religions Article Article “Whoever“Whoever HarmsHarms aa DhimmDhimmı¯ī II ShallShall BeBe HisHis FoeFoe onon thethe DayDay of of Judgment”: Judgment”: An An Investigation Investigation into into an an Authentic Prophetic Tradition andand ItsIts OriginsOrigins fromfrom thethe Covenants Covenants Ahmed El-Wakil Ahmed El-Wakil College of Islamic Studies, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, P.O. Box 34110 Doha, Qatar; [email protected] of Islamic Studies, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, P.O. Box 34110 Doha, Qatar; [email protected] Received: 6 June 2019; Accepted: 9 August 2019; Published: 5 September 2019 Received: 6 June 2019; Accepted: 9 August 2019; Published: 5 September 2019 Abstract: The ḥadīth, “whoever harms a dhimmī I shall be his foe on the Day of Judgment’, can be foundAbstract: as anThe endh. adclause¯ıth, “whoeverto covenants harms which a dhimmthe Prophet¯ı I shall Muḥ beammad his foe issued on the to Day Christian, of Judgment’, Jewish, and can Magianbe found communities. as an end clause As it tois covenantshighly unlikely which for the different Prophet non-Muslim Muh. ammad communities issued to Christian, to have Jewish,forged thisand Prophetic Magian communities. statement at As the it isend highly of their unlikely respective for di ffdocuments,erent non-Muslim this paper communities argues that to havethis utteranceforged this is Propheticauthentic statementand can be at confidently the end of their traced respective back to documents,the Prophet. this This paper paper argues examines that thisthe occurrenceutterance is of authentic this statement and can as bea ḥ confidentlyadīth in the tracedIslamic back literature to the and Prophet. notes how This it paper was dismissed examines theby scholarsoccurrence of tradition of this statement who only as accepted a h. ad¯ıth inone the of Islamicits variants. literature The andpaper notes then how compares it was dismissedthe rights grantedby scholars to non-Muslims of tradition who in the only covenants accepted to one those of itsconveyed variants. in Thea number paper thenof ḥad comparesīths and thenotes rights the discrepanciesgranted to non-Muslims between early in theIslam’s covenants official to docume those conveyednts and the in alegal number injunctions of h. ad ¯ıthsfound and in notes Muslim the tradition.discrepancies It argues between that earlythe ḥad Islam’sīths on o ffithecial rights documents of non-Muslims and the legaloftentimes injunctions reflect found legal maxims in Muslim of scholarstradition. living It argues in the that ‘Abbas the h. adīd ¯ıthsera onand the that rights these of non-Muslimswere back-projected oftentimes to the reflect Prophet legal and maxims his Companionsof scholars living using in thefictitious ‘Abbas isn¯ıdā erads. andFinally, that thesethis werepaper back-projected concludes by to therecommending Prophet and the his incorporationCompanions using of the fictitious Prophet’s isn ads.¯official Finally, decrees, this paperwhich concludes includes the byrecommending covenants, within the incorporationthe fabric of Islamicof the Prophet’s law. official decrees, which includes the covenants, within the fabric of Islamic law. Keywords:Keywords: Prophet;Prophet; Muhammad; Muhammad; Islam; Islam; covenant; covenant; authenticity; authenticity; dhimmi; dhimmi; hadith 1.1. Introduction Introduction MuhammadMuhammad Hamidullah’s Hamidullah’s referential referential work work MajmMajmūu¯ʿatat al-Wath al-Wathāa¯ʾiqiq al-Siy al-Siyāasiyya¯siyya li-l- ʿahdahd al-Nabaw ī¯ı wa-l-Khilwa-l-Khilāafat¯fat al-R al-Rāashida¯shida broughtbrought together together all all the the letters letters and and po politicallitical treaties treaties of of the the Prophet Prophet and and the the RightlyRightly Guided Guided Caliphs Caliphs in in one volume spanning ju justst over 750 pages.pages. The The sheer magnanimity of of traditionstraditions reporting reporting how how official official decrees decrees were were issued issued during during the the rise rise of of Islam Islam cannot cannot all all be be based based on on fabrication.fabrication. As As a a matter matter of of fact, fact, the the authenticity authenticity of of the the ConstitutionConstitution of of Mad Madī¯ınana revealsreveals how how the the Prophet Prophet beganbegan writing writing political political decrees decrees early on and and that that this this practice practice was was continued continued by by his his Companions Companions after after hishis death. death. In In an an attempt attempt to to shed shed light light on on the the nature nature of of these these official official decrees decrees and and the the motivation motivation behind behind them,them, this this paper paper adopts adopts an an inter-textual inter-textual examinatio examinationn of of what what Muslim Muslim and and non-Muslim non-Muslim sources sources report report aboutabout them. them. AsAs Jewish,Jewish, Samaritan, Samaritan, Christian, Christian, and Magiand traditionsMagi traditions all unanimously all unanimously agree that theiragree communities that their communitiesreceived a covenant received of protectiona covenant from of theprotection Prophet fr guaranteeingom the Prophet their safetyguaranteeing and religious their liberty,safety theirand religiousclaims cannot liberty, be their disregarded claims cannot without be a disregarded careful investigation. without a careful The question investigation. that therefore The question arises is that not thereforewhether thearises Prophet is not issued whether offi cialthe decrees,Prophet forissued this official should decrees, be regarded for this as historical should be fact, regarded but rather as historicalwhere are fact, these but offi rathercial decrees where now,are these and moreofficial importantly, decrees now, in theand absence more importantly, of the originals, in the what absence was oftheir the content?originals, what was their content? PastPast scholarship scholarship on on the the covenants covenants looked looked at at these these in in silos, silos, leading leading scholars scholars to to either either reject reject their their authenticityauthenticity or or at at best express skepticism over th theireir provenance. Ever Ever since since the the publication of of John Religions 2019, 10, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/religions Religions 2019, 10, 516; doi:10.3390/rel10090516 www.mdpi.com/journal/religions Religions 2019, 10, 516 2 of 33 Andrew Morrow’s book The Covenants of the Prophet Muh. ammad with the Christians of the World, there has been renewed interest in these documents. The obvious “mistakes” which led to the rejection of the covenants, such as their early dating, the names of witnesses, and the scribe’s name, have all proved to be consistent anachronisms in texts inherited by non-Muslim communities for which there is no evidence of cross-communal borrowing or influence. Analysis of these textual parallelisms have, thus, led to a counterintuitive conclusion, namely, that the covenants are authentic and, on the whole, textually accurate but that they were deliberately suppressed or interpolated in Muslim sources.1 Though one is not here arguing that all letters and official decrees of the Prophet and the early Caliphs that exist in Muslim tradition are edited versions of the originals, one nevertheless cannot negate the possibility of a policy having developed around the 2nd/8th century to undermine and reverse the rights that were initially granted to non-Muslim communities. 2. A Mutawatir¯ Dictum in the Covenants The term dhimm¯ı in Arabic means “a protected person” or a “person who has been granted a pact of protection” and usually refers to a non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim nation. An analysis of the covenants reveals that the tradition “whoever harms a dhimm¯ı I shall be his foe on the Day of Judgment” can be found at the end of a number of covenants in the possession of different non-Muslim communities. Considering that a mutawatir¯ report can briefly be defined as one which has been transmitted by a large enough number of people who could not have possibly colluded or agreed to fabricate it,2 any fair-minded observer would certainly consider it very peculiar for different and geographically dispersed non-Muslim communities to have come together and conspired to forge documents which would have included this clause at the end of them on the authority of the Prophet. When we complement this observation with internal and external evidence adjudicating the authenticity of the covenants, it renders the allegation of forgery highly unlikely. The first Prophetic covenant to incorporate this clause was from a manuscript recorded by Michel Gabriel in his book Tar¯ ¯ıkh al-Kan¯ısa al-An.takiyya¯ al-Suryaniyya¯ al-Mar¯ uniyya,¯ first published in 1899 CE.3 Another copy of the exact same covenant was discovered by a French officer who participated in Napoleon Bonaparte’s expedition to Egypt and which was published in Jeanne Aubert’s Le Serment du Prophète in 1938 CE.4 The Gabriel recension reads that “it was written to all Christians and to all the places where Christians reside.”5 The text of the Aubert recension is somewhat faint, but appears to read that it was addressed “to all Jacobite Christians and all places [which they reside] (li-ka¯ffat 6 al-nas.ar¯ a¯ al-ya‘aqib¯ li-sa’ir¯ al-amakin).”¯ The covenant was scribed by ‘Al¯ı b. Ab¯ı T. alib¯ on 11 Muh. arram 2 AH7 and its last clause reads: “Whoever afterwards commits an injustice towards a protected person by breaking or rejecting the covenant, I shall be his foe on the Day of Judgment from among all the Believers and the Muslims.” “wa man z.alama ba‘d dhalika dhimm¯ıyyan wa naqad. a al-‘ahd wa rafad. ahu kuntu khas.mahu yawm al-qiyama¯ min jam¯ı‘ al-mu’min¯ ¯ın wa al-muslim¯ın ka¯ffatan.” 8 1 For recent scholarship on the covenants see (Morrow 2013, 2017). Also see (El-Wakil 2016, 2017). 2 For a contemporary definition rooted in classical Muslim orthodoxy, see (Keller and al-Misri 1997), w48.2.