|
Muslim World News Updates |
|
|
|
2 May 2009 In the argument of whether operations
where the person brings death upon himself are allowed
or not, the ones who oppose this form of Jihad use the
main argument that it is suicide because death was not
brought by the enemy but by the person himself.
Ibn al Athir, in al-Kamel, mentions an incident
that happened during the siege of Acre by Salahudeen.
Unfortunately, he mentions it in passing without a
comment.
He mentions that Salahudeen needed men so he asked
for a ship to transport some of his soldiers from
Beirut. This was a large ship carrying 700 soldiers
full with equipment and provisions. King Richard of
England succeeded in intercepting the ship and it was
the decree of Allah that the wind stops and the
Muslims were surrounded with a fleet of forty sails.
Nevertheless the Muslims defended themselves against
this overwhelming force. They succeeded in killing
many of Richard's men but the attack of the enemy was
fierce. When the Muslim leader saw that the enemy was
overcoming them he said we will not die but honorable
and we will not hand over to them anything. He did not
want them to take them as prisoners and did not want
their equipment to fall into the enemies' hands. So he
descended to the bottom of the ship and broke a hole
into it and they all drowned. The entire Muslim force
of 700 men strong drowned in the sea.
According to the view held by the ones against
martyrdom operations this operation is clearly suicide
because not only did the Muslims kill themselves with
their own hands but they did not inflict any harm on
the enemy in doing so. All what was achieved by the
Muslims was to avoid capture and prevent the enemy
from making use of their equipment. I would also need
to note here that death was far from certain if they
fell into the hands of Richard because as the events
of the time clearly show that many times Muslim
prisoners, especially soldiers, were kept alive by
the Crusaders for the sake of ransom and labor.
Ibn Shaddad, a Shafi jurist, in al-Nawader al-Sultaniyya
also mentions this incident. But he closes with the
following:
"People were very depressed and the Sultan received
the news and considered it to be counted as an act in
the path of Allah and he was being patient with the
tests of Allah and Allah does not waste the efforts of
the good doers."
This closing comment from Ibn Shaddad reflects his
view on what Yaqub, the head of the Muslim force, has
done. He says about him: "He was a good man,
courageous, and an expert in warfare." As I quoted
above he says: Allah does not waste the efforts of the
good doers. This is exactly what the scholars who
approve of martyrdom operations say. If the intentions
of the Muslim are good and for the sake of Allah then
he is a shaheed whether he died by the enemy or by his
own hands. It is the intention that counts.
Suicide is one of the kaba'ir (great sins) so is it
possible that such a large number of Muslims would
commit suicide and be destined to Hellfire and then
Ibn al Athir passes over this incident without a note
of disapproval? Salahudeen counted the casualties as
martyrs in the path of Allah. You may say he was not a
scholar. True, but he was the Sultan of Muslims who
understood the reality of war, acted responsibly, and
was a man that according to his biographers was
greatly influenced by al Qadi al Fadhil, a great
scholar of his time, and he would not take any
decisions without consulting him.
The action of the Muslim leader, Yaqub, was done
with the knowledge of his soldiers. In fact, in the
narration of Ibn Shaddad it states that they all
participated collectively in breaking apart the ship.
Is it possible for seven hundred soldiers in the army
of the righteous leader Salahudeen al Ayubi to commit
such a mass suicide and no one as far as we know
disapproves of it? At least Ibn al Athir or Ibn
Shaddaad would have asked Allah to forgive them for
the sin they committed or something to that effect.
Instead Ibn Shaddad a scholar steeped in knowledge
praises this amir and says about him and his soldiers
"and Allah does not waste the efforts of the good
doers."
The approval of Salahudeen and Ibn Shaddad, and the
action of 700 Muslim soldiers are not a source of
legislation in Islam so we cannot claim that this is
an evidence for the legality of martyrdom operations.
The evidence for that needs to be derived from Quran
and Sunnah and the understanding of the early
generations of the text and I have covered this matter
in the series of Mashari al -Ashwaaq. But the above
mentioned incident is a reflection of how Muslims in
the time of Salahudeen, a time of victory for the
ummah, felt.
Also in general by reading into the words of Ibn
Shaddad, Ibn al-Athir, al Qadi al Fadhil, al Imad al
Kattib, and the other giants of the time one would see
a spirit of strength, sacrifice, hatred of the enemies
of Allah and love of the servants of Allah. One would
find these scholars rallying behind their leaders of
Jihad and standing with the ummah against the enemy in
their fatwa and speeches. The ummah were in love with
their leaders because they were soldiers in the path
of Allah and they loved their scholars because they
who spoke the truth.
Scholars of those times even if they disagreed on
some issues they would not speak out loud against the
Muslim fighters of the day and would not give fatawa
that would play into the hands of the enemy. The
reputation of the Turkish soldiers who were the Muslim
armies of the day was that of corruption and
consumption of alcohol. Nevertheless al-Imam al
Ghazali said these are the protectors of Islam and had
plenty of praise for them. Ibn Taymiyyah in his own
words said many of soldiers of his time (the Mamluks)
were corrupt but he went as far as calling them al
Ta'ifah al Mansoorah.
Today the world turns upside down when one Muslim
performs a martyrdom operation. Can you imagine what
would happen if that is done by seven hundred Muslims
on the same day?!
Brothers and sisters whether you agree or not with
martyrdom operations let's leave our differences
behind us, and let us support our Muslim brothers who
are in the frontlines. Just like we disagree on many
other issues, we should not let our disagreements
stand in the way of our solidarity in the face of our
adversaries. |