Sucide Bombing - Halal or Haram in Islam?

[faqir]

:salam:

I was wondering what the views of the users of Sunniforum were in this regard.

Also, post any relevant fatawa if you have access to them.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

if you search the forums bro, you will find that this topic has already been discussed.

There is difference of opinion on this issue, although it is a topic which many ulama have expressed their unwillingness to discuss.

Some ulama who are for this method are very harsh against those who are not, and vice versa.

I personally cannot see how it is permissible. Shaykh Qaradawi and a group believe it is permissible in Palestine only....

There is one truth in all of this: this method was never adopted by any Muslims in their entire history until the 80s, when it was the Shia who adopted it - possible from the Ismaili sect.

[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.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

this fatwa has been anaylsed by many ulama - i personally own a copy of a refutation of this point by point.

rather than quote the whole article because it is rather long, i can sum-up the concepts raised in this issue.

primarily, the issue of suicide. while in all the evidences above quoted from classical scholars, including the hadith of the boy, (which has been misused for the purpose of this topic - the lesson from this story is not to show permissiblity of self-sacrifice!), the mujahid is KILLED BY ANOTHER PERSON/ENEMY and not by himself/herself/detonator/bombs strapped to herself/himself..... this is the crucial difference. to make it clearer, in none of these stories did the mujahideen take an arrow and kill himself prior to/while attempting to kill others!...

the other issues are those of benefit in shari'a, helping the Muslims and indeed raising the banner of Islam - which i believe these methods are doing the exact opposite.. thats my humble opinion

Allah knows best

[anti-bid'ah]

as salamu alaykum

this fatwa has been anaylsed by many ulama - i personally own a copy of a refutation of this point by point.

rather than quote the whole article because it is rather long, i can sum-up the concepts raised in this issue.

primarily, the issue of suicide. while in all the evidences above quoted from classical scholars, including the hadith of the boy, (which has been misused for the purpose of this topic - the lesson from this story is not to show permissiblity of self-sacrifice!), the mujahid is KILLED BY ANOTHER PERSON/ENEMY and not by himself/herself/detonator/bombs strapped to herself/himself..... this is the crucial difference. to make it clearer, in none of these stories did the mujahideen take an arrow and kill himself prior to/while attempting to kill others!...

the other issues are those of benefit in shari'a, helping the Muslims and indeed raising the banner of Islam - which i believe these methods are doing the exact opposite.. thats my humble opinion

Allah knows best

اسلام علیکم
intresting, can you show me the full refutation please

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

unforuntately, the essay is rather long, but it mainly addresses the issues raised above:

1. suicide or not. the refutation says it is regardless of intention of the perpetrator.

2. benefit for those who are at war with the kuffar. quite clearly in places like Palestine, rather than benefiting the cause, they invite greater destruction from the enemy. Islam, the Muslims and indeed nobody benefits from these actions. Rather than striking fear into the hearts of the enemy which is valid shari'i reason, the Israeli's expand their borders, inflict civilian casualties, and invite more people to Israel and arm the settlers.

3. Miuses of 'evidences' - in ALL the cases quoted, the Mujahideen are attacked and killed by an enemy force and attain martyrdom this way. In the modern operations, the enemy have nothing to do with the death of the perpetrator.

I have other articles addressing this. I will summarise the other points soon insha Allah.

[IlyasLahoz]

salam,
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 modernist thinkers are moving 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.

wallahu 'alam

[muminah]

as salamu alaykum

this fatwa has been anaylsed by many ulama - i personally own a copy of a refutation of this point by point.



i really do want see this refutation bro !!! please put it up :)

[Zaid 'Abdur-Rahman]

:bism:

Akhi Sahib has taken the words straight out of my mouth. Suicide bombing is not only counter productive, it's stupid. Not only that, it targets women and children. The most prominent argument for allowing said choice of victims is that the israeli military is by conscript and said children would have only served in the military at some point. This is a bogus assertion, and it is false for the same reason that a Muslim couldn't push another person off a boat if you were stranded at sea. As Imam Al-Ghazali wisely pointed out, you have no clue if you are going to be rescued the next day, or all die in the next hour (in which case the drowning death of the person would have been totally unnecessary). You have no clue whether or not the children would grow up and be in the military, whether or not the people on the bus support the illegal occupation of the palestinians or not. And, as akhi sahib points out, every "evidence" i have seen that "supports" suicide bombing has been grossly misinterpreted. It reflects nothing more than desperation and the influence of shaitan a'udhu billah. I'd like every wannabe bomber to go to the Masjid, and spend their days in prayer to Allah ta'Ala for deliverence. Their time would be better spent, and ultimately, far more productive. You can only detonate yourself once, you can make Dua every waking hour.


Wasalaam,
Zaid

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

"supplication is the weapon of the believer"

Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam)

[anti-bid'ah]

"supplication is the weapon of the believer"

Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam)


what you trying to say???
we dont have 2 use weapons in jihad?????

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

....read my post again; if you think i said that or was 'trying' to say that - you have no proof...

i was simply following on from what the previous brother wrote.

[GenN]

Assalmu alykum,

there is a legitiate differnce of on on this issue. Who ever is right will get 2 rewards InshAllah. whoever is wrong will only get one reward InshAllah.

We should look upon the the person who carried out the martyrdom operation with good intent, and so say they are Shaeed InshAllah (unless other factors obvioulsy make them to be non-shaeed).

Also there would be differnce of opion on the time and place it is carried out. some places at some times it may be legit other places at some times it might not.

and Allah knows best.

was salaam

[Zaid 'Abdur-Rahman]

Amin, Akhi Shayks-Pir

[Zaid 'Abdur-Rahman]

Assalmu alykum,


We should look upon the the person who carried out the martyrdom operation with good intent, and so say they are Shaeed InshAllah (unless other factors obvioulsy make them to be non-shaeed).

Also there would be differnce of opion on the time and place it is carried out. some places at some times it may be legit other places at some times it might not.

and Allah knows best.

was salaam


Akhi, glossing over a brother's errors doesn't excuse crimes: Allah will decide if a person is a Shahid for detonating themselves on a bus and taking women and children with him/her.

Could I see an instance were a suicide bombing might be necessary? Yes, perhaps to take out actual SOLDIERS, and such a bombing being the only way. Perhaps, then, maybe yes. Allahu Alim

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

...as for it being justified because it is the only way - well, personally i am not convinced by that. The mere fact that 'warfare' has been reduced to this methodology from amongst the Muslims is a testament to the state we are in today. Never in the history of Islam have we read about Muslims adopting unconventional methods of warfare. And even if anyone here could drag out some reference to an unusual method of fighting undertaken by Muslim forces, i could guarantee that it was done for ultimate benefit for Islam, the Muslims and the borders of the Khilafaf/Sultanate.

Sporadic suicide operations on the other hand are far from the complex and strategic methods of warfare adopted by our predecessors, and almost always confer absolutely no benefit to Islam, the Muslims or her borders. If anything it invites greater destruction, lowers the lofty station of Islam and alters public opinion the world over regarding the deen of Allah; no doubting at all the utter persecution of the Palestinians at the hands of the wretched Zionists, and given the overall events of the last 50 years, i would say the response of the Palestinians has been relatively calm considering what they have had to suffer. However, when a white, female British MP says she would do the same (suicide op) if she were Palestinian - doesn't it show us that these acts are more a reflection of desperation rather than anything else. Furthermore, it is extremely rare for us to see the actual leaders take part in such operations. They would rather recruit from among the youth who are already frustrated and angry, and give them the perfect opportunity to express that anger for the cause of islam supposedly.

Just because it is the only means available does not render it permissible.

Of course, while i agree there is difference of opinion on the issue, i find this difficult to stomach. This is because usually when there is difference of opinion on an issue the ulama recognise it as such and respect it. Unfortunately those who propagate such acts are extremely harsh against those who condemn them. That is where 'legimate difference of opinion' is problematic.

What is true is that this methodology is a bida. Whether it proves to be acceptable in the long-term, Allah only knows

[faqir]

:salam:

The permissibility in certain situations can be related to the principle of bearing the lesser harm / choosing the lesser of two evils - this was the justification given by Mufti Desai.