Question about a hadith regarding fighting in Mecca

[Peter_502]

Salaam alaikum,
I was wondering if someone could explain the following to me.
Why did Muhammad ban anyone from fighting in Mecca,

Narrated Abu Huraira:

In the year of the Conquest of Mecca, the tribe of Khuza`a killed a man from the tribe of Bam Laith in revenge for a killed person belonging to them in the Pre-lslamic Period of Ignorance. So Allah's Apostle got up saying, "Allah held back the (army having) elephants from Mecca, but He let His Apostle and the believers overpower the infidels (of Mecca). Beware! (Mecca is a sanctuary)! Verily! Fighting in Mecca was not permitted for anybody before me, nor will it be permitted for anybody after me; It was permitted for me only for a while (an hour or so) of that day. No doubt! It is at this moment a sanctuary; its thorny shrubs should not be uprooted; its trees should not be cut down; and its Luqata (fallen things) should not be picked up except by the one who would look for its owner. And if somebody is killed, his closest relative has the right to choose one of two things, i.e., either the Blood money or retaliation by having the killer killed." Then a man from Yemen, called Abu Shah, stood up and said, "Write that) for me, O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)!" Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said (to his companions), "Write that for Abu Shah." Then another man from Quraish got up, saying, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Except Al- Idhkhir (a special kind of grass) as we use it in our houses and for graves." Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Except Al-idhkkir."


حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا شَيْبَانُ، عَنْ يَحْيَى، عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ خُزَاعَةَ، قَتَلُوا رَجُلاً‏.‏ وَقَالَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ رَجَاءٍ حَدَّثَنَا حَرْبٌ عَنْ يَحْيَى حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو سَلَمَةَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ أَنَّهُ عَامَ فَتْحِ مَكَّةَ قَتَلَتْ خُزَاعَةُ رَجُلاً مِنْ بَنِي لَيْثٍ بِقَتِيلٍ لَهُمْ فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ، فَقَامَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ ‏"‏ إِنَّ اللَّهَ حَبَسَ عَنْ مَكَّةَ الْفِيلَ وَسَلَّطَ عَلَيْهِمْ رَسُولَهُ وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ، أَلاَ وَإِنَّهَا لَمْ تَحِلَّ لأَحَدٍ قَبْلِي، وَلاَ تَحِلُّ لأَحَدٍ بَعْدِي، أَلاَ وَإِنَّمَا أُحِلَّتْ لِي سَاعَةً مِنْ نَهَارٍ، أَلاَ وَإِنَّهَا سَاعَتِي هَذِهِ حَرَامٌ لاَ يُخْتَلَى شَوْكُهَا، وَلاَ يُعْضَدُ شَجَرُهَا، وَلاَ يَلْتَقِطُ سَاقِطَتَهَا إِلاَّ مُنْشِدٌ، وَمَنْ قُتِلَ لَهُ قَتِيلٌ فَهْوَ بِخَيْرِ النَّظَرَيْنِ إِمَّا يُودَى وَإِمَّا يُقَادُ ‏"‏‏.‏ فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْيَمَنِ يُقَالُ لَهُ أَبُو شَاهٍ فَقَالَ اكْتُبْ لِي يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ اكْتُبُوا لأَبِي شَاهٍ ‏"‏‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِلاَّ الإِذْخِرَ، فَإِنَّمَا نَجْعَلُهُ فِي بُيُوتِنَا وَقُبُورِنَا‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ إِلاَّ الإِذْخِرَ ‏"‏‏.‏ وَتَابَعَهُ عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ عَنْ شَيْبَانَ فِي الْفِيلِ، قَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ عَنْ أَبِي نُعَيْمٍ الْقَتْلَ‏.‏ وَقَالَ عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ إِمَّا أَنْ يُقَادَ أَهْلُ الْقَتِيلِ‏.‏
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 6880
In-book reference : Book 87, Hadith 19
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 9, Book 83, Hadith 19
(deprecated numbering scheme)

http://sunnah.com/bukhari/87/19


Is fighting in Mecca really not allowed for any reason whatsoever? What if evil people came into the city to do harm to others?

Would it not then be obligatory for Muslims to fight them (as a pacifist I don't believe in ever using violence but I know Islam allows fighting in self-defence), even if they had to fight them in the city?

How can it be that God makes fighting in Mecca illegal to everyone after Muhammad? Isn't fighting in self-defence prescribed? Or am I understanding something here incorrectly?

 

[a_stranger]

I read what scholars wrote about this topic ,there are different opinions regarding this hadith. Some said it is Ok to start a fight for a just cause or defend your self . Others said Moslems should not start a fight in Mecca even for a just cause, but the aggressors the must be dragged outside Mecca.

 

[mezeren]

[quote="Peter_502, post: 648000, member: 125965"

Is fighting in Mecca really not allowed for any reason whatsoever? What if evil people came into the city to do harm to others?

Would it not then be obligatory for Muslims to fight them (as a pacifist I don't believe in ever using violence but I know Islam allows fighting in self-defence), even if they had to fight them in the city?

How can it be that God makes fighting in Mecca illegal to everyone after Muhammad? Isn't fighting in self-defence prescribed? Or am I understanding something here incorrectly?[/quote]


Macca is sacred to muslims because ;

Indeed, the first House [of worship] established for mankind was that at Makkah - blessed and a guidance for the worlds.(3:96)

When someone attack you, you don't just sit there and wait to be killed. We should not fight in Macca unless it is necessary.

Throughout history, both before and after Muhammed(a.s.), there have been several fightings in Macca and propably will be in the future. So, no need to worry. You have to fight to defend yourself and prevent disorder.

 

[Peter_502]

I read what scholars wrote about this topic ,there are different opinions regarding this hadith. Some said it is Ok to start a fight for a just cause or defend your self . Others said Moslems should not start a fight in Mecca even for a just cause, but the aggressors the must be dragged outside Mecca.

Thanks, A_Stranger.
To those that say it is ok to start a fight in just cause or self-defence, how different then would this be from what Muhammad did? I am assuming he didn't fight the pagans in Mecca unjustly. He was defending his people from their evil persecution and attempts to harm them.
Yet he said that God granted permission to no one except him to fight in Mecca. What did he mean by that?

Also, if someone is armed and engaged in a violent conquest or a riot, how do you drag them out without fighting them?

 

[Peter_502]

Is fighting in Mecca really not allowed for any reason whatsoever? What if evil people came into the city to do harm to others?

Would it not then be obligatory for Muslims to fight them (as a pacifist I don't believe in ever using violence but I know Islam allows fighting in self-defence), even if they had to fight them in the city?

How can it be that God makes fighting in Mecca illegal to everyone after Muhammad? Isn't fighting in self-defence prescribed? Or am I understanding something here incorrectly?

Macca is sacred to muslims because ;

Indeed, the first House [of worship] established for mankind was that at Makkah - blessed and a guidance for the worlds.(3:96)

Definitely, this is very true.

When someone attack you, you don't just sit there and wait to be killed. We should not fight in Macca unless it is necessary.

Throughout history, both before and after Muhammed(a.s.), there have been several fightings in Macca and propably will be in the future. So, no need to worry. You have to fight to defend yourself and prevent disorder.

How would you reconcile this however with Muhammad's statement that after him, God has given permission to no Muslim to fight in Mecca?
Muhammad did not fight in Mecca for fun, he fought only because it was necessary. God allowed him.
Yet he said that after this battle, God will not grant anyone else permission to fight in Mecca.

Are you aware of scholarly intepretations of what this meant?

 

[cabdixakim]

Salaam alaikum,
I was wondering if someone could explain the following to me.
Why did Muhammad ban anyone from fighting in Mecca,

Narrated Abu Huraira:

In the year of the Conquest of Mecca, the tribe of Khuza`a killed a man from the tribe of Bam Laith in revenge for a killed person belonging to them in the Pre-lslamic Period of Ignorance. So Allah's Apostle got up saying, "Allah held back the (army having) elephants from Mecca, but He let His Apostle and the believers overpower the infidels (of Mecca). Beware! (Mecca is a sanctuary)! Verily! Fighting in Mecca was not permitted for anybody before me, nor will it be permitted for anybody after me; It was permitted for me only for a while (an hour or so) of that day. No doubt! It is at this moment a sanctuary; its thorny shrubs should not be uprooted; its trees should not be cut down; and its Luqata (fallen things) should not be picked up except by the one who would look for its owner. And if somebody is killed, his closest relative has the right to choose one of two things, i.e., either the Blood money or retaliation by having the killer killed." Then a man from Yemen, called Abu Shah, stood up and said, "Write that) for me, O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)!" Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said (to his companions), "Write that for Abu Shah." Then another man from Quraish got up, saying, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Except Al- Idhkhir (a special kind of grass) as we use it in our houses and for graves." Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Except Al-idhkkir."

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا شَيْبَانُ، عَنْ يَحْيَى، عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ خُزَاعَةَ، قَتَلُوا رَجُلاً‏.‏ وَقَالَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ رَجَاءٍ حَدَّثَنَا حَرْبٌ عَنْ يَحْيَى حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو سَلَمَةَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ أَنَّهُ عَامَ فَتْحِ مَكَّةَ قَتَلَتْ خُزَاعَةُ رَجُلاً مِنْ بَنِي لَيْثٍ بِقَتِيلٍ لَهُمْ فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ، فَقَامَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ ‏"‏ إِنَّ اللَّهَ حَبَسَ عَنْ مَكَّةَ الْفِيلَ وَسَلَّطَ عَلَيْهِمْ رَسُولَهُ وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ، أَلاَ وَإِنَّهَا لَمْ تَحِلَّ لأَحَدٍ قَبْلِي، وَلاَ تَحِلُّ لأَحَدٍ بَعْدِي، أَلاَ وَإِنَّمَا أُحِلَّتْ لِي سَاعَةً مِنْ نَهَارٍ، أَلاَ وَإِنَّهَا سَاعَتِي هَذِهِ حَرَامٌ لاَ يُخْتَلَى شَوْكُهَا، وَلاَ يُعْضَدُ شَجَرُهَا، وَلاَ يَلْتَقِطُ سَاقِطَتَهَا إِلاَّ مُنْشِدٌ، وَمَنْ قُتِلَ لَهُ قَتِيلٌ فَهْوَ بِخَيْرِ النَّظَرَيْنِ إِمَّا يُودَى وَإِمَّا يُقَادُ ‏"‏‏.‏ فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْيَمَنِ يُقَالُ لَهُ أَبُو شَاهٍ فَقَالَ اكْتُبْ لِي يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ اكْتُبُوا لأَبِي شَاهٍ ‏"‏‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِلاَّ الإِذْخِرَ، فَإِنَّمَا نَجْعَلُهُ فِي بُيُوتِنَا وَقُبُورِنَا‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ إِلاَّ الإِذْخِرَ ‏"‏‏.‏ وَتَابَعَهُ عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ عَنْ شَيْبَانَ فِي الْفِيلِ، قَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ عَنْ أَبِي نُعَيْمٍ الْقَتْلَ‏.‏ وَقَالَ عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ إِمَّا أَنْ يُقَادَ أَهْلُ الْقَتِيلِ‏.‏
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 6880
In-book reference : Book 87, Hadith 19
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 9, Book 83, Hadith 19
(deprecated numbering scheme)

http://sunnah.com/bukhari/87/19


Is fighting in Mecca really not allowed for any reason whatsoever? What if evil people came into the city to do harm to others?

Would it not then be obligatory for Muslims to fight them (as a pacifist I don't believe in ever using violence but I know Islam allows fighting in self-defence), even if they had to fight them in the city?

How can it be that God makes fighting in Mecca illegal to everyone after Muhammad? Isn't fighting in self-defence prescribed? Or am I understanding something here incorrectly?

Wa'aleykumas'salaam @Peter_502

What's referred to in this hadith is not simply fighting(whether in self defence or not)... it's about "invasion"... it's for invading Makkah that Abraha(king of elephant army) was destroyed and it is for invading it(in its coquest) that Prophet(p.b.u.h) was permitted for some part of the day...

During the Prophet's conquest of Makkah there was not even fighting, the city surrendered without a fight and there was non violent conquest; so from there you clearly see that what the Hadith is referring to is Taking/entering Makkah by force with an invading army which is prohibited for anyone before or after the Prophet(p.b.u.h).

That's how the Hadith speaks...and not simply about fighting.

And Makkah is a sanctuary, Allah made it so; not only is fighting in it is prohibited but also cutting down its trees,hunting in it, picking up lost properties unless for the purpose of finding the owner & +all the numerous conditions that give it the description "sanctuary"... meaning, all that in it is to be left in total peace and security.

 

[Peter_502]

Wa'aleykumas'salaam @Peter_502

What's referred to in this hadith is not simply fighting(whether in self defence or not)... it's about "invasion"... it's for invading Makkah that Abraha(king of elephant army) was destroyed and it is for invading it(in its coquest) that Prophet(p.b.u.h) was permitted for some part of the day...

During the Prophet's conquest of Makkah there was not even fighting, the city surrendered without a fight and there was non violent conquest; so from there you clearly see that what the Hadith is referring to is Taking/entering Makkah by force with an invading army which is prohibited for anyone before or after the Prophet(p.b.u.h).

That's how the Hadith speaks...and not simply about fighting.

And Makkah is a sanctuary, Allah made it so; not only is fighting in it is prohibited but also cutting down its trees,hunting in it, picking up lost properties unless for the purpose of finding the owner & +all the numerous conditions that give it the description "sanctuary"... meaning, all that in it is to be left in total peace and security.

Salaam alaikum, and thank you for the answer. Thanks for differentiating between fighting and invading Mecca.
If an army of non-Muslims one day seized Mecca, or even a group of Muslim extremists, wouldn't an invasion be necessary to reclaim the city?

Many thanks.

 

[cabdixakim]

Salaam alaikum, and thank you for the answer. Thanks for differentiating between fighting and invading Mecca.
If an army of non-Muslims one day seized Mecca, or even a group of Muslim extremists, wouldn't an invasion be necessary to reclaim the city?

Many thanks.

so this your question has no ending @Peter_502 ... and it seems you're so fond of finding deficiency for the Hadith that you didn't completely understand what I wrote earlier...

what's the prohibition of "invading/entering makkah forcefully " as found in the Hadith?... is it for muslims only?

The Hadith says "prohibited before and after me..."

Now, Abraha(the king of elephant army), was he a muslim? No, yet the prohibition applied to him as well!

The simple thing you take from the hadith; it's prohibited for any invading non muslims/muslims to enter Makkah, Allah protects the city and every such army will face the fate of the elephant army... so this prohibition is universal and a threat of destruction...

The Hadith is saying that Makkah is holy and a sanctuary so Allah protects it and destroys its aggressors... only the Prophet(p.b.u.h) was permitted to invade it during the conquest of Makkah And none after him...

All the good questions you're asking are,for me, off context i.e the hadith is speaking of one thing and you're asking something completely different...

 

[Peter_502]

so this your question has no ending @Peter_502 ... and it seems you're so fond of finding deficiency for the Hadith that you didn't completely understand what I wrote earlier...

what's the prohibition of "invading/entering makkah forcefully " as found in the Hadith?... is it for muslims only?

The Hadith says "prohibited before and after me..."

Now, Abraha(the king of elephant army), was he a muslim? No, yet the prohibition applied to him as well!

The simple thing you take from the hadith; it's prohibited for any invading non muslims/muslims to enter Makkah, Allah protects the city and every such army will face the fate of the elephant army... so this prohibition is universal and a threat of destruction...

The Hadith is saying that Makkah is holy and a sanctuary so Allah protects it and destroys its aggressors... only the Prophet(p.b.u.h) was permitted to invade it during the conquest of Makkah And none after him...

All the good questions you're asking are,for me, off context i.e the hadith is speaking of one thing and you're asking something completely different...

Salaam alaikum. You stated that Allah protects Mecca from any invading army, and that He protects it and destroys its aggressors.

How can this be the case when in 1987, a group of extremists seized Mecca and the Saudi Army had to be called in and lay siege to the city to get them out?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mosque_seizure

Or even worse, the seizure and destruction of the city by a group of non-Muslim terrorists, who pillaged it and massacred pilgrims, going as far as to take the Black Stone and hold it for ransom in AD 930?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qarmatians

 

[cabdixakim]

Salaam alaikum. You stated that Allah protects Mecca from any invading army, and that He protects it and destroys its aggressors.

How can this be the case when in 1987, a group of extremists seized Mecca and the Saudi Army had to be called in and lay siege to the city to get them out?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mosque_seizure

Or even worse, the seizure and destruction of the city by a group of non-Muslim terrorists, who pillaged it and massacred pilgrims, going as far as to take the Black Stone and hold it for ransom in AD 930?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qarmatians

Wa'aleykumas'salaam @Peter_502

This Wikipedia research of yours answeres your question "should we not fight in Makkah even against aggressors?"... as you've read the Saudi army (muslims) were called upon to lay a seige and so there was a fight for the Just course against aggressors.(this answers your original question)

so now, your question turned from " why the prophet(p.b.u.h) banned fights in Makka after him" to "why didn't Allah protect the city against the insurgents?" ... So this is my last post to you on this matter...

I hope I've clarified how the hadith in question was speaking and what the prohibition meant...

as for the question, "why didn't Allah protect the city against the insurgents"... Allah did protect the city and Allah Has His ways and means of protecting what He promised to protect and destroying its aggressors...

Remember, the prohibition was in place before and after the prophet(p.b.u.h) meaning Makkah was already a sanctuary in the advent of his prophethood when the muslims were being persecuted in it... so what if someone asks, " If Makkah is a sanctuary why were the early muslims persecuted in it?"...

There has always been bad people and fights in Makkah but this particular hadith is informing muslims of the prohibition of invading Makkah kept in place by Allah and only permitted for the prophet(p.b.u.h) and warns them of violating it.

if there is another question revolving around the same questions please try to respect what others have written and try to find an answer in what's already written.

 

[Peter_502]

Wa'aleykumas'salaam @Peter_502

This Wikipedia research of yours answeres your question "should we not fight in Makkah even against aggressors?"... as you've read the Saudi army (muslims) were called upon to lay a seige and so there was a fight for the Just course against aggressors.(this answers your original question)

so now, your question turned from " why the prophet(p.b.u.h) banned fights in Makka after him" to "why didn't Allah protect the city against the insurgents?" ... So this is my last post to you on this matter...

I hope I've clarified how the hadith in question was speaking and what the prohibition meant...

as for the question, "why didn't Allah protect the city against the insurgents"... Allah did protect the city and Allah Has His ways and means of protecting what He promised to protect and destroying its aggressors...

Remember, the prohibition was in place before and after the prophet(p.b.u.h) meaning Makkah was already a sanctuary in the advent of his prophethood when the muslims were being persecuted in it... so what if someone asks, " If Makkah is a sanctuary why were the early muslims persecuted in it?"...

There has always been bad people and fights in Makkah but this particular hadith is informing muslims of the prohibition of invading Makkah kept in place by Allah and only permitted for the prophet(p.b.u.h) and warns them of violating it.

if there is another question revolving around the same questions please try to respect what others have written and try to find an answer in what's already written.

Salaam alaikum.

I apologize if I misunderstood you. Let me state what I thought we have both said so far in this discussion, and tell me if I misquoted you or misunderstood what you said.
I asked why did Muhammad say that fighting in Mecca has not been allowed for anyone before him, and will not be allowed for anyone after him.
You stated that this hadith is about banning people from invading Mecca, not fighting in Mecca.
I asked what would happen if an army of extremists or even non-Muslims seized Mecca, would an invasion be then not necessary to reclaim the city.
You said I didn't understand what you wrote, and repeated that God does not allow invasions of Mecca, stating that any such army that has tried to do that, He destroyed.
I brought up two historical examples, one in 930 and the other in 1979, when extremists managed to seize Mecca. I asked how can this be if God, as you said, protects the city and destroys all invading armies and aggressors.

You responded by saying that fighting in Mecca is allowed for Muslims if it against aggressors. Thanks for saying this, as this was my original question to begin with.
In response to your answer- how would fighting to free the city from an aggressor be different from what Muhammad did, when he fought to free the city of the pagan rulers who were persecuting Muslims?

You said that "Allah did protect the city and had His ways of destroying the aggressors"... that is true of the extremists in 1979, but not in the case of the Qarmatians in 930, who not only seized the city but destroyed huge sections of it and defiled the Kabaa and took off and vandalized the Black Stone, without having anyone stop them.