PDA

View Full Version : Islam does not allow attacking cities and towns



OmAbdullah
06-29-2015, 02:21 PM
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Islam does not allow attacking cities and towns



Islam is a very beautiful religion. Those that say that there is terrorism in Islam are completely wrong. In fact not only terrorism forbidden but also in war Muslims are prohibited to fight an enemy in the inhabited area like a village, a town or a city. In such areas innocent people live, they include women, children and innocent men who want to live peacefully in their houses.

Muslims are not only allowed but even are encouraged and ordered to fight against the transgressors who attack them, then the Muslims have full right to defend their religion and their lives. But the fight is always with the attacking and confronting enemies.

The Final Prophet Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam never attacked habitations, no matter which type of people lived in those habitations. He also always defended the inhabited area of Madinah and didn’t allow the kaafir attackers enter it. The digging of a trench in the Battle of Trench is a unique example and proof in the history that the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings be upon him) struggled hard to defend the innocent inhabitants in their houses.

Keeping in mind this principle of the Islamic battles /wars we can easily conclude that the modern type of fighting by taking air planes into the cities to bombard the innocent people in their resting places is completely anti-Islamic. Thus it is the handiwork of Satan’s friends and the Muslims who truly believe in Allah and The Day of Judgement must keep away from it. Even on the ground, the Muslim fighters must keep away from human habitations although the inhabitants may be kaafirs.


Allah informed us in the surah Al-Ma’idah verse 32 that saving one innocent life is like saving the whole world and killing one person unjustly is like killing the whole world.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
greenhill
06-29-2015, 02:35 PM
I like the writing in red.

I agree, let alone the use of nuclear bombs, human bombs, etc.

:jz:
Reply

Abz2000
06-29-2015, 02:52 PM
Assalamu'alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuhu,

I am in no way questioning your intentions in attempting to present a smily face ukhti, however we should be very careful when doing so and must at all times bear in mind that the Messenger of Allah may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him was taught wisdom from experience and directly from Allah, we may not always understand a certain ruling but others in the field may see it as obviously plausible, therefore it is best to study as much as we can and provide a justly balanced presentation.

Presenting our desires alone can result in being discredited by a debater who knows more, and thereby put all parties atodds with God and His Messengers.

6) The other method of fighting which is relevant to our discussion is setting the catapult or mangonel against the cities of the disbelievers.

The scholars of sirah mentioned that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلمset up the mangonel against al-Taif and that Amr bin al-Aas used it against Alexandria in Egypt.

The mangonel would strike its missiles against the city and did not distinguish between man, woman or child. The ruling on using the mangonel against the enemy is summarized by Ibn Rushd who states that: “It is the consensus of the jurists that it is allowed to setup catapults against the forts of the disbelievers whether there are women and children in them or not because of what was narrated to us that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم set up the mangonel against the people of al-Taif.”

7) Imam al-Shafi’i says: “It has been reported to us that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم set up the mangonel against al-Taif.

So if it was necessary for the Muslims to not target the disbelievers because of the existence of children amongst them,the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم would have prohibited that because their cities and fortresses are not without women, children, elderly,(Muslim) prisoners, and merchants.

This narration from al-Taif (that he used the mangonel) and others is well preserved and well known from the sunnah of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم and his sirah. It has also been the practice of the Muslims and the righteous predecessors from the companions of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم to be as such in regards to the fortresses of the disbelieversbefore us and it has not been reported to us that any one of them stopped targeting a fortress by mangonel or other forms of weaponry just because of the existence of women, children or others who should not be killed among them.”

After mentioning that it is allowed to use the mangonel, Imamal-Mawardi says that: “The prohibition of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلمof killing women and children applies to when they fall captive since they are booty for the Muslims.

But when the women and children are in the land of war they can be targeted as their men because the land of war is a land that is permissible(to target its people).”

8) But even with the mangonel, the scholars allowed its use against civilian targets based on the need. Imam al-Shafi’i states that if the Muslims are at a distance from the fort or the town they should fire only at the walls and not at the homes of the disbelievers.

9) However, if they are close to the walls then they are allowed to fire at the homes. Again, with the mangonel just as with bayat, it leads to the loss of lives of non-combatants. A mangonel missile that strikes at a city and which is by no means an accurate weapon is no different than bombing a city of a nation that is at war with the Muslims.
So although it is clear that women, children and elderly etc of criminal populations should not be purposefully singled out or targeted when operating an assault, protecting the believers and establishing the universal law of Allah that has been completed via Quran and Sunnah which presides over all other laws is given priority.

For those who assume this to be difficult to understand, it would be wise to study recent events and aerial bombings of cities etc,
And anyone from America should keep their heads bowed in shame in case they are reminded of atrocities like hiroshima and nagasaki.


Combatants and Non-Combatants in Islam

Who is an innocent and who isn't in Islam?*• The scholars have divided the people of dar al-ĥarb into combatants and non-combatants.• The scholars agree that all combatants may be targeted. With the category of non-combatants it is more complex.•

Scholars agree that women and children should not be intentionally targeted.• The scholars differed however on the ruling concerning the elderly,farmers, merchants and slaves.•
But they all agree that if women,the elderly, farmers, merchants or slaves participate in the war effort against Muslims either by actual participation in fighting,financial contribution or opinion,they become legitimate targets.• If combatants and non-combatants are mixed together and integrated, it is allowed for the Muslims to attack them even if women, children, the elderly,farmers, merchants and slaves get killed but this should only be done with the intention of fighting the combatants.• If Muslims kill non-combatants in fighting there is no liability on the Muslims. There is no retribution,no blood money to be paid and there is no sin on the Muslims in the eyes of Allah.•
If Muslims get killed unintentionally or by mistake during the fight with the disbelievers, there is no sin on the Muslim who killed him but there is a kaffarah which is fasting two months or feeding sixty poor persons. There is a difference of opinion whether blood money should be paid.• Non-combatants should not be executed if they fall into captivity.• Islam does not allow the enemy to use our rules against us and to use our rules to our disadvantage.• The consideration of the continuation of jihad and the victory of the Muslims should always take precedence when the scholar gives a fatwa on a matter relating to jihad. The following are aĥadith that prohibit the killing of non-combatants:•

Ibn Umar narrated that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibited the killing of women and children.1) The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said:“Do not kill an old man or a child or a woman.”

2) The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلمfound a woman killed in one of his battles and said: “She is not a fighter.”3) Our scholars have used the terms muqatilah and ghayr muqatilah which translates into “combatants”and “non-combatants” respectively to classify the disbelievers who are at war with the Muslims. It is the consensus of the scholars that Muslims should not kill the women and children of the disbelievers intentionally.

It is the word “intentionally” that should be explained here because it qualifies the above statement and a lack of understanding this rule is what leads to the confusion that surrounds this issue today. What is meant is that women and children should not be singled out for killing;women and children should not be killed if they fall into captivity and if they can be separated from the combatants in war they should. But in no way does it mean that Islam prohibits the fighting against the disbelievers if their men, women and children are intermingled. This understanding is very dangerous and detrimental to jihad and awareness on this issue is very important. To stop the targeting of disbelievers who are at war with the Muslims just because there are women and children among them leads to constraints on today’s jihad that make it very difficult, and at times, impossible to fight and places the Muslims at a great dis-advantage compared to their enemy.To properly understand this issue let’s look at the statements of the scholars regarding attacking the enemy in their dwellings and laying siege to their towns.

During the time of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم there was a form of fighting called bayat. This is when the enemy would be attacked at night under the cover of darkness. The attackers would ambush the enemy in their tents and houses and engage them in fighting. This would lead to the deaths of men,women and children who were in the tents or homes because of the difficulty in distinguishing the difference between man, woman and child. So is this form of fighting allowed in Islam? The answer is yes.

The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم was asked about the ruling concerning the women and children who get targeted in bayat. The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said in an authentic narration: “They belong to them.”
Which means that the ruling of the women and children is the same as that for the combatant men whom it is allowed to kill.

The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم permitted his companions to engage in this form of fighting even though, at occasions,entire families would be killed. Salamah said: “I myself have killed the inhabitants of nine houses.”
4) Imam Ahmad was asked about bayat. He said: “And is the fighting against the Romans but bayat?”

5) In other words, Imam Ahmad not only approves of bayat but also states that it is the most common method of war employed by the Muslims against the Romans.
With all that mentioned, it is apparent to a keen student that nobody is given free reign to indiscriminately go on a "collateral" campaign, experienced and faithful commanders submitting to the commands of Quran and Sunnah with sincerity and to the best of their ability who know when it is necessary are given the ability to make such decisions. And Allah's actions are not to be compared with that of humans since He knows the inner and outer workings from beginning to infinity.

Watching what's happening in Burma should make one realise that jihad in the way of Allah is of utmost priority and not a tear would be shed on my part if Allah sent the burmese a devastating and indiscriminate tornado.


Reply

OmAbdullah
07-04-2015, 05:18 PM
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Respected brother

Assalmo alaikum wa rahmatullah

Please give me some details about the attack on Ta’if because I have never read of such an attack in the history of Islam. I only remember the story when the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings be upon him) went to Ta’if to preach Islam during his Makkan time of Prophethood ( when there was no permission of fighting). He salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam had good expectations from the people of Ta’if but they proved to be very hard hearted. They and their children threw stones on him salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam so much that his shoes became full of blood. Then he salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam, being extremely grieved, went away from them and sat in a place where he salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam complained to Allah and made du’aa. Right at that time Allah sent Jibreel alaihi salaam to him with the angel having authority on mountains. Jibreel alaihi salaam said to the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings be upon him) to give permission to the angel of the mountains to crush the people of Ta’if between the two mountains. But Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam didn’t allow the angel to crush those people saying that (in future ) their children will become Muslims. (Allah knows best the saying of HIS Messenger and angels alaihim salaam).

I cannot understand that those people whom The Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings be upon him) protected from the wrath of Allah for the sake of their children/race in future, then how is it possible that he salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam attacked the same children? Moreover the story of that attack given in your post, is very strange. It gives very contradictory statements about the actions of Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam. I cannot believe such a statement about him salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam, His Character was clean and pure from such behavior.


2. The Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings be upon him) conquered Makkah without any battle and no inhabitant was harmed. This is a unique example of conquering a city without any battle and without any harm to the inhabitants.

3. Umar rAa deposed Khalid Bin Waleed from the post of commander-in-chief because Khalid Bin Waleed would enter cities.

4. Abu Bakar Siddeeq rAa used to give instructions to the army that they shouldn’t disturb people in their worshipping place, shouldn’t even cut trees or damage farms and that after killing a fighter, shouldn’t mutilate his body.

5. Salaahu-Deen Ayoubi had conquered Al-Quds during the Crusaders wars. His army had broken the walls of the fort by throwing on it something like mangonel missiles etc. But the inhabitants were safe and they were ordered to leave the city safely. When they were leaving, the Muslim invaders gave them money and food. They were astonished at the kind behavior of the Muslims because they were expecting that they will be killed as before the crusaders had massacred Muslims. This story was written by a crusader who was caught as war prisoner and he converted to Islam due to the merciful behavior of the Muslims.


The saying that “the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings be upon him) of killing women and children applies to when they fall captives since they are booty for the Muslims. But when the women and children are in the land of war they can be targeted as their men because the land of war is a land that is permissible ( to target its people)” ---------is a very selfish saying!!!

Islam is not a religion made by man, It is the religion sent down by Almighty Allah (The only one God). Islam is the Religion made by God. God is high above any defect. Islam is thus pure and high above any defect or selfishness.


Islam doesn’t protect children because they are in the Muslim hands. Rather Islam and Muslims protect Children because they are innocent!!! Those women who fight are the same as combatants. My thread is about the non-combatant men, women and children, these are the ones who are in their houses. They have the right to be left with peace.

The quoted part in your post says that Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam prohibited the killing of women and children, but then it contradicts itself and brings opposite sayings too !!! This contradiction is not the quality of Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam, but it is the quality of those writers who are heedless from the accounting and severe punishment in the Hereafter!!! Please don’t follow them but do follow Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam.

The difference between a kaafir and a Muslim is that when a kaafir gets power in the land he becomes proud and considers himself to be above all. So he follows his lust and fills up the land with mischief and bloodshed. A Muslim when gets power in the land, he becomes humble and bows down to Allah believing that Allah is The Real Owner and Ruler, and he, being the creation and servant of Allah, has to follow Allah’s Commands. So he then follows the Quraan and Suaanh only.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Karl
07-06-2015, 10:37 PM
Alexander the Great never lost in battle so he must have had Allah on his side as do all the wining conquerors. Is that right or wrong and how do you know the will of Allah in any case?
Reply

Abz2000
07-07-2015, 12:18 AM
Originally Posted by nbegam
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Respected brother

Assalmo alaikum wa rahmatullah

Please give me some details about the attack on Taif...

:wa:
Ukhti the march on taif (which took place after the conquests of Makkah, hunayn and awtaf) is mentioned in almost every (if not in every) seerah penned.

It was not to punish the people of taif out of revenge but to bring the peoples of the localities into the folds of Islam and governance according to the Laws of Almighty God.

Try,
the sealed nectar (ar raheeq al makhtum)
Abridged biography of prophet muhammad pbuh (mukhtasar seerah ar rasool) by ibn taymiyyah
Or just google siege of taif.

Fortunately they realized the folly of opposing Allah and His messenger and submitted to Allah in Islam before the forbidden months were up and they sent a delegation begging him to allow them to keep idols on display, at which he pbuh refused, they then submitted unconditionally.

Dunno your intention for asking despite it being such an easy search, maybe would be better to apologize to readers for previous disinfo? Allah A'lam.

Just in case you doubt the plethora of traditional seerah sources, its also mentioned in sahih al Muslim:



And this from al bukhari:





And correct me if i'm wrong in guessing you understand bangla and use it as a first language?













Even this kafir knows!!!




And one of the most respectable scholars:







TA’IF CAMPAIGN:

Ta’if Campaign is in fact an extension of Hunain*Ghazwah;*that is because the majority of the defeated troops of Hawazin and Thaqif went into Ta’if with the general commander — Malik bin ‘Awf An-Nasri — and fortified themselves within it.

So upon finishing with Hunain Invasion, he gathered the booty at Al-Ji‘ranah in the very month (i.e. Shawwal) and in the eighth year A.H.A vanguard battalion of a thousand men led by Khalid bin Al-Waleed marched towards At-Ta’if. Whereas the Messenger of Allâh (peace be upon him) proceeded passing through Nakhlah Al-Yamaniyah, Qarn Al-Manazil and through Laiyah.

At Laiyah there was a castle that belonged to Malik bin ‘Awf, so the Messenger of Allâh (peace be upon him) gave orders to have it destroyed. He resumed his march till he got to Ta’if. There he dismounted, camped near its castle and laid siege to the castle inhabitants; but not for long.How long the siege continued, is still a matter of disagreement. It however stands between 10-20 days.

A lot of arrow-shooting and rock-hurling occurred during the siege. For as soon as the Muslims laid siege round the castle, its people started shooting arrows against them. The arrows were so intense and fierce that they looked as if they had been locusts on the move. A number of Muslims were wounded and twelve were killed.

To be far from the arrow-range, the Muslims had to ascend to a higher location and camped on — i.e. to what is now called At-Ta’if Mosque. The Prophet (peace be upon him) set up a mangonel and shelled the castle. Eventually a gap was made in the castle wall, through which a number of Muslims managed to pass into the castle, sheltered by a wooden tank, with the purpose of setting fire into it. Anyway, the enemy poured down molten hot iron on them. Affected by this the Muslims stepped out of the tank and were again exposed to arrow shooting and consequently some of them were killed.

To force the enemy to surrender, the Prophet (peace be upon him) tended to a war policy of burning and cutting the enemy’s crops. His order was to cut their vineyards and burn them. Seeing that the Muslims started rapidly cutting and burning their vines, they implored the Prophet (peace be upon him) to stop and have mercy on them for the sake of Allâh and out of kinship motives. So the Prophet agreed.

When the caller of the Messenger of Allâh (peace be upon him) called out unto people saying “He whosoever descends and steps out of the castle is free.” Twenty-three men came out. One of them was Abu Bakrah who tied himself to a wall and let himself down by means of a small wheel, that would normally be used for drawing up water from a well. The way he let himself down made the Prophet nickname him “Abu Bakrah”, i.e. the man with the wheel. The Messenger of Allâh (peace be upon him) set them all free and entrusted each one of them to a Muslim to care about their living affairs, which was too hard for the castle folkspeople to bear.

Seeing that the siege lasted too long and that the castle was immune and could stand any siege (for they had already stored a supply that suffices for over a year) and that the Muslims were suffering — day by day — from arrow-shots and heated iron hooks, the Messenger of Allâh (peace be upon him) consulted Nawfal bin Mu‘âwiyah Ad-Daili about that. He said: “They are like a fox hiding inside its burrow. If you stoodfast at it you would catch it, but if you parted with it, no harm would afflict you.” The Messenger of Allâh (peace be upon him) decided to lift the siege and depart. ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, who was orderedby the Prophet to notify people, said to them “If Allâh will, we are leaving the castle and going back tomorrow.”

As it was too hard for the Muslims to go back and leave the castle unconquered they complained saying, “Should we go away while the castle is still unopened?” His reply was: “Then, start fighting in the morning.” In the morning they fought and were wounded. So when he repeated this statement: “If Allâh will, we are leaving the castle and going back tomorrow”, they were pleased and carried out the order submissively and started moving, which made the Messenger of Allâh (peace be upon him) laugh.

As soon as they mounted and started moving the Messenger (peace be upon him) said:“Say! Here we are returning, repenting, worshipping (Allâh) and to our Lord we offer praise.”

When the Messenger of Allâh was asked to invoke Allâh against Thaqif, he said:
“O Allâh, guide Thaqif and bring them to us as Muslims.”

https://islamgreatreligion.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/the-third-stage-sealed-nectar-chapter-35-life-of-muhammad/
Sent from Samsung mobile
Reply

Abz2000
07-07-2015, 08:06 AM
Double post, please delete
Reply

Abz2000
07-07-2015, 08:10 AM
You need to read the full seerah of the Messenger of Allah pbuh in order to gain a complete and balanced understanding, and so we can avoid having to focus on controversial state of emergency topics magnified out of context, it is available in english here:https://islamgreatreligion.wordpress...sealed-nectar/
2. The Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings be upon him) conquered Makkah without any battle and no inhabitant was harmed. This is a unique example of conquering a city without any battle and without any harm to the inhabitants.
Also note that during the conquest of Makkah, there were some relatively minor skirmishes, ikrimah ibn amr ibn hisham (ibn abi jahl) and a few other fools tried to make a stand despite the wise advice of abu sufyan and were dispersed, a kill order was also made upon a few veteran enemies of God and His Messenger, these included lady gaga, madonna, tasleema nasreen and pamela geller typesIt is amazing how some people imagine a jolly father christmas like figure in place of a man.They called abu bakr "abu al faseel", only to find that he was abu al fahd.Why would we diminish their hard work and make them look like pansies or tyrants?
Reply

InToTheRain
07-07-2015, 09:45 AM
Originally Posted by Abz2000
Also note that during the conquest of Makkah, there were some relatively minor skirmishes, ikrimah ibn amr ibn hisham (ibn abi jahl) and a few other fools tried to make a stand despite the wise advice of abu sufyan and were dispersed
I find this statement outrageous!

1) Ikramah(RA) did not make a stand he fled.
http://sohabih.blogspot.co.uk/2015/0...pts-islam.html

2) Ikramah(RA) is a Sahabah all of whom Allah Most High is Pleased with so who are you to dare insult them?

Companions are all those who met the Prophet (saws) and died as Muslims. Scholars have said that they were 114,000 in number [as stated by Abu Zur'ah, the teacher of Imam Muslim, and recorded by as-Suyootee]. They are praised in many Qur'anic verses:

"You are the best of peoples ever raised for mankind, you enjoin good and forbid evil, and you believe in Allah." [3:110]

"And the first to embrace Islam of the Muhajiroon (the Emigrants from Makkah) and the Ansar (the citizens of Al-Madeenah who helped the Muhajiroon) and also those who followed them exactly (in Faith). Allah is well-pleased with them as they are well pleased with Him. He has prepared for them Gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success." [9:100]

"Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave their pledge to you (O Muhammad) under the tree. He knew what was in their hearts and He sent down calmness and tranquility upon them..." [48:18]
Mods can you please keep a lid on the heretics especially during Ramadan. You will be responsible what was permitted under your watch.

I am done!
Reply

OmAbdullah
05-18-2016, 10:05 PM
Originally Posted by Karl
Alexander the Great never lost in battle so he must have had Allah on his side as do all the wining conquerors. Is that right or wrong and how do you know the will of Allah in any case?

We can know the will of Allah from the Holly Quraan which is The Statement of Allah. It was revealed to the Final Prophet Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam during a period of 23 years, little by little and according to the circumstances. Then He salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam applied it as well as he explained it in words. Thus the Holy Quraan + the Method of its application by Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam (The Sunnah) covers all aspects of human life until the Last Day!!!
Reply

OmAbdullah
05-18-2016, 10:26 PM
Giving ahadeeth of the Prophet salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam with opposite meanings is a big mistake. One hadeeth says that the Prophet salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam allowed to kill women and children of the mushrikeen. This hadeeth is against all other texts, so it is a false statement attributed to Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam. The other hadeeth says that He salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam disapproved the killing of women and children, this seems to be a true hadeeth as it is in accordance with the other texts of the Holy Quraan and the Sunnah. We must keep away from false ahadeeth because according to a saying of the Prophet salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam, such a person makes his place in Hell!!!
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!