The Sanctification of Violence

Pre-Islamic Arabia, often termed the Jahiliyya (Age of Ignorance) by Islamic sources, was a harsh, tribal society shaped by scarcity, vendettas, and survival. Violence was endemic, driven by tribal feuds, resource competition, and honor-based conflicts. Raids (ghazw) were common, as tribes sought to secure wealth or assert dominance. Yet, even in this unforgiving environment, violence operated within a traditional framework governed by unwritten codes of conduct.

Killing was not indiscriminate. Innocents, those uninvolved in a feud, such as women, children, or neutral parties like merchants, were generally spared, as targeting them could escalate conflicts and invite retribution. Hospitality and alliances were sacred; a guest or a trading partner was protected under tribal norms. Breaching these norms was a grave offense, as it undermined the fragile trust that sustained trade and coexistence in the desert. Tribal violence, while brutal, was pragmatic and contained. Retaliation followed a logic of proportionality, and feuds could be resolved through blood money (diya) or mediation. This framework, though far from humane by modern standards, imposed limits on violence, ensuring it served specific social or economic ends rather than ideological ones.

Islam’s Reframing of Violence

The advent of Islam fundamentally altered this landscape. Muhammad’s teachings introduced a monotheistic worldview that transcended tribal affiliations, unifying believers under a single divine authority. With this shift came a redefinition of violence: no longer a pragmatic act bound by tribal codes, it became a sacred duty, an expression of obedience to Allah and His Prophet. The story of Mahisa and Hawisa illustrates this transformation vividly.

There were two brothers, one named Mahisa and the other Hawisa, both living during the time of Muhammad. Mahisa had already converted to Islam. His brother Hawisa had not. According to one of the most authoritative early Islamic sources, Ibn Hisham, the Prophet Muhammad reportedly said:

"Whoever you find among the Jews, kill him."

In response, Mahisa sought out the Jewish merchant Ibn Sabina, killed him, and looted his wealth. Outraged, Hawisa, still a non-Muslim, grabbed his brother and shouted at him:

"You killed him after all the good he has done for us?"

But Mahisa responded:

"The Prophet commanded me to kill him. I swear by Allah, if he had ordered me to kill you, I would have done it."

Shocked by this level of obedience, Hawisa replied:

"Is this the kind of religion that brings such commitment?"
And then he converted to Islam.

When Muhammad commanded, “Whoever you find among the Jews, kill him,” he issued a directive that bypassed tribal norms. Ibn Sabina’s murder was not motivated by personal enmity, tribal rivalry, or economic gain, it was an act of religious obedience. Mahisa’s justification, “The Prophet commanded me to kill him”, reveals a new moral paradigm where divine authority supersedes human relationships, gratitude, or ethical restraint. The killing of a civilian, a merchant known for his kindness, was reframed as a virtuous act, a proof of faith. Hawisa’s subsequent conversion, prompted by awe at Mahisa’s commitment, underscores the psychological power of this reframing: violence became a pathway to spiritual legitimacy.