Koranic evidence that striking the necks is an Islamic doctrine

color codes

Green: Koranic verses
Red: verses from the Bible
Blue: other Islamic sources
Orange: links you can click on to gain access to the original source

Note: We were unable to provide links to the English translations. The links, therefore, refer to the original Arabic sources. If the researcher is familiar with both English and Arabic, he/she will be able to compare the two languages and judge the credibility and accuracy of the translation for themselves.

 

According to Islamic cleric the , the desire to smash skulls, and to sever limbs for the sake of Allah and in defense of his religion is an honor for the believer of Allah

 

 

According to Islamic cleric non Muslims does not deserve to live and we have to fight them.

 

According to Islamic cleric, terrorist is the religion of Allah

 

* Sūrah Al-Anfāl 8 verse 12: Then your Lord signaled to the angels: ‘I am indeed with you; so steady the faithful. I will cast terror into the hearts of the faithless. So strike their necks [lit. above or upon the necks], and strike their every limb joint!’
Commentary of Ibn Kathīr: “fawqa al-aʿnāq.” It was sais that it means: Strike the heads off. In that sense “fawqa al-aʿnāq” would mean “upon the necks,” where ʾaʿnāq means riqāb. The Messenger of Allāh said: “For I have not been commissioned to torment people with Allāh’s torment. I was rather commissioned with the striking off of the neck and binding [captives] firmly.” Ibn Jarīr opted for the possibility that it may indicate the striking off of the necks and the splitting up of the heads. In my opinion, it says in the Maghāzī by Al-ʾUmawī that the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, began to walk through the dead on the Day of Badr, saying,“Let us split up the crowns of the heads.”

Commentary of Ṭabarī: Narrated Ibn Wakīʿ that Ibn Idrīs said, on the authority of his father, on the authority of ʿAṭiyya: “So strike [upon] their necks,” means smite the necks off. He also said: My father told me, on the authority of Al-Masʿūdī, on the authority of Al-Qāsim, that the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, said, “For I have not been commissioned to torment people with God’s torment. I was rather commissioned with the striking off of the neck and binding [captives] firmly.” I was told, on the authority of Ibn Al-Faraj that he said: I heard Abū Maʿāḏ saying: ʿUbayd b. Sulaymān told us: I heard Aḍ-Ḍaḥḥāk saying, among others: “f-aḍribū fawqa al-ʾaʿnāq” means “strike off the necks.”
*Sūrah Muḥammad 47 (the fighting) verse 4 When you meet the faithless in battle, strike their necks. When you have thoroughly decimated them, bind the captives firmly. Thereafter either oblige them [by setting them free] or take ransom, until the war lays down its burdens. That [is Allāh’s ordinance]. Had Allah wished He could have taken vengeance on them, but that He may test some of you by means of others. As for those who were slain in the way of Allāh, He will not let their works go fruitless.

Commentary of Al-Qurṭubī: It was said: [This applies to] whoever disagrees with the religion of Islam, be they idolaters or of the People of the Book, if they are not protected by a treaty or subject to a dhimma contract, according to Al-Māwardī. … He also said: It says “strike the necks off,” and does not say, “kill them,” because the phrase “strike the necks off” is harsher and tougher than the phrase “kill them.” For it depicts the killing in the most loathsome forms, i.e., the cutting off of the neck and removal of the head, which is the chief and most honorable member of the body … Saʿīd b. Jubayr said: Taking ransom and taking captives should only happen after there is a thorough decimation and slaughter by the sword because of the verse that says: A Prophet may not take captives until he has thoroughly decimated [the enemy] in the land. [Sūrah Al-Anfāl 8 verse 67]. If he takes captive later, it is for the chief leader (imām) to judge by the slaughter he saw or otherwise.

 

Commentary of Ibn Kathīr:When you meet the faithless” i.e., when you encounter them in battle, mow them down by the swords. “When you have thoroughly decimated them, bind …” i.e., destroy them by slaughtering them, and bind those among them you took captive. Then after the war is over and the battle is settled, you are free to do whatever you like with them. If you want you could oblige them by setting their captives free for no money, and if you want you could give them back to them in exchange for ransom … then some scholars have claimed that this verse has been abrogated by the saying the Almighty: “Then, when the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them.” [At-Tawba 9:5] The judgment in the case of captives used to be that it was not permissible to “kill them through patience,” i.e., by imprisoning them until they die, but it was permissible to set them free and take ransom for them, as stated in the verse “Thereafter either oblige them [by setting them free] or take ransom.” [Sūrah Muḥammad 47: 4]. Then this was abrogated by the judgment of the verse that says, “kill the polytheists” Sūrah At-Tawba 9: 5, where the judgment for captives became death. No ransom, therefore, is to be accepted for them. For more on the verse “kill the polytheists,

*Sūrah Muḥammad 47 (the fighting) verse 4 When you meet the faithless in battle, strike their necks. When you have thoroughly decimated them, bind the captives firmly. Thereafter either oblige them [by setting them free] or take ransom, until the war lays down its burdens. That [is Allāh’s ordinance]. Had Allah wished He could have taken vengeance on them, but that He may test some of you by means of others. As for those who were slain in the way of Allāh, He will not let their works go fruitless
… He also said: It says “strike the necks off,” and does not say, “kill them,” because the phrase “strike the necks off” is harsher and tougher than the phrase “kill them.” For it depicts the killing in the most loathsome forms, i.e., the cutting off of the neck and removal of the head, which is the chief and most honorable
How dare a Muslim cleric, after reading this verse and this interpretation, say that these men are terrorists and do not express the tolerant nature of Islam? Where is tolerance in these bloodthirsty words?

 

فهرس الأسلاميات

فهرس المسيحيات