Defending Islam

Does Islam promote violence?

Does Islam promote violence?

Introduction
Understanding Violence in Religion
Quranic Verses Related to Violence
Hadiths on Violence and Justice
Scholarly Perspectives
Logical and Philosophical Arguments
Historical Context and Miracles
Moving Forward (Conclusion)
Recommended Reading

Introduction

Islam is often misunderstood as a religion that promotes violence, especially when verses from the Qur’an are quoted out of context in the media. Many people wonder, “Does Islam encourage violence?” The straightforward answer is a resounding no—Islam does not promote unjust or unprovoked violence. In fact, Islamic teachings explicitly declare the sanctity and value of innocent life. Prophet Muhammad ﷺ (peace be upon him) firmly warned: “Whoever kills an innocent person, it is as if he has killed all of humanity.” (Qur’an 5:32). In clear terms, the Prophet ﷺ stated that a true believer is one from whose hands and tongue others are safe, further emphasizing Islam's foundational principle of peace and respect for life.

However, Islam also acknowledges reality. In a world where injustice, oppression, and aggression exist, Islam provides practical and ethical guidance on when and how force may be legitimately used. It emphasizes that such measures are a last resort and strictly regulated by justice, proportionality, and mercy. Rather than promoting violence, Islam explicitly forbids unjust aggression and unnecessary harm.

Indeed, Islam condemns violent acts against innocent individuals in the strongest possible terms. Prophet Muhammad ﷺ warned clearly, saying, “Whoever kills a person protected by a treaty (peace agreement) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari). Thus, far from promoting violence, Islam firmly stands against injustice, cruelty, and the shedding of innocent blood.

At the same time, Islam recognizes that conflicts and aggression exist in the real world. Rather than ignoring these harsh realities, it provides moral and practical guidelines for responding ethically and justly when necessary. This balanced approach guides Muslims clearly: violence is permitted only as a last resort, strictly regulated, and always subordinate to the overarching principles of justice, mercy, and reconciliation.

So, how do we reconcile verses about fighting in the Qur’an with Islam’s message of peace? In this article, we will explore this important question. We'll delve into what the Qur’an actually teaches about violence, examine historical and textual contexts, and learn how Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and respected Islamic scholars have understood and applied these teachings. By the end, you’ll see clearly that Islam is fundamentally a religion of compassion, justice, and peace—not cruelty or aggression.

Understanding Violence in Religion

Why does religion (or any moral system) need to talk about violence at all? The reason is that violence is a part of human reality – wars, crime, and oppression have sadly always existed. A true religion must guide humanity on how to handle violence and injustice in a righteous way. If a religion only taught, “be peaceful and loving” (which is good), but never addressed what to do if you are attacked or if innocent people are harmed, then followers would be left defenseless or confused. On the other extreme, if a religion encouraged violence without limits, it would lead to chaos and cruelty. Islam takes the middle path: it encourages peace, forgiveness, and patience, but also gives permission to fight against oppression and injustice when there is no other option.

Think about laws in any country today – we all agree that self-defense is a moral right. Stopping a bully or a criminal from hurting others is actually a good thing. Police and peace-keepers sometimes have to use force to protect the innocent. Similarly, Islam teaches that opposing oppression is necessary. The Qur’an says:

Qur’an 4:75 – “And what is [the matter] with you that you do not fight in the cause of Allah and for the oppressed – men, women, and children – who cry out, ‘Our Lord, rescue us from this town of wrongdoers...’?”

In this verse, the Qur’an is urging believers to stand up against injustice and help those who are oppressed. It’s a call to rescue victims of persecution. This shows that fighting is not for personal gain or hate, but to establish justice and protect the vulnerable.

Islam teaches that wronging others is forbidden (this is called ẓulm, or oppression). The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said: “Help your brother whether he is the oppressor or the oppressed.” His companions asked, “How can we help him if he is an oppressor?” The Prophet replied: “By stopping him from oppressing others – that is helping him.” (Sahih al-Bukhari). This profound teaching shows that allowing someone to commit violence is harmful to them as well; stopping injustice is a favor to both the victim and the perpetrator (by preventing them from accumulating sin).

Moreover, Islam recognizes the moral obligation to defend oneself and others. If someone physically attacks you or your family, it wouldn’t be sensible (or moral) to just let it happen. Islam permits self-defense. In fact, the Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever is killed defending his family or wealth is a martyr.” This means that dying while protecting your loved ones or property is considered an honor, not a sin. So while Islam prefers peace, it is not a pacifist religion that says “never fight under any circumstances.” Instead, it says fighting is allowed for self-defense, to protect the community, and to uphold justice – but even then, with strict rules and compassion.

It’s important to note that when Islam does address warfare or violence, it always ties it to ethical guidelines. As we will see, the Qur’an and Hadith (Prophet’s teachings) insist on limits: no harming civilians, no excess beyond what is necessary, and seeking peace when possible. This ethical framework was revolutionary for its time and remains very relevant today. Many of these principles anticipated what we now call “just war theory” or international humanitarian law .

In summary, violence is addressed in Islam not to promote it, but to manage it. Islam’s stance is that peace is the default state (“Allah invites to the Home of Peace” – Qur’an 10:25), but justice is vital. If peace is broken by aggressors, Muslims are allowed to defend themselves and others within moral limits. This balance of justice and mercy is what we will explore through the primary texts of Islam.

The Qur’an, which Muslims believe is the word of God, contains several verses about fighting and warfare. These verses were revealed in specific historical contexts – often addressing the young Muslim community in Medina that faced aggression from enemies. To understand “Does Islam promote violence?”, we need to examine these verses carefully, along with their context and language. Below, we will list the major Qur’anic verses on this topic, explain what they mean, and show how they fit into Islam’s overall message.

Permission for Self-Defense and Justice

The first verses allowing Muslims to fight were revealed after years of persecution. Early Muslims in Mecca suffered abuse and even torture at the hands of the Meccan pagans. They were not allowed to retaliate at all during that time – they endured patiently or migrated to escape harm. Only after the Muslims migrated to Medina and the aggressors still threatened them did God give permission to take up arms in defense. This pivotal permission is given in Surah Al-Hajj (Chapter 22):

Qur’an 22:39 – “Permission [to fight] is given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is Most Capable of giving them victory.”

This verse makes it clear why Muslims were allowed to fight: “because they were wronged.” In other words, they were victims of injustice and attack. The next verse (22:40) continues, saying that these people were driven from their homes unjustly “only for saying, ‘Allah is our Lord.’” It also states that if God did not allow the oppressed to defend themselves, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques would be destroyed – meaning all places of worship must be protected. So, far from promoting violence, the Qur’an is recognizing the reality of tyranny and giving the oppressed the right to defend themselves and their religious freedom.

Another verse emphasizes justice in retaliation:

Qur’an 22:60 – “That [is God’s command]. And whoever retaliates with the equivalent of the injury he was afflicted with and then is again wronged, Allah will surely aid him. Indeed, Allah is Pardoning and Forgiving.”

Here, the Qur’an says if you must retaliate against an aggressor, do not exceed what was done to you (justice must be proportional). It also hints that forgiving (pardoning) the offender is a virtue (“Allah is Forgiving”), encouraging Muslims to not seek revenge beyond fairness. This establishes an important principle: limited, just retaliation is allowed, but forgiveness and patience are praised as even better when feasible.

In fact, patience and forgiveness are repeatedly encouraged. For example:

Qur’an 16:126 – “And if you retaliate, retaliate with no worse than what you were afflicted with. But if you endure patiently, it is better for the patient.”

This beautiful verse gently reminds believers that while repelling harm with equal force is permissible, choosing patience (if it will not lead to one’s annihilation or more harm) is superior in God’s eyes. It shows the moral high ground of mercy whenever possible.

Likewise, the sanctity of life is strongly affirmed:

Qur’an 17:33 – “And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed] except by legal right. And whoever is killed unjustly – We have given his heir authority [to seek justice]. But let him not exceed bounds in taking life, for he is helped [by the law].”

This verse reminds us that life is sacred. No one may be killed except with due right (for example, as a last resort punishment for murder, which is similar to laws in many societies). If someone is murdered, their family has the right to seek justice – but even then, they must not overstep the limits (for instance, harming others besides the murderer). Islam thus prohibits vigilante justice or collective punishment. It establishes rule of law: only the guilty should be punished, and only in proportion to their crime.

Another key passage often cited is from Surah Al-Mā’idah (Chapter 5), which illustrates how precious human life is:

Qur’an 5:32 – “...Whoever kills a person – unless in retribution for murder or spreading corruption on earth – it is as if he had killed all of humanity. And whoever saves a life, it is as if he had saved all of humanity.”

This verse (though addressed to the Children of Israel in context) is embraced in Islam to mean murder is an enormous crime – taking one life unjustly is like attacking all people. Similarly, saving one life is like saving the world. It powerfully conveys the value of each human life. Right after this, the next verses (5:33-34) speak about punishment for those who wage war against society (highway robbers, terrorists, etc., described as “spreaders of corruption”). It lists severe penalties for such serious crimes, showing that while individual life is sacred, those who threaten the lives of many may face strong justice. Even then, verse 5:34 adds that if such criminals repent before they are caught, mercy can be shown. So, the Qur’an balances the need to protect society with opportunities for repentance and reform.

Rules of Engagement and Restraint

Islamic teachings in the Qur’an not only give permission to fight oppressors, but also lay down rules of engagement to prevent cruelty. One famous verse in this regard is:

Qur’an 2:190 – “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress limits. Indeed, Allah does not love transgressors.”

This verse was revealed concerning the battles the Muslims faced. It is essentially the Islamic version of just war theory: fight only against combatants/enemies (“those who fight you”), and do not go beyond limits (no brutality or harming others unjustly). Transgression could include killing non-combatants, torturing, mutilating bodies, etc., all of which are forbidden as we will see in the Hadiths. The next verses (2:191–193) continue to explain that the Muslims could fight the enemy forces wherever they encountered them in war, because those enemies had driven them out of their homes and persecuted them. It says “persecution is worse than killing” – meaning the oppression and religious persecution Muslims endured was worse in God’s sight than the act of fighting the oppressors in return. However, even in that context, the Qur’an immediately says: “If they cease (fighting), then Allah is Forgiving and Merciful” (2:192) and “If they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors” (2:193). In simple terms: stop fighting if the enemy stops, and don’t continue aggression. This establishes that fighting in Islam is conditioned on the enemy’s hostility; it is not an endless holy war. When oppression stops and peace is offered, Muslims must also stop fighting.

In fact, the Qur’an explicitly commands Muslims to accept peace if the enemy wants peace:

Qur’an 8:61 – “And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also], and put your trust in Allah. Indeed, He is the Hearing, the Knowing.”

This verse was revealed during a time of conflict, yet Allah instructs the Prophet ﷺ that if the opposing side shows an openness to peace, the Muslims must also pursue peace. This destroys the myth that Islam wants fighting for fighting’s sake. On the contrary, peace is preferred whenever it can be achieved honorably.

Dealing with Aggressors and Oppressors

Some of the most frequently misunderstood verses are those that tell Muslims to fight certain groups, especially in Surah At-Tawbah (Chapter 9) and Surah Al-Anfāl (Chapter 8). Let’s address them with context:

Surah At-Tawbah (Chapter 9) was one of the last portions of the Qur’an revealed, at a time when the Muslim community had grown strong in Arabia. It deals with treacherous enemies who broke peace treaties and attacked the Muslims. For instance:

Qur’an 9:13-14 – “Will you not fight a people who broke their oaths and determined to expel the Messenger, and who attacked you first? Do you fear them? But Allah has more right that you should fear Him, if you are believers. Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the hearts of a believing people.”

These verses clearly describe the offenders: they violated agreements, plotted to banish Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, and initiated aggression (“attacked you first”). Thus, Allah is urging the believers to stand up to these treacherous attackers. It is a call to fight back against betrayal and aggression, not a blanket instruction to fight everyone. In fact, it appeals to their conscience – “Will you not fight…?” – highlighting that it is morally right to respond to such oppression.

Now, Qur’an 9:5, sometimes called the “Sword Verse” by critics, is often quoted out of context. It says:

Qur’an 9:5 – “Then, when the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and ambush them. But if they repent and establish prayer and give zakat (the charity), then let them go their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”

On the surface, this sounds very harsh – “kill the polytheists wherever you find them” – but who is this talking about and when? To understand, we need the historical context. Earlier in this passage (9:1-4), the Qur’an declares the end of treaties with certain pagan tribes in Arabia who had repeatedly broken their peace pacts with the Muslims. These tribes betrayed the Muslims and attacked them despite promising not to. Verse 4 actually exempts those pagan tribes who remained faithful to their treaties: “Except for those idolaters with whom you have treaties and who have not violated them… fulfill your agreements with them.” So, 9:5 was directed only at those hostile groups who had violated agreements and fought the Muslims. They were given a warning of four months to cease hostilities (9:2). After that period, the Muslims would be at war with them – hence the verse tells the believers to engage the enemy forces “wherever you find them” (which is normal in war, meaning wherever the battlefield takes you). It does not mean to hunt down any non-Muslim anywhere in the world. It was specific to the remaining pagan militants in Arabia at that time.

Crucially, right after 9:5, Qur’an 9:6 says:

Qur’an 9:6 – “And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to a place of safety for him. That is because they are people who do not know.”

This verse shows the merciful side: even among those enemy polytheists, if someone surrendered or asked for asylum, the Muslims must protect them and escort them to safety, so they can learn about Islam peacefully. This wouldn’t make sense if 9:5 was a blanket command to kill all non-Muslims – clearly it was about active combatants in a state of war. Islamic teachings always distinguished between combatants and non-combatants, and even combatants who surrender are to be spared. Classical scholars note that 9:5 did not apply to non-hostile communities like Christians and Jews living under Muslim rule (who had their own ruling in 9:29 regarding paying a tax instead of military service), nor to anyone who made peace.

Speaking of Qur’an 9:29, this verse says:

Qur’an 9:29 – “Fight those among the People of the Book (i.e. Jews and Christians) who do not [truly] believe in Allah and the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth, until they pay the jizyah (tribute) willingly, while they are humbled.”

This verse has also been misinterpreted. It helped establish relations between the Muslim state and neighboring non-Muslim populations. It does not mean “fight all Jews and Christians because they don’t believe in Islam.” In Islamic history, this was understood as fight those who fight you or pose an imminent threat, and bring hostile territories under a peace treaty called dhimmah. The jizyah is a tax in exchange for protection and exemption from military service (Muslim citizens paid a different tax called zakat and were required to serve in defense). In essence, 9:29 permitted the early Muslim state to fight the Byzantine or Persian forces (who were People of the Book) if they were aggressive or to remove their oppression over people, and if those populations chose not to convert to Islam, they could sign a treaty and pay jizyah instead. Those who paid jizyah became protected citizens (dhimmis) under the Muslim government, keeping their religion and safety. Many scholars say this verse was specific to certain conflicts of that time and that later generations of Muslim rulers could choose peace treaties over conflict. Throughout Islamic history, millions of Christians, Jews, and others lived peacefully under Muslim rule by this system – they were not fought as long as they fulfilled the treaty conditions. So again, the verse isn’t about forced conversion (Islam forbids forcing faith – “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256)). It was about dealing with hostile powers and then offering peaceful co-existence (through jizyah agreement) if they didn’t want to fight.

From Surah Al-Anfāl (Chapter 8), we also have verses revealed around the time of the Battle of Badr, when Muslims faced the Meccan army:

Qur’an 8:39-40 – “And fight them until there is no more fitnah (persecution) and [until] religion [i.e. worship] is for Allah [alone]. But if they cease, then indeed Allah is All-Seeing of what they do. And if they turn away (refuse), then know that Allah is your Protector – an excellent Protector and an excellent Helper.”

“Fitnah” in Arabic here means persecution or oppression – specifically, the Meccans’ persecution of Muslims for their faith. So the command is to fight until that persecution stops and people are free to worship Allah. Again, it immediately says if the enemy stops their aggression, then stop fighting. The goal is not killing; the goal is ending oppression and establishing freedom of religion. Once that is achieved, fighting is no longer needed.

Another verse in the same chapter:

Qur’an 8:60 – “And prepare against them whatever forces you can muster and steeds of war by which you may strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them whom you do not know but Allah knows. Whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be repaid to you in full, and you will not be wronged.”

This verse advises the Muslims to be well-prepared and strong to deter their enemies. The phrase “strike terror into [the enemy]” sounds alarming in English, but it means to instill fear in would-be aggressors as a deterrent. In modern terms, one might say “maintain a strong defense to discourage anyone from attacking you.” It’s important to note that this is about military preparedness, not about harming civilians. The context is clear that it’s addressing warfare between armies. A strong, prepared defense can prevent war – because enemies will think twice before attacking. So, this verse is often misunderstood; it actually aligns with the idea of maintaining a deterrent force for protection.

Lastly, the Qur’an also acknowledges that fighting is difficult. It never glorifies war as something great in itself. Muslims are not told to love violence. In fact, one verse states:

Qur’an 2:216 – “Fighting has been ordained for you, though it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you...”

This shows the companions of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ did not like fighting – who would enjoy bloodshed? But sometimes, they had no choice because justice and survival were at stake. The Qur’an comforts them that although they dislike war, God knows it may be necessary for a greater good (like ending oppression). This verse implies that violence is a last resort, not a first choice. Believers are not to be warmongers; rather, they should only fight when compelled by circumstances and moral duty.

Summary of Quranic Guidance on Violence

When we compile the guidance from all these verses, a clear picture emerges:

Fight only for just causes – to defend against aggression, protect the oppressed, and ensure freedom of belief. Never fight out of mere hatred or for conquest of wealth. “Permission to fight is because they have been wronged” .
Even when fighting, do not go to extremes – do not target innocent people, do not torture, do not destroy more than necessary. “Do not transgress limits. Allah does not love transgressors” (2:190).
If the enemy inclines to peace, then accept peace (8:61). War should end as soon as its justified aims (like stopping oppression) are achieved.
Human life is sacred – killing one innocent = killing all humanity (5:32). Unjust violence is one of the worst sins.
Enforce justice fairly – retaliation must be proportional (eye for an eye at most, not an eye for a life), and forgiveness is recommended wherever possible (16:126).
Keep treaties and promises – The Qur’an repeatedly commands that agreements must be honored (e.g., 9:4). Only if the other side breaks a treaty can it be voided.
No compulsion in religion – people cannot be forced to convert (2:256). The fights in early Islam were never about forcing faith, but about security and ending persecution.

In light of these points, we see that Islam’s scriptures do not promote random or unjust violence. They regulate the use of force, limiting it to rightful causes and within ethical boundaries. This is why, historically, many non-Muslims lived under Muslim rule for centuries and kept their religion – they were not wiped out. If the Qur’an had truly promoted indiscriminate violence, that would not have been the case.

Next, we will look at the Hadiths – the sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ – to further see how he put these Quranic principles into practice.

Hadiths on Violence and Justice

The Hadith (reports of the Prophet’s words and deeds) are the second most important source in Islam after the Qur’an. They give us insight into how Prophet Muhammad ﷺ actually dealt with issues of war and peace, and how he expected his followers to behave. Importantly, the Prophet embodied mercy and justice, even in times of conflict. He is described in the Qur’an as “a mercy to all the worlds” (21:107). Here, we will list authentic (Sahih) hadiths related to violence, fighting, and justice. These hadiths show clearly that Islam does not condone cruelty or senseless violence – in fact, Prophet Muhammad ﷺ actively limited violence and encouraged compassion.

Defining a Muslim: The Prophet ﷺ defined a true Muslim as someone who does not harm others. As mentioned earlier, “A Muslim is the one from whose tongue and hand people are safe.” This hadith is found in both Bukhari and Muslim collections. It means a practicing Muslim should not be abusing others – neither verbally (tongue) nor physically (hand). In another narration, the Prophet added, “and a believer is one whom people trust with their lives and wealth.” So, causing violence or terror in society is absolutely against the qualities of a believer.
No desire for war: Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was not bloodthirsty or eager to fight. He advised his companions: “O people! Do not wish to meet the enemy (in battle). Rather, ask Allah for safety and well-being. But if you do encounter the enemy, then be firm (steadfast), and know that Paradise lies under the shade of swords.” (Sahih al-Bukhari & Muslim). In this powerful advice, we see two things: First, the Prophet told them not to wish for conflict, but to hope for peace (“ask Allah for ‘afiyah,” meaning safety). War is only a necessity, not something to seek out. Second, if they are forced into battle, they should remain steadfast and remember their cause is just (hence “Paradise under the shade of swords” – a reassurance that fighting in self-defense or for justice can be a noble deed). This hadith encapsulates Islam’s balanced attitude: avoid fighting if possible, but if you must, face it with courage and faith.
Protecting Non-Combatants: The Prophet ﷺ strictly forbade targeting non-combatants (people not actively fighting, such as women, children, elderly, etc.). There are multiple authentic narrations on this. For example: “During one of the battles, a woman was found killed, and Allah’s Messenger ﷺ condemned the killing of women and children.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim) . In another narration, it says he forbade the killing of women and children. This was unprecedented in those times when many armies would massacre indiscriminately. The Prophet’s companion and second caliph, `Umar ibn al-Khattab, once saw a killed woman in a battle and he was extremely upset, saying “How could this happen?” – indicating it was against Islamic rules. The Prophet also said, “Do not kill the old, the weak, or the monks in their hermitages” (reported in the books of history and hadith).

In Sunan Abu Dawud (Hadith 2614), there is an incident where the Prophet saw people gathered during an expedition. He sent someone to see what was happening. The man reported, “It’s a woman who has been killed.” The Prophet ﷺ said, “She was not fighting!**” In other words, this woman was not a combatant. The Prophet then urgently sent a message to the commander of the army (Khalid bin Walid at that time) to stop harming women or servants. This shows the Prophet’s immediate concern for non-combatants; even in the heat of battle, he held his soldiers accountable to Islamic ethics.

The early caliphs followed this teaching closely. It is recorded that Abu Bakr, the first caliph, gave these instructions to his army: “Do not kill women or children or the elderly. Do not destroy fruit trees or fertile land. Do not kill sheep or camels except for food. Do not harm monks in monasteries.” These guidelines mirror what the Prophet taught and became essentially the rules of engagement in Islamic law.
No treachery or mutilation: Prophet Muhammad ﷺ also said, “Do not betray or be treacherous, and do not mutilate (the bodies of the enemy dead).” (Sahih Muslim). “Do not betray” means if you have a treaty or if individuals have been promised safety, you must not betray that trust. Unfortunately, some extremists today commit betrayal by harming civilians or violating agreements – these actions completely violate the Prophet’s commands. As for mutilation, some cultures at the time would mutilate enemies’ bodies as a form of revenge or terror; the Prophet absolutely forbade this, even though his own uncle was mutilated by the enemy in the Battle of Uhud. Islam taught respect even for the dead of the enemy.
No suicide or killing of innocents: Islam also prohibits suicide and by extension suicide attacks. The Prophet ﷺ said that whoever commits suicide will be punished by God. Classical scholars unanimously forbid suicide bombing and killing civilians . They based this on the Qur’an and hadith. In modern times, Muslim scholars worldwide have condemned terrorism as un-Islamic for these reasons. One hadith states: “A believer is not to kill others. Faith is a deterrent to killing.”

This means a true believer would be prevented by his conscience and faith from murder or treachery. The Prophet also said: “Whoever kills a person under a treaty or covenant will not smell the fragrance of Paradise.” (Sahih hadith – reported by al-Bukhari and others). A “person under covenant” refers to any non-Muslim who is living in peace with Muslims (such as today’s non-Muslim citizens in Muslim-majority countries, or any non-combatant who has an agreement of safety). Killing such a person is a major sin that bars one from Paradise – a very strong warning against unwarranted violence.
Gentleness and mercy: In general conduct, the Prophet ﷺ encouraged gentleness over harshness. He said: “Allah is gentle and loves gentleness in all matters.” and “He who is not merciful to others will not be shown mercy (by God).” (Sahih al-Bukhari). Once some companions asked the Prophet to curse the pagan enemies, but he replied, “I was not sent to curse people, but as a mercy.” Even when he had opportunities for revenge, he showed mercy. A famous example is the Conquest of Mecca: after years of the Meccans waging war on the Muslims, when the Muslims finally entered Mecca victorious, the Prophet ﷺ did not take revenge. He forgave the very people who had persecuted him and his followers. He declared, “No harm shall befall you today. Go, you all are free.” This act of pardoning thousands of former enemies is a historical proof of Islam’s preference for forgiveness over violence.
Justice in enforcement: There are hadiths where the Prophet emphasizes justice in punishments and discourages vigilantism. For example, there was a case of a Muslim who killed a man from a non-Muslim community with whom the Muslims had a peace treaty. When this was reported, the Prophet ﷺ was very upset and he paid blood-money to the victim’s family and reaffirmed that non-Muslim allies’ lives are sacred. He said, “If anyone wrongs a person under a covenant, I will be his opponent (on Judgment Day).” (Reported in Abu Dawud). Such statements show the Prophet’s commitment to justice for all, Muslim or not.
The best Jihad: The term “jihad” often comes up in discussions of Islam and violence. Literally, jihad means “to struggle” or “to strive.” The Prophet used the word in many contexts, not just war. One beautiful hadith states: “The best form of jihad is to speak a word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler.” (Sunan al-Nasa’i, graded Hasan). This means that standing up for justice through words – even though it may put one at risk – is a great form of striving in God’s cause. It’s essentially non-violent resistance against injustice. This hadith broadens our understanding: jihad is not synonymous with fighting; it includes any struggle for good, such as speaking truth, fighting one’s own ego and temptations, giving charity, seeking knowledge, etc. The military aspect of jihad (which is often called qital in the Qur’an, meaning fighting) is just one part, and it has strict conditions as we’ve seen.
Etiquette in battle: Another hadith from the Prophet’s instructions in battle: “March in the name of Allah… Do not kill any old person, weak person, or child. Do not exceed bounds. Do good, for Allah loves those who do good.” (Reported in Abu Dawud). “Do good” in battle? How can one do good in war? It means maintain honorable conduct – for example, treat captives well, bury the enemy’s dead, don’t loot or destroy property without need. There are accounts of how the Prophet ﷺ and his companions showed mercy even during war. For instance, after the Battle of Badr, the Muslim victors treated the captives kindly; some captives remarked that the Muslims gave them food while eating little themselves. Such compassion was unheard of at that time.

In summary, the Hadith literature strongly reinforces that Islam does not allow violence except in justified cases, and even then, it must be constrained and compassionate. Prophet Muhammad ﷺ consistently upheld the values of mercy, even toward enemies. He forbade killing innocents, urged forgiveness, and lived by the principle of justice. His companions and the early caliphs carried on this legacy, establishing a tradition of ethical warfare that was very advanced for their era.

It’s worth noting that throughout the Prophet’s 23-year mission, the number of enemies killed in all the battles is estimated to be quite small (some historians say around a few hundred total, which is minimal compared to other conflicts of that scale). This indicates that the goal was never mass violence; the conflicts were limited and defensive. Whenever peace was an option, the Prophet took it (such as the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, a peace treaty with the Meccans).

Scholarly Perspectives

Understanding the Qur’an and Hadith in context has always been the job of Islamic scholars. From the earliest generations, mainstream scholars have explained these verses and hadiths according to the principles of justice and mercy we discussed. Let’s look at what widely respected scholars – both classical and modern – have said on the issue of violence and jihad (just warfare) in Islam.

Classical Scholars (the Four Schools of Thought): Islam has four major legal schools (Madhhabs): Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali. All four schools, despite minor differences in legal detail, agree on the fundamental rules regarding combat:

War must be for just cause and declared by legitimate authority. For example, Imam Al-Bahuti (Hanbali scholar) noted that war should only be launched under the Muslim ruler’s decision, not by individuals acting on their own. This was to prevent chaos and ensure proper judgment.
No killing of non-combatants: This is explicitly stated in all schools’ jurisprudence manuals. Imam Ash-Shafi’i wrote that the Prophet’s ban on killing women and children is binding, so armies must avoid them. The only exception all scholars mentioned is if non-combatants actively take part in fighting (e.g., a woman shooting arrows in battle, etc., then she becomes a combatant). But even then, if they desist, they cannot be harmed. Imam Nawawi, a great Shafi’i scholar, said there is a consensus (ijma’) on this prohibition.
Humane treatment of captives: Classical scholars like Imam Malik ibn Anas taught that prisoners of war should be treated with kindness. The options for dealing with prisoners in Islamic law were either to exchange them, free them, ransom them, or if necessary, punish certain war criminals – but kindness was encouraged, especially if they could be guided to Islam by example.
Honoring treaties: All schools stress that if a peace treaty or cease-fire exists, Muslims must not break it. The Hanafi jurist Ibn Abidin wrote that treachery is haram (forbidden); even if one is in enemy land on a visa (safe conduct), they cannot betray that trust. This means a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country must not harm that country from within – because by residing there peacefully, they have an implicit pact of peace. Such insights show how scholars applied Islamic principles to all scenarios to prevent unjust violence.
Jihad is not “holy war” against all non-Muslims, but a just struggle. Scholars defined jihad primarily as defensive or to remove oppression. While some medieval jurists did discuss offensive jihad (expanding Muslim territories) in their context, even those discussions came with conditions (such as offering the enemy a chance at peace or treaty first). Many modern scholars note that in today’s world of nation-states and international law, aggressive war contradicts Islamic intent; jihad now essentially is only for defense or to help those oppressed, in line with the Qur’anic context.
Mercy and forgiveness: Classical commentaries often highlight stories of the Prophet’s mercy. For instance, in explaining Qur’an 9:5, Tafsir scholars like Ibn Kathir clarify it was directed at specific tribes who betrayed peace. They also cite right after it the verse 9:6 (to give asylum) to show Islam did not permit killing any polytheist who sought peace or was non-hostile . Classical scholars were well aware of context, so they never taught Muslims to just “attack all infidels” as some Islamophobes allege. On the contrary, scholars like Imam Al-Tabari and Imam Al-Qurtubi (famous Quran commentators) explained that these verses were circumstantial and that general principles of justice and peace remain paramount.

Modern Scholars: Today, mainstream scholars and organizations continue to emphasize that Islam does not promote violence or terrorism:

Scholars such as Shaykh Abdullāh bin Bayyah, Mufti Menk, Yasir Qadhi, Hamza Yusuf, and many others have given lectures and written articles denouncing extremist interpretations. They reiterate that no legitimate scholar ever sanctioned targeting civilians or indiscriminate violence.
The Grand Muftis of countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, etc., frequently cite the Qur’anic verses and hadiths above to remind Muslims that extremism and terrorism are grave sins. For example, Egypt’s Dar al-Ifta (Fatwa council) published “Jihad: Myths and Facts” explaining the true meaning of jihad and the prohibition of harming innocents.
The Amman Message (2005), a declaration by 200 Muslim scholars from 50 countries, affirmed the correct teachings of Islam and condemned illegitimate violence done in its name. It emphasized compassion, justice, and respect for life.
Institutions like Al-Azhar University (the oldest Islamic university) regularly issue statements that suicide bombings and fanatic killings have “no basis in Shariah.” They often quote the hadith “A believer does not kill another (unjustly)” and the verse “Do not transgress, Allah loves not the transgressors.”
The Yaqeen Institute and other research bodies have produced accessible materials for Muslims and non-Muslims, showing that terrorist groups violate every rule of Islam’s just war. As one Yaqeen article noted: “Indiscriminate acts of violence against civilians… have zero precedent in Islamic teachings” . It also states: “No classical Muslim scholar has ever condoned the killing of civilians, even in the midst of a justified war.” This is a well-documented fact.

When comparing the four schools, the differences are minor technicalities (like how to distribute war booty, or whether certain types of weapons are allowed). On the core ethics of war, all four schools agree: non-combatants are off-limits, treaties must be honored, torture is forbidden, destruction should be limited, and war is only entered into with due cause. They also agree that peace treaties and truces can even be long-term; Islam doesn’t require perpetual fighting.

One interesting philosophical view from scholars: Some have described the Prophet’s military conduct as preventative and minimal. He engaged in battle only when necessary, and often the outcome was far less bloody than comparable wars. For instance, when he entered Mecca without fighting (a peaceful conquest), that itself prevented what could have been a massive battle. Many see in this the wisdom (ḥikmah) of Islamic guidance – aim to stop greater violence with lesser violence.

Historical scholars like Imam Al-Ghazali and Imam Ash-Shawkani also wrote that the purpose of jihad is not to kill others, but to remove obstacles to people hearing the message of Islam. If those obstacles (like tyrants or aggressive armies) are removed, and people live under Muslim protection, then there is no need for fighting. This perspective again shows that violence isn’t the goal; spreading justice and true religion in a peaceful manner is the goal.

Logical and Philosophical Arguments

Beyond quoting scripture and scholars, we can also examine logically: How does Islam’s view on violence compare to other perspectives? Is it reasonable and ethical?

Comparison with other worldviews: Every society and religion has had to deal with the question of war and peace:

Secular nations today have armies and laws of war. They permit violence in self-defense, in defense of allies, or to uphold justice (like stopping genocide). This is seen as morally acceptable, even necessary. Islam’s stance is very similar – defensive and just causes are allowed. On the other hand, murder, terrorism, or aggression are crimes in any society, and Islam labels them sins as well. So Islam is not an outlier; it aligns with universal principles of justice.
Christianity in the scriptures of the Bible has some very strict pacifist teachings attributed to Jesus (“turn the other cheek”), yet historically, Christian societies developed the “Just War Theory” (by Saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas) to allow fighting in certain conditions. Islam from the start provided a Just War theory in the Qur’an. The difference is, Islam did not glorify turning the other cheek to tyrants who would then slaughter the innocent – Islam said stand up to tyrants. Interestingly, one of the Ten Commandments in the Bible is “Thou shall not kill (murder).” The Qur’an carries the same message in 5:32 about killing one person being like killing all humanity. So the value of life is shared. In practice, medieval Christian kingdoms and Muslim kingdoms both fought wars, but often the Muslim rules of war were more advanced (for example, Muslim leaders like Sultan Salahuddin (Saladin) were known for chivalry and sparing civilians, whereas some of the Crusaders committed massacres – due, arguably, to different guidance or interpretation).
Other religions: The Bhagavad Gita (Hindu scripture) famously is set on a battlefield and encourages a warrior to do his duty in a just war. So Hinduism also recognizes fighting can be a duty for justice. Buddhism preaches non-violence, yet historically there have been Buddhist generals and even violence in Buddhist contexts (e.g., in certain conflicts in East Asia), showing that when faced with aggression, even those with pacifist ideals sometimes fought. The point being: Islam is not uniquely “violent” – it is actually moderate and sensible in this regard, acknowledging reality but putting ethical limits.

Balancing justice and mercy: Islamic ethics strive to balance two values: Justice (ʿadl) and Mercy (raḥmah). When faced with evil or violence, simply showing mercy (by not retaliating) may embolden the aggressor – this would be injustice to the victims. Conversely, being all about justice without mercy could lead to cruelty. Islam’s solution is nuanced:

In personal wrongs, Islam encourages forgiveness. If someone insults you or hurts your feelings, patience and forgiveness are better.
In societal wrongs (like oppression of a community), Islam leans toward justice – stopping the oppressor – because the harm is collective.
Even when justice (through force) is applied, Islam never loses sight of mercy. For instance, prisoners of war could be released as an act of mercy, or treated kindly to win their hearts. The goal is to stop the aggression, not to inflict pain for revenge’s sake.

Philosophically, one might argue: “Couldn’t Islam have been a purely pacifist religion, never allowing violence?” Think of it this way: if the Prophet and early Muslims had not defended themselves, the community would have been destroyed by the powerful Makkan army or other enemies. The religion of Islam might not have survived beyond its first years. More importantly, all those oppressed people (mentioned in 4:75) would have remained under tyranny. So a purely pacifist stance, while noble on the individual level (like some small sects have tried), is unfortunately impractical on a large scale – unless everyone in the world were peaceful. But as history and current events show, aggression often targets the weak. Therefore, Islam’s allowance of controlled force to check aggression is logically justified. It seeks to minimize overall violence: sometimes force is needed to stop greater force (for example, police must sometimes shoot an active shooter to save innocent lives).

Another argument: Islam teaching its followers to be brave in combat for a just cause (promising Paradise for those who sacrifice in just warfare) actually serves to protect the community and deter enemies. A community that is unwilling to ever fight back would be an easy target. Islam cultivated courage not for conquest, but so that Muslims could not be easily wiped out or bullied. This courage led Muslims to defend themselves successfully in battles like Badr, even when outnumbered, which deterred further attacks for a time.

Mercy even in victory: Historically, one strong philosophical proof of Islam not being violent by nature is how Muslims behaved when they had power. Take the example of Jerusalem: when the second Caliph `Umar entered Jerusalem, it was surrendered peacefully; he ensured security for the Christian population and famously refused to pray inside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (so that Muslims in the future wouldn’t convert it into a mosque out of imitation). This tolerance in victory contrasts with what was common at the time (often massacre or forced conversions by conquerors elsewhere). Similarly, the Muslim rule in Spain (Andalus) for centuries had Muslims, Christians, and Jews coexisting, with relative harmony compared to other parts of medieval Europe. These instances show that when not under threat, Muslims did not go on a rampage of violence – instead, they often created thriving, multicultural societies. Violence was generally limited to battlefields, not aimed at civilians.

What about instances of violence in Islamic history? It is true that Muslims, being human, didn’t always live up to ideals. There were civil wars, power struggles, etc. But those were political struggles, not teachings of Islam. It’s important to separate what Islam teaches versus what some Muslims might have done out of anger or ambition. Islam sets the ideal; Muslims are expected to strive towards it. When evaluating a philosophy or religion, we should look at its principles. By its principles, Islam’s stance on violence is ethically sound and similar to how most people would want to be treated (i.e., protected from harm, and that wrongdoers face justice).

In comparison to modern standards like the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit targeting civilians, ensure humane treatment of prisoners, etc., Islam’s teachings (from 1400 years ago) are remarkably similar. In fact, many historians note that Muslim conduct in war was ahead of its time in chivalry.

Therefore, philosophically, one can argue Islam’s guidance on violence is not only morally permissible, it’s morally necessary in cases – just as a surgeon sometimes must operate (causing pain) to remove a cancer (greater harm), Islam allows limited violence to remove injustice or prevent greater bloodshed. As soon as the “cancer” of oppression is removed, the “operation” (fighting) must stop.

Historical Context and Miracles

To further understand, let’s briefly revisit some historical examples and notable events which highlight Islam’s approach:

Early Meccan Period: For the first 13 years of Islam in Mecca, Muslims faced persecution: they were beaten, boycotted, and some even killed (like Sumayyah, the first martyr, a woman killed for her faith). During this entire period, Muslims did not retaliate with violence. They were instructed to bear with patience, pray, and avoid confrontation. This shows that from the start, Islam did not promote violence; rather it taught resilience and faith in the face of suffering. This phase establishes an important principle: when Muslims are a persecuted minority and have no strength, they are supposed to be patient and not resort to violence. (This is relevant even today for Muslim minorities in some places – their model is the Prophet’s patience in Mecca.)
Migration (Hijrah): The Muslims migrated to Medina to escape violence. This was a peaceful solution – leaving their homeland rather than fighting back. It was only after the enemy pursued them even in Medina that defensive fighting became necessary. The Battle of Badr was the first major armed conflict, and it was essentially forced upon the Muslims as the Meccan army marched to attack them. Despite being outnumbered about 3 to 1, the Muslims won. The Qur’an mentions that this victory was aided by angels – a miraculous help (Qur’an 3:123-125). This can be seen as a sign that God approved of the Muslims’ defense, as they were protecting truth against aggression. It’s called the “Day of Criterion” in the Qur’an, meaning the day truth was distinguished from falsehood. A miracle here was not just the angels, but how the battle’s outcome affected the course of history – it gave the small Muslim community survival and confidence.
Treaty of Hudaybiyyah: Perhaps one of the greatest examples of choosing peace over war was the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. In the 6th year after migration, the Prophet ﷺ set out with 1,400 unarmed Muslims to perform pilgrimage in Mecca. The Meccans (still hostile) stopped them outside. Tensions were high and war could have broken out. But the Prophet engaged in negotiations and accepted a peace treaty, even though some terms seemed unfavorable to the Muslims. For instance, the Muslims had to turn back without doing pilgrimage (to come next year instead), and if any Meccan wanted to join the Muslims, the Muslims had to return him (which upset some Muslims as unfair). Yet, the Prophet ﷺ accepted these terms for the sake of avoiding bloodshed and building trust. This treaty led to 10 years of nominal peace. During that time, Islam spread more through dawah (invitation) and example than it had through years of conflict – showing that Islam thrives in peace. The Qur’an called this treaty “a clear victory” (48:1), even though it wasn’t a military victory at all. The lesson: peace and dialogue can achieve what war cannot. Indeed, two years later, the Meccans violated the treaty by attacking an ally of the Muslims, which then led to the Muslims marching on Mecca with a large force. But because of the groundwork of Hudaybiyyah, Mecca surrendered almost without a fight, and as mentioned, the Prophet forgave the Meccans. Many of those Meccans then embraced Islam willingly, seeing the mercy and truth of the religion.
Conquest of Mecca (630 CE): This was a pivotal moment. The Muslims entered their former home city, now victorious. The pagans feared retribution. Instead, the Prophet ﷺ announced a general amnesty. Only a handful of war criminals were targeted for punishment, and even most of those were later pardoned when they sought forgiveness. The Kaaba, the holy sanctuary, was cleansed of idols but no person was harmed in that process. This peaceful victory is often cited as a miracle of the Prophet’s clemency. It transformed hearts – many Meccans who had been staunch enemies became loyal Muslims after tasting the Prophet’s forgiveness.
The Ridda Wars: After the Prophet’s death, some tribes in Arabia rebelled or refused to pay zakat (charity tax) and some false prophets arose. The Caliph Abu Bakr had to deal with this in what’s known as the Ridda (apostasy) wars. While unfortunate, these were political fights to unify the state, not to force religion (since those tribes still claimed to be Muslim but didn’t want to follow the law). Abu Bakr’s resolve to fight them was to prevent the young Muslim nation from fragmenting and falling into chaos or reverting to pre-Islamic injustice. Again, a measure of force to preserve a greater peace and justice. Once unity was restored, energy went outward.
Early Expansions: In the decades after, the Muslims did engage the two superpowers of the time – the Byzantine and Sassanid Empires. History records that often the Muslim armies were welcomed by local populations (like in Syria or Egypt) who were oppressed by their rulers, or they surrendered quickly. Why? Because the Muslims had a reputation (by then) of relative justice and leniency compared to the Byzantines or Persians. For example, when Jerusalem was taken, it was done with a treaty, not a massacre. In Egypt, the Coptic Christians faced less harassment under Muslim rule than they did under the Byzantines who considered them heretics. So, while these were still conquests (and thus involve warfare), they were not wanton destruction. Many consider it a kind of miracle how rapidly Islam spread, but largely it spread because of its message and the comparatively better treatment under Islamic law, not by force conversion. In fact, centuries into Muslim rule, large portions of the population in places like Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and later India remained non-Muslim by choice (and some remain even today). This is evidence that Islamic rule did not “kill or convert everyone” – life generally continued normally for civilians after the initial wars of conquest.
Chivalry of Saladin: A famous later example often brought up is Salahuddin Ayyubi (Saladin) in the Crusades. When he recaptured Jerusalem from the Crusaders in 1187, he notably spared the population. This was in stark contrast to the Crusaders’ capture of Jerusalem in 1099, where they massacred Muslim and Jewish inhabitants. Saladin’s behavior was guided by Islamic ethics (and specifically he admired the Prophet’s example in Mecca). He even allowed Christians to leave safely or stay with freedom, and he treated prisoners with kindness. European histories marveled at his mercy. This kind of conduct reflects on Islam’s influence — leaders who truly followed the Prophet’s model tended to be more merciful and just.
Miraculous conversions through character, not sword: There are many stories where Islam spread without any fighting at all – which counters the “promotes violence” idea strongly. For example, Indonesia, the largest Muslim country today, was converted through trade and Sufi missionaries, not by any army. Similarly, large parts of West Africa embraced Islam through traders and teachers, peacefully. These cases show the beauty of Islam’s teachings attracting people, with zero violence involved. A religion that “promoted violence” would not win hearts in such a manner.

One could say the real “miracle” of Islam regarding violence is how it transformed brutal warring tribes into a society with laws and ethics. Pre-Islamic Arabs were known for feuds and raiding. After Islam, many of those same people became champions of mercy and justice. The Qur’an and Prophet instilled empathy even for one’s enemy at times. For instance, an enemy warrior, Thumamah ibn Uthal, was captured and brought to the Prophet’s mosque. The Prophet treated him well, let him witness Muslims up close, and then released him with no ransom. Thumamah was so moved by this kindness that he embraced Islam, saying “O Muhammad, there was no face on earth more hated to me than yours, now it is the dearest to me...” This kind of change of heart happened often. Islam conquered hearts, not just lands. That is the true miracle – a religion accused of violence actually spread largely through its moral force and the good conduct of its followers.

Moving Forward (Conclusion)

In conclusion, Islam does not promote violence – it promotes peace and justice. However, Islam is realistic: it permits fighting only to the extent necessary to confront injustice or defend the community. The Qur’an and Hadith set very high standards of ethics in warfare, which Muslims are bound to follow. Far from being a violent ideology, Islam seeks to minimize violence: by preventing oppression, by deterring aggressors, and by encouraging peace at every possible turn.

For Muslims today, what do these teachings mean?

It means that if we truly follow our religion, we must reject all forms of unjust violence. Terrorism, vigilantism, targeting innocent people – these have no place in Islam and should be condemned unequivocally. Unfortunately, in every community or nation, some fringe elements twist teachings to justify wrongdoing. Our responsibility is to educate ourselves and others about the true teachings. The vast majority of Muslims worldwide live peacefully and abide by the law of the land, as our faith instructs us to. The negative actions of extremists violate the Qur’an and Prophetic example we have discussed. As the Prophet ﷺ said, “Beware of extremism in religion, for it destroyed those before you.” We should be balanced and compassionate.

Muslims should also take pride in our scripture’s emphasis on mercy and justice. At the same time, we must be prepared to clarify misconceptions. For example, if someone quotes a verse like 9:5 to claim “your religion says to kill all non-Muslims,” we should calmly explain the context and quote the other verses that show the full picture. Context is key – one cannot take one line and ignore the rest, just as one wouldn’t judge a whole book by a single paragraph taken out of context.

In today’s world, the concept of jihad is often misunderstood. We should remember and remind others that “jihad” primarily means striving for good. That could be spiritual struggle (like overcoming one’s ego, often called jihad an-nafs), or intellectual struggle (spreading truth, fighting ignorance), or social struggle (helping the poor, enjoining good). The armed jihad is a smaller subset meant to protect the rights of the oppressed. Modern Islamic scholars often call it the “lesser jihad” and the inner spiritual struggle the “greater jihad” (based on a famous saying). Whether or not that specific saying is authentic, the concept holds true: The default in Islam is not violence; it’s personal betterment and societal betterment.

For non-Muslim readers, it’s important to differentiate between the teachings of Islam and the actions of certain political groups or historical empires. Violence committed by some Muslims does not define Islam, just as violence by people of other faiths doesn’t define their faiths. One should judge a religion by its scriptures and by the behavior of its exemplars (like the Prophet and his closest followers), not by those who clearly stray from its principles.

How should Muslims move forward with these teachings? We should:

Live by those principles: be people who uphold peace and justice in our own lives. That means being good neighbors, standing against bullying or oppression in our communities (through legal and peaceful means), and not transgressing against anyone.
Educate the youth: Young Muslims should be taught the balanced view of jihad and justice. That way they won’t fall prey to extremist ideologies that cherry-pick verses. They should learn that our Prophet ﷺ was courageous but also forgiving, and that true bravery often lies in restraint, not in aggression.
Engage in positive dialogue: When others have fears or misconceptions, respond with patience and knowledge. The Qur’an says to “argue in a way that is best” (16:125) – with wisdom and good manners.
Be active in promoting justice: This could mean supporting policies that reduce war and conflict, aiding refugees and victims of war (regardless of their religion), and so on. The Prophet taught us to care for all humanity. One hadith says, “All creatures are God’s dependents, and the most beloved to God is the one who is kind to His dependents.”
Counter hate with goodness: The Qur’an beautifully states, “Good and evil are not equal. Repel evil with what is better, and you may see that the one between whom and you is enmity will become as a close friend.” (41:34). This means Muslims should respond to hostility not with more hostility, but with patience, goodness, and fairness – often this transforms enemies into friends.

Today, Muslims often find themselves under scrutiny. By embodying the true teachings – being peaceful, but standing firm for justice – we can show by example what Islam really stands for. For instance, Muslims in Western countries can serve society as law-abiding, contributing citizens, and also speak out against injustices like racism, poverty, or overseas conflicts through democratic means. Both are part of our duty.

Media narratives sometimes paint Islam as inherently violent. We have to change the narrative by sharing knowledge: articles like this, interfaith initiatives, and highlighting Muslim heroes of peace (there are many, from Nobel Peace laureates to everyday individuals saving lives). Remember, ignorance breeds fear. Education and personal interaction break down those fears.

Finally, it’s crucial to remember that peace is the norm in Islam. The vision of Islam is a world where people can live with dignity, freedom of belief, and security. The greetings of Muslims, the end of our prayers (“peace be upon you”), and our ultimate hope (entering Paradise, described as the “abode of peace”) all center on peace. The occasional use of force is like a surgeon’s knife – regrettable but sometimes necessary to save the patient. Once healed, the goal is a peaceful healthy society.

Let us move forward with the Prophet’s example as our guide: showing mercy wherever possible, standing up to oppression wherever necessary, and always preferring reconciliation over conflict. In doing so, we continue the mission of presenting the truth and beauty of Islam to the world through both word and deed.