Shaheed or Suicide? Martyr or Murderer?

[faqir]

Shahid or Suicide – Martyr or Murderer?
The Muslims’ Rules of Engagement


Both the Qur’an1 and the hadith2 make it clear that it is haram (forbidden) either to murder
someone or to commit suicide, both of which will take you to the Fire:

And do not kill yourselves,
Allah is Most Merciful to you.
As for anyone who does that out of enmity and wrongdoing,
We will roast him in a Fire.
That is an easy matter for Allah.
(Qur’an : 4. 29-30)

And :

As for anyone who kills a mumin3 deliberately,
his repayment is Hell,
remaining in it timelessly, for ever.
Allah is angry with him and has cursed him,
and has prepared for him a terrible punishment.
(Qur’an : 4. 92)

And :

So We decreed for the tribe of Israel
that if someone kills another person –
unless it is in retaliation for someone else
or for causing corruption in the earth –
it is as if he had murdered all mankind.
And if anyone gives life to another person,
it is as if he had given life to all mankind.
Our Messengers came to them with Clear Signs
but even after that many of them
committed outrages in the earth.
(Qur’an : 5. 32)


Ibn Mas‘ud related that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, said, “The blood of a Muslim may not be legally spilt
other than in one of three situations: the married person who commits
adultery; a life for a life; and one who forsakes his deen4 and abandons
the community.” (Al-Bukhari).


As in the case of most legal systems, the Shari‘a 5 of Islam permits Muslims to fight in self-
defence if they are attacked – but even in times of war, it is forbidden to kill non-combat-
ants, especially women and children and old men:


Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi from Ibn Umar that the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, saw the
corpse of a woman who had been slain in one of the raids, and he disap-
proved of it and forbade the killing of women and children.

2
Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Sa’id that Abu Bakr as-
Siddiq was sending armies to ash-Sham. He went for a walk with Yazid
ibn Abi Sufyan who was the commander of one of the battalions. It is
claimed that Yazid said to Abu Bakr, “Will you ride or shall I get down?”
Abu Bakr said, “I will not ride and you will not get down. I intend these
steps of mine to be in the way of Allah.”

Then Abu Bakr advised Yazid, “You will find a people who claim to
have totally given themselves to Allah. Leave them to what they claim to
have given themselves. You will find a people who have shaved the mid-
dle of their heads; strike what they have shaved with the sword.”
“I advise you ten things: Do not kill women or children or an aged,
infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an
inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do
not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and
do not be cowardly.”


Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Umar ibn Abd
al-Aziz wrote to one of his governors, “It has been passed down to us
that when the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him
peace, sent out a raiding party, he would say to them, ‘Make your raids
in the name of Allah in the way of Allah. Fight whoever denies Allah.
Do not steal from the booty, and do not act treacherously. Do not muti-
late and do not kill children.’ Say the same to your armies and raiding
parties, Allah willing. Peace be upon you.” (Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik:
21.3.9-11)


As regards suicide, the hadith not only confirm that it is haram to commit suicide and that
the punishment for it is to repeatedly commit the same act in the Fire without ever dying,
forever – but also clearly confirm that it is forbidden to commit suicide even in war:


Narrated Sahl bin Sad As-Sa’idi: “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah
bless him and grant him peace, and the kafirun 6 faced each other and
started fighting. When the Messenger of Allah returned to his camp and
when the kafirun returned to their camp, someone talked about a man
amongst the companions of the Messenger of Allah who had been pur-
suing and killing with his sword any kafir fleeing alone. He said, ‘No-
one fought as hard today as that man.’ The Messenger of Allah said,
‘Truly, he is one of the people of the Fire.’ A man among the people said,
‘I shall follow him (to see what he does).’ So he followed him, and wher-
ever he stood, he would stand with him, and wherever he ran, he would
run with him.

“Then the (brave) man was wounded seriously and decided to bring
about his own death quickly. He slanted the blade of the sword in the
ground directing its sharp end towards his chest between his two breasts.
Then he leaned on the sword and killed himself. The other man came to
the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and
said, ‘I testify that you are the Messenger of Allah.’ The Prophet asked,
‘What happened?’ He replied, ‘(It is about) the man whom you de-
scribed as being one of the people of the Fire. The people were greatly
surprised at what you said, and so I said, “I will find out his reality for
you.” So, I followed him and watched him. He was severely wounded,
and hastened to die by slanting the blade of his sword in the ground and
directing its sharp end towards his chest between his two breasts. Then
he leant on his sword and killed himself.’

“Then the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace,
said, ‘A man may seem to the people as if he were practising the deeds of
the people of Paradise while in fact he is from the people of the Fire, and
another may seem to the people as if he were practising the deeds of the
people of Hell, while in fact he is from the people of the Garden.’”

(Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 147).


And :

Narrated Abu Huraira: “We were in the company of the Messenger of
Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in a ghazwa, 7 and he
remarked about a man who claimed to be a Muslim, saying, ‘This man
is one of the people of the Fire.’ When the battle started, the man fought
fiercely until he was wounded. Somebody said, ‘O Messenger of Allah,
the man whom you described as being one of the people of the Fire
fought fiercely today and died.’ The Prophet, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, replied, ‘He will go to the Fire.’ Some of the people
were on the point of doubting (the truth of what the Prophet had said)
and while they were in this state, someone came and said that the man
was still alive but severely wounded. When night fell, the man lost pa-
tience and committed suicide. The Prophet was informed of this and
said, ‘Allah is Greater! I testify that I am the Messenger of Allah and His
slave.’ Then he ordered Bilal to announce to the people: ‘No-one will
enter Paradise unless he is a Muslim, and Allah can support this deen (of
Islam) even with a disobedient man.’” (Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 4, Book
52, Number 297).

And :

Narrated Jundub: “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, said, ‘Amongst the nations before you there was a man
who received a wound, and growing impatient (because of the pain), he
took a knife and cut his wrist with it and the blood did not stop flowing
until he died. Allah said, “My Slave hurried to bring death upon himself
so I have forbidden him the Garden.”’” (Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 4,
Book 56, Number 669).


The verses of Qur’an and hadith quoted above are not the only ones on the subject, but in
my opinion they summarise what the Shari‘a has to say about killing another human being
or committing suicide, whether in peace time or during war.


I cannot see, in the light of these verses of Qur’an and hadith,how any well-informed
Muslim can believe that blowing him or her self up and killing and maiming anyone in the
vicinity will take him or her to the Garden. Historically only certain members of the Ismaili
sect have held this kind of view – and they are not accepted as being Muslims or as repre-
senting Islam by the main body of Muslims. These acts have nothing to do with the Sunna.
8

I can understand how someone whose home and family and friends have been annihilated
by laser precision bomb or rocket attacks may be driven in anger to carry out such a
nihilistic act against civilian targets – using the rationale, “If they are killing our families,
we will kill their families,” – but both indiscriminate bombing (whether by land, sea or
air) and suicide bombing remain nevertheless unacceptable from a balanced Islamic per-
spective and neither course of action can be condoned. They have nothing to do with the
Sunna. They cannot possibly have positive consequences either in this world or in the next.

In the Palestinian conflict, both sides are blowing each other up, each claiming that it is
retaliation – and ascertaining at this stage who committed the first act of aggression (pos-
sibly the massacre of some 250 civilian inhabitants, mostly women and children, of Deir
Yaseen by the Stern Gang and Irgun Zvai Leumi terrorists on the 9th April 1948) will not
in itself halt this chain reaction which appears to be out of control and leading ineluctably
to fulfilment of the prophecies in chapters 38 and 39 of Ezekiel.

It is true that the shahid, the martyr who dies in the way of Allah, is promised many
rewards in the next life, both in the Qur’an and in the hadith, but in my opinion anyone
who murders an innocent bystander or non-combatant or commits suicide cannot die as
a shahid. It is also true that there is more than one kind of martyr:


Yahya related to me from Malik from Sumayy, the mawla of Abu Bakr
ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahman from Abu Salih from Abu Hurayra that the Messen-
ger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said ... “Martyrs
are five: the one killed by a plague, the one killed by a disease of the
belly, the one who drowns, the one killed by a collapsing building, and
the martyr in the path of Allah.” (Al-Muwatta’ of Imam Malik : 8.2.6)







Ahmad Thomson

Ahmad Thomson is a practising barrister and author, whose more recent works include
The Last Prophet, The Islamic Will, The Difficult Journey, The Way Back, Making History
and the revised editions of Jesus, Prophet of Islam, Blood on the Cross (in two parts: For
Christ’s Sake and Islam in Andalus), and Dajjal – the AntiChrist.


Notes
:
1Qur’an : the ‘Recitation’, the last Revelation from Allah to mankind and the jinn before
the end of the world, revealed to the Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant
him peace, through the angel Jibril, over a period of twenty-three years (beginning in 610
and ending in 632), the first thirteen of which were spent in Makka and the last ten of
which were spent in Madina. The Qur‘an amends, encompasses, expands, surpasses and
abrogates all the earlier revelations revealed to the earlier Messengers, peace be on all of
them. The Qur‘an is by far the greatest of all the miracles given to the Prophet Muhammad
by Allah, for he was illiterate and could neither read nor write. The Qur‘an is the uncreated
word of Allah. The Qur‘an still exists today exactly as it was originally revealed, without
any alteration or change or addition or deletion. Whoever recites the Qur‘an with courtesy
and sincerity receives knowledge and wisdom, for it is the well of wisdom in this age.

2 hadith : reported speech of the Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant
him peace.


3 mumin : a mumin (the plural is muminun) is someone who possesses iman; iman is
belief, faith, acceptance in the heart of Allah and His Messenger. Iman consists of believing
in Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers, the Last Day, the Garden and the Fire,
and that everything, both the good and the bad, is by the decree of Allah.

4 deen : means life transaction, the way you live and behave towards Allah, submission
and obedience to a particular system of rules and practices. Literally it means the debt or
exchange situation between two parties, in this usage the Creator and the created, or as
some say between the conditioned and the unconditioned, the limited and the limitless, or
the many and the One. Allah says in the Qur‘an that surely the deen with Allah is Islam.

5 shari‘a : lit. road, the legal modality of a people based on the Revelation of their Prophet.
The final Shari‘a is that of Islam. Islam can be defined briefly as: ‘submission to the will of
Allah, the way of life embodied by all of the Prophets, given its final form in the guidance
brought by the Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.’
Shaykh ‘Abd’al-Qadir as-Sufi writes, ‘It is the behaviour modality of a people based on
the revelation of their Prophet. The last Shari‘a in history has proved to be that of Islam.
Its social modality abrogates all previous shara’i e.g. Navaho, Judaic, Vedic, Buddhic, etc.
These shara’i however, continue until the arrival and confrontation takes place in that culture with the final and
thus superior Shari‘a – Islam. It is, being the last, therefore the easiest to follow, for it is ap-
plicable to the whole human race wherever they are.’ (Qur‘anic Tawhid. Diwan Press. 1981).

6 kafirun : the plural of kafir, disbelievers. The kafiris the one who denies the Existence
of Allah and who rejects His Prophets and Messengers, and who accordingly has no peace
or trust in this life, and a place in the Fire in the next life. Shaykh ‘Abd’al-Qadir as-Sufi
writes, ‘Kufr means to cover up reality: kafir is one who does so. The kafir is the opposite of
the mumin. The point is that everyone knows ‘how it is’ – only it suits some people to deny
it and pretend it is otherwise, to behave as if we were going to be here for ever. This is called
kufr. The condition of the kafir is therefore one of neurosis, because of his inner knowing.
He ‘bites his hand in rage’ but will not give in to his inevitable oncoming death.’ (Qur‘anic
Tawhid. Diwan Press. 1981).

7 ghazwa : a raid, a military expedition, especially a desert raid.

8 sunna : the customary practice of a person or group of people. It has come to refer
almost exclusively to the practice of the Messenger of Allah and of the first generation of
Muslims.


[Definitions of Arabic terminology are from A Glossary of Islamic Terms by Aisha Bewley,
(Ta-Ha Publishers, London, 1998). Quotations from the Qur’an are from THE NOBLE QUR’AN
– a New Rendering of its Meaning in English by Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley, (Bookwork,
Norwich, 1999). Quotations of hadith are from Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik translated by
Aisha Bewley and Yaqub Johnson (Diwan Press, Norwich, 1982) and the Sahih of Imam
Al-Bukhari translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan (Madina University Press, 1971).]

[Azzam]

We must be very careful when analysing the texts and trying to make connections.

Easily people can provide perceived convincing but in reality the situation is different.

The ahadith mentioned are too general to be used to derive staunch rulings. Whereas there are other ahadith which would indicate the opposite.

This issue has been played out a lot. For the least part we must agree its a difference of opinion. The people who would indulge in such tactics cannot be described as haram because they know the situation being on the field better than cheerleaders (actually not even that, more like bystanders) on the sidelines.

We must also distinguish between suicide in its origin and restrictive case and martyrdom tactics which utilize methods of self sacrifice. The two are quite different.

Suicide in its origin and restricted to its nature as alone or unrelated to other situations except the causes of such actions is no doubtedly haram. Because its a denial of the Qadar of Allah which in itself is an act of kufr.

However, to attack the enemy using such methodology is not haram and at the least is a matter that is disagreed upon.

[saq333]

I think its simply idiotic to kill yourslef along with your enemies.

I mean, if its legal jihad,
why not keep yourself alive?

surely things can be done without killing yourself.

its just a very supid, illogical military tactic.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

<<We must also distinguish between suicide in its origin and restrictive case and martyrdom tactics which utilize methods of self sacrifice. The two are quite different.>>

how are they different? in suicide, one kills himself willingly. in 'self-sacrifice' one kills himself willingly. please explain - am i missing something?

[Usman]

http://img126.exs.cx/img126/7598/00-Title.jpg

I've been discussing this topic on various other forums. Actually, it's easy for us to sit on our comfy couches, and debate on these issues, but there are many situations, when to bring harm to the greater evil, there are permissibilities of a smaller evil. It depends upon the situation.

I'll try to put this book online in a couple of weeks, (needs scanning 300+ pages). It's basically written in Urdu, extremely useful for the study.

However, let me tell the brothers and sisters one thing. Mujahideen do not go about obtaining Fatawa for permissibility of Jihad or other forms. They know what's the best step to be taken. Moreover, there are various scholars from around the world of the highest eminent and Taqwa, who have said that martyrdom operations are permissible, especially in Palestine,Iraq and Afghanistan.

wasSalaam,
Usman

[faqir]

Asalamu alaykum,

The lesser of two evils is still evil, no?

Anyways, I am yet to come across any narration in any fatwa from the scholars where the deliberate taking of one's own life in order to attack an enemy is mentioned....

If anyone has access to such a narration please post it.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

i agree it is a complex topic. i have seen many justifications for it, but not really convinced by any.

the qa'ida (principle) of lesser of the two evils has been used as a defence of these type of operations. but this is not the only one. among others are:

1. overriding necessity (darura) - e.g. eating pork when one is starving

however there are even limitations in this aswell - for example - if you are starving and there is no food, you are NOT permitted to kill the another person and eat him! so not necessarily all the haram becomes halal.

this is complex, because there are times when need can become necessity - these are all deep fiqh issues...

2. the intention of the mujahid.

this is false because intention can never transform the permissibilty of an action, if that action is definitely associated with the intention.

3. evidences of sahaba and predecessors throwing themselves into the enemy.

the critical difference here is that the enemy kills the mujahid, not one's own bomb that the mujahid detonates. i have seen fuqaha relate that the one who kills himself by accident in battle is not sinful - so what of the one who does it deliberately?

4. lesser of the two evils.

i find this problematic, because the surely this is the greater evil because it invites utter destruction and humiliation of for example the palestinian communities... what is a greater evil than that. an important priniciple in fiqh is consideration of the consequences of one's actions and there are examples of the prophet acting in this way. surely the ones who do this should consider this also. secondly, in jihad and battle, the actions and strategy employed must have or hope to have some benefit for Islam and the Muslims - surely the ones who do this can see that there is no benefit from such actions especially in Palestine where the Israeli's continue their utter destruction (at the same time using the actions of young palestinians as a justification for their actions - inviting sympathy from all corners). They want these type of operations to continue because it justifies complete destruction of the palestinian cause, and further settlements.

i have not seen credible evidence from anyone on this. Shaykh AbdalQadir and Shaykh AbdalHakim Murad were correct to say this was borrowed from the Ismaili assassins.

[Azzam]

how are they different? in suicide, one kills himself willingly. in 'self-sacrifice' one kills himself willingly. please explain - am i missing something?

They are very different. This is a basic idea, people dont want to agree with something so thats their fault.

In suicide as I said earlier, there is a denial of the Qadr of Allah. This is an act of kufr. For example, one is displeased with the situation one is in and instead of facing reality and having sabr, he kills himself because he has chosen not to deal with the situation he is in. Thus he denied the Qadr of Allah which in fact as we know is among the arkaanul iman (Pillars of Faith).

Such a person is totally different than one who volunteers his life to make an attack on the enemy. In any case anyone who goes for war, is in fact pledging his life to die if the opportunity comes. But for an operation of martyrdom, one pledges himself to die within the tactic, that he may provide some benefit for the Mujahideen and the Muslims.

For example, he may be a source of motivation, or may damage the kuffar severly. In this case benefit was brought about. Such a person cannot be considered a faasiq doomed to hell. We should watch what we say lest we will become that which we fear.

So the ulema who are against the suicide bombing as called, should be martyrdom tactics or operations argued that if no perceived benefit is evident such tactics should not be done. This is true, that is "perceived benefit" is absent.

However, the perceived benefit can be seen properly for those on the field, not as I said earlier the people on the sidelines or 5000 miles away.

Fromt he evil media and the lack of awareness about specific situations people will easily fall prey to petty accusations. Which may amount to accusations or suspicious ideas which are totally haram when not warranted. May Allah protect our tongues and our iman in such situations.

The sheikh Muhammad Al Maqdisi mentioned that since the mujahideen are a small minority group, they must be careful of their numbers. Therefore, he said martyrdom operations should not be the preference nor should they be misused by the commanders. However, we (not being there) are not in a position to judge.

In this case, Islam does not require to indulge in what is right and what is wrong with limited information, when the whole account is not available. Rather, what is required of us is that we make dua and hold Muslims in good standing in our minds, regardless of what is thought. This is required of Muslims.

We dont do the required in the minimal sense, yet we try to maximize what we are not required to do.

To accuse someone of "just blowing themselves" as if it was done to no reason, is wrong and should be retracted.

I have some information on this, when I have time I will post it.

[Azzam]

i have not seen credible evidence from anyone on this. Shaykh AbdalQadir and Shaykh AbdalHakim Murad were correct to say this was borrowed from the Ismaili assassins.

Are these people involved directly with any jihad around the world? Can you please mention their situations and what country they went to to wage war in the name of Allah.

Do they have experience with people "just blowing themselves up"?

Maybe they do I dont know?

[faqir]

I am yet to come across any narration in any fatwa from the scholars where the deliberate taking of one's own life in order to attack an enemy is mentioned....

If anyone has access to such a narration please post it.


Akhi Azzam, if you have knowledge of such a narration could you post it please.

[Azzam]

Akhi Azzam, if you have knowledge of such a narration could you post it please.

I will when I have time. There is some information I have, I have to find it.

In the mean time can you please take the evidences provided in the above article and provide references for each one. And please comment upon each one as to its generality and its specifications.

For instance the narration of Abu Bakr and Yazid is way too general and could be tied to almost any situation.

The othe narration of the man not bearing the pain and cutting his hand and bleeding to death is not related to the concept of martyrdom operations.

That man fought and was wounded. He could not bear the pain so we cut his hand off or something like that and bleed to death. He could not bear the burden even though this is the reality and therefore it could be said he denied the Qadar of Allah.

This action had nothing to do with going into the enemy and so on.

I am not saying that it is perfectly jaiz in every single situation and as I said earlier it is a matter which at the lowest level is a matter of disagreement.

[faqir]

eh?

Isn't it already referenced?

[salman]

Salamu Alaikum

Fear Allah! Will you be willing to take the risk of speaking against the Shuhada?

[Azzam]

eh?

Isn't it already referenced?

yes it is sorry. I meant please provide your analysis of the information presented. Such as the exact contexts of the evidences provided.

[Azzam]

Salamu Alaikum

Fear Allah! Will you be willing to take the risk of speaking against the Shuhada?

Is this statement for me? If it is please explain.

[faqir]

yes it is sorry. I meant please provide your analysis of the information presented. Such as the exact contexts of the evidences provided.

umm, bruv, I didn't write the article! The author has given his interpretation.

[Azzam]

umm, bruv, I didn't write the article!

But you put it up,

so you knew what he was talking about exactly, otherwise why would you put it up?

[Azzam]

umm, bruv, I didn't write the article! The author has given his interpretation.

So clarify the interpretation, I dont think he tied the interpretation to the evidences clearly.

[faqir]

I posted an article. I am a layman - no where near a scholar. And if anyone were to follow your principle you would find only scholars posting articles of scholars for they are the only one's who can really interpret the evidence.

[faqir]

So clarify the interpretation, I dont think he tied the interpretation to the evidences clearly.

Why don't you advise us as to where his interpretation was incorrect?

[Azzam]

Why don't you advise us as to where his interpretation was incorrect?

I mentioned two of those instances which cannot be tied directly to this situation we are discussing. We will go into it further. I am not a scholar but I will provide some evidence for you. The other brother said he will put the book up as well. I am not here to convince anyone. From my experiences few people are willing to change their positions anyway.

Laymen should not post things they do not understand. Sometimes I have seen people post things that they just saw the title the author and posted it. They did not bother to read it or even understand it.

I am not accusing you of this. But it is assumed that when we take a position we know what we are doing to some sort of extent.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

<<In suicide as I said earlier, there is a denial of the Qadr of Allah. This is an act of kufr. For example, one is displeased with the situation one is in and instead of facing reality and having sabr, he kills himself because he has chosen not to deal with the situation he is in. Thus he denied the Qadr of Allah which in fact as we know is among the arkaanul iman (Pillars of Faith).>>

there is absolutely no proof that the illah (reason) for the prohibition for suicide is the fact that someone is displeased with the situation that one is in. secondly, the act of suicide and its strict definition has nothing to do with depression, although this may be a triggering factor.

<<Such a person is totally different than one who volunteers his life to make an attack on the enemy. In any case anyone who goes for war, is in fact pledging his life to die if the opportunity comes. But for an operation of martyrdom, one pledges himself to die within the tactic, that he may provide some benefit for the Mujahideen and the Muslims.>>

you have raised many points in this paragraph alone.

1. just because the person is different and has different intentions, this cannot justify the act if it is forbidden

2. that pledges himself to die in the tactic BY HIS OWN HANDS - subtle but crucial difference.

3. i have yet to see where this action has had LONG-TERM benefit for Muslims - indeed it has proved to be utterly destructive to the plight of Muslims the world over.

<<For example, he may be a source of motivation, or may damage the kuffar severly. In this case benefit was brought about.>>

give me one example of such an operation which has damaged the kuffar 'severely' such that it benefits the Muslims, or indeed causes the kuffar to retreat and surrender.

<<Such a person cannot be considered a faasiq doomed to hell. We should watch what we say lest we will become that which we fear.>>

i am watching what i am saying, i have mentioned no names and condemned no-one to hell, nor called any person a fasiq. i am talking fiqh and nothing else.

<<However, the perceived benefit can be seen properly for those on the field, not as I said earlier the people on the sidelines or 5000 miles away.>>

examples would be nice.

<<Fromt he evil media and the lack of awareness about specific situations people will easily fall prey to petty accusations. Which may amount to accusations or suspicious ideas which are totally haram when not warranted. May Allah protect our tongues and our iman in such situations.>>

i agree. but it is fact from many non-saudi salafis who support 9/11, that they support the actions of the 19 men who perpetrated the act. i think the awareness of what is happening on the 'battefield' is quite evident, don't you?

<<In this case, Islam does not require to indulge in what is right and what is wrong with limited information, when the whole account is not available. Rather, what is required of us is that we make dua and hold Muslims in good standing in our minds, regardless of what is thought. This is required of Muslims.>>

the action can be judged whether it is seen or not. the reality of what happens is a different story. we are permitted to give fatawa on hypothetical situations and actions - and those that have happened and the facts are available.

of course, we always think good of Muslims - but dear brother, there is a limit to this. Commanding the good and forbidding evil is not restricted to non-muslims.

<<To accuse someone of "just blowing themselves" as if it was done to no reason, is wrong and should be retracted.>>

reason or no reason, this is a description of what occurs, without playing with definitions and words.

<<Are these people involved directly with any jihad around the world? Can you please mention their situations and what country they went to to wage war in the name of Allah.>>

are the ones who fight free from error? it appears as if you believe that the mujahideen are masoom. scholars are free to give their opinion on jihad, regardless of whether they take part or not.

<<Do they have experience with people "just blowing themselves up"?>>

i know brothers who do have experience with such people... indeed i know brothers who would do it themselves... i know of brothers approached by organisations who would arrange these things.

<<Maybe they do I dont know?>>

exactly. maybe they do. do you?

[salman]

Is this statement for me? If it is please explain.

Are you speaking against them?

[Usman]

I though the following few pages may help a little in understanding the point. Read carefully please.
http://img84.exs.cx/img84/2333/10398.jpg
http://img77.exs.cx/img77/4092/8397.jpg
http://img70.exs.cx/img70/9642/13281.jpg
http://img78.exs.cx/img78/7913/8692.jpg
http://img65.exs.cx/img65/4984/12684.jpg
http://img53.exs.cx/img53/7259/12089.jpg

[Azzam]

I am not condoning all such incidents. But we should be open minded to both sides as this is a matter of disagreement between scholars.


there is absolutely no proof that the illah (reason) for the prohibition for suicide is the fact that someone is displeased with the situation that one is in. secondly, the act of suicide and its strict definition has nothing to do with depression, although this may be a triggering factor.

I did not say that in absolute terms suicide is a product of depression or remorse. But in most cases people who are unsatisfied with something about life, will feel they do not have anything to live for so they will want to die. This is in fact the majority of cases of suicide that we know of. If there are other cases that you wish to provide that will lead to suicide.

Some say it is related to biology through genes, others from other disciplines relate it to the sociological make up of the individual. Among the groups, old people have higher rates than most age groups. In most cases the causes are varied but a feeling of loneliness, or abandonment has triggered this. Other groups include young men, who have been abused or have had some sort of trauma in their lives. Men are more likely to commit suicide than women and men do it in more violent ways because according to studies women are afraid to use violent methods and rely more on longterm punishment to the body such as eating pills, poisons, or not eating nutritious diets.

The point I am making is that all theories associated that I have come across depict some sort of emotional attachment which was altered. The emotional state of these individuals was altered in the sense that they felt negative about a perceived situation they were and it led to stress and hyper stress leading to depression. I remember one person telling me depression is the sign of not being thankful to Allah.

Does not matter the situation. A depressed person is depressed for some reason. Rather if he thanks Allah and remains patient for what he has instead of he does not have, then he will be fine. Any type of depression shows ingratitude for the situation one is in. For example, if a brother wants to marry a sister, and she marries someone else. He must face this reality and be firm and resistant against the temptations of shaytaan. He must not give in and become sad. Here his sadness will lead to more sadness and eventually to depression. He forgets that it is possibly not written for him to marry this person, instead of coming to terms with the Qadr of Allah he remains upset.

Things like this also happen when people die.

Sadness or grief is alright but beyond a certain level it is destructive. If sadness or grief leads to doing good deeds and accepting that one is deficient and happily submitting to the qadr of Allah, then one would get over his problems and move on. That is why we say “Verily to Allah we belong and verily to Him we will return.” Because the dunya is just a hollow setting, the reality is with Allah. And Allah owns everything, He chooses to give to whom He pleases not what the humans want.

So my friend instructed me that depression is a form of ingratitude to Allah. We should be aware when we say I am feeling depressed over a situation, rather is better to say the beautiful words above “Verily to Allah we belong and verily to Him we will return.” Or to be patient or acknowledge that one is weak and so on.

Tying this to the topic on hand. Depression and displaced emotional attachment is a key risk factor according to many scholars of medicine and sociology. Even if we consider the biological association we must consider this element. For the biological association they say that the genes of hormones of an individual work accordingly to his or her genetic makeup. That if a family possesses suicidal tendencies or has in the past certain situations of resulting suicide than that increases the risk for suicide in each of its members, regardless of the situation one is in. The second part of the last sentence lacks evidence, as there is in the most in almost all cases a direct cause of suicide that is personalized and not indirect as the case of genetics.

Furthermore and extension of the biological association will reveal and this is important, that certain humans given a situation react according to their genetic makeup. For example when one is approached by another who wishes to inflict harm, one individual might be inclined to resist with force, based on his genes, whereas another might simply through his genetic makeup decide to flee. This shows that the condition of the reaction is rooted in its biological form used to direct behavioural actions and reactions. This is the same case as some families have a history of laughing and when they are given a joke they laugh loud and others have a tendency to smile and you will see some doing that instead. Then this is routed in genetic makeup, but cannot be attributed to many cases without a direct set of associated risk factors.

Another aspect of the biological condition is related to imbalances in the chemical make up of an individual. But we must consider one thing that stress leads to imbalances in such chemicals. Stress causes imbalances to need chemical discharges from the brain. If this is affected than for example studying can become hard and may lead to other neurological diseases. So in fact it might be triggered by a behavioural event and the biological disfunction is actually an effect not a cause. Some people though beyond their control may have chemical imbalances, that are not triggered by behaviour. Such is the case of certain side effects of drugs that are a need, genetic and unknown causes. The principle in Islam here is that firstly Allah knows best what is happening to this person and in any case Allah knows what we don’t and we may never, but He will always. We do know what is beyond the control of the individual he or she may not be held accountable.

The other situation may be that one is possessed by a jinn. From what I heard this usually happens when one is depressed and is not protected by the kalima because as we said earlier he has denied the qadar of Allah. Allah knows best but I did hear from somewhere that depressed people are what the jinns and shaytaan come after because they are easy prey to do kufr. May Allah protect us from fear, depression and other situations where are our iman may be at stake. However, it is the case that someone becomes possessed and commits suicide, regardless of the reason of their possession. I do not have knowledge in this. If someone does than they can share.

I would like you to present what other risk factor there is for suicide besides the main ideas I mentioned. Much of what I said is from research from the United States who in fact has a higher rate of suicide than homicide. My main focus was that suicide is emotionally stimulated through a variety of specific factors and situations. It is not necessary to go into detail of such specifics, because I think you get my point. I tied that emotional displacement within an individual and between individuals leads to stress and to depression if prolonged or uncontrolled. I said depression is a sign of ingratitude to Allah and this is how I tied it to the rejection or lack of belief in the Qadar of Allah, which eventually may lead one to commit suicide.

I wish to add that many studies relied on this set of risk factors as the most apparent: loss of something or situation entailing such, suicidal behaviour in relatives, ICD-10 major depressive episode, emotionally unstable personality and substance dependence. ICD-10 is a classification of disease by the International Classification of Diseases.

I would like to add, teens in various episodes. A lot has to do with possible changes in the neurological makeup of growing teens do not match with realistic situations. Also a feeling of failure may fall into the category of a minor loss event. In many asian cultures embarrassment in a social setting is a risk factor, is for instance a boy in a village with strong moral values commits a theft. He is branded as a thief and in this setting that becomes a risk factor for him. Being forced into a marriage.

And finally much of what I said deals with socially normal people. People will psychiatric conditions are also a large risk group, but their conditions (what state they are in and how they got there and what sort of triggered or untriggered reactions they have) relies on a different set of factors.

I do not why I went into such detail, but I wanted to make my point. If you disagree go ahead and disagree.

Back to the specific topic on hand. I cannot trace this to martyrdom operation unless the intention of the individual is to die and not caring about the Muslims. Then this is a wrong action. So we must make this distinction.


1. just because the person is different and has different intentions, this cannot justify the act if it is forbidden

2. that pledges himself to die in the tactic BY HIS OWN HANDS - subtle but crucial difference.

3. i have yet to see where this action has had LONG-TERM benefit for Muslims - indeed it has proved to be utterly destructive to the plight of Muslims the world over.

1. The act according to scholars is a matter of disagreement. Not all such actions are allowed and not all such actions are haram either. The act in itself is forbidden but we made this distinction is a state of war and not the same type of killing as self-destruction. Looking at intentions is important, this would actually be in agreement with what you are saying. If people’s intentions are not correct than the act is void as in all acts. But we are looking at a specific situation in which the scholar differ, so this is a reason that comes up. IF this act was one where the ulema were of one opinion that it is impermissible than the intention aspect would be void. But that is not the case.

2. We must consider what we mean “by own hands”. The principle derived by the ulema who support these actions as I will show later is based on the fact that plunging into the enemy is allowed. Such an act entails that one will not come back alive or the situation seems to suggest that. The evidence they show is more based on that. Because there were no explosives in those days as gun powder was not invented until later. Therefore to derive primary texts that suggest this action directly is not possible. So they may made this connection. Plunging into the enemy in such a state has been a matter of disagreement as well. It does not make sense that someone would go and stab himself with a sword as the enemy watches him. But in an era of different weaponry different conditions will apply.

3. This is really is not your judgement or mine.


give me one example of such an operation which has damaged the kuffar 'severely' such that it benefits the Muslims, or indeed causes the kuffar to retreat and surrender.

Looking for benefits then one must be involved directly. At the same time, war requires patience, it does not end with one blow in most cases. The Americans basically carpet bombed Iraq on many occasions yet the war is still on. War is longterm (more than one blow) in many cases this day in age, especially for those who have very less weaponry if any at all.


the action can be judged whether it is seen or not. the reality of what happens is a different story. we are permitted to give fatawa on hypothetical situations and actions - and those that have happened and the facts are available.

The facts are not available. I would like to ask you what sources do you have that you base your opinions? Even the American president or any world leader gets reported to (or is supposed to) by his field commanders not secondary or tertiary sources such as news networks.

Any army will also not provide accurate information, nor are they required to anyway. No one in war excepts the other side to report properly on deaths or injuries or what is happening unless it is favourable to one’s side. Therefore, be weary of the media in times of war and these days in all times.


are the ones who fight free from error? it appears as if you believe that the mujahideen are masoom. scholars are free to give their opinion on jihad, regardless of whether they take part or not.

The mujahideen are not masoom. No one is except the Prophet SAW. However, a strong principle of giving out rulings is to understand fully the situation of the one asking. Many ulema not involved in jihad give superficial rulings based on a variety of factors. Their lack of experience in this field is a source of possible rejection of their opinions. Therefore it is important to be part of or know what is happening exactly.

They are free to quote evidences and quote the texts and no one says that is wrong. Allah mentioned that when some believers go and fight that some stay behind to teach the religion of Allah. If the ulema of the Mujahideen are at odds with what the sit at home ulema are saying than too bad I will take from those who are directly involved. Whose fatwas have their blood not just their ink on them. There is a difference.

So when it comes to the rulings of jihad one must be in jihad to become an authority in this discipline. Not just one who sits at home. If there is no contradiction between the two than that is fine, but when there is a contradiction than it matters. There are many ulema who are not in jihad, but their rulings and description are not different than what the ulema from the Mujahideen tell us. The Mujahideen also praised these scholars.

I ask you when you are sick will you see one who reads medical journals or one who practices. One who is still in med school or a doctor of 25 years?

[Azzam]

To add to the issue of giving rulings on Jihad.

In these days, with all the fitnaah happening around the world, we hear alot about what diffrent scholars/"scholars" have to say regarding the rulings in Jihaad, and they give their opinions regarding what is Jihaad and what is not Jihaad.

al-Imaam Ibn Taymeeyah (Rahimahullaah) says regarding those scholars :


"The obligation regarding issues of Jihaad is to consider the opinion of the people of correct Deen, who have experience in the Dunyaa. The opinion of the people of Dunyaa who tend to look at the surface of the Deen, or the people of Deen who have no experience in the Dunyaa, is not to be followed."
[al-Mustadrak 3alaa Majmoo3 al-Fataawaa (220/3) compiled by Ibn Qaasim]

Ibn Taymeeyah means that people who have some understanding of Jihaad, such as good scholars with sincerety (good and sincere means no government scholars) but who have no relationship with the Mujaahideen nor experience with Jihaad, should not be asked about Jihaad issues.

This fatwa is also found in al-Fataawaa al-Kubra, the final volume (no. 5) :


"And those who are asked about the matters of Jihaad are those people of correct, sound religion and who know what the people of the dunya are upon, and they are not to be asked, those who look at the superificialness of texts only, and and they are not to be asked those who have correct and sound religion, but are not aware of what the people of the dunya are upon"
[Al-Fatawa al-Kubraa, and this is taken from page 51 of Fil-Jihaad fiqh-Wajtihaad for Shaykh 'Abdullah 'Azzam]

This is due to the guidance the Mujahideen have, which Ibn ul-Qayyim and Ibn Taymiyaah has mentioned :


Ibn ul-Qayyim :
"The Mujahidon and the people of frontlines are the guided ones, so if the opinions differ, and the paths divert, the guidance is drawn by their lines, in following their sayings and holding unto their opinions. The people of Jihaad have guidance and discovering [of truths and realities], that is not found in other than the people of Mujaahadah; and it is not found in those who [only] do Jihaad of the desires and Satan, for no one is successful in the Jihaad of the external enemy, except the one who has defeated the internal enemy. From here, our Master, may He be glorified, attached guidance to Jihaad, so the most complete of people in guidance, are the ones of the greatest Jihaad, and whoever leaves Jihaad, misses out on guidance in accordance to how little he does of it".
[al-Fawaa`id, page 59.]



Ibn Taymeeyah :
"Jihaad necessarily leads to guidance, which encompasses all knowledge, as the statement of Allaah indicates: {Those who did Jihaad in Our Cause, We will surely guide them to Our Paths.} So He guided to all His Paths, the one who does Jihaad in His Cause. For this reason, the two Imaams Ibn al-Mubaarak and Ahmad bin Hambal, as well as others, said, 'If the people differ over a matter, then see what those on the frontlines are upon, for the truth is with them, because Allaah Says, {Those who did Jihaad in Our Cause, We will surely guide them to Our Paths.} [Soorah al-'Ankaboot v. 69]'"
[Majmoo' al-Fataawaa 28/442]

[IlyasLahoz]

Assalamu 'alaikum,
The following, taken from a law review article, postulates an interesting theory about the origins of suicide bombing. i don't know that i agree 100% with this analysis, yet i think it is worth consideration and at the very least is a good indicator of where some thinkers are on the subject.
as an aside, the author is a practicing sunni muslim.

MARTYRDOM, SUICIDE, AND THE ISLAMIC LAW OF WAR: A SHORT LEGAL HISTORY

27 Fordham Int'l L.J. 299


Bernard K. Freamon*

* Professor of Law and Director, Program for the Study of Law in the Middle East, Seton Hall Law School. Professor Freamon is a Doctor in the Science of Law (JSD) candidate at Columbia Law School.

This Article is concerned with one key aspect of the law of the military jihad: the Islamic concept of martyrdom [shahada or istishhad]. The topic is of great interest now because of its use as an ideological and mobilizing tool by military jihadists promoting self-annihilatory acts of violence. These acts are currently being used by jihadists in support of the Palestinian liberation struggle and also in support of efforts by Al Qaeda and other jihadist organizations to advance what they claim to be an Islamic agenda. Even though the Islamist use of self-annihilation as a jihadist tool may be a relatively new methodology, the theological underpinnings for this methodology are not new. In fact, the Islamic religion has a long and rich martyrological tradition. It is this tradition that is at the core of current normative and legal justifications offered by military jihadists in support of self-annihilatory violence.
This Article will demonstrate that the current Islamist financing and systematic organization and direction of self-annihilatory acts of violence is only weakly supported, if at all, by the classical sources on martyrdom in Islamic law and jurisprudence. The Article will show that current justifications for self-annihilatory violence are instead the result of a major reinterpretation of the theology and religious law on martyrdom and the military jihad advanced by Shi'ite theologians and jurists in Iraq and Iran between the mid-1960s and the late-1970s. There is a direct historical relationship between this Shi'a reinterpretation of the concept of martyrdom and the self-annihilatory violence encouraged by military jihadists today. This new conception of martyrdom challenges traditionally strong and universal Islamic prohibitions against suicide and represents a profound shift in the practice of Islamic theology and law, particularly the theology and law of the military jihad. Understanding the history of the Islamic theology of martyrdom, particularly the Shi'a theology, is therefore key to understanding contemporary jihadist behavior in war.

CLICK for full article (http://alexandalus.blogspot.com/2004/07/martyrdom-suicide-and-islamic-law-of.html)
wasalamu 'alaikum

[Azzam]

Akhi Alex,
The article is way too long, but it looks worth it to read. Can you do me a favour. I am not interested in shia stuff, so can you just tell me exactly which parts the author discusses the law or fiqh of his self-described "self-annilhilatory" acts.

[IlyasLahoz]

Akhi Alex,
The article is way too long, but it looks worth it to read. Can you do me a favour. I am not interested in shia stuff, so can you just tell me exactly which parts the author discusses the law or fiqh of his self-described "self-annilhilatory" acts.
You're right it is very long (i think it took me about 4 hours to read) IshaAllah I'll go through it and pull out the specific info you requested.
Just as a point of clarification, the author is not (nor does he claim to be) an Islamic scholar.

[IlyasLahoz]

One other point Sidi Azzam. It might be difficult to divorce the shia element from the author's discussion of the fiqh of suicidal warfare, since the main thrust of the article is that suicide bombing/martyrdom operations or anything else one would call it, is a wholly modern, Shia invention.
Walalhu 'Alam.
InshaAllah I'll get back to you with more. (its been about 4-5 months since I read the article)

[Azzam]

If you can please also pick out for me the exact situations of what incidents the shia did that would qualify them as self annihilation. I wish to see what actions people are using to qualify such.

I also wanted to know if anyone knows the acts of the hashasheen (early Ismailis) or Assassins in English. I heard or read somewhere that it was these fighters that started the martyrdom tactics. So the acts I am interested in are what exactly did they do to get that designation.

[Usman]

I also wanted to know if anyone knows the acts of the hashasheen (early Ismailis) or Assassins in English. I heard or read somewhere that it was these fighters that started the martyrdom tactics. So the acts I am interested in are what exactly did they do to get that designation.

I've heard that too, it's when they used to attack the Hujjaj groups, and then kill themselves with daggers.

[IlyasLahoz]

Salam,
I've pulled out some relevant sections. InshaAllah I'll paste them in separate posts so as to make the material more digestible.

P.S. The note numbers (ex. n125 ) are the footnotes and are available at the end of the article.
Also the random numbers found throught the text (ex. [*304] ) are page-break referrences from the original publication and should just be ignored.

[IlyasLahoz]

Early Islamic Juristic Classifications of Martyrs

In addition to the Qur'anic references, the terms shahid and its plural shuhada' are found in hundreds of hadiths and in sira literature [biographical accounts] recounting events from the earliest times in the Prophet Muhammad's mission, especially battlefield events after the Prophet established the new Islamic State in Medina. These accounts are at the heart of the juristic discourse on martyrdom and they make it clear that the early Muslims understood the foundational Quranic references to the shuhada' as referring to those who died in battle during a military jihad. n68 All of these early martyrs were men, as women [*320] under normal circumstances were not permitted to engage in battle. n69
Because the designation as a martyr can have important juridical implications for the deceased's family and compatriots, much of the attention of the early jurists was concerned with defining martyrdom and identifying behaviors that would qualify one for the designation. There are two main types of martyr recognized by Muslim jurists and theologians. The first type is the martyr "both in this world and the next world." The "battlefield martyr" who dies in a military jihad is of this type. n70 The second type of martyr is "of the next world only." This classification of lesser martyrs contains a number of interesting categories, including, inter alia: those murdered while in the service of God; those killed for their beliefs; those who die from disease or accident; women who die in childbirth; those who love, remain chaste, conceal their love, and die with their secret intact ("martyrs of love"); and those who die a natural death while engaged in a meritorious act, such as the pilgrimage to Mecca, a worthwhile scholarly pursuit, or after leading a virtuous life. n71 There is [*321] no reference to this kind of martyrdom in the Qur'an. The classification is based on statements of the Prophet Muhammad, as reported in hadith of varying degrees of authenticity.

[IlyasLahoz]

The Classical Fiqh on Martyrdom and Suicide

The classical fiqh n73 on martyrdom tracks the basic principles laid down in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. The classical fuqaha n74 did not author manuals or treatises devoted exclusively to the subject of martyrdom. Instead, much of the fiqh-material on martyrdom is found in chapters on jihad and funeral rites [*322] [jana'iz] in the legal treatises. n75 This is true for both the Sunni and the Shi'a fiqh. Although the Qur'anic verses and commentary on those verses by scholars are said to command the highest juridical authority, the bulk of the source material for the rules that the fuqaha developed concerning martyrdom came from the hadith. Wensinck, in his handbook on hadith, notes several hundred prophetic accounts that specifically concern martyrdom. n76 There are many more that tangentially touch upon the subject. Similarly, the Shi'a collections of hadith are replete with accounts of battlefield actions leading to martyrdom. Although the Sunni and Shi'a fiqh on jihad and martyrdom are very similar to each other, it appears that the Sunni jurists took a more rationalist, pragmatic approach to jus in bello issues in evaluating the behavior of Muslims involved in war. n77 They emphasized survival and victory rather than death.
[*323] Consequently, the "quest for martyrdom" and the proselytizing of believers to seek the eschatological rewards of martyrdom are not prominent themes in the Sunni juristic discourse on war. In fact, such desires were condemned by some of the Sunni classical jurists because they were associated with the Kharijite phenomenon, n78 and came close to suicide. n79 The Sunni tradition "contains sayings which are strong in their verdict against any possible relation between a man's death and his own will." n80 These same traditions prohibit wishing for death or wishing for an encounter with the enemy. n81 They commend those who avoid exposing themselves to danger. n82 Instead, the treatises and books of fiqh, relying on hadith, emphasize the distinctions that must be made in choices of weapons, the damage allowed to be inflicted on various categories of enemies, division of spoils, treatment of captives and prisoners of war, determination of exemptions from the obligation to take part in the jihad, protection of the lives of non-combatants, decision-making on tactics [*324] and strategies, and other practical issues. n83 Self-sacrifice was not favored and some jurists taught that profession of a false creed was "preferred to self-sacrifice." n84
Concomitantly, it should be noted that the general Islamic prohibition against suicide has always been strong. Although the Qur'anic provisions are inconclusive, n85 the hadith are very clear. The Prophet declared on many occasions that suicide is an unlawful act. In one example, he announced, "whoever kills himself (with a steel instrument, or something else) will be punished in the same manner in the fire of Hell." n86 Juristic literature suggests that this punishment for suicide will be repeated endlessly.

[IlyasLahoz]

L: -then after outlining the history of the development of suicide as a strategy for warfare by the Shia ulama in Najaf -based on a reinterpretation of Imam Husayn’s martyrdom (see the full article for details)- and it’s influence on Shaykh Muhammad Fadlallah, the author goes on to state the following:

Why the Term Self-Annihilation {L: my subtitle}

Many of the Iranian clerics who were with Khomeini in Najaf returned to Iran and took positions in the new Islamic government in Tehran. One of the most important of these clerics was Ayatollah Taleqani, a scholar who has written on the concept of martyrdom. When the Iranian government began to export its vision of Islam, Ayatollah Taleqani's views on martyrdom gained influence. They reflect the radical reinterpretation of the Shi'a theology, permitting self-annihilation, which took form at Najaf. Consider his description of Islamic martyrdom, given in a speech in Tehran in June, 1963:

In short, anyone who has understood this truth and divine [*341] goal and has stood for it, sacrificing his life, is called shahid in the terminology of the Qur'an and jurisprudence. The shahid is the one who has experienced the shuhud [vision] of truth. The sacrifice of his own life is not based on illusion or agitation of his emotions. He has seen the truth and the goal. That is why he has chosen to wallow in the blood and the dust. Such a person does so with the intention of intimacy with God, not on the basis of fantasies and personal desires. He is above these worldly matters. He has understood the value of truth in a deserved way. This is why he annihilates himself, like a drop in the ocean of truth. This is the true meaning of the esoteric term fana fi Allah (self-annihilation in God). Fana is not what the Sufi does in the khanaqah, shouting 'Hu! Hu!' and then imagining that he has reached God. The real meaning of fana is exhibited in the following poem:
From head to toe, God's light you'll
radiate,
If in His cause, you self-annihilate!
If a person has reached the stage of readiness for self-annihilation through the vision of truth, for the sake of establishing truth, his title is shahid. Thus one cannot call everyone shahid. If someone mistakenly or for a worldly and illusive cause gets killed, he has lost both worlds, this and the hereafter. A shahid is the one who understands religion, knows his God, and believes in the hereafter as well as in eternal life. He must realize the goal. Then because he has seen the truth, he has no fear of death. Death is easy for him. n140

Taleqani became a pivotal figure in the new Islamic government in Tehran and was elected to the Assembly of Experts in the first days of the new Islamic government.

and

Consider these words by Imam Khomeini, delivered in a speech at the Feyziyeh Theological School in Iran, shortly after his return from France:

We have sacrificed much blood and martyrs. Islam has sacrificed blood and martyrs.
We do not fear giving martyrs ... . Whatever we give for [*353] Islam is not enough and is too little. Our lives are not worthy. Let those who wish us ill not imagine that our youths are afraid of death or of martyrdom. Martyrdom is a legacy which we have received from our prophets. Those should fear death who consider the aftermath of death to be obliteration. We, who consider the aftermath of death a life more sublime than this one, what fear have we? The traitors should be afraid. The servants of God have no fear ... . Our guards who were [killed] ... have achieved eternal life.

[IlyasLahoz]

Self-Annihilatory Action {L: my subtitle}


...the war-time actions of the Iranian child-soldiers, as recounted by Muhammad Sallam, a Lebanese journalist who personally witnessed them.

One scene still haunts him ... It happened at the Iraqi-Iranian front at the beginning of the year 1984, near the town of Al-Usair, not far from that bridge over the Tigris, which would stop U.S. General Norman Schwarzkopf's advance seven years later in the Gulf War. After weeks of silence the Iranian attack had begun and Muhammad Sallam, one of the few foreign journalists directly at the front, was watching an [*348] Iraqi gunner: how he was sitting behind his heavy machine gun, his body so rigid that he could endure endless hours in this position. He was holding his hand on the trigger. And then they came. No, first they could be heard, a constant buzzing as if thousands of locusts were approaching. The tone got deeper and deeper, formed from thousands of mouths screaming "Ya Karbala, Ya Hussein, Ya Khomeini!", coming closer. Like a wave of people, they came from tunnels and caves, from behind walls and mountains, thousands and thousands coming closer. And almost all were children or teenagers ... And the man with the machine gun fired. He fired, and he did not stop, and 'he killed these children like you would fire on empty bottles. And they kept on running, climbing, jumping, and falling over the dead.' n178

[German journalist Christoph] Reuter, quoting Muhammad Sallam, tells how, after the assault, called "Karbala" by the Iranian military, "there were only dead, as far as you could see," n179 describing more than 23,000 dead, all killed in one day, all children around twelve or thirteen years old, and all found with keys around their necks. In Sallam's words "they were told they could use the key to open the doors to paradise once dying as martyrs." n180 As the chant and actions of the young Iranians so graphically illustrate, it was the paradigm of Husayn's martyrdom and the discourse that flowed from that paradigm in Najaf that ultimately became the genesis of the behavior of the young Iranian soldiers described by Sallam. This behavior then became the basis for a new self-annihilatory norm in modern jihadist wars.

[IlyasLahoz]

I believe section V. HIZBU'LLAH, MUHAMMAD HUSAYN FADLALLAH, THE PALESTINIAN STRUGGLE, AND AL QAEDA
and on is all relevant to the discussion and as such I've not reposted it here.
InshaAllah this is useful.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

<<<I do not why I went into such detail, but I wanted to make my point. If you disagree go ahead and disagree.>>>

i don't know either brother - but you are digressing. i am well aware of ICD-10 classification and assessment of suicide risk and possible factors associated with higher risks of suicide. i work in the medical profession, furthermore i have worked specifically in the field of psychiatry.



<<1. The act according to scholars is a matter of disagreement. Not all such actions are allowed and not all such actions are haram either. The act in itself is forbidden but we made this distinction is a state of war and not the same type of killing as self-destruction.>>

the act is forbidden you say. so now it becomes a matter of fiqh, in which what conditions and realities are existent that can transform the haram into a halal.

<<2. We must consider what we mean “by own hands”. The principle derived by the ulema who support these actions as I will show later is based on the fact that plunging into the enemy is allowed.>>

of course it is. but if you look the detailed evidence of this, all cases show that the enemy kills the mujahid, no-one or nothing else.

<<Such an act entails that one will not come back alive or the situation seems to suggest that. The evidence they show is more based on that.>>

you know that you may not come back alive because it is more than likely that the enemy will kill you, not a bomb which is under your control. this is just a play of words i believe.

<<Because there were no explosives in those days as gun powder was not invented until later. Therefore to derive primary texts that suggest this action directly is not possible. So they may made this connection.>>

so does that mean you can shoot yourself in the head? qiyas is a deep topic. the above i don't think is a true example of qiyas.

regarding the sole mujahid who plunges himself into the enemy - can you show me the conditions or even the work of a scholar on this?

<<Plunging into the enemy in such a state has been a matter of disagreement as well. It does not make sense that someone would go and stab himself with a sword as the enemy watches him. But in an era of different weaponry different conditions will apply.>>

true. but what you are saying without realising is that if any person non-muslim or otherwise straps himself with a bomb and detonates it, it is not suicide. you see, the analogy can work both ways.

<<3. This is really is not your judgement or mine.

Looking for benefits then one must be involved directly. At the same time, war requires patience, it does not end with one blow in most cases. The Americans basically carpet bombed Iraq on many occasions yet the war is still on. War is longterm (more than one blow) in many cases this day in age, especially for those who have very less weaponry if any at all.>>

so give me an example of benefit for the Muslims and Islam, as the fuqaha have stated. now you are saying the benefit is only for those on the battlefield - again, please give an example of this - just one.


<<The mujahideen are not masoom. No one is except the Prophet SAW.>>

...and all the prophets...

<<However, a strong principle of giving out rulings is to understand fully the situation of the one asking. Many ulema not involved in jihad give superficial rulings based on a variety of factors. Their lack of experience in this field is a source of possible rejection of their opinions. Therefore it is important to be part of or know what is happening exactly.>>

true. but the rulings i have seen on the matter also don't take into account the reality of what is happening on a wider scale. again, taking part doesn't make you free from error. furthermore, the rulings can be influenced by emotive forces.

<<They are free to quote evidences and quote the texts and no one says that is wrong. Allah mentioned that when some believers go and fight that some stay behind to teach the religion of Allah. If the ulema of the Mujahideen are at odds with what the sit at home ulema are saying than too bad I will take from those who are directly involved. Whose fatwas have their blood not just their ink on them. There is a difference.>>

i take what i believe to be the truth - no matter which group it is from. from what i have seen, the rulings are not based on a deep understanding of shari'a and tafsir. rather they are superficial and often the adilla is used in the wrong context.

<<So when it comes to the rulings of jihad one must be in jihad to become an authority in this discipline. Not just one who sits at home. If there is no contradiction between the two than that is fine, but when there is a contradiction than it matters. There are many ulema who are not in jihad, but their rulings and description are not different than what the ulema from the Mujahideen tell us. The Mujahideen also praised these scholars.>>

this is where the problem lies. i agree that the reality of the battle is known greater to those fighting. however there are basic rules which must be adhered to. first of all, we have to acknowledge whether the rulings coming from the mujahideen are in fact based on knowledge. are these people trained in the sciences of the deen, such that such rulings can be trusted. everyone has their own methods of trusting ulama. but i must trust the one issuing the statement before i take it. a shia can give me 10000 proofs for the 12 imams, yet i will not believe it because i don't trust him. again, your point brings me back to the point that just because one is in jihad, his rulings and fatawa are undisputable. in any case, the realities that are represented in such rulings still do not justify some of the actions, but each situation needs its own comment.

<<I ask you when you are sick will you see one who reads medical journals or one who practices. One who is still in med school or a doctor of 25 years?>>

of course, i ask the one i trust. and that is this case is based on what i believe is to the person with the most knowledge and experience. the mujahid does not automatically become a scholar whose rulings are binding.

in any case, i would like to see some fatawa, particularly those that support acts such as 9/11, madrid, beslan and bali. but any would do.

secondly not all the fatawa are detailed to actually state that the fatwa is for a specific situation.

<<"The obligation regarding issues of Jihaad is to consider the opinion of the people of correct Deen, who have experience in the Dunyaa. The opinion of the people of Dunyaa who tend to look at the surface of the Deen, or the people of Deen who have no experience in the Dunyaa, is not to be followed."
[al-Mustadrak 3alaa Majmoo3 al-Fataawaa (220/3) compiled by Ibn Qaasim]


Ibn Taymeeyah means that people who have some understanding of Jihaad, such as good scholars with sincerety (good and sincere means no government scholars) but who have no relationship with the Mujaahideen nor experience with Jihaad, should not be asked about Jihaad issues.>>

this can also be reversed. mujahideen who have no standing in the deen, or qualified scholarship, should also not be asked about jihad - do you agree?

the sayings you have quoted is not daleel in any case. it is the opinion of a great scholar.


<<This is due to the guidance the Mujahideen have, which Ibn ul-Qayyim and Ibn Taymiyaah has mentioned :

Quote:

Ibn ul-Qayyim :
"The Mujahidon and the people of frontlines are the guided ones, so if the opinions differ, and the paths divert, the guidance is drawn by their lines, in following their sayings and holding unto their opinions. The people of Jihaad have guidance and discovering [of truths and realities], that is not found in other than the people of Mujaahadah; and it is not found in those who [only] do Jihaad of the desires and Satan, for no one is successful in the Jihaad of the external enemy, except the one who has defeated the internal enemy. From here, our Master, may He be glorified, attached guidance to Jihaad, so the most complete of people in guidance, are the ones of the greatest Jihaad, and whoever leaves Jihaad, misses out on guidance in accordance to how little he does of it".
[al-Fawaa`id, page 59.]>>

true, i agree. but read it all carefully.

i would also add that for someone to be called a mujahid, it would have to be jihad he is taking part in.

<<Ibn Taymeeyah :
"Jihaad necessarily leads to guidance, which encompasses all knowledge, as the statement of Allaah indicates: {Those who did Jihaad in Our Cause, We will surely guide them to Our Paths.} So He guided to all His Paths, the one who does Jihaad in His Cause. For this reason, the two Imaams Ibn al-Mubaarak and Ahmad bin Hambal, as well as others, said, 'If the people differ over a matter, then see what those on the frontlines are upon, for the truth is with them, because Allaah Says, {Those who did Jihaad in Our Cause, We will surely guide them to Our Paths.} [Soorah al-'Ankaboot v. 69]'"
[Majmoo' al-Fataawaa 28/442]>>

jihad here is an all-encomassing meaning. especially in the aya quoted, so that ibn Kathir writes:

(As for those who strive hard for Us,) meaning the Messenger and his Companions and those who follow him, until the Day of Resurrection,

[لَنَهْدِيَنَّهُمْ سُبُلَنَا]

(We will surely guide them to Our paths. ) means, `We will help them to follow Our path in this world and the Hereafter.' Ibn Abi Hatim narrated that `Abbas Al-Hamdani Abu Ahmad -- one of the people of `Akka (Palestine) -- said, concerning the Ayah:

[وَالَّذِينَ جَـهَدُواْ فِينَا لَنَهْدِيَنَّهُمْ سُبُلَنَا وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمَعَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ ]

(As for those who strive hard for Us (in Our cause), We will surely guide them to Our paths. And verily, Allah is with the doers of good.) "Those who act upon what they know, Allah will guide them to that which they do not know.'' Ahmad bin Abu Al-Hawari said, "I told this to Abu Sulayman Ad-Darani, and he liked it and said: `No one who is inspired to do something good should do it until he hears a report concerning that; if he hears a report then he should go ahead and do it, and praise Allah because it was in accordance with what he himself felt.'''

[وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمَعَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ]

(And verily, Allah is with the doers of good.) Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ash-Sha`bi said; "Isa bin Maryam, peace be upon him, said: `Righteousness means doing good to those who ill-treat you, it does not mean doing good to those who do good to you.''' And Allah knows best.


furthermore the vast majority of ulama have stated this is a Makkan sura, with exception of maybe the first 10 ayat. fighting was not prescribed until after hijra. Jihad or the striving here mentioned thus does not necessarily entail physical jihad.

Allah knows best

[Azzam]

I think we have reached the point where discussing this from now on will go nowhere and I do not see a benefit in it. So now we came to the point where you said:


of course it is. but if you look the detailed evidence of this, all cases show that the enemy kills the mujahid, no-one or nothing else.

and


you know that you may not come back alive because it is more than likely that the enemy will kill you, not a bomb which is under your control. this is just a play of words i believe.

I explained that there is a difference between that time and now due to the nature of warfare itself. To inflict casualties bombs are used to fight and the button or whatever is pressed by the one carrying out the attack.

This point right here, since it is "not the enemy" that kills the person, some scholars deemed this impermissible which obviously is the opinion you hold.

From previous discussions on this topic this is the key distinguishing point and beyond this there is no logical argument. So I wish to refrain from going further, however I will post the side of the allowance shortly, so their rationale can be known.

About this,


true. but the rulings i have seen on the matter also don't take into account the reality of what is happening on a wider scale. again, taking part doesn't make you free from error. furthermore, the rulings can be influenced by emotive forces.

I dont understand what you mean "wider scale". Taking part does not free you from error. But not taking part and sitting at home and then issuing silly fatwas is wrong. Rulings can be influenced by emotive forces anywhere, for one sitting at home or in battle. However, Allah has mentioned that those that sit at home are not equal with those who strive and fight in the path of Allah.

Many times people would offer their opinions while not attending the fight. So the Prophet SAW and the Companions would fight and listen to these people when they got home. If they won, they came to take part in the booty distribution and if they lost then these people would start tp evaluate their mistakes and so on. "Oh you should not have done this oh you should not have done that."

Therefore, you can follow who you want. If someone sitting at home or in a governmental house or palace gives a ruling then fine. But it is incorrect adab to single out people and speak against them while doing nothing of any comparison. Allah mentioned in the Quran in Surat Saff when people wanted to know the best deed and they would be ready to do it whatever it was and Allah revealed "O ye who believe, why do say that which you dont do!" and then He be he Glorified mentioned what He loves most.

and


i take what i believe to be the truth - no matter which group it is from. from what i have seen, the rulings are not based on a deep understanding of shari'a and tafsir. rather they are superficial and often the adilla is used in the wrong context.

This is you opinion based on one group's analogy what is correct and you are applying it to everyone. So obviously like everyone who hold some people which you take from I can understand that.

But to make a statement like that please tell me what verdicts exactly have you read? Which ulema from the Mujahideen have you heard?

Please provide the link of the verdicts of the Mujahideen that you have read and understood, fully, not copy and paste news stories. Please direct me to them so I can see them.

Which website or sources did you get them from? Are they in arabic or English? Please direct me to them.

To make a statement like that one must have the knowledge individually. One must have also read fully with full understanding the position of such scholars. One must be fully aware of the situation they are in to understand the nature of their verdicts.

I say this because this is a severe accusation. This one


...the rulings are not based on a deep understanding of shari'a and tafsir. rather they are superficial and often the adilla is used in the wrong context.

I also wish for you to provide all the information you have that would lead one to make this kind of statement. If the statement is from someone else then they must provide evidence as well and you should mention that such and such person mentioned this.

Above all I do not wish to hear from regular North American or European scholars who have no experience in Jihad whatsoever, neither the famous so called Mujahideen who now have luxurious lives and write best sellers about their lives.

The ulema of the mujahideen among them Mawlana Masood Azhar (may Allah protect him) in one of his tapes warned against following such scholars who define Jihad and the rules of Jihad in a certain way. Yet they never landed one toe on the battlefield.

He also mentioned the importance of Jihad and that no act among the obligatory acts were described as much as Jihad was in the Quran. Therefore, those involved we know from the statements of other ulema are few and really the most truthful and sincere among the believers.

Mawlana Sahib mentioned in one of his tapes that once in a gathering of believers, Ameer ul Mu'mineen Umar RA was giving a bayan. There a man got up and left. So Umar RA inquired a bit later as to why the man left, they told him "For Fee Sabilillah Ya Ameer ul Mu'mineen". He then rushed out running intensely, bearfoot and finally caught up with the man and inquired about his journey.

When the man told him, Umar RA who was breathing heavily told him "Make dua for me for the dua of the Mujahideen is accepted".

This is the value and virtue of Jihad and being a Mujahid and this is what differentiates between people.

To simply say that these are normal people is an insult.

Anyway I will in another thread mention the importance of Jihad and the value of the Mujahideen.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

<<I explained that there is a difference between that time and now due to the nature of warfare itself. To inflict casualties bombs are used to fight and the button or whatever is pressed by the one carrying out the attack.>>

....who also knows that the bomb will inflict damage on himself.


<<I dont understand what you mean "wider scale". Taking part does not free you from error. But not taking part and sitting at home and then issuing silly fatwas is wrong.>>

i think your last comment is a completely unfair description of the efforts of ulama. just because you assume ( and it is an assumption ) that they don't partake in jihad, you reject their 'silly' fatawa outright. this is wrong.

<<Rulings can be influenced by emotive forces anywhere, for one sitting at home or in battle. However, Allah has mentioned that those that sit at home are not equal with those who strive and fight in the path of Allah.>>

again, one must distinguish the learned from the follower. a mujahid does not automatically become a scholar. if you at most of the writings of Shaykh Azzam, none of it conflicts with classicall understandings, even though he was involved in modern warfare.

<<Therefore, you can follow who you want. If someone sitting at home or in a governmental house or palace gives a ruling then fine. But it is incorrect adab to single out people and speak against them while doing nothing of any comparison.>>

tell me brother, what amount of information do you know about the ulama of the mujahideen, their training in the islamic sciences and teachers. in addition, i am not making a generalisation about methods used in war. i am specifically talking about self-annilihation, and where it has proved success.

<<Allah mentioned in the Quran in Surat Saff when people wanted to know the best deed and they would be ready to do it whatever it was and Allah revealed "O ye who believe, why do say that which you dont do!" and then He be he Glorified mentioned what He loves most.>>

how is this related to jihad? does this not refer to the ones who issue rulings but do not act upon them themselves? not those who issue fatawa on matters which are against the deen.

<<I also wish for you to provide all the information you have that would lead one to make this kind of statement. If the statement is from someone else then they must provide evidence as well and you should mention that such and such person mentioned this.>>

this statement was based first and foremost on the fatwa circulated a while ago, and 'added' into Shaykh Azzam's book (i wonder if he would have approved that), entitled 'the islamic permissibility of martyrdom operations'. i have seen the fatwa released by Hamas, even by Shaykh Buti (whom i have immense respect for and has deep knowledge but i believe he erred here, possible due to the political climate he lives under) and others.

<<Above all I do not wish to hear from regular North American or European scholars who have no experience in Jihad whatsoever, neither the famous so called Mujahideen who now have luxurious lives and write best sellers about their lives.>>

i hear what you saying, but:

1. how do you know they have not partaken in jihad?

2. what makes you deny their statements completely?

<<The ulema of the mujahideen among them Mawlana Masood Azhar (may Allah protect him) in one of his tapes warned against following such scholars who define Jihad and the rules of Jihad in a certain way. Yet they never landed one toe on the battlefield.>>

true, which is why many of the western scholars refrrain from talking about it (and get attacked for that also).

<<This is the value and virtue of Jihad and being a Mujahid and this is what differentiates between people.>>

no doubt. the qur'an elevates the mujahideen, those who fight in the way of Allah.

<<To simply say that these are normal people is an insult.>>

i didn't say that. jihad is a lofty principle which i believe is used with such ease nowadays. people who fight are not automatically mujahideen. the cause has to be isolated, identified and the purpose and aims.

<<Anyway I will in another thread mention the importance of Jihad and the value of the Mujahideen.>>

you can, and this is not something i will disagree with you on.

but it looks like we aren't going anywhere...

[Azzam]

When I said knowledge among the Mujahideen I did not mean just regular fighters, but the ulema amonst them for example, Sheikh Abdullah Azzam, Sheikh Tamim Adnani, Sheikh Abu Hafs Al Mauritani (Khalid Ash Shinqiti), Sheikh Yusuf Uyayri, Sheikh Masood Azhar, Sheikh Hassan Sarehi, there are others around the world and there are those that are not directly involved but have participated before and then there are the ones who did not participate for various reasons, such as Sheikh Hamoud bin Al Uqla, Sheikh Umar Abdur Rahman (who is probably amongst the most knowledgeable), Sheikh Nasir al Ulwan, Sheikh Ali Khudayr. There are a few.

I want to know do you speak Arabic? I can forward you to some sites that you can go through and see others and get the picture.

Since I understand you have read a lot of the fatawa of the Mujahideen ulema, then you probably speak Arabic because the majority of these are not translated into English.

To make that claim you must bring the evidence not me. I did not claim anything against anyone. I asked you if the two people you mentioned served in Jihad anywhere and I still want to know. If you dont know simply say I dont know, dont tell me maybe they did or maybe they did not.

And it is not wrong to take the rulings of those involved in the matter greater than those not involved. They can quote whatever they wish, but without experience then they are such spilling out words. Which I am not saying they will be wrong but without action then why do they bother to talk.

And once again I did not say regular Mujahideen become scholars once they step onto the battlefield. But there are ulema amongst them. The true ulema are amongst the first people to enter such lands anyway.

[Azzam]

Even the recitors Sheikh Ahmad Al Ajmy, Sheikh Saad Al Ghaamidi, and Mishary Rashid Efaasy also went and fought jihad before and I think Sheikh Hudayfi of Madeenah. There are actually much more than this.

There are also various ulema among the Taliban.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

i think we are digressing again. in any case, the ulama have to be recognised as valid sources and leaders... yes, there are some amongst the ones you mentioned.

but back to the title of the thread....

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

...out if interest, which one of the scholars above issued a fatwa supporting self-annilihation operations?

secondly, what is the educational background of abu hafs al-mauritani?

[abdushakur]

Azzam, you said "Even the recitors Sheikh Ahmad Al Ajmy, Sheikh Saad Al Ghaamidi, and Mishary Rashid Efaasy also went and fought jihad before and I think Sheikh Hudayfi of Madeenah. There are actually much more than this.

There are also various ulema among the Taliban."

i heard this aswell from someone, but i would like to know the source. can u help?
also forgive me if i am saying wrong, but is it true that Shaykh Ahmad Ali Ajami has passed away...as a shaheed?

Allah knows best.



btw, this is an interesting thread. May Allah keep the peace between all contributors. Shaytan can get out.


a bro was telling me some time back that in a 'recent' bayan of maulana Masood Azhar (db) he said that the 'recent' bombings of churches in Pakistan is not jihad and brings the amal of jihad into disrepute...i think many ppl dont realise that statements like these are made.

i have a lot of respect for maulana Sahib from what i know of him.

[Azzam]

Azzam, you said "Even the recitors Sheikh Ahmad Al Ajmy, Sheikh Saad Al Ghaamidi, and Mishary Rashid Efaasy also went and fought jihad before and I think Sheikh Hudayfi of Madeenah. There are actually much more than this.

There are also various ulema among the Taliban."

i heard this aswell from someone, but i would like to know the source. can u help?
also forgive me if i am saying wrong, but is it true that Shaykh Ahmad Ali Ajami has passed away...as a shaheed?

Allah knows best.


Sheikh Ahmad Al Ajmy has not passed away he is alive alhamdulillah. So are the other two. I have a friend very close with both Al Ajmy and Saad Al Ghaamidi.

About their jihad it is quite well known what they have done.

I do not wish to participate in this topic as I have figured out the tone of the forum and what it stands for. Besides that it will go nowhere.

If certain people are interested in it then they can go to other forums, where people will discuss it with them in more detail.

[Omar HH]

Why do people justify the killing of little children, women, and one's self? Because they are mad. Simple and plain. I agree with the Palestinian cause, but let's be honest with ourselves here. Seriously! The Palestinians are just enraged, and they are in such a rage that they even dress up their little 4 year old children in suicide bomber outfits.

I know what has happened to them is bad, but two wrongs don't make a right.

It's not that I am not for self defense. But blowing yourself up and civilians is something else.

Remember the words of Imam Nawawi "Not praying for your enemies is jealousy" because that means you only want yourself to be guided and not other people, even if they are your enemies. The Prophet (SAWS) said "There should be no harm nor reciprocating harm."

[Azzam]

in actuality you are responding by emotion for little kids.

I can understand. However, it is not simple as that.

Too bad people are getting blamed for speaking the truth.

[Omar HH]

As a strictly legal issue Traditional Sunni scholars have rulings both ways. See Shaykh al-Bouti and Mufti Ebrahim Desai for halal rulings, Shaykh Abu Qanit al-Hassani for haraam rulings. Both are subject to conditions and one should go read the actual rulings.

We are not Shaykhs or Muftis, so there's no need to debate it as a legal issue.

As a political issue, thats a different story.

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[Omar HH]

"Whatever one's position on the issue, it remains that the condemnation of suicide bombers of civilians to hell fire is not new nor exclusive to Shaykh Hamza but I have heard it from the Ba `Alawi Shuyukh as per Shaykh Abu Bakr al-`Attas at the Muhammad Fatih Institute in Beirut."
- Sunnipath.com

[muminah]

The Islamic Ruling on the Permissibility of Martyrdom Operations
Did Hawa Barayev Commit Suicide or achieve Martyrdom?
Introduction
All praise is due to Allah, Sustainer of the Universe, Who informs us that:
"Were it not for Allah's repelling some people by means of others, the earth would surely have
become corrupt." [Quran]
The choicest peace and blessings be on the Chief of the Prophets, who has said,
"By [Allah] in Whose Hand is my soul! I have surely wished to be killed in the path of Allah, then
brought to life, then killed [again], then brought to life, then killed!" [Bukhari, Muslim and others]
And who has also said, "Act, and each will be eased to that for which he was created." [Bukhari,
Muslim and others]
Allah legislated Jihad for the dignity of this Ummah, knowing that it is abhorrent to us. People today
have neglected this great duty, and pursued what they love, thinking good lies in what they love, and
failing to realize that good lies in that which Allah has legislated.
Allah has blessed us, here in Chechnya, by allowing us to fight unbelief - represented by the Russian
army, and we ask Allah to strengthen and assist us. We praise Allah also for allowing us to have
scored victories over the enemy. Some of us have fulfilled their pledges; others are still waiting.
Verily, Allah has fulfilled His promise to us, and granted us dignity through Jihad. Our martyred
brothers have written, with their blood, a history we can be proud of, and their sacrifices only increase
us in eagerness for our own martyrdom, so as to meet Allah, and to be resurrected with the Prophet
(peace and blessings be upon him), his companions and all the other prophets, martyrs and righteous
ones.
The Ummah has become used to hearing, through its history, about men who sacrifice their lives for
the religion, but they are not as familiar with women doing the same. The young woman who was -
inshaa-Allah - martyred, Hawa Barayev, is one of the few women whose name will be recorded in
history. Undoubtedly, she has set the most marvellous example by her sacrifice. The Russians may
well await death from every quarter now, and their hearts may appropriately be filled with terror on
account of women like her. Let every jealous one perish in his rage! Let every sluggish individual bury
his head in the dirt! She has done what few men have done. Every supporter of the truth should
prepare to give the like of what she has given. The Ummah may well be proud that such a paragon has
appeared in our midst. We are certain that an Ummah that contains people like her will never - by
Allah's leave - become devoid of good.
However, while we were in the midst of rejoicing over our sister's self-sacrifice, and we were still
supplicating for her to achieve forgiveness and mercy from Allah, we received mail which clouded our
joy. It came, not from an enemy or envier, but rather from a handful of people whom we presume
wanted to offer constructive advice. However, they erred, and accused the great Mujahidah, Hawa
Barayev, of having committed suicide, saying that it was not permissible for her to have acted thus.
Nor did they think it was permissible for us to mention her account on our website, rather that we
should have criticized her. They mentioned evidences which they had misunderstood to imply what
they claimed. In this study, we shall clarify that Hawa Barayev - and similarly `Abdur-Rahman Shishani, Qadi Mowladi, Khatam, his brother `Ali, `Abdul-Malik and others - are, Allah willing, in
Gardens of Eternity, in the bodies of green birds, betaking themselves to lanterns hanging from the
`Arsh. This is how we regard them, but we do not sanctify anyone before Allah.
Before we embark on a detailed exposition concerning the Islamic verdict on martyrdom operations, it
is appropriate for us to first present a brief, to-the-point response:
Firstly : If you did not know, could you not ask? It is not appropriate for someone who is unaware of
a verdict to make sweeping statements accusing others of wrongdoing. If those who criticized us had
only investigated the issue first, they would have found that the issue is, at worst, a disagreed issue
among scholars, such that we cannot be criticized for following legitimate scholarship.
Secondly : We request our respected brothers, who seek the truth, not to criticize us for anything
without backing the criticism with verdicts of scholars, and [especially] the understanding of the Pious
Predecessors.
Thirdly : Dear brothers and sisters! Not every martyrdom operation is legitimate, nor is every
martyrdom operation prohibited. Rather, the verdict differs based on factors such as the enemy's
condition, the situation of the war, the potential martyr's personal circumstances, and the elements of
the operation itself. Thus, one may not give a verdict on such operations without having an
understanding of the actual situation, and this is obtained from the Mujahideen, and not the
unbelievers. How, then, can you accuse us of ignorance when you are unaware of our situation, let
alone the specific details of the operation in question?
Definition of Martyrdom Operations, and their Effect on the Enemy
Martyrdom or self-sacrifice operations are those performed by one or more people, against enemies far
outstripping them in numbers and equipment, with prior knowledge that the operations will almost
inevitably lead to death.
The form this usually takes nowadays is to wire up one's body, or a vehicle or suitcase with
explosives, and then to enter amongst a conglomeration of the enemy, or in their vital facilities, and to
detonate in an appropriate place there in order to cause the maximum losses in the enemy ranks, taking
advantage of the element of surprise and penetration. Naturally, the enacter of the operation will
usually be the first to die.
Another technique is for an armed Mujahid to break into the enemy barracks, or area of
conglomeration, and fire at them at close-range, without having prepared any plan of escape, nor
having considered escape a possibility. The objective is to kill as many of the enemy as possible, and
he will almost certainly die.
The name 'suicide-operations' used by some is inaccurate, and in fact this name was chosen by the
Jews to discourage people from such endeavours. How great is the difference between one who
commits suicide - because of his unhappiness, lack of patience and weakness or absence of iman and
has been threatened with Hell-Fire - and between the self-sacrificer who embarks on the operation out
of strength of faith and conviction, and to bring victory to Islam, by sacrificing his life for the
upliftment of Allah's word!
As for the effects of these operations on the enemy, we have found, through the course of our
experience that there is no other technique which strikes as much terror into their hearts, and which
shatters their spirit as much. On account of this they refrain from mixing with the population, and from
oppressing, harassing and looting them. They have also become occupied with trying to expose suchoperations before they occur, which has distracted them from other things. Praise is to Allah. Many of
their imminent plans were foiled, and furthermore, Putin issued a severe condemnation of the Home
Affairs and Defense Ministers, placing the responsibility on them, and threatening high-level
reshufflings in the two ministries. Those troops who are not busy trying to foil martyrdom operations
are occupied with removal of Russian corpses, healing the wounded, and drawing out plans and
policies from beneath the debris. This is all on the moral level.
On the material level, these operations inflict the heaviest losses on the enemy, and are lowest in cost
to us. The cost of equipment is negligible in comparison to the assault; in fact the explosives and
vehicles were captured as war-booty, such that we returned them to the Russians in our special way!
The human casualty is a single life, who is in fact a martyr and hero gone ahead to Gardens of
Eternity, inshaa-Allah. As for the enemy, their losses are high; after the last operation, they had over
1,600 dead and wounded, and the most crucial concentration of Russian forces in Chechnya was
completely destroyed.
All of this was achieved by the efforts of only four heroes. We feel sure that the Russians will not
remain long in our land with such operations continuing. Either they will fear aggregation, in which
case they will become easy targets for attack, or they will gather together to combat the assaults, in
which case the martyrdom operations will be sufficient - Allah willing - to disperse them. If they wish
to keep matters under control, they would need more than 300,000 troops in every city, and this is no
exaggeration.
One can see how much fear the operations in Palestine caused, and that they were a major factor in
convincing the Jews to grant self-rule to the Palestinians, hoping that they could be more easily
controlled in that way. In Chechnya, the damage is much greater than in similar operations in
Palestine, on account of Russian fortification being much less than that possessed by the Jews.
Evidences for the Issue
Before going into the verdict concerning the operations, citing the pronouncements of scholars about
them, and resolving some unclear issues, it is appropriate for us to first present some of the Shar`i
(Islamic law) evidences, and then follow them up with discussion and application thereof. We will not
analyze the chains of transmission of each narration separately; we will regard it as sufficient that the
basis of the evidence is in the collections of Bukhari and Muslim, and hence any reports outside of
these two books is strengthened by them.
1 - "Verily, Allah has purchased from the believers their selves and their wealth, in return for
Heaven being theirs. They fight in the path of Allah and they kill and are killed " [Qur'an, 9:111]
Hence, any scenario in which the Mujahid offers the purchase price in order to attain the merchandise
is permissible unless an evidence exists to specifically prohibit it.
2 - "How many a small force has overcome a numerous force, by the permission of Allah. And
Allah is with the steadfast ones." [Qur'an, 2:249]
This verse indicates that the measure of power in the Shari`ah is not primarily linked to material,
worldly measures.
3 - "Among mankind is he who sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah. And Allah is Pitying
towards the servants." [Qur'an, 2:207]
According to the explanation of this verse by the Sahabah, as we cite below, one who sells himself for
the sake of Allah is not considered to have committed suicide, even if he immerses himself into 1,000
of the enemy forces without armour.
4 - In the hadith in Sahih Muslim, containing the account of the boy and the king in the story of the
Trenches referred to by Surah al-Buruj, we find that the unbelieving king tried various means to kill
the believing boy, failing each time. Eventually, the boy told him, "You will not be able to kill me until
… you gather people on one plateau, hang me on a palm-trunk, take an arrow from my quiver, place it
in the bow, say, "In the name of Allah, the Lord of the boy," and shoot me." The king did this, and
thereby managed to kill the boy as predicted, but the people who had gathered began saying, "We
believe in Allah, the Lord of the boy!" Thereupon, the king ordered trenches to be dug, and fires lit in
them, and then for the people to be made to jump into them if they refused to give up their faith. This
was done, and eventually a woman was brought with her infant, and she hesitated to jump on account
of him, but he said, "O mother! Remain steadfast for you are upon the truth."
The boy, in this hadith, ordered the king to kill him in the interest of the religion, and this indicates
that such a deed is legitimate, and not considered suicide.
5 - Imam Ahmad has narrated in his Musnad (1/310) [and a similar narration is in Ibn Majah (4030)]
that Ibn `Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah said, "On the night in which I was taken by night, a
pleasant fragrance came my way, and so I said, "O Gabriel! What is this pleasant fragrance?" He said,
"This is the fragrance of the hairdresser of Pharaoh's daughter, and [of the hairdresser]'s children." I
said, "What is her situation?" He said, "While she was combing Pharaoh's daughter's hair one day,
the comb fell from her hand, so she said, "In the name of Allah." Pharaoh's daughter asked, "[You
mean] my father?" She said, "No, rather my Lord, and the Lord of your father, is Allah." She said,
"Can I tell him that?" She said, "Yes."" The hadith goes on to describe that a huge brass pot was
heated, and it was ordered for her and her children to be cast therein. She requested from Pharaoh -
and he acceded to her request - that her bones and her children's bones be gathered in a single cloth
and buried. Her children were then thrown into the cauldron one by one before her eyes, until they got
to a suckling infant, and it seemed she wavered on account of him, but he said, "O mother! Jump in,
for the torture of this world is lighter than the punishment of the Hereafter." So she jumped in.
The narrators of the chain [of Imam Ahmad's version] are reliable, apart from Abu `Umar al-Dareer,
whom al-Dhahabi and Abu Hatim al-Razi considered truthful, and Ibn Hibban considered reliable.
According to this hadith, the child was made to speak, as was the child in the preceding story of the
trenches, telling the mother to jump into the fire, which indicates the virtue of this deed.
6 - Abu Dawud (3/27) and Tirmidhi (4/280) have narrated (and Tirmidhi graded it as sahih) that
Aslam ibn `Imran narrated that when they were fighting a mighty army of the Romans, a man in the
Muslim army attacked the Roman ranks until he penetrated them. People shouted, saying,
"SubhanAllah! He has contributed to his own destruction." Thereupon, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari stood
up, and said, "O people! You give this interpretation to this verse, whereas it was revealed concerning
us, the Ansar, when Allah had given honour to Islam and its supporters had become many, whereupon
some of us secretly said to one another … "Our wealth has been depleted, and Allah has given honour
to Islam and its supporters have become many, so let us stay amidst our wealth and make up what has
been depleted of it." Thereupon, Allah revealed to His Prophet [meaning] "And spend in the Path of
Allah, and do not contribute to your own destruction" [Qur'an, 2:195] refuting what we had said.
So, the destruction lay in staying with our wealth and repleting it, and abandoning combat." Abu
Ayyub remained fixed until he [was killed and] was buried in Rome.
Al-Hakim authenticated it, saying it conforms to the criteria of Bukhari and Muslim, and Dhahabi
corroborated him. Nasa'i and Ibn Hibban also narrated it. Bayhaqi included it, and other narrations in
his Sunan in a chapter entitled, "Permissibility of a man or men fighting alone in the enemy land,"thereby citing it as evidence for the permissibility of advancing against a group, even if the more likely
result is that they will kill him.
In this hadith, Abu Ayyub explained that the verse (Qur'an, 2:195) does not apply to one who plunges
into the enemy ranks alone, even though it may seem to people that he is destroying himself. The
Sahabah tacitly confirmed this explanation of his [by not objecting].
7 - Ibn Abi Shaybah has narrated in his Musannaf (5/338) that Mu`adh ibn `Afra' asked the Messenger
of Allah, "What makes Allah laugh upon His slave?" The reply: "[The servant] immersing himself into
the enemy without armour." Mu`adh then took off his armour and fought until he was killed.
This hadith is a clear evidence for the virtue of Jihad operations in which it is most likely that one will
die, and it indicates that Jihad has some special rules which permit what may normally be prohibited.
8 - Ibn Abi Shaybah has extracted (5/289) [and similarly Tirmidhi (2491 and 2492, the latter narration
he classified as sahih) and Nasa'i (1597 and 2523), and Ahmad (20,393), as well as Tabarani (in al-
Kabir, with a hasan chain) and Ibn al-Mubarak (in Kitab al-Jihad, 1/84)], "Three [categories of
people] Allah loves,…" and among them is "a man who was in a dispatchment and met the enemy, and
they were defeated, but he faced them with his chest until he was killed or victorious." Al-Hakim also
narrated it, and said it is sahih.
9 - Ahmad narrated in his Musnad (6/22) from Ibn Mas`ud that the Prophet said, "Our Sustainer
marvels at two men: a man who stirs from his bed … to salah … and a man who fights in the path of
Allah, and his companions are defeated, and he realizes what awaits him in defeat and what awaits
him in returning [to combat], but he returns [to combat] until his blood is spilled. Allah says, "Look
at My servant who went back [to combat] hopeful and anxious for what is with Me, until his blood
was spilled."
Ahmad Shakir said,: its chain is sahih. Haythami said in Majma` al-Zawa'id: Ahmad ad Abu Ya`la
narrated it, as did Tabarani in al-Kabir, and its isnad is hasan. Abu Dawud and Al-Hakim narrated it in
abbreviated form, and Al-Hakim authenticated it. Ibn al-Nahhas said: even if there were only this
single authentic hadith, it would suffice us as evidence for the virtue of plunging [into the enemy
ranks].
10 - Muslim has narrated from Abu Hurayrah, "Among the best of lives for people is a man who clasps
the reins of his horse in the path of Allah, rushing on its back; whenever he hears a cry [of battle] or
advancement towards the enemy, he hurries to it, seeking death and being slain with eagerness."
This indicates that seeking to be killed and pursuing martyrdom are legitimate and praiseworthy acts.
11 - Bayhaqi has narrated in Al-Sunan al-Kubra (9/100) with a sahih chain from Mujahid that the
Prophet sent out `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud and Khabbab as one dispatchment, and Dihyah as a
dispatchment on his own.
This indicates that regardless of the level of risk in a Jihad operation, it remains permissible by default,
and the greater the risk, the greater the reward.
12 - Bukhari and Muslim have narrated that Talhah shielded the Prophet from arrows in the Battle of
Uhud, and his hand was crippled thereby.
13 - Bukhari and Muslim have reported that Salamah ibn al-Akwa` was asked, "For what did you
pledge allegiance to the Prophet on the Day of Hudaybiyyah?" He said, "For death."
________________________________________

[muminah]

14- Many have reported from Muhammad ibn Thabit ibn Qays Ibn Shimas, when the Muslims were
disclosed on the Day of Yamamah, Salim, the freed-slave of Abu Hudhayfah, said, "This is not how
we used to act with the Messenger of Allah." Then, he dug a trench for himself, and stood in it carrying
the flag, and fought until he was killed as a martyr on the Day of Yamamah.
This and the next report indicate that steadfastness is desirable, even if it leads to death, and Salim
attributed this type of action to the [days of] the Messenger of Allah.
15 - Ibn Jareer Tabari has narrated in his Tarikh (2/151) that in the Battle of Mu'tah, Ja`far ibn Abi
Talib took the flag and fought until he became immersed in the fighting, whereupon he turned to a
light-colored horse he had and wounded it [so he could not escape], then he fought until he was killed.
Hence, JA`far was the first Muslim to wound his horse [in this manner].
16 - Muslim has narrated that a man heard a Sahabi saying, when the enemy was near, "The
Messenger of Allah said : The doors of Heaven are under the shade of the swords." The man, upon
hearing this, got up and asked for verification of the hadith. When it was confirmed, he turned to his
companions, gave them the greeting of salam, broke and discarded the scabbard of his sword and then
advanced to the enemy with his sword, striking them until he was killed.
[The original study in Arabic contains 40 narrations, but for brevity we have omitted the remainder].
Verdicts of Scholars Concerning one who Attacks the Enemy Alone
Having established the permissibility of plunging into the enemy and attacking alone even when death
is certain, we proceed and say that the martyrdom operations are derived from this principle, realizing
that the prohibition of suicide relates to deficiency or absence of faith. However, the former
generations did not have knowledge of martyrdom operations in their current-day form, for these
evolved with the changes in techniques of warfare, and hence they did not specifically address them.
However, they did address similar issues, such as that of attacking the enemy single-handed and
frightening them with one's own death being certain. They also deduced general principles under
which the martyrdom operations fall, and in doing so they relied on evidences such as those we have
mentioned in the previous section. There is one difference between the martyrdom operations and their
classical precedent, namely that in our case the person is killed by his own hand, whereas in the other
he was killed by the enemy. We also explain that this difference does not affect the verdict.
A. Scholars of the Sahabah and Tabi`in
1 - Ibn al-Mubarak and Ibn Abi Shaybah (5/303) have reported, through a sahih chain, that Mudrik ibn
`Awf al-Ahmasi said, "I was in the presence of `Umar when the messenger of Nu`man ibn Muqrin cam
to him and `Umar asked him about the people, whereupon he replied, "So-and-so and so-and-so were
hit, and others and others whom I do not know." `Umar said, "But Allah knows them." [The
messenger] said, "O chief of the believers! [There was] a man who sold his life." At this Mudrik said,
"That is my maternal uncle, by Allah, O chief of the believers! People claimed he has contributed to
his own destruction." `Umar said, "They have lied (or: are mistaken). Rather, he is among those who
have bought the Hereafter with this world." Bayhaqi mentioned that that was on the day of Nahawand.
2 - Ibn Abi Shaybah has extracted (5/322) that a battalion of unbelievers advanced, and a man of the
Ansar faced them and attacked them, and broke through the ranks, then returned, repeating this twice
or thrice. Sa`d ibn Hisham mentioned this to Abu Hurayrah, who recited the verse (meaning), "Among
mankind is he who sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah."
________________________________________
Page 7
3 - Al-Hakim has extracted in the Book of Tafseer (2/275) and Ibn Abi Hatim (1/128), with a similar
narration recorded by Ibn `Asakir, that Bara' was asked about the verse (meaning), "And spend in the Path of Allah, and do not contribute to your own destruction..."; does it refer to a man who
encounters the enemy and fights until he is killed? He said, "No, rather it is a man who commits a sin,
and then says Allah will not forgive him." Al-Hakim said this is authentic according to Bukhari's and
Muslim's criteria. This explanation of the verse was narrated by Tabari in his exegesis (3/584) from
Hudhayfah, Ibn `Abbas, `Ikrimah, Hasan Basri, `Ata', Sa`id ibn Jubayr, Dahhak, Suddi, Muqatil and
others.
B. Verdicts of Renowned Exegetes
1 - Ibn al-`Arabi says in Ahkam al-Qur'an (1/116, and see also Qurtubi's tafseer 2/364), commenting
on the verse, (meaning), "And spend in the Path of Allah, and do not contribute to your own
destruction...," "There are five views about [the meaning of] destruction [here]:
•
Do not give up spending [in the path of Allah]
•
Do not go out without provision
•
Do not abandon Jihad
•
Do not take on an enemy you are not capable of withstanding
•
Do not despair of forgiveness
Tabari said: "It is general [in scope], and there is no contradiction between them." He is right, except
regarding plunging into the enemy, for scholars have disagreed concerning this. Qasim ibn
Mukhaymirah, Qasim ibn Muhammad and `Abdul-Malik from among our [Maliki] scholars said there
is no objection to a man single-handedly taking on a large army, if he is strong and [the action] is
sincerely for Allah. If he has no power, then that is self-destruction. It has been said [by some] that if
he is seeking martyrdom and his intention is sincere, he can attack, for his goal is to kill one of the
enemy forces, and that is clear in the verse (meaning), "Among mankind is he who sells himself
seeking the pleasure of Allah." The correct view by me is that of permissibility of rushing into an
army one cannot withstand, for it contains four [possible] aspects:
•
Seeking martyrdom
•
Inflicting losses [on the enemy]
•
Encouraging the Muslims to attack
•
Demoralizing the enemy, showing them that if one man can do this, what will the totality be
capable of!"
2 - Qurtubi says in his Tafseer (2/364), "Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani, the student of Abu
Hanifah, said: If a man single-handedly attacks 1,000 pagans, there is no objection to it if there is hope
of success, or inflicting loss on the enemy, otherwise it is disliked, for then he would expose himself to
death without benefit to the Muslims. As for someone whose aim is to embolden the Muslims to
emulate his feat, it's permissibility is not far-fetched, for it entails benefit to the Muslims in some
ways. if his intent is to frighten the enemy, and demonstrate the Muslims' strength of faith, its
permissibility is not far-fetched. If there is benefit in it for the Muslims, then giving one's life for the
strengthening of the religion and weakening of the unbelievers, then it is the noble rank praised in the
verse, (meaning), "Among mankind is he who sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah." and other
verses."
3 - Shawkani says in Fath al-Qadeer (1/297) about the verse of self-destruction, "The reality is that the
words have general implication, and are not specific to the circumstances of revelation, and so
everything which may be described as worldly or religious self-destruction is covered by it, as stated
________________________________________
Page 8
by Ibn Jareer al-Tabari. Among that which comes under this verse is a man attacking an enemy army
which he can neither overcome, nor have any effect beneficial to the Mujahideen."
This implies that if there is a benefit it is permissible.
C. Texts of the Madhahib
1 - Hanafi
Ibn `Abideen says in his Hashiyah (4/303), "There is no objection to a man fighting alone, even if he
thinks he will be killed, provided he achieves something such as killing, wounding or defeating [the
enemy], for this has been reported from a number of the Sahabah in the presence of the Messenger of
Allah on the Day of Uhud, and he praised them for it. If, however, he knows he will not inflict any
loss on them, it is not permissible for him to attack, for it would not contribute to the strengthening of
the religion."
2 - Maliki
Ibn Khuwayz-Mandad said, as cited by Qurtubi in his Tafseer (2/364), "As for a man single-handedly
attacking 100 or more enemy troops ... this has two scenarios: If he is certain, or reasonably so, that he
will kill the subject of his attack, and emerge safe, then it is good, and similarly if he is reasonably
certain that he will be killed, but will inflict loss or cause damage, or have a beneficial effect for the
Muslims, then it is permissible also." Statements from Qurtubi and Ibn al-`Arabi have already
preceded.
3 - Shafi`i
In the completion of Al-Majmu` (19/291) by al-Muti`i, we find, "If the number of the unbelievers are
twice the numbers of the Muslims, and they do not fear perdition, it is obligatory to stand firm ... If
they are more convinced than not of destruction, then there are two possibilities:
1. That they may turn back, based on the verse (meaning), "do not contribute to your own
destruction..."
2. That they may not turn back, and this is the correct view, based on the verse, (meaning), "When
you encounter a force, remain steadfast...", and because the Mujahid only fights in order to kill or be
killed. If the number of the unbelievers exceed twice the numbers of the Muslims, then they may turn
back. If they are more convinced than not that they will not be destroyed, then it is better for them to
remain steadfast so that the Muslims are not routed. If they are more convinced than not that they will
be destroyed, then there are two possibilities:
•
That they are obliged to turn back, based on the words of Allah (meaning), "do not contribute
to your own destruction..."
•
That it is recommended for them to turn back, but not binding, for if they are killed they will
attain martyrdom."
4 - Hanbali
Ibn Qudamah says in Al-Mughni (9/309),
"If the enemy is more than twice the Muslims' number, and the Muslims are reasonably certain of
victory, then it is preferable to remain steadfast on account of the benefit [involved], but if they turn
back it is permissible, for they are not immune to destruction ... it is conceivable that they are obliged
________________________________________
Page 9
to stand fast if they are reasonably certain of victory, on account of the benefit, but if they are
reasonably certain or being defeated by remaining and being unscathed by turning back, then it is
preferable for them to turn back, but if they remain put, it is permissible, for they have a goal of
martyrdom, and it is also possible that they will be victorious. If they are reasonably certain of being
routed whether they remain put or turn back, then it is preferable for them to remain steadfast to attain
the rank or martyrdom, ... and also because it is possible they might be victorious."
Ibn Taymiyyah says, in Majmu` al-Fatawa (28/540),
"Muslim has narrated in his Sahih the story of the people of the trenches, in which the boy ordered his
own killing for the benefit of the religion, and hence the four imams have allowed a Muslim to
immerse himself in the enemy ranks, even if he is reasonably certain that they will kill him, provided
there is benefit in that for the Muslims. "
5 - Zahiri
Ibn Hazm says in Al-Muhalla (7/294), "Neither Abu Ayyub al-Ansari nor Abu Musa al-Ash`ari
criticized a man plunging alone into a raging army and remaining steadfast until he was killed... It has
been authentically reported that a man from among the Sahabah asked the Messenger of Allah about
what makes Allah laugh upon a servant, and he said, "His immersing himself into the enemy without
armour," whereupon the man removed his armour and entered the enemy [ranks, fighting] until he was
killed."
D. Some Analysis
The hadith of the boy is the strongest of evidences for this issue. The hadith explains that when the
boy saw that his being killed in a specific way would be a means for spreading the religion, and hence
he advised the king - from whom Allah had protected him hitherto - how to kill him, for spread of the
religion and people's entering into it was more weighty in his eyes than his remaining alive, and he
thereby contributed to taking his own life. Yes, he did not take it by his own hand, but his opinion was
the sole factor leading to his killing. This is just as if a man, suffering from painful wounds, asked
someone else to kill him; he would be as guilty of suicide as if he had taken his own life, regardless of
who did the killing, for he requested it. Similarly, Allah praised those who believed in the boy's Lord;
those who were being forced to jump into the pits of fire for refusing to renounce their faith. Nay, even
the infant spoke, encouraging its mother to advance when she hesitated about entering the fire. They
were praised in Surah al-Buruj, which described their fate as being gardens beneath which flow rivers,
and they are called successful. The story of Pharaoh's daughter's hairdresser is similar. We have cited
evidences from our Shari`ah which fortify these two hadiths, and nothing has appeared to contradict
sacrificing one's life for raising Allah's word. Hence, the content of these two hadiths is part of our
Shari`ah, according to the majority of scholars.
In fact, we see that this sort of operation was carried out in the presence of the Prophet, and after him
by the Sahabah, not once but many times. Furthermore, protection of the religion is the greatest
service a Mujahid performs, and the evidences do not leave us with any doubt that a Mujahid may
sacrifice his life for the religion. Talhah shielded the Prophet with his hand, and this supports the
permissibility of a person sacrificing himself for others in the interests of the religion.

[muminah]

E. Synopsis
________________________________________
Page 10
It has transpired that scholars gave, to the issue of plunging single-handed into the enemy with
reasonable certainty of being killed, the same verdict as in cases of death being certain, such that
whoever permits the latter permits the former.
Further, the majority of scholars gave conditions for the permissibility:
1. Intention
2. Infliction of losses on the enemy
3. Frightening them
4. Strengthening the hearts of the Muslims
Qurtubi and Ibn Qudamah allowed plunging into the enemy with only a sincere intention, even if no
other conditions are fulfilled, for seeking martyrdom is legitimate. Since there is no explicit stipulation
of the majority's conditions in narrations, this view appears preferable. The majority deduced their
conditions from general standards of the Shari`ah, but the general need not restrict the specific. Yes,
we do say that if there is no benefit to the Muslims or the Mujahideen, an action should not be carried
out, and is not the most optimal practice, but this is apart from the original permissibility of the act, for
to condemn one seeking martyrdom without a firm basis is an injustice.
The Issue of using Prisoners as a Human Shield
The issue of killing Muslim prisoners whom the enemy has used as a human shield resembles the issue
at hand, although there is also a difference between them. The similarity is that both involve ending a
Muslim life in the interests of the religion. The difference between the issues is that killing those used
as a shield was permitted by scholars out of necessity, for there does not exist any text permitting the
taking of someone else's life, rather it derives from the public interest overshadowing the individual
interest. Hence, killing prisoners used as a shield is based on the rule of necessity permitting the
unlawful, and of choosing the lesser of two evils when one is inevitable. As for martyrdom operations,
no such rules need be applied, for we have clear texts encouraging plunging into the enemy ranks in
spite of the certainty of being killed, and it is not a case of necessity.
Killing another person is an even greater sin than killing oneself; Qurtubi cites in his Tafseer (10/183)
consensus of scholars that anyone who is coerced to kill someone else may not comply. Hence
whoever allows killing another Muslim, where no textual evidence exists, but for an overwhelming
religious benefit, should similarly allow killing oneself for an overwhelming benefit, for the taking of
one's own life is less serious than taking someone else's life. This would be even if we did not have
any texts to support martyrdom operations, although we actually do have specific evidences, as
mentioned earlier.
The Muslim army is ordinarily prohibited from killing not only Muslims, but also dhimmis
(unbelievers living as protected subjects of the Muslim state), as well as old men, women and children
from among the unbelievers. If Muslim prisoners of war are used by the unbelievers then it is not
permissible to fire on them except in cases of dire necessity. In the case of women and children of the
unbelievers, however, they could be fired upon for an expediency of war even if it is not dire
necessity, for war may need such action, but the intention should not be specifically to kill the non-
combatants. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his Household) was asked about the
pagans being hit by night, and some women and children being killed in the process, and he replied,
"They are from among them." [Bukhari and Muslim] In the case of Muslims, however, firing is
permissible only if abstaining will lead to a wholesale harm, such as a greater number of Muslims
being killed than those being used as a shield, or the Muslims being defeated and their land overrun. In
such a case, any Muslims killed as a result will be raised up according to their intentions.
________________________________________
Page 11
The majority consider it obligatory to attack the enemy in cases of necessity, even if it leads to the
members of a human shield being killed. [See: Shawkani's Fath al-Qadeer (5/447), Mughni al-Muhtaj
(4/244), Hashiyat al-Dusuqi (2/178), and Ibn Qudamah's al-Mughni (10/505)] The author of Mughni
al-Muhtaj gives two conditions which should be satisfied:
1. That the Mujahideen try their best to avoid hitting the shield deliberately.
2. That they do not intend to kill the people in the shield.
Ibn Taymiyyah said, "If the unbelievers use Muslims as a human shield, and the unbelievers cannot be
repelled without killing [the Muslims], then [the Muslim army may fire], for inflictions and afflictions
may smite one in this world who does not deserve it in the Hereafter, and it counts as a misfortune for
him [for which he may be rewarded]. Some expressed this by saying, "The killer is a Mujahid and the
killed one is a martyr.""
The majority of Hanafis and Malikis, as well as Imam Sufyan al-Thawri, have permitted attacking
when the enemy have used a shield of Muslims, whether or not abstaining would be detrimental or
lead to defeat, reasoning that otherwise Jihad would never take place. [See: Fath al-Qadeer (5/448),
Jassas' Ahkam al-Qur'an (5/273) and Minah al-Jaleel (3/151)] The weakness of this position is clear,
in that the sanctity of a Muslim life is greater than to allow its taking without a clear proof, and
moreover such shields are not universally used, and so Jihad would not necessarily come to a halt.
In the case of women children and old men from among the unbelievers being used as shield, the
majority of Hanafis, Shafi`is and Hanbalis have allowed attacking even if it is not a dire necessity.
[See: Al-Siyar al-Kabeer (4/1554) Mughni al-Muhtaj (4/224) and Al-Mughni (10/504)] The Malikis
differed, but for brevity we will not mention their reasoning. [See: Dardeer's Al-Sharh al-Kabeer
(2/178) and Minah al-Jaleel (3/150).]
The View of the Majority Concerning one who assists in Killing
Plunging into the enemy ranks without hope of escape is the greatest means by which a Mujahid
contributes to his death, and contributing to one's own death is just like killing oneself, just as one who
deliberately causes the death of someone is like one who actually killed him. The majority of scholars,
from among the Malikis Shafi`is and Hanbalis, have subjected one who kills someone by consequence
to being killed in retaliation just as in the case of direct murder.
Among the textual bases for this is that which Bukhari has reported, that a boy was assassinated,
whereupon `Umar said, "Even if all the inhabitants of San`a took part in it, I would kill them all."
From a rational angle, if killing in retaliation were to be halted in such a case, murder would increase,
for murderers would merely use one or more accomplices without fear of being executed for the crime.
The monetary compensation of blood-money would not deter all murderers, especially the well-off.
Hence it is fitting for all the participants to be executed, and in a similar light the Qur'an describes one
who kills one person to be like one who has killed all mankind. [See: Al-Sayl al-Jarrar (4/397),
Tafseer al-Qurtubi (2/251), Majmu` Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah (20/382), Al-Bahr al-Ra'iq (8/354),
Sam`ani's Qawati` al-Adillah (2/243)]
So, if one who kills himself by plunging into the enemy is praised, then this praise applies independent
of the weapon and manner in which he gives up his life. We have already mentioned in evidence 14
the Sahabi's action, and no criticism or stipulation has been recorded from the Prophet (peace and
blessings be upon him) of such a practice. Hence, if allowing oneself to be killed by the enemy is
allowed when it is in the interests of the Muslims, then clearly killing oneself for the same purpose
should be allowed, and in such a case a Mujahid is exempted from the general texts which prohibit
taking one's own life.
________________________________________
Page 12
Definition of a Shaheed (martyr)
Nawawi has enumerated [in Sharh Sahih Muslim (1/515) and Al-Majmu` (1/277)] seven explanations
for why the martyr is called Shaheed:
(1) Because Allah and the Prophet have testified concerning his entry into Heaven
(2) Because he is alive before his Lord
(3) Because the angels of mercy witness the taking of his soul
(4) Because he will be among those who testify over nations on the Day of Resurrection
(5) Because his faith and good ending have outwardly been witnessed
(6) Because he has a witness to his death, namely his blood
(7) Because his soul immediately witnesses Heaven.
Ibn Hajar has mentioned fourteen means by which a person can acquire the title, some of them
specifically related to being killed in the path of Allah and others not. [See: Fath al-Bari (6/43)]
Jurists have given the technical definition of a martyr as follows:
According to the Hanafis:
"One who is killed by the pagans, or is found killed in the battle bearing a mark of any wound,
whether external or internal - such as blood emerging from an eye orr the like." [Al-`Inayah published
on the margins of Fath al-Qadeer (2/142) and Hashiyat Ibn `Abideen (2/268)]
"Anyone who is killed while fighting pagans, or rebels, or brigands, by a means attributed to the
enemy - whether directly or by consequence - is a shaheed, anyone who is killed by a means not
specifically attributed to [an action of] the enemy is not considered a shaheed." [Zayla`i's Tabyeen al-
Haqa'iq, (1/247). See also Al-Bahr al-Ra'iq (2/211)]
According to the Malikis:
"One who is killed while fighting warring unbelievers only, even if killed on Islamic land such as if
the enemy attacked the Muslims, [even if he] did not fight on account of being unaware or asleep, [and
even if] killed by a Muslim who mistook him for an unbeliever, or trampled by a horse, or mistakenly
smitten by his own sword or arrow, or by having fallen into a well or from a cliff during the fighting."
[Dardeer's Al-Sharh al-Kabeer, (1/425)]
According to the Shafi`is:
"One who is killed in fighting unbelievers, facing and not running away, for the raising of Allah's
word…and not for any worldly motive." [Mughni al-Muhtaj (1/350) and see Fath al-Bari (6/129)]
According to the Hanbalis:
"One who dies in a battle with the unbelievers, whether male or female, adult or not, whether killed by
the unbelievers, or by his own weapon in error, or by having fallen off his mount, or having been
found dead with no mark, provided he was sincere." [Kash-shaf al-Qina`, 2/113. See also Al-Mughni
(2/206)]
________________________________________
Page 13
From the above, it transpires that the majority - apart from the Hanafis - do not consider the identity of
the killing party to be a factor in determining whether the victim is a shaheed. The majority view
emerges preferable, based on:
i. A hadith narrated by Bukhari (4196) in which `Aamir while trying to kill an enemy man during the
battle of Khaybar, mistakenly killed himself instead. Someone said he had invalidated his good deeds,
but the Prophet said, "Whoever says that is lying (or mistaken). Verily, he is has two rewards," and he
coupled two of his fingers, "He is a striver and a Mujahid."
ii. A hadith narrated by Abu Dawud (2539) about a Sahabi who mistakenly hit himself with his own
sword, and people asked, "Is he a shaheed?", whereupon it is reported that the Prophet said, "Yes, and
I am a witness for him."
Some people may waver about the permissibility of martyrdom operations because the Mujahid is
killing himself. In order to dispel this confusion, we may remind ourselves that the Shari`ah often
gives a differing verdict about two actions which externally appear the same, but differ in the
intentions behind them. E.g.
•
Marrying a divorced woman is permissible, but doing so with the sole intention of making her
permissible to the first husband is prohibited.
•
Paying back a loan with more than was borrowed is allowed, but if the excess is stipulated in
the contract, it is prohibited, being riba.
•
One who performs Jihad in order to raise aloft the word of Allah is a Mujahid, but one who
fights for the sake of showing off bravery is among the first who will be taken to Hell.
•
Mistakenly striking oneself with one's own weapon makes one shaheed (according to the
majority) but deliberately killing oneself to escape the pain of wounds makes one deserving of
Hell.
These examples, all based on the hadith, "Verily, actions are only according to intentions…", clearly
support the notion that the verdict concerning the shaheed does not differ based on who the killing
party is, provided the intention is pure. So, one who has a bad intention and is killed by the enemy is
deserving of the Fire, as would be the case if he kills himself out of pain. And, one who has a sincere
intention will be in Heaven, whether he is killed by the enemy, or kills himself in error. And, one who
helps in killing himself for the good of the religion will be in Heaven, like the boy, inshaa-Allah.
Definition of Suicide
Suicide here refers to killing oneself on account of anger, pain or some other worldly motive, and
scholars are unanimous that it is prohibited and moreover a major sin, making the offender deserving
of Hell - either eternally if he legitimizes the act, or for a finite duration [if he did not legitimize it and
died as a Muslim]. "Do not kill yourselves. Verily, Allah is merciful to you. And, whoever does that,
out of animosity and , We shall burn him in a Fire. And that is easy for Allah." [Qur'an, 4:29-30;
See Tafseer al-Qurtubi, (5/156)]
"Among those before you, there was a man with a wound, and he was in anguish, so he took a knife
and cut his hands, and the blood did not stop until he died. Allah said, "My servant has hastened the
ending of his life, so I have prohibited Heaven to him." [Bukhari and Muslim]
"Whoever strangles himself will be strangling himself in the Fire, and whoever stabs himself will be
stabbing himself in the Fire." [Bukhari and Muslim]
________________________________________
Page 14
The authentic ahadith on this subject are many. In fact, we have been ordered not to even wish for
death.
"Let not any of you wish for death on account of harm which has befallen him. But, if he must, he
should pray, 'O Allah! Keep me alive as long as life is better for me, and take my life when death is
better for me." [Bukhari and Muslim]
All of these texts prohibiting suicide related to killing oneself for worldly motives such as pain or
anguish or lack of patience, and not for raising aloft the Word of Allah. We have already cited the
evidences for permitting a Mujahid to plunge into the enemy ranks without armour, and these exempt
the Mujahid from the generality of the suicide texts. Can one then say that one who kills himself in
order to lift the Word of Allah - to inflict losses on the enemy, to frighten them, and with a sincere
intention - can we describe him as one committingg suicide? That is a grave slander. We say that the
prohibition of suicide is on account of its resulting from weakness or lack of faith, whereas the
Mujahid in a martyrdom operation is killing himself on account of the strength of his faith. The boy in
the account of the Trenches referred to in Surah al-Buruj effectively killed himself for such a reason,
and his deed was praiseworthy. Similarly, the Prophet wished for death in the Path of Allah not once
but thrice [the hadith was cited at the start of the article], and it was permissible because it was not on
account of harm which had befallen him, but rather it emanated from strong faith. So, when the
rationale of the prohibition of suicide becomes clear, one arrives at the conclusion that martyrdom
operations are permissible and praiseworthy when undertaken for some religious benefit.
Synopsis
We have arrived at the conclusion that martyrdom operations are permissible, and in fact the Mujahid
who is killed in them is better than one who is killed fighting in the ranks, for there are gradations
even among martyrs, corresponding to their role, action effort and risk undertaken. Then, we explained
how martyrdom operations are the least costly to the Mujahideen and most detrimental to the enemy.
We have heard, as you must have, that most scholars today permit such operations; at least 30 Fatawa
have been issued to this effect. We explained how this issue is derived from the issue of plunging
single-handedly into the enemy ranks; something which is praiseworthy by the agreement of jurists.
We then further stated that we preferred the view that such an action is permissible even if martyrdom
is the only goal, although it is certainly not the optimal practice. Martyrdom operations should not be
carried out unless certain conditions are met:
1. One's intention is sincere and pure - to raise the Word of Allah.
2. One is reasonably sure that the desired effect cannot be achieved by any other means which would
guarantee preservation of his life.
3. One is reasonably sure that loss will be inflicted on the enemy, or they will be frightened, or the
Muslims will be emboldened.
4. One should consult with war strategy experts, and especially with the amber of war, for otherwise
he may upset plan and alert the enemy to their presence.
If the first condition is absent, the deed is worthless, but if it is satisfied while some others are lacking,
then it is not the best thing, but this does not necessarily mean the Mujahid is not shaheed.
We also explained how causing a death carries the same verdict as actual killing. Hence one who
plunges without armour into the enemy ranks, being certain of death, just like one who engages in a
martyrdom operation, is effectively causing his own death, but they are praiseworthy because of the
circumstances and intention, and hence are not considered to have committed suicide. We also
clarified that [according to the majority] the identity of the killer does not have an effect on whether
the Mujahid will be considered shaheed. This dispels the wavering arising from the fact that the
________________________________________
Page 15
Mujahid is taking his own life. Thus, such operations could take on any of the five Shar`i verdicts
depending on intention and circumstances. Finally, we clarified that taking one's own life is not always
blameworthy; rather it is contingent on the motives behind it. So, we conclude that one who kills
himself because of his strong faith and out of love for Allah and the Prophet, and in the interests of the
religion, is praiseworthy.
Conclusion
Finally, we should point out that this topic needs a much more expansive study. However, we are
thankful to Allah for having allowed us to complete this. If we are correct, it is due to Allah, and if we
have erred, then all humans are prone to error. Finally, let the scholars and students of knowledge
approach us with their feedback and advice, for we are in need of such help. Let them fear Allah in
discharging their responsibility to us.
And peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah, who rightly strove in the Path of Allah until
he left this world, and also upon his Household and Companions and those who follow them in
goodness until the Day of Judgment.
And our final words are praise to Allah, Lord of the Worlds.

[faqir]

Asalamu alaykum sister mu'minah,

I don't want to debate this issue when there is debate amongst the qualified Ulema regarding this but could you perhaps provide a specific narration where the deliberate taking of one's own life in order to attack the enemy is mentioned.

JazakAllah khair.

[Azzam]

As a strictly legal issue Traditional Sunni scholars have rulings both ways. See Shaykh al-Bouti and Mufti Ebrahim Desai for halal rulings, Shaykh Abu Qanit al-Hassani for haraam rulings. Both are subject to conditions and one should go read the actual rulings.

We are not Shaykhs or Muftis, so there's no need to debate it as a legal issue.

As a political issue, thats a different story.

Jazakallahu Khayrun

Please quote where I mentioned that I am a Mufti or a Sheikh.

I do not need to turn to the fatawa of just these people, because there are many others. But if you want the rulings in the Jihad then those involved in the Jihad best serve that. See rulings from Sheikh Abu Muhammad Al Maqdisi, Sheikh Nasir Al Ulwan and others.

In the least situation it is a difference of opinion.

[Azzam]

Asalamu alaykum sister mu'minah,

I don't want to debate this issue when there is debate amongst the qualified Ulema regarding this but could you perhaps provide a specific narration where the taking of one's own life in order to attack the enemy is mentioned.

JazakAllah khair.

As I had said earlier, you cannot from a historical context directly see a relation to a specific action. This rule applies here, because of the type of warfare being used.

We are in an age of bombs and guns and planes and tanks.

Taking one's life directly is inconceivable in the olden days because of the absence of such weaponry. Therefore you would not take your sword and kill yourself while fighting the enemy.

This is common sense.

But they use the premise that going into the enemy ranks where a situation was closer to death (as this is only allowed by Allah) was a practice.

Based on that priniciple the "for" scholars and those involved in such acts draw upon their evidence.

[Azzam]

"Whatever one's position on the issue, it remains that the condemnation of suicide bombers of civilians to hell fire is not new nor exclusive to Shaykh Hamza but I have heard it from the Ba `Alawi Shuyukh as per Shaykh Abu Bakr al-`Attas at the Muhammad Fatih Institute in Beirut."
- Sunnipath.com

Honestly, this is an area one should be clear of. Because it is a difference of opinion, the "for" people ask that this sort of rhetoric be removed.

I am not going to into the issue of civilians non combatants and so on. It is not just as people try to proclaim.

But to condemn another Muslim to hell fire in the situation that is evident within the type of ijtihad which is being used is extreme.

Besides moderate shuyukh are not against it either so this cannot be said "as an act of extremism" as another popular slogan which is tossed around.

[Omar HH]

Yeah I never said you were a Mufti or Shaykh. I didn't have you in mind when I wrote that Akhi. I just wanted to clarify that this - like many other issues on this forum - is a waste of time to debate as a legal fiqh issue. Why? Because we are not Shaykhs or Muftis. Here's what will happen. One side will copy-paste all the Shaykhs that say something is halal, one side will copy-paste all the Shaykhs that say it's haraam. Then this will continue until at the end of the thread someone will be like "umm guys? Remember that ikhtilaf in my Ummah = rahma?"

I was just saying, when we talk about "Shaheed or Suicide" we shouldn't talk about it in the sense of a legal debate, but a political debate on what they accomplish, what their effect is on the Palestinians, their cause, etc.

Jazakallahu Khayr!
;)

[faqir]

mod edit: let's not wind others up.

[Mossy]

Ok.

I think the wisest course would be to look and see, oooh, difference of opinion as something like this exactly did not happen at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) and leave discussion of such a sensitive topic to the ulema. Until then, you can pick your position and run with it.

Feel free to discuss the political implications of such actions.

[Azzam]

I do not see how we should divide something into political or islamic. Since I see them the same.

If something is politically (literal) correct it does not deem it as halal and if something is politically (literal) incorrect it does not make it haram.

'Political' is a relative word, and therefore we are to turn to Quran and Sunnah on these matters.

Caring about the political implications of others (Kuffar) I am against, because I dont care what they think anyways.

[Omar HH]

Umm, let me give you an example.

Is it halal to yell out Allahu Akbar for 3 hours in the middle of a huge crowd of people outside (bearing in mind it breaks no state or federal laws)? Yes.

Is it politically helpful to Muslims to just randomly keep yelling out Allahu Akbar and have people look at them with weird looks have have wierd ideas come to their heads?

The people who made Islam and Politics into one are the Shi'a.

No doubt religion is political and Islam is a way of life and does include Government, yet their is a seperation in the disciplines.

For example, you have a Geometry problem. Do you go out and see Shaykh XYZ or go get a Geometry teacher? Even though Islam is a way of life and it may - legally - touch upon all parts of your life, there ARE seperate disciplines.

Same thing with excercize. Do you go out and seek an excercize specialist or go out and seek Shaykh XYZ? What about if you get sick? Do you go see only the Shaykh (I say only because there is spiritual healing) no you also go to the Doctor.

Same thing with politics. The Shi'a said that the U'lema = Political leaders, hence you've got Ayatollah Khomeini and now Khameini running his country.

You may goto a Shaykh and ask him "Are suicide bombings permissable" and get an answer, thats the religious ruling. You don't go ask the Shaykh "how do we reform the income tax code to make people's lives easier in this country" unless he's also a master of the political discipline.

The knowledge of political administration and knowledge of Shari'a, Aqeedah, or Tassawuf are seperate things. Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), Abu Bakr (RA), Umar (RA), Uthman (RA), Ali (RA), Mu'awiyah (RA), Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (RA) etc. are part of a group of individuals who were masters of both political administration and religious knowledge.

The Khalifa according to the Guiding Helper:
2543 The preconditions for the Khalifah are:
a) He must be male (no females may take public government leadership positions in our din
(however, females may take private or social leadership positions (e.g., head of a business or
social organization)).
b) He must be past puberty (no children are allowed).
c) He must be sane (please refer to footnote 71).
d) He must be upright (i.e. he must pray five times a day, try his best to perform all the wajib
acts, and stay away from all unlawful acts in our din).
e) He must be Muslim.
f) He must be a scholar of the din (i.e. he must know Arabic, have a firm grounding in the
primary texts (i.e. Qur'an and Ahadith), and must have studied texts like al-Murshid al-Mu`in,
Mukhtasar Khalil, and Tuhfah al-Hukkam which completely cover all three aspects of our din
(please refer to footnote 248)). [The Khalifah should also keep a counsel of pious scholars of the
din to consult with on major issues.]
g) He must be fully able to discharge the duties of the office without physical help (i.e. he should
be independent).
h) It is better if the Khalifah is a descendent of Nadr ibn Kinanah (the father of the Quraysh
tribe); however, a non-Qurayshi or non-Arab Khalifah is also valid.
i) He must not desire or want to be the Khalifah. Anyone who desires the office of the Khalifah
is automatically disqualified. Rather, he should be put in office against his own will. From this,
you see that political campaigning is not part of our din."

Hence all Khalifah = scholars, but not all scholars = Khalifa.

Also, you ask, "How can something be not politically correct but Islamically correct?"

Umm... throwing sticks at the enemies at wartime, i've never read it was haraam. So if it is halal, it's religiously and Islamically correct, but will it really defeat the enemy? Thats how it's not really politically going to do anything. We can throw sticks and sticks and sticks for like a gillion years, and cut down every tree we can, and just keep throwing sticks. Does that mean we will win? Not necessarily. But with Allah (SWT) everything is possible, so maybe one of those sticks really knocks someone out :) but you see, there's a distinction.

Islam, logic, geometry, anthropology, politics, sociology, biology, literature, fitness, English, etc. are all different disciplines.

Thus you see I do not believe the suicide bombings will ever succeed at anything politically. After so many years of being practiced has it done anything?

I don't think you'll ever win a war through terrorism.

Thats just my opinion.
Jazakallahu Khayrun.

[Mossy]

If you are engaged in any form of struggle, it makes sense to take into account all available information - tactics etc.

Islam is a total system - what is halal is indeed what is ultimately politically correct, being a representation of the truth. We also see that our Islam does not guarantee piety - what our rules that we derive from usul do is lay out the boundaries of piety. Someone can act Islamically, but still be subject to riya.

Someone can perform an action that is "halal" on the surface, and this is the important point, be ultimately detrimental to either the ummah or the muslim himself (again to be judged in terms of our boundaries) - this type of problem pops up often, leading to such nice constructs as the lesser of two evils.. But in the end we have to be clever about what we do while remaining within the boundaries of our religion insh'allah.

[Adam]

As Salaamu Aleikum,

Either we can agree to disagree or we can turn to scholars which we all love and respect. Though I have love for my Salafite/Salafised Brothers and Sisters I really do not refer to Salafite Scholars - regardless of whether they have been involved in armed struggle or not...

Do the words of our Respected Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah carry any weight with you Brother Azzam?

It puzzles me that Muslims - of all people - need so-called legal evidence to prevent them from disrespecting and disgracing their heritage and the blessed example of that Secret of Creation (S.A.W.)... Is Reality that far from our hearts that we cannot even understand that acts of disrespect against creation is disrespect against its Source?

The Sharia is our protection against the lowest aspect in us. Shaykh bin Bayyah tells us to neither be cowards nor extremists. The Sunnah is the balance and Wasatiyyah - not extremism and Tatarruf. I have never seen a more powerful testimony to faith than when a human being is struck by unspeakable injustice only to seek refuge in the Shahada...

Oh and on the topic of the so-called Kuffaar and all these claimants to Hanbaliyyah... The authentic Hanbali scholar Imam Shabrakhiti ibn Rajul (R.A.) understands the Hadith of "None of you truly believes until he wants for his Brother what he wants for himself" as not only referring to your Muslim Brother, but your Adamic Brother. What is your understanding?

I apologise if my post smacks of frustration. I am not a regular poster on this forum, however, something in this thread deeply troubled me. Over the past few years I have once or twice visited the so-called Mujahideen. I have met people of Iman, Taqwa, and Dhikr who clearly reflected the Light of the Prophet (S.A.W.) fighting in the way of Allah, and I have met rascals and bandits who have made a habit out of trying to disgrace the respected school of Imam Hanbal (R.A.) by their clearly inauthentic, pseudo-modernist, anthropomorphic and venemous poison against Kuffaar and honest Muslims alike.

As Muslims we have fallen in to the trap of the Jews by separating and consolidating Shariah from Haqiqah and now we are enjoying the bitter fruits of our labour - completely imbalanced and misguided worship of subanimalistic urges to maim, torture and disfigure the creation of the One and Only. If we do not fear and love Him through every manifestation of His attributes we will have what is due...

Astaghfirullah wa Atubu Ilaih.

Wa Salaam,
Adam

[ahsanirfan]

As Salaamu Aleikum,

Either we can agree to disagree or we can turn to scholars which we all love and respect. Though I have love for my Salafite/Salafised Brothers and Sisters I really do not refer to Salafite Scholars - regardless of whether they have been involved in armed struggle or not...

Do the words of our Respected Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah carry any weight with you Brother Azzam?

It puzzles me that Muslims - of all people - need so-called legal evidence to prevent them from disrespecting and disgracing their heritage and the blessed example of that Secret of Creation (S.A.W.)... Is Reality that far from our hearts that we cannot even understand that acts of disrespect against creation is disrespect against its Source?

The Sharia is our protection against the lowest aspect in us. Shaykh bin Bayyah tells us to neither be cowards nor extremists. The Sunnah is the balance and Wasatiyyah - not extremism and Tatarruf. I have never seen a more powerful testimony to faith than when a human being is struck by unspeakable injustice only to seek refuge in the Shahada...

Oh and on the topic of the so-called Kuffaar and all these claimants to Hanbaliyyah... The authentic Hanbali scholar Imam Shabrakhiti ibn Rajul (R.A.) understands the Hadith of "None of you truly believes until he wants for his Brother what he wants for himself" as not only referring to your Muslim Brother, but your Adamic Brother. What is your understanding?

I apologise if my post smacks of frustration. I am not a regular poster on this forum, however, something in this thread deeply troubled me. Over the past few years I have once or twice visited the so-called Mujahideen. I have met people of Iman, Taqwa, and Dhikr who clearly reflected the Light of the Prophet (S.A.W.) fighting in the way of Allah, and I have met rascals and bandits who have made a habit out of trying to disgrace the respected school of Imam Hanbal (R.A.) by their clearly inauthentic, pseudo-modernist, anthropomorphic and venemous poison against Kuffaar and honest Muslims alike.

As Muslims we have fallen in to the trap of the Jews by separating and consolidating Shariah from Haqiqah and now we are enjoying the bitter fruits of our labour - completely imbalanced and misguided worship of subanimalistic urges to maim, torture and disfigure the creation of the One and Only. If we do not fear and love Him through every manifestation of His attributes we will have what is due...

Astaghfirullah wa Atubu Ilaih.

Wa Salaam,
Adam


well said bro... masha Allah ;)

[Omar HH]

The authentic Hanbali scholar Imam Shabrakhiti ibn Rajul (R.A.) understands the Hadith of "None of you truly believes until he wants for his Brother what he wants for himself" as not only referring to your Muslim Brother, but your Adamic Brother. What is your understanding?


Sidi Faraz Rabbani's Daily Guidance Lectures:

"One should dislike the attribute but not the person themsleves. One must interpret dubios actions in a favorable light. Suspicion alows precaution, but not ill-thinking. Prying into another's affairs is sinful.

The perfection of belief is achieved when he loves for his brother what he loves for himself. One must love for all humans what one loves for oneself of faith and fair and upright dealings and good treatment.

What good character is is expending all good. This returns to loving for another human being what one loves for one self. If you love something for another you seek it out for them - a lover seeks! They seek that which they love and they seek all good to come to that one which they love. So if you love for your brother what you love for yourself then you seek all means to get it for them whether direct or indirect (making du'a). Also preventing any harm from them; restraining one's harm so one does not harm others and warding off harm from others."

[Azzam]

I apologise if my post smacks of frustration. I am not a regular poster on this forum, however, something in this thread deeply troubled me. Over the past few years I have once or twice visited the so-called Mujahideen. I have met people of Iman, Taqwa, and Dhikr who clearly reflected the Light of the Prophet (S.A.W.) fighting in the way of Allah, and I have met rascals and bandits who have made a habit out of trying to disgrace the respected school of Imam Hanbal (R.A.) by their clearly inauthentic, pseudo-modernist, anthropomorphic and venemous poison against Kuffaar and honest Muslims alike.

Wa Salaam,
Adam

I strongly disagree with this. But as I said earlier, it is of no benefit to go tit-for-tat arguments that lead to nothing.

I have met Abdullah bin Bayyah several times. I will try to get in touch with him or someone close to him to give me a direct answer on what you said above, indirectly trying to imply something:


...I have met rascals and bandits who have made a habit out of trying to disgrace the respected school of Imam Hanbal (R.A.) by their clearly inauthentic, pseudo-modernist, anthropomorphic and venemous poison against Kuffaar and honest Muslims alike.

I already know Sheikh Abdullah's position about this (salafis), but I will try to get something concrete that I can share. I am sick and tired of people blaming others of anthropomorphism and all kinds of issues.

About the Kuffar and so on...I have disagreements.

After seeing on another thread someone mentioned that Syria, Morrocco and some other places have Ahl Sunnah governments. Then I felt if people really believe this then I wish to decline in discussing these things because it will lead to no benefit. Almost all the Muslim countries are governed by Non Muslims or Non Muslim ideals including the baathist alawi syrian government. This also includes the ahl saud royal family.

[Adam]

Wa Aleikum As Salaam Brother Azzam,

You are my Brother and I have no wish for entertaining an argument with you. I am not qualified and I do not have the permission - nor can I find such a desire in my heart.

I am a little disappointed that you do not share your views on the Respected Shaykh's dismissal of suicide bombings or Jihad without proper leadership or respect for the boundaries of Shariah. His views are wellknown. He also endorses Imam Shabrakhiti ibn Rajul's (R.A.) understanding of the mentioned Hadith. You say you disagree and this is your right - my heart is content with the understandings of the Shaykh and the Imam...

Not unlike yourself, I too am sick and tired of people blaming others of all kinds of issues including Bidah, Shirk or Kufr. I am sick and tired of the Salafite Taqiyah of "I-am-mainly-Hanafee". I am sick and tired of complete absence of any form of Adab, Nur, Ikhlas or Sulook amongst a particular group of Kharijites who have taken the friends of Allah and the Ahl al Dhikr as their enemies. Mostly - I am sick and tired of youngsters who have never seen a single day of action in their entire lives, wanting to teach me "real Islam", whilst being utterly unable to answer simple questions like why we do our wudhu, what the significance is of washing one's hands, head or feet before Salaat, what is found in a Sajdah or what is the meaning of Tawheed. So to them is their way and to me is mine... May Allah guide us all.

I do, however, ask one thing of you. Please do not imply that I consider the Governments of Syria or Morocco as defenders of classical Islam. I do not. It is the least you can afford me, not knowing who or what I am. Likewise, I do not accuse you of defending the Kharijite Mujassimah, trying to have the best possible opinion of my Brother Azzam, Inshallah ul Aziz.

Wa Salaam,
Adam

[faqir]

Wa Aleikum As Salaam Brother Azzam,

You are my Brother and I have no wish for entertaining an argument with you. I am not qualified and I do not have the permission - nor can I find such a desire in my heart.

I am a little disappointed that you do not share your views on the Respected Shaykh's dismissal of suicide bombings or Jihad without proper leadership or respect for the boundaries of Shariah. His views are wellknown. He also endorses Imam Shabrakhiti ibn Rajul's (R.A.) understanding of the mentioned Hadith. You say you disagree and this is your right - my heart is content with the understandings of the Shaykh and the Imam...

Not unlike yourself, I too am sick and tired of people blaming others of all kinds of issues including Bidah, Shirk or Kufr. I am sick and tired of the Salafite Taqiyah of "I-am-mainly-Hanafee". I am sick and tired of complete absence of any form of Adab, Nur, Ikhlas or Sulook amongst a particular group of Kharijites who have taken the friends of Allah and the Ahl al Dhikr as their enemies. Mostly - I am sick and tired of youngsters who have never seen a single day of action in their entire lives, wanting to teach me "real Islam", whilst being utterly unable to answer simple questions like why we do our wudhu, what the significance is of washing one's hands, head or feet before Salaat, what is found in a Sajdah or what is the meaning of Tawheed. So to them is their way and to me is mine... May Allah guide us all.

I do, however, ask one thing of you. Please do not imply that I consider the Governments of Syria or Morocco as defenders of classical Islam. I do not. It is the least you can afford me, not knowing who or what I am. Likewise, I do not accuse you of defending the Kharijite Mujassimah, trying to have the best possible opinion of my Brother Azzam, Inshallah ul Aziz.

Wa Salaam,
Adam


:jazak:

[Azzam]

Wa Aleikum As Salaam Brother Azzam,
I do, however, ask one thing of you. Please do not imply that I consider the Governments of Syria or Morocco as defenders of classical Islam. I do not. It is the least you can afford me, not knowing who or what I am. Likewise, I do not accuse you of defending the Kharijite Mujassimah, trying to have the best possible opinion of my Brother Azzam, Inshallah ul Aziz.

Wa Salaam,
Adam

Wa Alaikum As Salam,

I did not imply that you believe these leaders are ahl sunnah I was referring to someone else's post.

I do not wish to argue about these issues. It serves no purpose. I am well aware of the rulings of the sheikh. It is not I, but other ulema who disagree with him on some issues. I respect the sheikh greatly and he is respected greatly by the salafi ulema in Saudi. That does not mean I will take everything from him.

This is a matter of disagreement between the ulema. I have always held this opinion. I already mentioned that this topic will not go anywhere a couple of times in this thread.

My point was that people should not say that such and such is not a martyr for doing this or is going to hell fire quoting ahadith about suicide and trying to provide a link between these tactics and suicide and so on.

What I mentioned about the Sheikh was that I would refer to him this conception that the salafites are kharajites and so on about the notion that salafis are anthropomorphists and so on as you implied earlier. He teaches in Saudi and is around these very people, some of the top shuyukh in the country are and have studied under him and they follow the salafi way. So as I said before I already know his opinion on this, but I was going to get something official from him about it, not about suicide and martyrdom tactics.

I never once mentioned I believe, anything about salafis or issues of aqaaid in this thread. Yet it went into this. I did not want to continue this thread but I felt some Muslims were being mocked at because of a negligence of differing opinions.

[faqir]

I recently came across an interesting article on the livingislam site but I am unclear as to who the authors are:



The Hijacked Caravan

Refuting Suicide Bombings as Martyrdom Operations in Contemporary Jihad Strategy



INTRODUCTION...................................... ....................... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#in)

A. REFUTING CLAIMS AGAINST A HOLISTIC DEDUCTION...... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#a)

B. EVIDENCES FOR A HOLISTIC DEDUCTION .... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#b)

C. DEFINITION OF A SUICIDE BOMBING........... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#c)

D. REFUTING PRIME EVIDENCES FOR SUICIDE BOMBING IN SUNNI ISLAM..... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#d)

1. REGARDING ALLAH’S PURCHASE OF LIVES..........

2. REGARDING SEEKING T. PLEASURE OF ALLAH WITHIN HIS LAWS...

3. REGARDING THE PEOPLE OF THE DITCH............

4. REGARDING PHAROAH’S HAIRDRESSER...............

5. REGARDING CONTRIBUTING TO ONE’S DESTRUCTION.......

E. TECHNIQUE AS LEGAL REPREHENSIBLE INNOVATION....... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#e)

F. THE SPECIFITY OF SUICIDE BOMBINGS......... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#f)

G. EVIDENCES FOR DETERMINING SUICIDE BOMBING AS SUICIDE AND MURDER ..... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#)

I. SUICIDE......... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#i)

1. ETERNAL DAMNATION OF SUICIDE.......

2. ONE’S OWN HANDS IN SELF-DESTRUCTION..........

3. THE MEANS OF SUICIDE IN THE HEREAFTER ........

4. SUICIDE IN JIHAD................................

5. APPARENT MARTYRDOM AS SUICIDE....

6. THE INTENTION OF THE MARTYR.........

7. OBEDIENCE IN ONLY THE MERITABLE......

8. THE FIRST MARTYRS OF ISLAM..............

9. ACCIDENTAL DEATH IN GENERAL.........

10. ACCIDENTAL DEATH IN JIHAD................

11. SHUNNING THE SUICIDE PERPETRATOR...........

II. MURDER.................................. (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#ii)

1. KILLING OF ONE PERSON.....

2. KILLING OF MUSLIMS............

3. KILLING OF NON-MUSLIMS......

4. KILLING OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN.........

H. ABANDONING FORBIDDEN MILITARY TACTICS......... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#h)

1. THE IMPORTANCE OF INTENTIONS IN JIHAD............

2. A FLAWED JIHAD MISSION...............

I. ADOPTING CHIVALRY IN ISLAM............. (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#iii)

1. PURITY IN INTENTION OF JIHAD.............

J. THE DEFINITION OF THE MARTYRED ISLAMIC WARRIOR... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#j)

K. CONCLUSION..... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#k)

L. Footnotes ....... (http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html#)


http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/ez/isl/0-sbm/The.Hijacked.Caravan.html


The pdf file presents the article in a much easier to read format:

[You may have to Right Click, Save As ]

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

salams faqir

http://www.ihsanic-intelligence.com/

but it still doesn't say who it is exactly. am gonna contact them.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

salam

i don't know if this has been posted already but sidi abdassamad clarke has posted a complete rebuttal of the 'azzam' fatwa:

http://www.bogvaerker.dk/suicide.html

[Tisatashar]

Assalaamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh,

One of the highest priorities in Islam is Jihad Daffa - Defense of The Muslim Lands. It's fard ayn until enough turn up for duty to repel the enemy. Now we should know that one's Islam is measured by ones intentions.

This should be straight forward especially to those who believe it is halal to holler out "Ya shayk Abdul Qadir Jalani maddad". Because many have pointed the finger of shirk at this practice and the defense touted has always been 'Islam is by intentions."

So why when it comes to fighting America with the weapon of fear via 'suicide bombing' is it Kufr Akbar? Allah's knows they don't have much weaponry or numbers to combat the might of Amerika.

Perhaps my brothers should consider this hadith;

Narrated AbuHurayrah

Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) said: Do you know who is poor? They (the Companions of the Prophet) said: A poor man amongst us is one who has neither dirham with him nor wealth. He (the Prophet) said: The poor of my Ummah would be he who would come on the Day of Resurrection with prayers and fasts and Zakat but (he would find himself bankrupt on that day as he would have exhausted his funds of virtues) since he hurled abuses upon others, brought calumny against others and unlawfully consumed the wealth of others and shed the blood of others and beat others, and his virtues would be credited to the account of one who suffered at his hand. And if his good deeds fall short to clear the account, then his sins would be entered in his account and he would be thrown in the Hell-Fire.

I cited this well known narration because it is the plight that "The Blamers" may find themselves in Judgement Day. It may go something like this...in sha allah;

Allah may say: why did you blow yourself up?
Shaheed may say: For you Lord. It was all I could do to halt the overwhelming force of the enemy.
Allah may say: Did you not hear that is haram?
Shaheed may say: Yes. But my intention was to place the defense of the ummah above my personal needs. And I acted with full hope in your mercy Lord whereas the verse about suicide is about the one who has given up hope in your mercy. And I proceeded with faith in your promise.
Allah may say: And what's that?
Shaheed may say: Forgiveness with the first drop of my blood fisabilillah.
Allah may say: Ya shaheed, take your sin of suicide and hand it to the one who sat at home and spoke ill against you.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

Allah may say: Did you not hear that is haram?
Shaheed may say: Yes. But my intention was to place the defense of the ummah above my personal needs. And I acted with full hope in your mercy Lord whereas the verse about suicide is about the one who has given up hope in your mercy. And I proceeded with faith in your promise.
Allah may say: And what's that?
Shaheed may say: Forgiveness with the first drop of my blood fisabilillah.
Allah may say: Ya shaheed, take your sin of suicide and hand it to the one who sat at home and spoke ill against you.

astaghfirullah. how dare you put forwards words for Allah. this is disgraceful brother - like the creation of Allah convincing Allah that what he did was right.

if you want to discuss the act - this is totally not the way. in fact its absolutely ridiculous.

[salman]

Salamu `Alaykum

The issue is one in which there is khilaf.

Some notable scholars permitted it, others did not.

Wasalam