|
The hadeeth ("Verily, the Imaam is
but a shield..." {BUKHAARI, MUSLIM from Abu Hurayrah}) has also
explained that jihaad can only operate correctly and most beneficially
under a unified authority and that the offensive jihaad to expand darul
Islam is only correct under the authority of the Imaam. This means jihad
is only complete when under an ameer and also it is most effective when
under an ameer. This is all implied by the words “Verily, the Imaam is
a shield behind which the people fight…” This is undeniable as the
Imaam is needed for the functioning of darul Islam and it is the Imaam who
will decide the details of contracts with those people such as the ahludh
Dhimmah who are offered to pay the jizya etc. So many points come from
this hadeeth concerning ahkaam and qawaai'd of Imaamah and Jihaad but it
all overlooked in a time of ignorance and haste, people just want to
derive from it a stance that supports their own freedom, they say, 'We
wont work to support leadership and unity until an Imaam comes and saves
us and the ummah from the bombs of the kuffaar!' yet the hadeeth actually
refutes this understanding. Imaamah and Jihaad are both revealed systems,
Imaamah is not about a superhuman individual, rather it is a supreme
system that remains operative in all circumstances, it operates in
weakness and strength, ease and adversity, it increases its effectiveness
due to the obedience, sincerity, capability, efforts, knowledge,
intellect, wisdom and resources of those who recognize and comply with it.
Similarly, its effectiveness decreases when the people do not support it
or their knowledge, sincerity and efforts are depleted, this was proven in
the life of Nabi (saw), and in the time of the khulafaa' raashideen and
throughout Islamic history.
A junnah [shield]
does not only mean shield but can mean a protection and a covering from
many matters and the Imaam is responsible for his decisions that he makes
during jihad just as he is responsible at any other time and the mistakes
he makes are upon him and those who obeyed him are covered by the Imaams
greater responsibility so that they can not be blamed unless the command
was to ma’seeyah (disobedience to Allah). This fact, is proven by numerous
ayaat and ahadeeth, e.g. :-
• Abu Hurayrah reported that Nabi (saw) said “Jihaad is binding upon
you with every ameer whether baaran [righteous] or faajiran [corrupt] and
though he may commit major sins…” (ABU DAWOOD similar in IBN MAAJAH)
• Buraydah narrated ‘Whenever rasool Allah (saw) deputed anyone as an
ameer of an army or expedition he admonished him to have taqwa of Allah
and be good to the Muslims with him…’ (MUSLIM, IBN MAAJAH)
• Yahya ibn Sa’eed narrated that Mua’dh ibn Jabal said “The battle [ghazwa]
is of two types. One is when there is generosity in spending, and ease
with the partner and there is obedience to those possessing authority [amr]
and where corruption [fasaad] is avoided. So that ghazwa is all good. And
there is the ghazwa where there is no spending with generosity and no ease
with the partner and no obedience to those possessing authority and no
avoidance of corruption. So that ghazwa does not return its companion with
sufficiency” (MAALIK Kitaabul Jihaad [no.1015])
• Allah (swt) says “O you who believe! Obey Allah obey the messenger
and those in authority amongst you…” (an Nisaa 4:59) Ibn A’bbaas said
concerning the above ayah “Was revealed about Abdullah ibn Hudhaafah bin
Qays bin A’di who rasool Allah (swt) sent on a military expedition” (BUKHAARI,
MUSLIM, IBN KATHEER ‘Tafseerul Quran al A’zeem’) So this ayah was revealed
concerning the Imaarah necessary for jihad and this was under the command
of the greater Imaarah of Rasool Allah (saw).
• Al Haarith al Asha’ri reported that Nabi (saw) said “I command you
with five which Allah commanded me with: Listening and obeying, jihaad and
hijrah and the Jama’ah for he who leaves the jama’ah by a handsbreadth,
then he has thrown off the yoke of Islam from his neck.” (AHMAD[4/130,
202] AT-TAYAALISI [1161] IBN HIBBAAN [1550] IBN KHUZAYMAH [930] AL-HAAKIM
[1/236] similar from TIRMIDHI) So this connected jihad to three other
matters that are based upon the greater Imaamah, i.e. listening and
obeying and clinging to al Jama’h.
When looking to life of Rasool Allah (saw) and his sunnah, it is clear
that the Jihaad, whether defensive or offensive was always organised under
his authority as the Imaam of the ummah when that was possible. Indeed the
evidences established that in many ways, some of which we have already
mentioned. However, we can also look to the works of the classical
scholars who also made clear that jihad is an obligation that generally
falls under the authority of Imaamah. Some have said that there is no
Imaamah for defensive jihad, but this is wrong. The following points make
this clear in addition to the weighty and undeniable evidences already
mentioned:-
• Rather the evidences that connected Imaamah to Jihaad were general and
include offensive and defensive jihad.
• Also, the life of Rasool Allah (saw) as an obligatory legislative
example proved that the defensive jihad was always under his authority
when possible.
• Also, the responsibility and authority of the Imaam concerning the
collective affairs of the ummah was made general and absolute by the
evidences of Imaamah, and that generality necessarily extends to jihad,
whether offensive or defensive.
• Jihaad is not an independent branch of Islam but rather it is a branch
of the unified system of Islam which operates under the unified Imaamah.
When it is divorced from this organised system of unity and broken off
from the other parts of Islam and the ummah, it does not function
effectively. Allah (swt) says “…establish the deen and do not make
divisions in it…” (ash Shoora 42:13)
• Even though Jihaad is a high obligation in Islamand highly rewardable
and a sign of sincere and true imaan, it does not mean that the mujaahid
is exempted from his other obligations. Where is the evidence that a
mujaahid can abstain from any obligation such as salah and fasting? Where
is there any evidence that allows a mujaahid to avoid the obligation of
unity and the obligation to have a bayah to the Imaam? Rather there is no
evidence for that and is totally contradicted by many general and specific
evidences, Allah (swt) says “O you who believe! Enter into submission
completely and do not follow the footsteps of Shaytaan for he is a clear
enemy” (al Baqarah 2:208) and Allah (swt) says “…Then do you
believe in part of the Book and reject the rest? Then what is the
recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of
this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall have the most
grievous torment.. And Allah is not unaware of what you do” (al
Baqarah 2:85)
• Some among independent mujaahideen or in fact more so today, not
necessarily mujaahideen, but those who talk about jihad, claim that they
should never give bayah except to someone from their own ranks (such as
independent jihaadee groups etc) and should not give bayah to an Imaam
already appointed. They say to the nature of ‘We shall only give bayah to
the greatest warrior in the world’ Again, this is erroneous thinking, as
the hadeeth commanded the muslims to give the bayah to the legitimate
Imaam who has been appointed first, as Abu Hurayrah narrated that Rasool
Allah (saw) said “Give bayah to the first then the first” (BUKHAARI,
MUSLIM) So no-one should argue with the commands of Rasool Allah (saw) on
the basis of their own emotions or intentions. They make the mistake in
thinking that the office of Imaamah is some sort of medal or prize when in
fact it is no such thing but rather a great burden and responsibility.
This was to the extent that the vast majority of sahaabah turned away from
wanting authority and many ahadeeth warned about it. Rather, the Imaamah
is a matter of hukm shari’ah [Divine Law] and its conditions have been set
and it is a command upon the ummah in general to appoint an Imaam without
delay and for the ummah to give him the bayah of obedience as long as he
meets the conditions. The Imaamah is a system for the organisation of the
affairs of the ummah and is not a prize. Whoever neglects it has become
sinful, regardless of all of their good deeds.
• As for those situations where an Imaama has passed away and still an
Imaama has not yet been appointed or when people are attacked and are away
from the Imaam, then of course they are commanded by the Quran to fight
those who fight them, and do not have to wait for anything as that is an
emergency issue. However, even in that situation, those people will still
be organised under a specific imaarah which they appoint for themselves as
the shari’ah organises that. This again should show them that there is no
success without unity and organisation under one man. This should be a
sign for them concerning the obligation and condition of the wider ummah.
The symptoms will continue to arise all over the body, but the body must
come under the command of the head in order to revive itself. Numaan bin
Basheer reported that Rasool Allah (saw) said “The believers are like
one person, if his head is in pain the whole body aches with with fever
and sleeplessness.” And in another version “The similitude of
believers in regard to mutual love, kindness and brotherhood is that of
one body. When any limb of it aches the whole body aches due to
sleeplessness and fever.” (MUSLIM No.s 6258-6262 and similar from
BUKHAARI)
• Some of the independent thinking people who call for jihad claim that
the ummah will only be unified by jihad and again this is an error in
understanding the way the shari’ah works and what it commands us. Every
hukm of the shari’ah has its own reality, conditions, objectives and
methods. Is jihad the answer to everything in Islam? How do we pray? Is it
by jihad? How do we fast? Is it by jihad? How do we organise the zakah? Is
it by jihad? No, rather all of these have their own rules. Jihad like all
rules of Islam is connected to other rules and helps support them.
However, the main objective of jihad is the repelling of enemies and the
removal of physical obstacles to the application of shari’ah and the word
of Allah being the uppermost. As for unity, then that has its own pillars
and methods. Unity on Islam, is not about beating someone or fighting
them, but rather it is about an agreement to reject the taaghoot, to
reject kufr and its allies and affirm the pillars of belief. That
establishes the belief basis of unity known as al walaa’ wal baraa’
[allegiance and disassociation]. As for the structure of unity and its
practical application then that takes place by recognising one man as
Imaam and unifying under his command. Those are the two pillars of unity
in Islam, for jihad, then that is something which emanates from that
unified structure of believers. If some mujaahideen were to defeat an
opposition and they did not possess the Islamic concept of unity along
with its shari’ah method then what would they replace the fallen regime
with? How would they prevent further divisions and fighting among
themselves and the people if they did not understand the shari’ah basis of
unity? Indeed history has shown that whoever, neglects Islamic unity then
the divisions arise and destroy whatever has been built. And that is of
course proven by numerous evidences including the ayah “And those who
disbelieve are awliyaa to one another, if you do not do so then there will
be calamities upon the earth and great corruption” (al Anfaal 8:73)
• Finally, those people who are unaware of an existing Imaam, or even
unaware of the hukm and find themselves attacked by hostile forces, then
this does not mean they abstain from a duty of jihad to defend themselves
because they are leaderless. Rather, the obligations remain. Just because
someone is sinful for neglecting one duty or are ignorant of it, this does
not prevent them from fulfilling other duties. Rather, every Muslim should
perform all the duties that he is aware of and that he is capable of.
Allah (swt) says “The only deen with Allah is submission” (aali
I’mraan 3:20) and Abu Hurayrah reported that Rasool Allah (saw) said
“If I command you to do something then do as much as are able…” (BUKHAARI,
MUSLIM)
Finally, we mention some of those indications and clear statements from
the classical scholars which connect jihad to the greater authority of the
Imaam:-
• Imaam Maalik [d.179 h] Yahya (the main narrator of al Muwatta) said that
Maalik was asked whether someone who killed one of the enemy could keep
the man’s effects without permission of the Imaam. He said ‘No one can do
that without the permission of the Imaam. Only the Imaam can make ijtihaad.
I have not heard that Rasool Allah [saaw] ever said ‘Whoever kills someone
can have his effects’ on any other day than the day of Hunayan.’ (al
Muwatta [Kitaabul Jihaad vol.1 no.991] and Maalik was asked about bonuses
and whether they were taken from the first of the spoils, and he said
‘That is only decided according to the ijtihaad of the Imaam. We do not
have a known reliable command about that other than it is up to the
ijtihaad of the Sultaan. I have not heard that Rasool Allah [saw] gave
bonuses in all his raids. I have only heard that he gave bonuses in one of
them, namely, the day of Hunayn. It depends on the ijtihaad of the Imaam
whether they are taken from the first of the spoils or whatever is after
it.’ (al Muwatta [Kitaabul Jihaad vol.1 no.992])
• Imaam Bukhaari [d.256 h] one of the main muhaditheen and a shafi’ faqeeh
connected the affairs of the ummah to Imaamah throughout his main hadeeth
book ‘Jaami’us Saheeh’ through mentioning the Imaam in the various chapter
headings. He connected many of the matters of jihad to the Imaam and we
mention here just a few of those chapter headings:-
o ‘Seeking permission of the Imaam’ (BUKHAARI kitaabul Jihaad [vol.4
no.211] an Noor 24:62)
o ‘The Imaam distributes what is presented before him and keeps aside the
share of those who are not present or absent’ (BUKHAARI Kitaab Fardul
Khumus [vol.4 no.356])
o ‘From the evidence that the Khumus is for the Imaam…’ (BUKHAARI Kitaab
Fardul Khumus [vol.4 no.368])
• Imaam Muslim [d.261 h] regarded as the second most authentic of the main
compilers of hadeeth was also a shafi’I faqeeh arranged his chapters of
hadeeth and headed them according to his understanding of fiqh. He again
showed the way the shari’ah revolved around the Imaam by the headings of
his chapters and this can be seen particularly clearly in the case of
jihad, we mention the following examples [NOTE: similar examples can be
seen in all the books of hadeeth of major classical muhaditheen such IBN
MAAJAH, TIRMIDHI, NASAA’I, ABU DAWOOD etc]:-
o ‘Appointment of the Ameers of expeditions by the Imaam and his advice to
them on the conduct of the battles and other matters’ (MUSLIM Kitaabul
Jihaad was Siyar [vol.3]
o ‘Preferability for the Imaam to take a baya’ah from the army when
intending to fight…’ (MUSLIM ‘Kitaabul Imaarah’ [vol.3]
• Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal [d.241 h] said in the book attributed to him
concering a’qeedah ‘Participation in the battles along with the umaraa’ [ameers]
whether they be righteous or sinful, is until Qiyaamah, it is never to be
abandoned and the division of the fay and the establishment of the hudood
with the Imaam’ [Usoolus Sunnah [no.49] and ‘Fighting against the thieves
and the khawaarij is permissible. That is when they set upon a man with
respect to his person and wealth. It is then permissible for him to fight
for himself and his property and to repel them with everything that is in
his capacity. But it is not permissible for him, when they depart from him
or abandon him. That he seeks them, nor should he follow their tracks and
this is not for anyone other than the Imaam or the governors of the
Muslims’ (Usoolus Sunnah [no.55-56])
• Imaam an Nawawi [d.676 h.] ‘It is blamable to invade he territory of the
disbelievers without the authority of the sovereign or his deputy. The
sunnah also requires that the sovereign should give precise details
instructions to the ameer he has appointed for each detachment ordered
upon an expedition…’ (‘Minhaajut Talibeen’ [Kitaabus Siyar p.458])
• Imaam Al Awzaa’ee [d.157 h] Imaam ibn Rushd said ‘Al Awzaa’ee permitted
that the Imaam may negotiate a truce with the disbelievers on the basis of
something that the Muslims would give to the disbelievers if that is
required as a necessity for avoiding trials or on the basis of any other
necessity’ (Bidaayatul Mujtahid wal Kifaayatul Muqtasid’ [vol.1 p.463])
• Imaam ibn Abi Zayd al Qayrawaani [d.386 h.] said ‘Of the ghaneemah
Muslims take in the fray of the battle, the Imaam should take one fifth
and should divide the other four fifths among the members of the army…’
and the authority of the Imaam was also drawn out in terms of granting
security [amaan] ‘…It is permissible for the least of the Muslims to
protect the rest of them. Also the woman and the boy if the understood
amaan. It was said ….If the Imaam gave permission for that then it is
permissible.’ ‘And fighting the enemy is performed with every one from the
wulaa’ [i.e. umaraa appointed by the Imaam] who is righteous [barr] or
corrupt [faajir]’ (ar Risaalatul Qayrawaani’ Bab:’fi’l Jihaad’)
• Imaam ash Shaybaani [d.189 h] The following discussions are from the
book on foreign policy and the rules of war and peace by Imaama ash
Shaybaani and the other two main root sources of the Hanafi madh-hab, that
is Imaam Abu Yoosuf [d.182] and Imaam Abu Haneefah [d.150 h] In these
discussions, which are a mixture of the opinions of these early u’lemaa,
who mixed with the tabi’een, we see the absolute authority given to the
Imaam over the affairs of the ummah in general in times of war and peace
and in jihad in particular. We have only selected a few quotations to
illustrate that fact. :-
o Imaam ash Shaybaani said I asked ‘If an Imaam entered Darul Harb at the
head of a Muslim army and died there, but opinion in the army was divided
as to who would be the khaleefah and they came into armed conflict with
each other but later encountered disbelievers whom they fought and from
whom they captured spoils, would such spoils be subject to the one fifth
share and would they participate in the division?’ He replied ‘Yes’ (Kitaabus
Siyar [no.1599-1600]
o ‘I asked, ‘If the Imaam attacked an enemy territory and took possession
of it, do you think he should divide the land (among the warriors) as he
divides the spoils of war?’ He replied ‘The Imaam is free either to divide
the land into five shares, distributing the four fifths among the warriors
who participated in conquering it or not to divide it up (i.e. hold it as
land under the Imaamah) as U’mar did in the land of Sawaad’ (Kitaabus
Siyar [no.90-91]
o ‘I asked, ‘If male captives of war were taken from the territory of war,
do you think that the Imaam should kill them all or divide them as slaves
among the Muslims?’ He replied, ‘The Imaam is entitled to a choice between
taking them to darul Islam to be divided (among the warriors) and killing
them (while in darul harb) I asked, ‘which is preferable?’ He replied
‘(The Imaam), should examine the situation and decide whatever he deems to
be advantageous to the Muslims’ (Kitaabus Siyar [no.94-97])
o ‘I asked, ‘If some of the inhabitants of darul harb asked the Muslims to
make peace with them for a specified number of years without paying jizya,
do you think the Muslims should grant the request?’ He replied ‘Yes,
provided the Imaam has considered the situation and has found that the
inhabitants of darul harb are too strong for the Muslims to prevail
against them and it would be better for the Muslims to make peace with
them’ (Kitaabus Siyar [no.602-603])
• Abu Haneefah [d.150 h.] Imaam ash Shaybaani said ‘Abu Haneefah held that
if the Imaam conquered a tterritory of the disbelievers, he would have the
choice to do whatever appeared to be more advantageous and acceptable to
the Muslims. If he decideds to take out of the land and property, the one
fifth and divide the four fifths among the warriors who captured it, he
may do so. The one fifth, would be then divided into three parts. One for
the poor, one for the orphans and one for the wayfarer. But Abu Haneefah
said, if the Imaam decides to immobilize the land and leave it to its
people as dhimmees who would be obliged to pay for themselves and their
land [jizya] and kharaaj, as U’mar ibn al Khattaab had decreed for the
Sawaad, he may do so.’ (Kitaabus Siyar [no.1628])
• Imaam Abu Ja’far at Tahaawi [d.321 h.] said ‘Hajj and Jihaad under the
leadership of the oolil amr of the muslimeen whether they are righteous [barr]
or corrupt [faajir] are continuing obligations until the Last Hour comes.
Nothing can annul or controvert them.’ (‘al A’qeedatut Tahaaweeyah’
[no.77])
• Imaam Barbahaari [d.329 h.] said ‘It is then not permissible for anyone
to spend a single night thinking that he has no Imaam over him whether he
be righteous or corrupt. The Hajj and the Jihad are to be carried out
under his leadership…’ (Sharhus Sunnah [no.30-31])
• Imaam as Saabooni [d.449 h.] said ‘The people of hadeeth hold that the
prayers of jumua’h, the two eids and any other prayer can be prayed behind
every Muslim Imaam irrespective of whether he is righteous or corrupt.
They also hold that jihad against the disbelievers is valid with them even
if they are oppressors and tyrants. They agree to make du’a for them,
asking to rectify their situation, to be given tawfeeq and to establish
justice among their subjects. They do not deem permissible rebellion
against the leaders with the sword even if they are unjust and tyrannical.
They say that the transgressors should be fought until they return to the
obedience of the just Imaam.’ (‘A’qeedatus Salaf Ashaabul Hadeeth’
[p.93-94])
• Imaam Ibn Rushd [d.595 h] in his book on the causes of differences in
fiqh issues among the various madhaahib mentioned many times the authority
of the Imaam in the affairs of jihad, from them we include:-
o ‘The majority of jurists maintained that the Imaam has different types
of choices regarding the prisoners of war, including their pardon, their
enslavement, execution, demand for ransom, and imposition of jizya on
them. A group of jurists maintained that it is not permitted to execute
the prisoners.’ (Bidaayutul Mujtahid wal Kifaayatul Muqtasid [vol.1
p.456])
o ‘The majority of the jurists agreed that four fifths of the spoils are
for those who seized them, if they acted with the permission of the Imaam.
They disagreed about those who acted without the permission of the Imaam…’
(Bidaayutul Mujtahid wal Kifaayatul Muqtasid [vol.1 p.468])
o ‘The jurists agreed about the permissibility of the Imaam’s granting of
a share of reward out of the spoils for whomsoever he likes…’ (Bidaayutul
Mujtahid wal Kifaayatul Muqtasid [vol.1 p.473])
o ‘The majority of the jurists permitted safe conduct [amaan] granted by
free Muslim males, except that Ibn al Maajishoon [d.212 or 214 h] was of
the view that it is contingent upon the consent of the Imaam. They
disagreed about the safe conduct granted by a slave or a woman. The
majority permited this while Ibn al Maajishoon and Sahnoon [d.240 h] used
to say that safe conduct granted by a woman is contingent upon the consent
of the Imaam’ and ‘Is truce permissible? A group of jurists permitted this
initially without necessity, if the Imaam considered it to be in the
interest of the Muslims.’ (Bidaayutul Mujtahid wal Kifaayatul Muqtasid
[vol.1 p.457])
• Imaam Burhaanud Deen Marghinaani [d.591 h] said ‘Thus it appears that
the observance of war, as said before, suffices (i.e. is fard kifaayah)
except where there is a general call (i.e. of the Imaam due to the enemy
attacking) for in this case war becomes a positive injunction with respect
to all of the inhabitants, whether men or women and whether the Imaam be a
just person or an unjust person…’ (al Hidaayah [Kitaabus Siyar vol.2 p141]
So here the Imaam clearly connected even the defensive jihad to the
authority of the Imaam. And he said ‘If the Imaam makes pece with the
enemy or with any particular tribe or body of them, and perceive it to be
eligible for the Muslims, there need be no hesitation…’ [ibid. p.150] and
‘If the Imaam makes peace with the enemy for a single term and afterwards
perceives that it is most advantageous for the Muslims interest to break
it he may in that case lawfully renew the war, after giving them due
notice…’ [ibid. p.151] and ‘If the disbelievers act against the peace, it
is then in such a case, lawful for the Imaam to attack them without any
previous notice, since the breach of the treaty in this instance
originates with them…’ (ibid. [p.151])
• Imaam Mawaardi [d.450 h.] Dedicated two separate and lengthy chapters on
his book on the rules of Imaamah to the subject of the Imaarah of the
Imaam over the affairs of Jihad. Also, even more significantly in his
opening chapter on the exclusive responsibilities of the Imaam, Imaam
Mawardi included ten matters, and among these were matters pertaining to
offensive and defensive jihad:-
o No.3 ‘He must protect the territory of Islam and defend the sanctuaries
so that people may earn their sustenance and journey safe from any threat
to their person or belongings’
o No.5 He must fortify the border posts against attack and defend them
with force against an enemy which might appear unexpectedly and violate
what is sacred or shed the blood of Muslims or dhimmees protected by
covenant.
o No.6 ‘He must make jihad against those who resist Islam, after having
been called to it until they submit to it or accept to live as a protected
dhimmee community, so that the rights of Allah t’ala “…be made uppermost
above all other deens” (at Tawbah 9:33)
So we see the above three matters are all proving the exclusive authority
of the Imaam in matters of offensive and defensive jihad. Also Imaam
Mawaardi made clear the relation of jihad with Imaarah in many places for
instance…. ‘As for the duties of the fighters towards the ameer, they are
four – They must obey him and submit to his authority as this has been
duly established and obedience is obligatory wherever authority has been
duly established, Allah ta’ala says “O you who believe! Obey Allah obey
the Messenger and those who are in authority among you…” (an Nisaa’
4:59) …(‘al Ahkaamus Sultaneeyah wal Wilaayatu Deeniyah’ p.73)
|
