two sides are actually fighting for Islam in principle at least.

Fourth if IS are wrong, then Allah will surely embarrass, humiliate and annihilate them very soon. We do not need to worry too much about their existence as Allah will not allow an oppressor in the name of Islam on a tyrannical scale to ruler for very long.


Junior Member
Assalamu alaikum brother Abu Juwairiya

I will wait for your PM. I would like to see the base of their understanding from the basic sources (Quran and Sunnah). Like brother Mehmet pointed out, it is possible to find all sorts of Fatwas. He has chosen the path of disappointment from the scholars. I, on the other hand, see it as my duty to try to understand the understanding of the basic sources behind each fatwa. So it does not matter, if the scholar is old or new, big or small. What matters is the weightage of their daleel.

In the mean time, I want to present in greater detail the understanding of the above verse in one of the articles of Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, so that you don't have to deal with a layman's interpretation.

War Captives

فَإِذا لَقِيتُمْ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَضَرْبَ الرِّقَابِ حَتَّى إِذَا أَثْخَنتُمُوهُمْ فَشُدُّوا الْوَثَاقَ فَإِمَّا مَنًّا بَعْدُ وَإِمَّا فِدَاءً حَتَّى تَضَعَ الْحَرْبُ أَوْزَارَهَا
So, when you meet [in the battlefield] those who disbelieve, strike off their heads. Then, when you have shed their blood fully, bind them [as captives]. Thereafter, free them as a favour or free them with ransom until war lays down its weapons. (47:4)

It is evident from the words of this verse that until its revelation wars with the disbelievers had not begun, though circumstances had reached the extent that they could begin anytime. Muslims are told that if they encounter the disbelievers of Arabia, who had rejected the truth in spite of being convinced about it, in the battle field they must slay them. They deserve no lenience after such a blatant denial of the truth which had been unveiled to them by the Prophet (sws) in its ultimate form. Muslims must rout their power when they meet them in the battlefield and capture those who survive. They should know that the help of the Almighty is with them and the enemy would not be able to harm them. It is now up to them to either set free the captives as a favour to them or set them free after accepting some ransom. This is the attitude they should adopt until warfare with the disbelievers ends in Arabia.[1]

Although this directive is stated in the sūrah with reference to the Mushrikūn, nothing in it restricts its application to them only. Therefore, it will apply to other combatants – whether of those times or of later – as well.

The words that have been used to state this directive read as: فَإِمَّا مَنًّا بَعْدُ وَإِمَّا فِدَاءً(thereafter free them as a favour or free them with ransom). Those who have a flare for the language know that if the word فِدَاءً (fidā’an) here means to set free a captive after accepting ransom, then since the word مَنًّا(mannan) is placed in contrast to it, مَنًّا(mannan) should convey the opposite meaning: that is to set them free without accepting any ransom as a favour. The word مَنًّا(mannan) here is a verbal noun of a suppressed verb and since it does not occur in contrast to قَتْل (murder) and in contrast to فِدَاءً(fidā’an), it can only and only mean the setting free of captives without accepting any ransom money. It is evident from this verse that Muslims had to set them free at all costs whether with ransom or without, and as per the Qur’an could even benefit from them in their capacity of slaves as long as they remained in captivity. However, they could neither kill them nor keep them as slaves come what may.

Three types of captives, however, were an exception to this rule:

1. Brutal adversaries, according to the dictates of the law of itmām al-hujjah[2],were required to be slain wherever found. Examples of people who were killed as a result were ‘Uqbah Ibn Abī Mu‘īt, Nadr Ibn Hārith[3] and Abū ‘Azzah[4] – the captives of the battles of Badr and Uhud. Similarly, at the conquest of Makkah, certain others were also slain as an exception to the general amnesty granted because of their open enmity.[5]

2. The captives of the Banū Qurayzah who met a fate decided by an arbitrator appointed by themselves: their men were slain and their women and children were sold as slaves.[6]

3. Captives who were slaves prior to their capture and, on certain instances, were distributed among people as slaves.[7]

It is obvious that these three cases were exceptions, and the directive stated in the above quoted verse never related to them. Consequently, if all the incidents of the Prophet’s times regarding prisoners of war are studied, it can be safely concluded that barring these three exceptions everything done was in conformity with the above quoted directive of Sūrah Muhammad.

Following are the details:

1. As long as the prisoners remained in captivity of the state authorities, they were treated in a befitting manner. It is known that the prisoners of Badr were distributed among the Companions (rta) and the Prophet (sws) himself directed the Companions (rta) in the words: إِسْتَوْصُوْا بِالْاُسَارَى خَيْرا (treat these prisoners well).[8] One of the prisoners Abū ‘Azīz says that he was kept in a house of the Ansār tribe. He goes on to say that his hosts fed him with chapātī while they themselves just ate dates.[9] When Thumāmah Ibn Uthāl, a chief of Yamāmah, was taken into custody, he, at the behest of the Prophet (sws), was fed with good food and milk as long as he remained in captivity.[10]

2. Most prisoners of the battle of Badr were set free after accepting ransom from them. Those among them who could pay in cash were exacted a ransom that ranged from one thousand to four thousand Dinārs per prisoner, while those among them who were not in a position to pay this amount were set free if they taught ten children each from among the Ansār to read and write. Abū Sufyan’s son, ‘Amr, was set free in exchange for Sa‘d Ibn Nu‘mān whom he had imprisoned.[11]

Among the captives of the battle of Banī Mustaliq, Juwayriyyah was freed after her father, Hārith Ibn Abī Darār paid the ransom money.[12] Once Abū Bakr (rta) was sent on a military campaign. Among the captives there was a beautiful lady. The Prophet (sws) sent her to Makkah and was able to win the freedom of many prisoners in lieu of her.[13] Similarly, a prisoner of the Banī ‘Aqīl was sent to Tā’if and in lieu of him, two prisoners in the custody of the Banū Thaqīf were released.[14]

3. Some captives were set free without any ransom. Among the captives of Badr, Abu’l-‘As, Matlab Ibn Hantab, Sayfī Ibn Abī Rafā‘ah and Abū ‘Azzah and among those of the battle against the Banū Qurayzah, Zubayr Ibn Bātās were set free like this.[15] At the time of the truce of Hudaybiyyah, about 80 people from Makkah suddenly attacked the Muslims at night from the direction of Tan‘īm. All of them were caught and the Prophet (sws) set them free without any ransom money as well.[16] Thumāmah Ibn Uthāl, referred to earlier, was also set free on similar grounds.[17]

4. On some occasions, the prisoners were distributed among people so that they could directly deal with them or their relatives on the principle of فَإِمَّا مَنًّا بَعْدُ وَإِمَّا فِدَاءً(thereafter free them as a favour or free them with ransom), the prisoners of the battle against the Banī Mustaliq, were distributed thus. However, once the Prophet (sws) married Jawayriyyah after she had been set free, all the Muslims set free the prisoners in their custody without any ransom saying that these prisoners had now become the relatives of the Prophet (sws). Prisoners from about one hundred families were released in this way.[18] The prisoners of the military campaign against the Hawāzin tribe were also similarly set free by the Prophet (sws) without taking any ransom from the people. Similar was the case of the prisoners of the Hunayn tribe.[19]

When the tribe of Hawāzin came to buy the freedom of their prisoners, it came to their knowledge that all their prisoners had been distributed. At their request, the Prophet (sws) gathered all Muslims among whom these prisoners had been distributed. When all had assembled, the Prophet (sws) expressed his opinion that as these people who had come to fetch the prisoners had repented, everyone should release the prisoners they had in custody. He further said that whoever wanted to set them free without any ransom should do so, and others who wanted ransom would be granted the ransom by the state treasury. As a result of this request, 6000 prisoners were set free, and those among the Muslims who demanded ransom were paid by the state treasury.[20]

5. Widows and other helpless women among these prisoners who had been similarly distributed were generally set free by the respective owners and married to them on the basis of their free consent. On these very grounds, the marital knot was tied between Safiyyah (rta) and the Prophet (sws).[21]

(Translated by Mr Shehzad Saleem)

[1]. This has been stated because once warfare ends with them, the only option for them would be to either accept faith or face death.
[2]. Unveiling truth to the extent that no one is left with any excuse to deny it.
[3].Ibn Hishām, al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah, 2nd ed., vol. 2 (Beirut: Dār al-Khayr, 1995), 215.
[4]. Ibid., vol. 3, 83.
[5]. Ibid., vol. 4, 41.
[6]. Ibid., vol.3,188-189.
[7]. Ibid., vol. 4, 105.
[8]. Ibid., vol. 2, 217.
[9]. Ibid.
[10]. Ibid., vol. 4,215.
[11]. Ibn Sa‘d, al-Tabaqāt al-Kubrā, vol. 2, (Beirut: Dār Sādir, 1960), 22;Ibn Hishām, al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah, 2nd ed., vol. 2 (Beirut: Dār al-Khayr, 1995), 221.
[12]. Ibid., vol. 3, 232.
[13]. Ibn Mājah, No: 2846.
[14]. Musnad Ahmad, No: 19892.
[15]. Ibn Hishām, al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah, 2nd ed., vol. 2 (Beirut: Dār al-Khayr, 1995), 228; Ibid., vol. 3, 190.
[16]. Abū Dā’ūd: No:2688.
[17]. Ibn Hishām, al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah, 2nd ed., vol. 4 (Beirut: Dār al-Khayr, 1995), 215-216.
[18]. Ibid., vol. 3, 231.
[19]. Ibn Kathīr, al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah, 1sted., vol. 3 (Beirut: Dār Al-Ma‘rifah, 1971), 453.
[20]. Ibn Hishām, al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah, 2nd ed., vol. 4 (Beirut: Dār al-Khayr, 1995), 104-106.
[21]. Bukhārī, No: 3965.
Author: Javed Ahmed Ghamidi


Wassalamu alaikum