The Difference Between the Early Muslim Conquests and those of Others

“To make mention of Alexander [the Great] and Genghis [Khan] etc. would be highly inappropriate. Undoubtedly, both of them accomplished great victories, but how? They did so through [imposed] famine, brutality and mass killings. Everyone knows about Genghis Khan.

“If we compare [the Muslim conquest] with the conquests of Alexander, when Alexander conquered Sur, a city of Syria, because the people resisted for a long time, he granted blanket permission to kill everyone. The heads of 1,000 residents were hung on the outer wall of the city. Along with this, he sold 30,000 men and women that lived there into slavery. Not a single person from the old residents or those who wished to live in freedom were spared. Similarly, when he conquered Istakhr in Persia” – Istakhr was an ancient city of Persia – “he killed all the men. There were similar other merciless acts committed by him”, i.e. by Alexander the Great, “how then can one ever compare these conquests to that of the Muslims?

“It is well known that oppression and injustice can bring down an empire. This is true because oppression and brutality cannot last forever. In the same way, the empires of Alexander and Genghis did not last long. However, such merciless killings have proven effective to gain immediate results as a result of which entire countries have been subdued.

“Since a large part of the population is killed, therefore there is no danger of revolt or rebellion. It is for this reason Genghis, Nebuchadnezzar, Tamerlane, Nadir Shah and other great conquerors were all brutal and cruel. However, in the conquests of Hazrat Umar (ra), never was the law contravened nor any injustice committed. Let alone a blanket permission to kill the men, even a tree was not permitted to be cut. Children or the elderly were never harmed. Apart from in the battlefield, nobody was to be killed”, i.e. a person could only be killed on the battlefield and not otherwise.

“A breach of trust or deception was not permitted against the enemy. The commanders were given strict instructions that when they engaged in battle, they were not to use deception, not to mutilate the bodies of the dead, children were not to be harmed and they were to fight openly. Furthermore, the people who accepted Muslim rule but then revolted, they were reminded of their treaty and forgiven; to the extent that the people of Arbasus recanted from their treaties three times.” Arbasus was a town near the frontiers of Syria which bordered Asia Minor. “So the most he did was to exile them, but they were paid in exchange for the wealth they lost.”

Maulana Shibli Nomani further writes:

“If the Jews of Khaibar were exiled owing to their instigations and rebellion, they were compensated for the land they lost and it was written to all the provinces that wherever the Jews pass by, they ought to be assisted. Wherever they settle in a town, Jizya should not be taken from them for one year.”

He then writes:

“Those people who say that in history, there were many other conquerors who achieved similar great feats as Hazrat Umar (ra) should demonstrate which ruler conquered even an inch of enemy land with the same level of precautions and benevolence. Furthermore, Alexander, Genghis etc. were physically present in every battle and would lead the army as commander-in-chief at every stage. This meant that aside from having an experienced commander-in-chief at hand, it would give courage to the army and they would have a natural zeal to sacrifice themselves for their master. But for the entire span of his caliphate, not once did Hazrat Umar (ra) set foot on the battlefield. His armies were engaged on several fronts, but the reins of the army were in the grips of Hazrat Umar (ra).

“Another notable and substantial difference was that the conquests of Alexander and others were like that of a passing cloud; it came all of a sudden and then departed. They never established an organised government. However, the distinction of the lands conquered by Hazrat Umar (ra) is that even after the passing of 1,300 years, they are still under Islamic rule today. And from the time of Hazrat Umar (ra), all structure and organisation of the country was established.”