بَابُ الْقِتَالِ فِي الْجِهَادِFighting in Jihad

¹ The statement: “concealing it by mentioning something else”: Ibn al-Malik said: This means he hid it by referring to something else, appearing to intend another destination for strategic reasons, to keep the enemy unaware and safe from spies who might inform them. His concealment (ﷺ) was through insinuation, such as intending Makkah but asking people about Khaybar’s condition and routes, not explicitly saying he intended one place while meaning another, as that would be lying, which is impermissible. As stated in (Al-Mirqat).

² The statement: “War is deception”: Al-Nawawi said: The most eloquent pronunciation is with an open “kha” and a silent “dal,” which was the Prophet’s (ﷺ) dialect. Scholars agree on the permissibility of deception against disbelievers in war by any means, except if it involves breaking a covenant or safe-conduct. It is authentically reported that lying is permissible in three cases. At-Tabari said: Only insinuation is allowed in war, not outright lying, though outright lying is permissible, but insinuation is preferable. As stated in (Al-Mirqat).

³ The statement: “when he went out, would provide water and treat the wounded”: In (Al-Hidayah): There is no issue with taking women and Qur’ans with Muslims if it is a large army where safety is assured, as safety is the dominant expectation and treated as certain. It is disliked to take them in a small detachment where safety is not assured. Elderly women may join a large army for tasks suited to them, like cooking, providing water, and treating wounds. Young women should stay home to avoid fitnah. They should not engage in combat, as this suggests Muslim weakness unless absolutely necessary. It is not recommended to take them for intimacy or service, but if necessary, it should be with slave women, not free women. In (‘Umdat al-Qari): If asked how this was permissible, I say: It was allowed for older women, as the context of treating wounds is not desirable, causing discomfort to both parties. For others, they treated without direct contact, applying medicine that others placed on the wound, or possibly without touching the body at all. This is supported by the consensus that if a woman dies and no woman is available to wash her, a man does not touch her but washes her from behind a barrier, per Hasan al-Basri, Nakha‘i, Zuhri, Qatadah, and Ishaq. According to Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyab, Malik, the Kufis, and Ahmad, she is purified with tayammum, which is the soundest Shafi‘i view. Al-Awza‘i said she is buried as is without tayammum. The difference between treating wounds and washing the dead is that washing is worship, while treatment is a necessity, and necessities permit the prohibited.

¹ The statement: “Kill the elderly polytheists, etc.”: This refers to those of fighting age, not the frail elderly, who are not killed unless they are strategists. As stated in (Al-Mirqat).

² The statement: “Do not kill a frail elder, etc.”: In (Al-Hidayah): Do not kill a woman, child, frail elder, cripple, or blind person, as, in our view, the justification for killing is waging war, which they cannot do. Thus, those with a paralyzed side, a severed right hand, or severed hand and foot on opposite sides are not killed. Shafi‘i disagrees regarding the frail elder, cripple, and blind, as he considers disbelief the justification for killing. Our evidence refutes this. It is authentically reported that the Prophet (ﷺ) prohibited killing children and offspring, and when he saw a slain woman, he said: “She was not fighting; why was she killed?”

¹ The statement: “prohibited the killing of women and children”: Shaykh Ibn al-Humam said: The six, except Nasa’i, narrated from Ibn Umar that a woman was found killed, and he prohibited killing women and children. I believe there is a consensus on the prohibition of killing women and children. Abu Bakr advised Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan when sending him to Sham: “Do not kill children, women, or the elderly,” as per the Hadith. However, those who fight from among those we say should not be killed, like the insane, children, women, elderly, or monks, are killed. Children and the insane are killed during their fighting, while others, like women and monks, are killed if they fight after being captured. A queen is killed even if she does not fight, as are a child or insane person who is a king, to break their power. As stated in (Al-Mirqat).

² The statement: “They are from them”: In (‘Umdat al-Qari): If you say this contradicts Bukhari’s narration from Ibn Umar prohibiting killing women and children, I say: Al-Khattabi said: “They are from them” means they share the ruling of their religion, as a disbeliever’s child is ruled as a disbeliever. This does not permit intentionally targeting their blood. It applies when reaching the fathers is only possible through them, so if they are harmed due to their intermingling, there is no blame for their killing. The Prophet (ﷺ) prohibited killing women and children intentionally, not in combat. If they fight, the prohibition is lifted, and the blood of disbelievers is permissible unless protected by a right. Tirmidhi narrated a Hadith prohibiting killing women and children, saying some Companions and others disliked it, which is the view of Thawri and Shafi‘i. Some scholars permitted killing women and children during night raids, which is the view of Ahmad and Ishaq. Our Shaykh said: Tirmidhi’s narration about Thawri and Shafi‘i’s dislike applies to killing them absolutely, in night raids or otherwise, but this is not so. Killing them outside night raids is unanimously prohibited if they do not fight, as Al-Nawawi stated in Sharh Muslim. If they fight, the majority say they are killed. Al-Tahawi titled a chapter: “What is prohibited from killing women and children in the land of war,” citing nine Companions prohibiting it. Some said it is impermissible to kill women and children in the land of war under any circumstance, and it is not permissible to target others if it risks harming them. For example, if the enemy uses their children as shields and Muslims cannot attack without hitting them, it is prohibited, or if they fortify with children, attacking the fortress is prohibited if it risks harming them, based on these Hadiths. I say: These are Al-Awza‘i, Malik, Shafi‘i in one opinion, and Ahmad in one narration. Abu Umar said: Scholars differed on attacking fortresses with catapults if polytheist children or Muslim captives are inside. Malik said: Do not attack the fortress or burn the disbelievers’ ships if Muslim captives are present. Al-Awza‘i said: If disbelievers use Muslim children as shields, do not attack or burn ships with Muslim captives. Thawri, Abu Hanifah, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, Shafi‘i in the sound opinion, Ahmad, and Ishaq said: If reaching them requires harming children or women, it is permissible. Abu Umar said: Abu Hanifah, his companions, and Thawri said there is no issue with attacking polytheist fortresses even if Muslim captives or their children are inside, or burning ships targeting polytheists. If a Muslim is harmed, there is no blood money or expiation. Thawri said: If they are harmed, there is expiation but no blood money.

¹ The statement: “or a hired servant”: Meaning a worker or follower for service, likely identified by being unarmed. As stated in (Al-Mirqat).

² The statement: “cut down the palm trees of Banu an-Nadir and burned them, etc.”: Ibn al-Humam said: This is permissible to weaken Allah’s enemies and break their strength. They may burn, cut trees, or destroy crops, but if it is evident they are defeated and victory is clear, this is disliked as it is destruction without necessity, which is only permitted for need. As stated in (Al-Mirqat).

³ The statement: “raided Banu al-Mustaliq, etc.”: In (Al-‘Alamgiriyyah): There is no issue with raiding them at night or day without invitation if the call to Islam has reached them. As stated in (Muhit as-Sarakhsi).

¹ The statement: “disliked raising their voices during combat”: Al-Mudhhar said: Warriors typically raise their voices to glorify themselves, exaggerate their numbers, intimidate their enemies, or display bravery by saying, “I am the courageous one seeking battle.” The Companions disliked raising voices for any of these reasons, as they do not draw one closer to Allah. Instead, they raised their voices with the remembrance of Allah, as it brings success in this world and the Hereafter. As stated in (Al-Mirqat).

² The statement: “called out: Who will duel?, etc.”: In (Sharh as-Sunnah): This indicates the permissibility of dueling in jihad against disbelievers, and there is no disagreement on its permissibility if the leader authorizes it. They differed if it occurs without the leader’s permission: some, including Malik and Shafi‘i, permitted it. In (Rahmat al-Ummah): If a Muslim initiates and seeks a duel, it is not allowed. Ibn Abi Habirah, a Shafi‘i, said it is disliked, and it is preferable not to duel without the leader’s permission, but if done without permission, it is permissible. Abu Hanifah said it is prohibited unless the duel is conducted with strength. ³ The statement: “Then we turned to al-Walid”: This indicates it is permissible for each side in a duel to assist their comrade if able. In (Sharh as-Sir al-Kabir): If a Muslim and a polytheist duel, it is permissible for Muslims to aid their companion if they can, as the polytheist intends to kill them as he does his opponent. They may repel his harm, and even if he does not target them, they may kill him as a warring polytheist. In the story of the Badr duel, Ali killed Shaybah, Hamzah killed Utbah, and Ali and Hamzah helped Ubaydah against al-Walid until they killed him, showing it is permissible. As stated in (Nayl al-Awtar).

¹ The statement: “set up a catapult, etc.”: In (Al-Hidayah): They set up catapults against them, as the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) did against Ta’if.

² The statement: “Kill the polytheists, etc.”: In (‘Umdat al-Qari): There is no disagreement among the people of tafsir and narrators of traditions that Surah Bara’ah (At-Tawbah) was revealed after Surah Muhammad, so its rulings abrogate the ransom mentioned elsewhere.