Saturday, 23 August 2014

INTENTIONAL KILLING OF NON COMBATANTS IS NOT PERMITTED

If Muslims don't stand up to rectify the  Khawarij extremism perpetrated by the terrorist groups against the Islamic teachings, then who will stand up? Islam doesn't legalise killing innocent civilians or any non combatant for that matter in any war since the history of Islam. Why do such things happen or who is the source of all the terrorism in the world which leads to such actions is a different topic all-together, not the subject of this article. 


NOTE: Please note the arabic translations (for quotes present and to come in future) would be approximate due to lack of time and not very precise so kindly excuse the errors as this document is compiled in a hurry AND I will try to keep this as squeezed up as i can but the topic deserves attention. 

There is no difference of opinion on the attacking on military personnel or anyone who fights the Muslims during a war, be it a woman or a youth or whatever.  Also we are not discussing the collateral damage that occurred unintentionally or whatever related to the actual genuine collateral damage and not merely an excuse under the guise of collateral damage. The question of this topic is to defy the claim that civilians or non combatants of the kuffar can be captured, troubled or killed as a counter measure

Please see this article: 25+ DISTINGUISHING TRAITS OF THE KHAWARIJ


TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1) Clarifying the fatwa of shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen rahimahullah who permitted killing "civilians"

2) The Fataawa of the salaf with regards to killing Non Combatants when GOING FOR WAR 


3) Now, the fataawa of the salaf in the regards of attacking their civilians if they attack ours


4) FATAWA OF THE SALAF AGAINST THE ARGUMENT THAT ANY NON MUSLIM AMIDST BATTLE CAN BE KILLED BECAUSE HE'S A KAAFIR 

5) THE FATAWA OF THE RECENT SCHOLARS FROM ALL SECTS ALSO AGREE UPON NOT HARMING WOMEN AND CHILDREN AKA NON COMBATANTS  WHEN YOU GO TO FIGHT THE ENEMIES (I REPEAT E.N.E.M.I.E.S.) . 

We should be proud that as Muslims, islam is the O.N.L.Y religion that actually lays down such rules or any rules for that matter in warfare. No other religion or tribe or race laid down such doctrines. Islam was the first one to implement humanity, ethics and what have you in war fare while the majority of the world continued to fight like barbarians , so it is of utmost importance that the Muslims as well as Non Muslims learn some of it , if not all of it. 


1) Clarifying the fatwa of shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen rahimahullah who permitted killing "civilians"


Some brothers take this fatwa of shaykh Ibn uthaymeen rahimahullah to PERMIT killing any civilians be it American or whatever. And Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen rahimahullah is far from such an accusation. 

http://www.yourepeat.com/watch/?v=bPVpv_afBHA 


Now if you all see at 1:49 onwards you’ll hear that the shaykh is clearly talking about “ the kuffar CAPTURING the lands of the Muslimeen, or they entered it by force…” 

The shaykh here is referring to the enemies entering Muslims lands . And then he continues on this topic and then from 2:21 onwards the shaykh says generally it is forbidden to kill women and children but if they (who they? Those who entered muslim lands) attack our children and women then we attack theirs too (theirs who? Who are “theirs” in this? They are the soldiers who entered muslim land so the shaykh is saying we attack the women and children of the soldiers who entered the muslim lands. He didn’t say that go to Arizona and attack any American or Christian you get for what some soldier did in our lands. He is speaking exclusively to the women folk of the soldiers PRESENT INSIDE THE MUSLIM LANDS. “ )


However at 2:40 he says : as is apparent (from one view)… we can do this..” this statement of the shaykh is a one sided view as will be shown below. And the shaykh then goes on to use the verse 2:194 . this is the verse shaykh uses to support his stance. I will also show how the muffasiren or the salaf are opposed to this interpretation. Moreover his own son in law Sh. Khalid al-Muslih and Sh. Ahmad al-Qadi  have clarified this stance of his and obviously a student knows best what his teacher stood or meant than others who try to interpret the shaykhs fatwa . This is as absurd as challenging a son that i know his father's statements more than him even when i haven't ever met him or studied with him even once. 

Now we can go on and quote general verses such as and none shall carry the burdens of another…”} [Quran] and many more verses and ahadeeth forbidding killing children, women, old folk, even youth who don’t fight you or the statement “ Go to Khalid bin al-Walid, and say to him that the Messenger of Allah orders you to say: ‘Do not kill a child, and do not kill the weak”  etc etc. But I ASSUME everybody is aware of the basics. So let’s proceed to some details in sha allah 


The Shar’i texts have stringently forbidden targeting the children and women of the polytheists with any type of killing or fighting, no matter what the reasons and causes for doing so. So much so that during the khilafah of abu bakr r.a the khalifa of rasool allah, when he used to send any expedition against the disbelievers fully knowing that their women and children would obviously be with them, he would say : 

“I advise you of ten things: do not kill a woman, or a child, or any old person, or cut down any fruit trees…” (al-Muwatta’, 982, Kitaab al-Jihaad). 

وعن يزيد بن هُرْمُز، أن نجدَةَ كتب إلى ابن عباس يسأله عن قتل أطفال المشركين .. فكتب إليه ابن عباس: إنك كتبتَ إليَّ تسأل عن قتل أطفال المشركين، فإن رسول الله  لم يقتلهم، وأنت فلا تقتلهم، إلا أن تعلم منهم ما علم الخَضِرُ من الغلام حين قتله

And it is narrated from Yazid bin Hurmuz that Najdah wrote to Ibn ‘Abbas, asking him about the killing of the children of the polytheists. So, Ibn ‘Abbas wrote back to him: “Verily, you wrote to me asking about the killing of the children of the polytheists. The Messenger of Allah did not kill them. Therefore, you are not to kill them, except that you know from them what al-Khidr knew about the young boy when he killed him!” (this means how allah informed khidr a.s about a young boy who was going to grow up to cause fitan so if you are aware of ilm al-ghayb from allah then kill him. Ibn `Abbas is making a sarcastic notion here) 


[Ref: Musnad Ahmad (2685); Saheeh by Ahmad Shaakir]

Shaykh tartoosi:


والأحاديث والآثار التي تمنع من قصد قتل أطفال ونساء المشركين أكثر من أن تُحصر في هذا الموضع .. وفيما تقدم ذكره كفاية وزيادة لمن نشد الحق.

And the ahadith and athar that forbid intentionally killing the children and women of the polytheists are more than can be collected here, and what has been mentioned (or what i assumed in the beginning about you knowing the basics of not killing non combatants) is more than enough for the one who seeks the truth.

أن الأطفال لا تُقتل لأنها أنفس مُصانة شرعاً، وأنها على الفطرة والملة .. وليس لكونهم مجرد مال ـ كأي مالٍ ـ وبالتالي يُمكن الاستغناء عن هذا المال أو التضحية به أو هدره لمصلحة ترجح عنه كما زعم الشيخ .. فالنبي  علل السبب الذي يمنع من قتل أطفال المشركين أنهم لا يزالون على طهر ونقاء وصفاء الفطرة والملة والتوحيد .. ولم يلوثوا بذنب بعد .. لذلك قال  لأصحابه:" ألا إنَّ خيارَكم أبناء المشركين .."، فهذا هو السبب الذي منع من قتل أطفال المشركين، وليس لكونهم مجرد مال كأي سلعة من السلع! 


Children are not to be killed, because according to the Shari’ah, they are pure souls, and are upon the pure fitrah. They are not simply like any wealth that can be disposed of, sacrificed, or destroyed for some greater benefit, as the Prophet provided the reason for not killing the children of the polytheists, and this is because they are still pure, uncorrupted, and upon the fitrah, correct belief, and Tawhid, and have not yet fallen into sin. Because of this, the Prophet said to his Companions: “The best of you are the children of the polytheists.” So, this is the reason that prevents the killing of the children of the polytheists, and they are not like any form of wealth or prize!

Now coming to the interpretation of the verse shaykh Ibn uthaymeen rahimahullah used :


أن الآية الكريمة التي استدل بها الشيخ، وهي قوله تعالى: فَمَنِ اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُوا عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ ، ليس فيها دليل على ما ذهب إليه؛ فهي آية عامة لكن لا يجوز العمل بها على إطلاقها من دون النظر إلى ما استثناه الشارع وخصه بالحرمة لذاته ومنع المقابلة فيه؛ كمقابلة الغدر بغدر، والخيانة بخيانة، والكذب بكذب، والفجور بفجور .. فالمعصية لا تُقابل بمعصية .. فقد صح عن النبي  أنه قال:" أدِّ الأمانة إلى من ائتمنك، ولا تخن من خانك ". وقتل الأنفس المعصومة البريئة أشد ذنباً وجرماً من مجرد الخيانة؛ فإذا كان لا يجوز أن تُقابل الخيانة بخيانة فمن باب أولى أن لا تُقابل قتل الأنفس المعصومة بقتل الأنفس المعصومة .. فيقع الظلم حينئذٍ مرتين؛ وفي كلا المرتين تكون الضحايا من الأنفس المعصومة البريئة!

 The noble verse that was used as proof: {“…So, whoever transgresses against you, transgress in a similar manner against him…”} [al-Baqarah; 194] does not contain evidence for what it was being used for. It is a general verse. However, it is not allowed to act upon its general meaning without looking to see what the Legislator has placed as an exception to it, including those things that are forbidden in and of themselves, and cannot be done in retaliation. For example, it is not allowed to counter betrayal with betrayal, and it is not allowed to counter treachery with treachery, and it is not allowed to counter a lie with a lie, and it is not allowed to counter sin with a sin, etc. So, an act of disobedience is not allowed to be performed to counter another act of disobedience.

It has been authentically narrated from the Prophet that he said: “Fulfill your trusts to those who have given you those trusts, and do not betray those who betray you.” And killing an innocent, protected life is even more severe in sin and crime than simply betraying someone. So, if it is not allowed to counter betrayal with betrayal, it is even more befitting that it is not allowed to counter the killing of innocent souls with the killing of innocent souls, resulting in wrongdoing being carried out twice, with the victims in each case being innocent, protected lives!



ونحو ذلك من سرقك فلا يجوز لك أن تسرقه، ومن شتم أبويك لا يجوز لك أن تشتم أبويه .. ومن اعتدى على عرضك بالقذف والشتم لا يجوز لك أن تعتدي على عرضه بالقذف والشتم .. ولو فعلت تكون قد تعديت وظلمت، وعاقبت من لا ذنب له بجريرة غيره .. ونحو ذلك من قتل طفلك لا تقتل طفله ـ ولا يجوز لك أن تقتل طفله ـ وإنما تقتل القاتل .. فإن قتلت طفله قتلت نفساً معصومة بوزر غيرها، وهذا ليس من المماثلة والمقابلة في شيء، وإنما هو من التعدي والظلم!
ولو قلت: أقتله وطفله معاً .. فهذا كذلك من التعدي والظلم .. وفيه تجاوز لحد المماثلة والمقابلة .. وتكون بذلك قد عاقبت بأكثر مما عُوقبت به!
لا يوجد أحد من أهل العلم يُجيز قتل أطفال القاتل كرد على عدوانه وقتله لأطفال الآخرين من قبيل المقابلة والمماثلة في العدوان .. وإنما الذي أجمعوا عليه قتل القاتل وحسب. 
وعليه نقول: الآية عامة تجيز رد العدوان بعدوان مماثل أياً كان هذا العدوان ونوعه .. إلا ما استثناه الشارع ومنع من المقابلة والمماثلة فيه، كالنصوص ـ التي تُخصص ذلك العام ـ فتُحرم قتل الأطفال والنساء وغيرها من الأعمال المحرمة لذاتها .. والتي تحرم معاقبة المرء بجريرة غيره .. فهذه الأعمال مُستثناة من ذلك العام .. والنصوص الواردة فيها تخصص ذلك العام .. وتقيد ذلك الإطلاق .. فتنبه لذلك!


Likewise, it is not allowed to steal from someone simply because they stole from you, and it is not allowed to insult the father of someone simply because he insulted yours. And it is not allowed to respond to the one who violates your honor with false accusations and insults by doing the same to him, etc. If you were to do this, you would have exceeded your bounds, and would be considered a wrongdoer, and would have punished someone with the sins of someone else.

Likewise, it is not allowed to respond to one who has killed your child by killing his child. Rather, you are to kill the killer, because if you were to kill his child, you would have killed an innocent life based on the mistake of a completely different person, and this has nothing to do with the legislated form of revenge and retaliation. Rather, it is nothing but excessiveness and oppression! With this, you would have exceeded the limits in revenge and retaliation, and would end up punishing with more than you were punished with!

And there is not a single scholar who permits the killing of the children of a killer in retaliation for his own oppression and killing of the children of others. Rather, there is consensus that only the killer is to be killed.

Based on this, we say that the verse generally allows the committing of aggression in response to aggression, in the same way that it was originally performed, and no matter what type of aggression this is…except in regards to that which the Legislator has placed as an exception, and has forbidden to be used as a form of revenge or retaliation, such as the texts that make specific that which is general. From these texts are those that forbid the killing of children and women, the punishment of one for the sins of another, and other actions that are forbidden in and of themselves.

So, such actions are specific exceptions to this generality, and the reported texts in this regard restrict this generality. So, pay attention to this!

ومنها: أن هذا القول الذي صدر عن الشيخ رغم شذوذه، وضعفه .. كما تقدم .. فليس من الحكمة ولا السياسة الشرعية العمل بمقتضاه في هذا العصر، ولا الترويج له، وذلك لسببين:
أولهما: أن هذا الباب لو فُتح ووجدت له التبريرات والمسوغات الشرعية .. فإن العدو ـ بحكم آلته العسكرية الضخمة التي يفتقدها المسلمون ـ هو الأقدر على العدوان .. وإنزال الضرر بالمسلمين، وأطفالهم ونسائهم! 
ثانياً: أن العدو يملك الآلة الإعلامية الضخمة التي يفتقدها المسلمون .. والتي يقدر من خلالها أن يُحوِّر ويُبدل حسنات المسلمين ـ أمام الرأي العام ـ إلى سيئات .. فما بالك لو عمل المسلمون بمقتضى كلام الشيخ .. كيف ستكون سمعتهم وصورتهم أمام الرأي العام .. وكيف سينظر الناس إليهم وإلى دينهم .. وماذا سيكون موقفهم .. وهذا بُعدٌ معتبر في ديننا لا يمكن للعاملين من أجل هذا الدين أن يتجاهلوه .. فالنبي  أمسك عن قتل رأس النفاق ابن أُبي حتى لا يُقال أن محمداً يقتلُ أصحابه! 
ومنها: أرجو أن يكون كلام الشيخ المذكور أعلاه عبارة عن زلة لسان .. يقع فيها عادة المتحدث .. وبخاصة أن هذا الكلام لم أجده مخطوطاً للشيخ في كتبه ومؤلفاته على كثرتها؛ إذ لو كان هذا هو مذهب الشيخ في المسألة لوجِدَت مخطوطة في كتبه، والله تعالى أعلم. 
بهذا أرد على كلام الشيخ أعلاه حول مسألة قصد قتل أطفال ونساء المشركين من قبيل المقابلة والمعاملة بالمثل .. وآخر دعوانا أن الحمد لله رب العالمين.

18/6/1426 هـ.                              عبد المنعم مصطفى حليمة 

24/7/2005م.                                    أبو بصير الطرطوسي 


Regarding this statement that has been put forth despite its strangeness and weakness: it is not from proper wisdom or the politics of the Shari’ah to act upon it in our times, or to circulate it. And this is for two reasons:

First: even if it had the Shar’i factors in place that would justify it, if this door were to be opened, the enemy – with its massive military equipment that the Muslims lack – is the one more capable of aggression, and is more capable of bringing down harm upon the Muslims, their children, and their women!

Second: the enemy possesses massive media influence that the Muslims lack, and through which he is able to twist the virtues of the Muslims – in light of public opinion – to bad characteristics. So, how much more would it be if the Muslims were to act upon this ruling? How would their reputation and image be in front of the public? How would the people look at them and their religion? What would their position be towards them?


This is a factor that is given consideration in our religion, and it is not proper for those who work for this Religion to ignore it, as the Prophet refrained from killing the head of nifaq – Ibn Ubayy – simply so that it would not be said that Muhammad kills his companions!…”


End of the fatwa of shaykh tartoosi refuting shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen's fatwa and he titled it as :  

مناقشةُ قولِ الشيخ ابن العثيمين حولَ مسألة

قتلِ ذَرَاري ونساءِ المشركين



2) The Fataawa of the salaf with regards to killing Non Combatants when GOING FOR WAR 



It is understood that any army that goes for war, will come across another army, as the prophet and sahaaba and those who followed them came across women and children and slaves and workers who by naturally and obviously hailed and cheered their own army and also assisted them as and when required such as serving water, or nursing them, or singing and etc yet the prophet (s.a.w) never commanded to kill them. 


Ibnul Qayim said:
"Killing is only obligatory when facing warfare and armed combat not when facing kufr. For this reason, neither women are to be killed nor children, or the elderly, nor the blind nor those worshippers who do not fight,rather we fight against those who fight us. This was the way of the Messenger of Allaah in dealing with the people of the earth, he used to fight those who fought against himuntil they either entered into the deen, make an agreement or treaty with him or came under his authority via paying the jizya. This is what he used to instruct his armies if they fought against their enemies, as has preceded from the Hadeeth of Buraydah".

[Ref:Ahkaam Al Udh-Dhimmah", Vol 1, Page 17]


Ibn Habeeb said:

"It was not prohibited to kill religious people due to their preocupation with their worship, as the are the most distant from Allaah than others from the people of their deen due to their intense insight into kufr.Rather, on account of their non-involvement with the people of their deen in waging war against the believers- whether that be via hand, thought or wealth. But as for it being known that one of them guides the enemy against us secretly or the likes, then at such a point it would be lawful to execute such a person".


(An Nawaadir wa'z-Ziyaadaat'alaa maa fil Mudawanna min Ghairiha min Al Amaahaat", Vol 3, Page 60).


Imaam Ibnul Munaasir said:

"As for the insane person then there should be no difference of opinion whatsoever over the issue of not killing them, even if the person has reached maturity, this is because the person is not responsible by agreement. The evidence that these types of people (are not to be fought against) is the saying of Allaah: "Fight in the way of Allaah against thse who fight you and do not trangress the limits. Indeed, Allaah does not love those who trangress". (Qur'an 2:190). From these types of people are those who are generally unable to fight such as the elderly, the decrepit, those who are secluded in worship, hired workers, mothers and the likes who are not to be transgressed against during fighting and Allaah gave them a special position in that it is prohibited to kill them due to His saying:"And do not trangress the limits". (Qur'an 2:190).Meaning: Do not kill non-combatants such as women due to their inability to fight".(Ibnul Munaasir, Vol 1, Page 228).

`Umar ibn Abdul Aziz said:


About the saying of Allaah:"Fight in the way of Allaah against those who fight you and do not trangress the limits. Indeed, Allaah does not love those who trangress". (Qur'an 2:190). The killing of women and children is included within this,and so are those who are not involved in warfare".

(An Nawaadir wa'z-Ziyaadaat", Vol 3, Page 57).


Shaykh Abdullaah Al Basaam said:

As for intending to attack those who are not fighting such as women, children, the elderly, those in monasteries, churches and the like -then this is not permissible, as long as they neither provide a benefit (to the enemy troops) via their views or strategies nor have committed murder".

(Tawdeeh ul Ahkaam bin Buluughil Maraam", Vol 6, Page 385).


Ibn Katheer said :

Allah's statement:"Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight you". (Qur'an 2:190) applies only to fighting the enemies who are engaged in fighting Islaam and it's people".

(Tafsir Ibn Kathir ).

Ibn Taymiyah said :

"As for those who are not from the people who help and fight, such as women, children, the worshipper, the elderly, the blind, the disabled and the likesthen they are not to be killedaccording to the majority of the Ulama' unless the person participates in fighting (against the Muslims) with speech or action. Even though some Ulama' permitted the killing of all merely on account of kufr, except for women and children which become for the Muslims. The first opinion (that non-combatants are not to be killed or fought against at all) is the most correct opinion,because fighting is only against whoever fights us when we want to manifest the deen of Allaah, just as Allaah says: "Fight in the way of Allaah against thse who fight you and do not trangress the limits. Indeed, Allaah does not love those who trangress". (Qur'an 2:190). In the Sunan is a Hadith from the Prophet that he passed by a woman who had been killed within a battle and the people had gathered around the body. The Prophet said: "This is not one who should be fought against", and sent the men away saying to one of them: "Tell Khalid not to kill children or workers". Also reported from him is that he said: "Do not kill a frail elderly man or a young child or a woman".

(As Siyaasah Ash Shariyah, Page 177).

Ibn Hajar asqalani said :

Killing Women and children in War with Kuffar. Commentary of Ibn Hajr al asqalani roughly translated

The hadith

Narated By As-Sab bin Jaththama : The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."

Ibn Hajar writes in his commentary on this hadîth in Fath al-Bârî ():

( هم منهم ) أي في الحكم تلك الحالة ، وليس المراد إباحة قتلهم بطريق القصد إليهم ،

“They are of them” means that they are construed as such under those circumstances. It does not mean that it is permissible to deliberately target them.
then he said

وكان الزهري إذا حدث بهذا الحديث قال : وأخبرني ابن كعب بن مالك عن عمه أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لما بعث إلى ابن أبي الحقيق نهى عن قتل النساء والصبيان " انتهى ، وهذا الحديث أخرجه أبو داود بمعناه من وجه آخر عن الزهري ، وكأن الزهري أشار بذلك إلى نسخ حديث الصعب ، وقال مالك والأوزاعي : لا يجوز قتل النساء والصبيان بحال حتى لو تترس أهل الحرب بالنساء والصبيان أو تحصنوا بحصن أو سفينة وجعلوا معهم النساء والصبيان لم يجز رميهم ولا تحريقهم . وقد أخرج ابن حبان في حديث الصعب زيادة في آخره : ثم نهى عنهم يوم حنين ، وهي مدرجة في حديث الصعب ، وذلك بين في سنن أبي داود فإنه قال في آخره : قال سفيان قال الزهري : ثم نهى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بعد ذلك عن قتل النساء والصبيان " ويؤيد كون النهي في غزوة حنين ما سيأتي في حديث رياح بن الربيع الآتي " فقال لأحدهم : الحق خالدا فقل له لا تقتل ذرية ولا عسيفا ، والعسيف بمهملتين وفاء الأجير وزنا ومعنى ، وخالد أول مشاهده مع النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم غزوة الفتح ، وفي ذلك العام كانت غزوة حنين ، وأخرج الطبراني في " الأوسط " من حديث ابن عمر قال " لما دخل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم مكة أتي بامرأة مقتولة فقال ما كانت هذه تقاتل ونهى " فذكر الحديث ، وأخرج أبو داود في " المراسيل " عن عكرمة أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم رأى امرأة مقتولة بالطائف فقال : ألم أنه عن قتل النساء ، من صاحبها ؟ فقال رجل : أنا يا رسول الله أردفتها فأرادت أن تصرعني فتقتلني فقتلتها ، فأمر بها أن توارى ويحتمل في هذه التعدد ، والذي جنح إليه غيرهم الجمع بين الحديثين كما تقدمت الإشارة إليه ، وهو قول الشافعي والكوفيين ، وقالوا : إذا قاتلت المرأة جاز قتلها . وقال ابن حبيب من المالكية : لا يجوز القصد إلى قتلها إلا إن باشرت القتل وقصدت إليه . قال : وكذلك الصبي المراهق . ويؤيد قول الجمهور ما أخرجه أبو داود والنسائي وابن حبان من حديث رياح بن الربيع وهو بكسر الراء والتحتانية التميمي قال " كنا مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في غزوة ، فرأى الناس مجتمعين ، فرأى امرأة مقتولة فقال : ما كانت هذه لتقاتل " فإن مفهومه أنها لو قاتلت لقتلت ، واتفق الجميع كما نقل ابن بطال وغيره على منع القصد إلى قتل النساء والولدان ، أما النساء فلضعفهن ، وأما الولدان فلقصورهم عن فعل الكفر ، ولما في استبقائهم جميعا من الانتفاع بهم إما بالرق أو بالفداء فيمن يجوز أن يفادى به ، وحكى الحازمي قولا بجواز قتل النساء والصبيان على ظاهر حديث الصعب ، وزعم أنه ناسخ لأحاديث النهي ، وهو غريب ، وسيأتي الكلام على قتل المرأة المرتدة في كتاب القصاص . 

When Zuhri mentioned the narration of ("They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).") he used to mention another narration i.e. "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children.” Abu Dawud also mentioned the meaning of it from him, ZUHRI POINTED OUT THE ABROGATION OF THE HADITH OF As-Sab bin Jaththama (i.e. where The Prophet (ﷺ) replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).").

MALIK AND AL AWZAAI SAID IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO KILL WOMEN AND CHILDREN AT ALL EVEN IF THE PEOPLE OF WAR TAKE THEM AS A SHEILD OR TAKE THEM IN A CASTLE OR A SHIP THEN IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO ATTACK.

Ibn Hibban mentioned the takhreej of this hadeeth OF As-Sab bin Jaththama (i.e. where The Prophet (ﷺ) replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).) and mentioned the words “Then It was prohibited on the day of al Hunain” But this is Mudarraj in this hadith (i.e. a Hadith in which the words of a narrator or an author are inserted into the Matn, such that it is thought that it is part of the Hadith) which can be cleared from the hadith of abu Dawud which states “Al-Zuhri said (after quoting the narration "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).") “Thereafter the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) prohibited to kill women and children”.

The evidence of this prohibition being on the day of al Hunain is the hadith of Rabah ibn Rabi' in which Prophet peace be upon him said: “Tell Khalid not to kill children or a hired servant.” Khalid’s first Ghazwah with Prophet peace be upon him was Fatah al Makkah and right after that Hunain happened.

at-Tabrani mentioned in al Awsat from Ibn Umar ra when Prophet peace be upon him entered into Makkah, there was a dead body of a woman who was killed. Prophet peace be upon him said: She was not fighting then he forbade it.

Abu Dawud mentioned in Maraseel from Ikrimah that when Prophet peace be upon him saw a dead body of a woman at the time of siege of Taaif, He said: Didn’t I forbade killing women?

Other scholars reconciled these ahadeeth that if the woman herself participate in the war (against Muslims to kill them) then it is allowed to kill. This is the opinion of ash-Shafiee and Kufis, Ibn Habeeb Maliki states if a boy who is going to be adult is taking part in war then it is allowed to kill.

The opinion of the majority of the scholars is supported by the hadeeth mentioned in Abu Dawud, an-Nisaee and Ibn Hibban Narrated Rabah ibn Rabi':
When we were with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) on an expedition, he saw some people collected together over something and sent a man and said: See, what are these people collected around? He then came and said: They are round a woman who has been killed. He said: This is not one with whom fighting should have taken place.” Meaning if she was taking part in war then it is allowed to kill.

ALL THE SCHOLARS ARE AGREED as mentioned by Ibn Battal and others that IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO KILL A WOMAN AND CHILDREN DELEBRATELY. Women due to physical weakness and the children due to not doing kufr, and it is good not to kill them (in war with kuffar) they will be either slaves or ransom will be taken from them.


Hazimi mentioned the saying of jawaz and they falsely claim that the hadith of Sab ra is abrogation of the hadith of prohibition (of killing women) but this saying ghareeb. 

[Translated by Asim ul-Haq, Fath al Bari Kitab: Al Jihad wal Sayr, Chapter: Probability of killing the babies and children hadith no. 3012 6/146]



3) Now, the fataawa of the salaf in the regards of attacking their civilians if they attack ours


Imam Qurtubi states in his commentary:


وأن المثلة بهم غير جائزة وإن قتلوا نساءنا وأطفالنا وغمونا بذلك ; فليس لنا أن نقتلهم بمثلة قصدا لإيصال الغم والحزن إليهم ; وإليه أشار عبد الله بن رواحة بقوله في القصة المشهورة : هذا معنى الآي

"And it is not permissible for us to retaliate in the same manner, even if they kill our women and children and cause sorrow to befall us, it is not permissible for us to act likewise with the intention of making them feel grief and sorrow".


Abu Abdullah al Qurtubi also said on Killing Women, old, farmers and Children in War with Kuffar that

وقال ابن عباس وعمر بن عبد العزيز ومجاهد : هي محكمة أي قاتلوا الذين هم بحالة من يقاتلونكم ، ولا تعتدوا في قتل النساء والصبيان والرهبان وشبههم ، على ما يأتي بيانه . قال أبو جعفر النحاس : وهذا أصح القولين في السنة والنظر ، فأما السنة فحديث ابن عمر أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم رأى في بعض مغازيه امرأة مقتولة فكره ذلك ، ونهى عن قتل النساء والصبيان ، رواه الأئمة ، وأما النظر فإن " فاعل " لا يكون في الغالب إلا من اثنين ، كالمقاتلة والمشاتمة والمخاصمة ، والقتال لا يكون في النساء ولا في الصبيان ومن أشبههم ، كالرهبان والزمنى والشيوخ والأجراء فلا يقتلون ، وبهذا أوصى أبو بكر الصديق رضي الله عنه يزيد بن أبي سفيان حين أرسله إلى الشام ، إلا أن يكون لهؤلاء إذاية ، أخرجه مالك وغيره ، وللعلماء فيهم صور ست : 
الأولى : النساء إن قاتلن قتلن ، قال سحنون : في حالة المقاتلة وبعدها ، لعموم قوله : وقاتلوا في سبيل الله الذين يقاتلونكم ، واقتلوهم حيث ثقفتموهم . وللمرأة آثار عظيمة في القتال ، منها الإمداد بالأموال ، ومنها التحريض على القتال ، وقد يخرجن ناشرات شعورهن نادبات مثيرات معيرات بالفرار ، وذلك يبيح قتلهن ، غير أنهن إذا حصلن في الأسر فالاسترقاق أنفع لسرعة إسلامهن ورجوعهن عن أديانهن ، وتعذر فرارهن إلى أوطانهن بخلاف الرجال .
الثانية : الصبيان فلا يقتلون للنهي الثابت عن قتل الذرية ; ولأنه لا تكليف عليهم ، فإن قاتل [ الصبي ] قتل .
الثالثة : الرهبان لا يقتلون ولا يسترقون ، بل يترك لهم ما يعيشون به من أموالهم ، وهذا إذا انفردوا عن أهل الكفر ، لقول أبي بكر ليزيد : " وستجد أقواما زعموا أنهم حبسوا أنفسهم لله ، فذرهم وما زعموا أنهم حبسوا أنفسهم له " فإن كانوا مع الكفار في الكنائس قتلوا ، ولو ترهبت المرأة فروى أشهب أنها لا تهاج . وقال سحنون : لا يغير الترهب حكمها . قال القاضي أبو بكر بن العربي : " والصحيح عندي رواية أشهب ; لأنها داخلة تحت قوله : " فذرهم وما حبسوا أنفسهم له " .
الرابعة : الزمنى . قال سحنون : يقتلون ، وقال ابن حبيب : لا يقتلون ، والصحيح أن تعتبر أحوالهم ، فإن كانت فيهم إذاية قتلوا ، وإلا تركوا وما هم بسبيله من الزمانة وصاروا مالا على حالهم وحشوة .
الخامسة : الشيوخ . قال مالك في كتاب محمد : لا يقتلون ، والذي عليه جمهور الفقهاء : إن كان شيخا كبيرا هرما لا يطيق القتال ، ولا ينتفع به في رأي ولا مدافعة فإنه لا يقتل ، وبه قال مالك وأبو حنيفة . وللشافعي قولان : أحدهما : مثل قول الجماعة ، والثاني : يقتل هو والراهب ، والصحيح الأول لقول أبي بكر ليزيد ، ولا مخالف له فثبت أنه إجماع ، وأيضا فإنه ممن لا يقاتل ولا يعين العدو فلا يجوز قتله كالمرأة ، وأما إن كان ممن تخشى مضرته بالحرب أو الرأي أو المال فهذا إذا أسر يكون الإمام فيه مخيرا بين خمسة أشياء : القتل أو المن أو الفداء أو الاسترقاق أو عقد الذمة على أداء الجزية .
السادسة : العسفاء ، وهم الأجراء والفلاحون ، فقال مالك في كتاب محمد : لا يقتلون وقال الشافعي : يقتل الفلاحون والأجراء والشيوخ الكبار إلا أن يسلموا أو يؤدوا الجزية . والأول أصح ، لقوله عليه السلام في حديث رباح بن الربيع الحق بخالد بن الوليد فلا يقتلن ذرية ولا عسيفا ، وقال عمر بن الخطاب : اتقوا الله في الذرية والفلاحين الذي لا ينصبون لكم الحرب ، وكان عمر بن عبد العزيز لا يقتل حراثا ، ذكره ابن المنذر .

Ibn Abbas, Umar bin Abdul Aziz and Mujahid said: This verse is Muhkam meaning Qitaal is for those who do qitaal against us, And do not transgress the limits in killing women, children and Raahibaan it will be mentioned further.

Abu Jafar an-Nahaas said this is the best saying in sunnah and nazar. In sunnah it is mentioned in the hadith of Ibn Umar that Prophet peace be upon him saw a woman who was killed in some Ghazwa and did not liked it and he prohibited killing women and children, This is narrated by scholars.... Qitaal is not done with women, children and people like them i.e. Raahib, disabled, old ones and laborers. These people will not be killed. Abu Bakr ra gave the same Naseeha to Yazeed bin Abi Sufiyan when he was sent to ash-Sham, unless if these people are among those who harm (Muslims and Islam) as mentioned by Maalik and others.

The scholars mentioned six categories on this:

1. IF the women kill then they will be killed, Sahnoon said in war and after the war these type of women will be killed as the verse of Quran is general " And fight in the way of Allah those who fight you" and "And kill them wherever you find them". There are athaar to know (whether the women is among them or not), like they help them with wealth, encouraging for fight, sometimes they come with open hair (and singing songs or poetries so as to) encourage them not to flee Then killing them is Mubah (permissible) in this situation but when they are captives then it is more beneficial because  they accept Islam early, and leave their religion, and it is hard that they run back to their home unlike men.

2. Children should not be killed because the prohibition of killing them is proven as they are not prone to fighting due to their small age and fear;  But as was the norm of the olden times that even 14 year old used to lead armies or battalions, then if this is the case then it is allowed to kill them.

3. Rahbaan should not be killed. neither they will be taken as captives, their weal will not be taken which they use to live the life. This is when they are not with people of kufr because Abu Bakr ra said to Yazeed ra "You will find a people who claim to have totally given themselves to Allah. Leave them... If they are with kuffar in the kanaais then they will be killed. If a woman is raahib then ash-hab said do not threat her. Sahnoon said being a raahiba will not change the ruling. qadhi Abu Bakr Ibn al Arabi said: The narration of AshHab is proven to me (i.e. she will not be threatened) because it is under the saying "leave those who totally given themselves to God".

4. Disabled. Sahnoon said they will be killed, Ibn Habeeb said they will not be killed. Truth is that their apparent things will be judged, if they are among those who harm then they will be killed otherwise they will be left.

5. The old one, Malik said in book of Muhammad that the old ones will not be killed. This is said by Majority that if the old one can not do qitaal and benefit can be taken with his opinion and he is among those who defend then he should not be killed. This is the saying of Malik and Abu Hanifa, there are two sayings of ash-Shafiee first if with the Majority and second is to kill the raahib. But true is his first saying as Abu Bakr said to Yazeed same thing. And there is no one who went against this saying so it is proven that it is consensus. These (old ones) are not among those who kill neither they help the enemies. So it is not allowed to kill them like the woman. But the one who harm and fight, give advice and wealth. When he will be in captivity then it is upto the Imam whether to kill, do Ehsaan or take fidya, or make him slave or take Jizya.


6. Labour and The Farmers, Malik said in the book of Muhammad that they will not be killed, ash-Shafiee said Labour, Farmers and old will be killed if they don't accept Islam or give Jiziyah. The first saying (of not killing) is correct as mentioned in the hadith of Ribah bin Rabi that Prophet peace be upon him said: Go to Khalid bin Waleed and do not kill any child and Labour. Umar ra said fear Allah with regards to Children and the Farmers who do not wage war, Umar bin Abdul Aziz did not kill the Farmers as mentioned by Ibn Mundhir

[Ref: Tafsir al Qurtubi under surah al Baqarah verse 190-191, Translated by Asim ul Haq]



Tafsir Al Jalalayn states:


"فَلَا يُسْرِف" يَتَجَاوَز الْحَدّ "فِي الْقَتْل" بِأَنْ يَقْتُل غَيْر قَاتِله أَوْ بِغَيْرِ مَا قُتِلَ بِهِ

“But let him not commit excess”, (means), let him not overstep the bounds, in slaying, by slaying other than the killer”. 


Ibn Katheer states:


فَلَا يُسْرِف فِي الْقَتْل " قَالُوا مَعْنَاهُ فَلَا يُسْرِف الْوَلِيّ فِي قَتْل الْقَاتِل بِأَنْ يُمَثِّل بِهِ أَوْ يَقْتَصّ مِنْ غَيْر الْقَاتِل "

“But let him not exceed limits in the matter of taking life”. They said: This means the heir should not go to extremes in killing the killer, such as mutilating the body or taking revenge on persons other than the killer”. 

يَقُول : فَلَا تَقْتُل بِالْمَقْتُولِ ظُلْمًا غَيْر قَاتِله , وَذَلِكَ أَنَّ أَهْل الْجَاهِلِيَّة كَانُوا يَفْعَلُونَ ذَلِكَ إِذَا قَتَلَ رَجُل رَجُلًا عَمَدَ وَلِيّ الْقَتِيل إِلَى الشَّرِيف مِنْ قَبِيلَة الْقَاتِل , فَقَتَلَهُ بِوَلِيِّهِ , وَتَرْك الْقَاتِل


Imam Tabari in his commentary argues that this is oppression it was in fact the pagans in the Jahiliyah period that had this mentality of killing the person's relatives if he happened to kill one of theirs and actually not end up killing the criminal himself...


We can even use more references or fataawa related to this topic like the fatwa of Imam nawawi rahimahullah with regards to the hadeeth in saheeh Muslim (Book 26, hadeeth 5569) 

‏أي فهلا عاقبت نملة واحدة هي التي قرصتك ; لأنها الجانية , وأما غيرها فليس لها جناية

You should have punished ONLY that one ant that pinched out, for it was the guilty one. As for other than it, they are not guilty. 

Note: Some of the scholars did permit this however, they permitted with certain terms and conditions and also against the folks of the soldiers who are attacking you. Only the soldiers who have entered the lands of the Muslims to kill, rape burn their wives. Only against their folks and not general civilians across the globe belonging to the country of that soldier or of the religion of that soldier


4) FATAWA OF THE SALAF AGAINST THE ARGUMENT THAT ANY NON MUSLIM AMIDST BATTLE CAN BE KILLED BECAUSE HE'S A KAAFIR 


Ibn Taymiyyah answers : 



"The foundation is that the blood of Bani Aadam is sanctified and inviolable and no one is killed except with right. Killing due to kufr is not something which the legislations have agreed upon at any one time of the Shariah,such as killing the one who sits out of combat, for this is something that the legislations and intellect do not differ over. The blood of a disbeliever during the early history of Islaam was sanctified and inviolable just like the original sanctity of a person. Allaah prevented the Muslims from killing such a disbeliever".

(As Saarim Al Maslool 'Alaa Shaatim ir Rasool", Page 104).

"Killing a women merely on account of kufr is not permissible and we do not know that it was allowed to kill any disbelieving women at any time whatsoever. Rather, the Qur'an and the sequence of its revelation prove that it is not allowed at all, because the first verses revealed about fighting: "Permission to fight has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allaah is competent to give them victory. They are those who have been evicted from their homes without right". (Qur'an 22:39 and 40). So it was allowed for the believers to fight in defending themselves and to retaliate against those who evicted them from their homes and prevented them from tawheed of Allaah and His worship, and women are not included from those who do this. Then it was prescribed for them to fight absolutely and this is explained in His saying:"Fight in the way of Allaah against those who fight you". (Qur'an 2:190).So those people who are nor people of combat are not permitted to be fought against".

(As Saarim Al Maslool", Page 101).



FATAWA OF THE SALAF WITH REGARDS TO KILLING ANY NON MUSLIM WHO ENTERS YOUR WAR ZONE OR MUSLIM LAND AS A JOURNALIST OR AS A SHEPARD OR EVEN A MERCHANT AND REMEMBER WE JUDGE BY THE APPARENT UNTIL PROOF IS ESTABLISHED FOR OTHERWISE 



Ibn Qudamah said:


"If a disbeliever enters Dar al-Islaam without having any covenant, if he is carrying with him goods for sale in Dar al-Islaam, and other merchants come with him without taking any covenant (physical or verbal from the Muslims),we are not allowed to fight and expel them".


Imam Ahmad said:

"If you are riding upon a ship and you come across merchants from the disbelievers from the enemies land to the Muslims land, you are not allowed to reject them or kill them, and all who enter the land of the Muslims from the people or war as merchants, accept them and do not ask them anything".

(Both statements in Al Mughni, 9/199).

Some brothers have been using a statement of `Umar (r.a) which isn't even verified to be his , but nevertheless they use it out of context.  the refutation for that is as follows : 


They quote a cut-paste fatwa of `umar r.a saying that he said as quoted by ali as-sallabi in his bio of umar r.a : If any prisoner is brought to you with whom you do not have a treaty, you should execute him so as to strike fear into your enemies and the enemies of Allah


They use this to kill any and every non combatant who enters their land. 

When we read the book, and that passage/letter from `Umar r.a in full context we find that , this part of the text was preceeded by a very lengthy message from `Umar radhiallahu anhu to sa`d radhiallahu anhu who was marching towards iraq to fight the PERSIANS 

and after 3 paragraphs of exhorting the muslims to fear allah with regards to the Muslims and even NON MUSLIMS who have protection from you he finally says : 

If any prisoner ( OF WAR FROM THE PERSIANS) is brought to you with whom you do not have a treaty, you should execute him so as to strike fear into your enemies and the enemies of Allah

So this is not applied on normal non Muslim civilians. this is known from the prophetic tradition of warning against killing old women children even YOUTH who dont fight you . More so the Muslims were in a battle against the persian empire already. A war was occurring between the two sides. In war , killing their soldiers is something very different to killing an unarmed civilian or a civilian who is there to actually help the poor of your religion! 

Secondly, this is taken from Muhammad rasheeds book; does it have a sanad also? . 

In this very letter to sa`d umar r.a said something which khawarij fanboys should keep in mind : 

I am commanding you and those who are with you to be more careful in avoiding sin than in avoiding your enemy, for the sins of the army are to be feared more than their enemy. The Muslims are supported by their enemy's disobedience towards Allah; were it not for that, we would not have any strength, for our numbers are not like theirs and our weapons are not like theirs. If we were equally matched in sin, they would have an advantage over us in strength, and if we did not have an advantage over them by our virtue, we would not be able to defeat them by our strength. Remember that you have over you protectors from Allah who know what you are doing, so feel shy before them and do not do any act of disobedience towards Allah. You are (striving) for the sake of Allah; do not say that our enemy is worse than us and will never prevail over us even if will commit sin. A people may be defeated by others who are worse than them, just as the Children of Israel were defeated by the Kafir Magians when they did deeds that angered Allah, and, " They entered the very innermost parts of your homes. And it was a promise [completely] fulfilled.^ (Qur'an 17: 5) "


5) THE FATAWA OF THE RECENT SCHOLARS FROM ALL SECTS ALSO AGREE UPON NOT HARMING WOMEN AND CHILDREN AKA NON COMBATANTS  WHEN YOU GO TO FIGHT THE ENEMIES (I REPEAT E.N.E.M.I.E.S.) . 



Also you may search for the fataawa of ibn baaz, or many other scholars on islamqa.com or alifta or other scholars of current day. 






2 comments:

  1. First, thanks for this article and I of course agree 1000% that Muslims (according the Sharia) are NOT allowed to intentionally target non-combatants, no ifs, ands, or buts, PERIOD.

    However, with all due respect (and I'm speaking as Sunni Muslim), why didn't you at least explain why the vast majority of "Salafis" (including many non-extremist, VERY respected Ulema such as the late Ibn Uthaymeen and many others) DO NOT AT ALL AGREE with this? Again I think these Salafis are 1000% WRONG! (IMO, this is one reason why other Sunni Muslims [and I'm NOT talking about the grave worshiping so-called "Sufis," or other Shirkish type of "Sunnis" or the Shia Rawafidh) really think the vast majority of "Salafis" are extremely jahil, evil and/or misguided, etc.)

    All of the alleged terrorist attacks these days are committed by self described Salafis ("Salafi Js"), although IMO many of these acts are committed by Intel Agencies (the Deep State), including the Mossad/Zionists (their hands are all over 911 and many other events), etc.

    We all know that basically all of the Muslim groups so-called “fighting” (sic) out there today (with the exception of maybe one group who are not “SJs” – Salafi Js - i.e. the Hanafi Afghan Taliban, and BTW, the Afghan Taliban is the only group who have been successful in repealing the invaders) DO SAY that they can intentionally target NON-COMBATANT women, CHILDREN, AND even BABIES. If you are ignorant of this, then sorry, but you are not doing your homework. And you need to have better arguments and additional rebuttals in which to refute them.

    These “SJs” say over and over and over and over and over and over, well you get the point (haven’t you seen their videos or MANY, MANY alleged “fatwas”), that NON-COMBATANT women, old men, and yes CHILDREN and BABIES can be intentionally targeted because of al-Qisaas, and use the various Ayahs in the Qur’an as their alleged “justification” (2:194, and 16:126 for example).

    As an example, they say that instead of killing the killer (or killers) who initially killed someone else’s children, that it is 100% Islamically halaal to kill HIS (the killer’s) children!!!!!! (And NOT the original killer… And that his children [including babies] must pay the price for a crime that they were NOT involved in, nor had anything to do with). Do you understand? Again, I’m not saying it’s right (and think they are 1000% wrong!), but this IS what they believe in… Yes, again they ALWAYS use the al-Qisaas Ayahs as “proof” that this is 100% Islamically halaal.

    The ONLY Salafi 'Alim in the modern era to EVER offer up great rebuttals against the extremely idiotic, Jahil, Majnoon "Salafi" argument that yes, Muslims "can" use Qisaas verses as "proof" (sic) to intentionally target non-combatants (including BABIES!) is Shaykh Abu Basir (May Allah protect him), and thanks for including what he wrote up.

    ReplyDelete

To contact us, Please do so from the "Contact us" tab on the top of this page