Chapter 44

Obligatory (wujub) in every situation and upon every person... This is why Al-Qurtubi, in his interpretation of the Almighty’s saying: “Fighting has been prescribed for you,” states: “Ibn Atiyyah said: That upon which the consensus (ijma) continues is that jihad is a fard kifaya (collective obligation) upon every individual of the Ummah of Muhammad (peace be upon him).” ¶

3. The Almighty’s saying: “And it is not for the believers to go forth altogether. So why should there not separate from each division of them a group to obtain understanding in the religion and warn their people when they return to them that they might be cautious?” It is said: nafar-yanfiru-nafran wa nafiran... meaning He called them to 'nafr', i.e., to go out to fight the enemy. 'Nafir' is the going out to face the enemy, and 'nafir' is a term for the people who go forth. The root of 'nafir' is the moving from one place to another for a cause that has instigated it. ¶

In Al-Qurtubi’s interpretation of this verse, it is stated: “Jihad is not upon every individual (fard ayn), but is rather a fard kifaya, as previously mentioned; for if everyone were to depart, those left behind—the families—would be lost. Therefore, a group should go out for jihad, while another group should stay behind to attain fiqh (deep understanding) in the religion and to protect the sanctuaries (families/homes), so that when those who went forth return, the ones who stayed behind inform them of what they have learned of the rulings of the Shariah and what was newly revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him).” ¶

4. It is recorded in Sahih Muslim: “From Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent an expedition to the Banu Lihyan of Hudhayl and said: ‘Let one out of every two men go forth, and the reward is shared between them.’” Al-Nawawi said in his commentary on the hadith: “The scholars agreed that the Banu Lihyan were disbelievers at that time, so he sent an expedition to fight them and told the expedition that half of the men from every tribe should go out, which is what is meant by ‘one out of every two.’ As for the reward being shared between them, it is understood to apply when the one who remains behind takes good care of the ghazi’s (warrior’s) family, as is clarified in other hadiths.” ¶

It is evident that the lack of a mandate for every member of the tribe to go out for combat, and the sufficiency of only some going out while others remained, indicates that Jihad is not an individual obligation (fard ayn) upon every individual, but rather a communal obligation (fard kifaya). ¶

5 - It is stated in Al-Rawda al-Nadiyya: 'Among the evidences indicating that it is a fard kifaya is that the Prophet (ﷺ) would sometimes go out himself, and at other times send others, and would suffice with a portion of the Muslims. His expeditions and detachments were continuous, while the Muslims were divided, some in Jihad and some with their families. The majority of scholars hold the view that it is a fard kifaya.' ¶

These are some of the arguments presented by those who maintain that Jihad—except in cases where it becomes an individual obligation, as will be discussed later—is originally a fard kifaya; if some perform it, the obligation is lifted from the rest. ¶

3 - The third point: When is Jihad a fard kifaya? Or the conditions under which Jihad is considered a fard kifaya. ¶

- We have learned from the preceding jurisprudential citations what the jurists have established: that Jihad is a fard kifaya when Muslims initiate combat against disbelievers to invite them to Islam or to bring them under Islamic governance. This is what is termed as offensive Jihad (Jihad al-Hujumi), as previously discussed. ¶

Among those jurisprudential citations is the following text: 'It is a fard kifaya... initially, even if they do not initiate hostilities against us.' ¶

And similarly the following text: 'There are two states for the disbelievers: one is that they reside in their own lands, not intending any of our territories; in this case, it is a fard kifaya.' ¶

- Furthermore, the jurists have established that Jihad is also a fard kifaya in cases of defense, not just in the [initial] state. ¶

The case where Muslims initiate combat against disbelievers: This applies when the Muslims who are directly attacked are capable of repelling the aggression and rise to defend themselves; in this state, the participation of other Muslims in the fighting alongside them falls under the rule of fard kifayah (collective obligation). ¶

Regarding this, it is stated in Hashiyat Ibn Abidin: "When jihad is declared as a general mobilization (nafir), it becomes fard ayn (individual obligation) only upon those who are near the enemy. As for those behind them who are far from the enemy, it is fard kifayah for them, to the extent that they may leave it if their assistance is not needed."(1) Thus, it becomes clear to us that jihad remains a fard kifayah even in the case of defensive jihad. ¶

1. It is a condition for offensive jihad (jihad al-hujumi) to be a fard kifayah that the Muslims must have the capability to perform this obligation. If they are unable to do so, the obligation is lifted from them, as there is no taklif (religious obligation) beyond one's capacity. In this regard, it is stated in Al-Siyar al-Kabir and its commentary, as previously mentioned: "It is not appropriate [- for the Imam -] to leave the polytheists without an invitation to Islam or a demand for jizya, if he is able to do so, because the obligation is in accordance with capacity."(2) ¶

2. It is also a condition for jihad to remain a fard kifayah in this situation that the number of Muslims in the world is not so small that if they wished to perform this obligation, they would all be forced to go out to fight. In such a case, as is clear, jihad transforms into a fard ayn. ¶

Regarding this, Hashiyat Ibn Abidin states: "Our discussion is regarding its obligatoriness as an initiation [- meaning Muslims initiating combat against disbelievers, rather than repelling aggression -] and this cannot be fard ayn unless the Muslims are few in number (may Allah grant protection), to the point that it is impossible for some of them to perform it, in which case it becomes fard ayn for each and every one of them."(3) ¶

Based on the above, we can state that jihad is a fard kifayah in the case of it being offensive. ¶

Or defensive, in light of the aforementioned conditions and circumstances, and in cases other than those where Jihad becomes personally obligatory (ta’ayyun) upon the Muslims—as will be discussed in the next section. ¶

4. Fourth Point: What is the minimum requirement to fulfill the communal obligation (fard kifaya) regarding Jihad? Jurists have determined that Jihad, which is a communal obligation in situations other than defense—that is, Jihad for the sake of Da’wah (inviting to Islam)—is fulfilled if Muslims perform it at least once a year. Here are the statements of the jurists regarding this: ¶

- It is stated in Hashiyat Ibn Abidin: “It is incumbent upon the Imam to send a military detachment (sariyyah) to the Dar al-Harb once or twice every year, and it is the duty of the subjects to assist him... If he fails to send one, the sin lies upon him. This applies if he is confident that he can match them; otherwise, fighting them is not permissible.”(1) ¶

- It is stated in Al-Sharh al-Kabir by al-Dardir: “Jihad... is a communal obligation, and it should be directed at the most important front. If the fronts are equal, the Imam has the discretion to choose each year.” In Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, it is stated: “His statement 'every year': meaning that the Imam sends a group every year, and either goes with them himself or sends a trusted person in his place to invite them to Islam and encourage them toward it, then fights them if they refuse.”(2) ¶

- It is stated in Al-Iqna’ by al-Mawardi: “Jihad is a communal obligation managed by the Imam, as long as it does not become personally binding. The minimum requirement is that no year should pass without him conducting a campaign, either personally or through his detachments.”(3) ¶

- And in Al-Sharh al-Kabir by Abu al-Faraj al-Maqdisi, it states: “The minimum performance of Jihad is once every year.”(4) ¶

Jurists have cited evidence for their view that fighting the disbelievers for the sake of Da’wah is obligatory at least once a year. The author of 'Mughni al-Muhtaj' summarizes these arguments: “The minimum level of Jihad is once a year, similar to the maintenance of the Kaaba, and based on the Almighty’s saying: {Do they not see that they are tried every year once or twice...}” ¶

Once or twice every year (1). Mujahid said: It was revealed regarding jihad, due to the Prophet’s (ﷺ) practice since he was commanded to perform it, and because jizya is obligatory as a substitute for it, and since it is due every year, so is its substitute (3). Furthermore, it is a recurring obligation, and the minimum requirement for recurring duties is annually, such as zakat and fasting; if one performs it more than once, it is better (3). ¶

Professor Dr. Wahba al-Zuhayli has discussed the arguments of those who claim that jihad is obligatory at least once a year. He adopted a position different from theirs on this issue, stating: «We believe that jihad recurs with the recurrence of its cause or attribute, which is the existence of aggression, without limiting it to whether it occurs within a year or not. The verse they cited [i.e., the Almighty’s saying: ﴿Do they not see that they are tried every year once or twice?﴾ (4)] points to this: for aggression is a cause for the trial and tribulation of the believers. We have established at the conclusion of this research that the Messenger’s stance in all his wars was defensive, and it is not valid to compare jihad—which is fundamentally defensive in foreign policy—with jizya, which is merely a tax within the state. Supporting our view is that the imperative form [i.e., the Almighty’s saying: ﴿Fight those who do not believe in Allah...﴾ (5)] does not signify recurrence or a single instance; rather, it signifies the demand for the 'essence' (mahiya) of the act without implying recurrence or singularity, as is the preferred view among the scholars of usul (refer to Sharh al-Isnawi, al-Matba’a al-Salafiyya 2/274). The command only recurs with the recurrence of its cause, which is aggression in this case... He then adds: And holding the obligation of jihad as absolute, without restricting it to at least once a year, is the school of the Hanafis!» (6). This is what Dr. al-Zuhayli mentioned. ¶

I say: Since we have prioritized in this treatise that jihad in the way of Allah has another cause alongside the repelling of aggression—which is the conveyance of Islam to other lands so that people may enter it, or... ¶

Submission to its [Islamic] rulings is required, even if no aggression has been issued from those lands against the Muslims, and no opposition to the propagation of the Da'wah has occurred, as long as they refuse to submit to Islamic rule... Therefore, just as Jihad recurs with the recurrence of its cause, which is aggression—as Dr. al-Zuhayli states—it also, in our view, recurs with the recurrence of its other cause, which is carrying Islam to other lands, in the manner previously mentioned, whenever Muslims are capable of doing so. ¶

Furthermore, we do not consider the verse of 'At-Tawbah' [9:126]: 'Do they not see that they are tried every year once or twice?' to be a strong evidence for the obligation to fight the disbelievers at least once a year. ¶

In 'Tafsir al-Jalalayn', the interpretation of this verse states: 'Do they not see'... i.e., the hypocrites... 'that they are tried,' i.e., tested, 'every year once or twice' with drought and diseases, 'then they do not repent' from their hypocrisy, 'nor do they remember,' i.e., take heed. ¶

It is worth noting that commentators have transmitted from the Tabi'un that they interpreted the 'trial' (fitnah) occurring to the hypocrites in this verse as Jihad, once or twice every year. It is stated in 'Tafsir al-Qurtubi': 'They are tried'... Qatadah, al-Hasan, and Mujahid said: Through expeditions and Jihad with the Prophet (PBUH), and they witness what Allah promised of victory. ¶

In any case, the context of the verse—if we limit the interpretation of 'fitnah' to Jihad—indicates that Allah (SWT) is highlighting the astonishment regarding the condition of these hypocrites: how they persist in hypocrisy and concealing disbelief, despite experiencing, every year, one or more instances where they test the truthfulness of Allah's promise to His Messenger and the believers of victory over their enemies. And Allah’s promise proves true, despite the small number of believers and the large number of disbelievers... A matter which should lead the hypocrites to return to their senses, repent from their hypocrisy, and take heed of the killing and dispersion that befalls the disbelievers at the hands of the believers... Should this not invite them to reconsider their stance on Islam before their affairs are exposed publicly and it is too late? ¶

I say: Even according to this interpretation, there is nothing in the verse that indicates the obligation to fight the disbelievers for the sake of conveying the call (da'wah) to them at least once a year. The mention of 'once,' being the minimum amount of jihad against the disbelievers that the hypocrites would perform each year, does not support our current subject. This is because the wars of the Prophet (PBUH)—and the mobilization of the believers, and occasionally the hypocrites, with him for combat—were solely for the purpose of defense or repelling aggression. These wars occurred much more frequently than once a year, depending on the recurrence of aggression against the Muslims. However, due to the minimal participation of the hypocrites in the fighting conducted by the Muslims, they would not attend more than one or two jihad events per year. Nevertheless, they witnessed signs of Allah’s support for His religion, His Messenger, and the believers, and the humiliation of polytheism and the polytheists—signs that served as a reminder and a profound lesson, had they been willing to remember or take heed. ¶

Yes, there is no strong indication in this verse that fighting the disbelievers at least once a year is obligatory, nor is there any such indication in the wars of the Messenger (PBUH). As previously mentioned, those wars were for the purpose of defense and repelling aggression, and they occurred much more than once a year, according to the requirements of defense against actual or expected aggression. We have previously discussed in earlier research that the wars of the Messenger (PBUH)—represented by all his ghazawat (expeditions he led) and saraya (expeditions he dispatched)—even if they were in response to the aggression of the polytheists, the Shariah texts from the Quran and Sunnah indicate the obligation to fight the disbelievers, even if they are not the aggressors, provided they refuse to submit to Islamic rule after being invited to Islam or to join the Islamic State, and they refuse both options, as detailed previously. However, the Shariah texts do not mention a minimum limit for fulfilling this duty within one year for the purpose of governing other lands with Islam through force if they refuse to accept it through consent and choice. ¶

Furthermore, the companions of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) proceeded after him to fulfill this duty, which the Shariah texts indicated, without regard to any minimum or maximum limit in this path. ¶

As for the argument that initiating war against the disbelievers at least once a year is obligatory—based on the jizya, which is the substitute for fighting and must be collected once a year, therefore its substitute, which is fighting, must also occur once a year—it appears that this deduction is not strong, as has been indicated. ¶

Dr. Al-Zuhayli—and perhaps for this very reason, the author of 'Al-Muhadhdhab' pointed to another piece of evidence regarding this issue, stating: '...and because suspending it for more than a year causes the enemy to covet the Muslims.'(1) ¶

It also appears that Ibn Hajar does not see in the aforementioned evidence of jizya anything that mandates limiting the obligation of fighting the disbelievers to only once a year, while treating fighting them beyond that as merely recommended. The view that fighting them is obligatory whenever possible, without being bound by a minimum or maximum limit, is strengthened... It is stated in Fath al-Bari: ¶

'The fulfillment of fard al-kifayah (communal obligation) is achieved by performing it once a year according to the majority. Their argument is that jizya becomes obligatory as a substitute for it, and by consensus, jizya is not obligatory more than once a year; therefore, its substitute should be the same. It is also said: It is obligatory whenever possible, and this is a strong view!'(2). ¶

However, Imam Al-Shafi'i, in his book 'Al-Umm', did not point to this evidence. Instead, he relied on the absolute fact that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) continuously fought the disbelievers from the time jihad was made obligatory upon the Muslims, although he believes that the obligation is limited to once a year. It is stated in 'Al-Umm': ¶

'The minimum obligation upon him [the Caliph] is that no year should pass without him engaging in a ghazw (expedition), so that jihad is not suspended in any year except for an excuse. When he conducts an expedition in one year, he should target a different land the following year; he should not persistently target the same land while leaving other lands of the polytheists suspended, unless the conditions of the lands differ. He may continue to target those from whom harm is feared or those whose lands the Muslims hope to conquer, while leaving others suspended, in the sense that they do not possess the same threat or opportunity. He said: I have described it thus because the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), from the time jihad was enjoined upon him, never let a year pass without conducting an expedition—either leading it himself or sending others—in one or two major battles or sariyyas (expeditions), even though there were times when he did not fight nor send a sarriyya, despite having the ability to do so!' ¶

But he rests, allows others to rest, calls to Allah, and clarifies the arguments against those he invites.' (1) This is what Imam al-Shafi'i stated. ¶

Based on the foregoing, our preferred position regarding the issue of what fulfills the 'fard al-kifaya' (communal obligation) in jihad for the sake of the call (dawah) is that the matter is left to the varying circumstances related to the state of the enemies, their stance toward Islam, the extent of their strength relative to the Muslims, and other factors that influence the hope of the Muslims winning the war and establishing Islam in other lands. ¶

- It may be that the conditions required for this 'fard al-kifaya' to be incumbent upon the Muslims are not met. - It may be that this obligation is fulfilled by fighting once a year. - It may be that the obligation is not discharged from the Muslims' responsibility unless they fight several times a year. ¶

Regarding this, al-Shafi'i, after mentioning what is incumbent upon the Caliph regarding the organization of troops and necessary fortifications on the borders of Muslim lands, states: ¶

'Once he has perfected this for the Muslims [meaning the preparation of the mentioned armies and fortifications], it is incumbent upon him to send the Muslims into the lands of the polytheists at times when he does not put the Muslims in peril, and when he hopes to attain victory over the enemy. If the Muslims possess strength, I do not believe a year should pass without an army or a raid into the lands of the polytheists who border the Muslims on all sides. And if it is possible for him to do so during the year without peril, I would prefer that he does not forgo it whenever possible.' (2) ¶

Although this text of al-Shafi'i indicates the obligation of at least one battle against the disbelievers annually and the recommendation of increasing such fighting whenever possible, we prefer, as we have mentioned, not to be bound by this single battle per year, but rather to leave the matter to the circumstances according to the assessment of the decision-maker, as circumstances might necessitate the obligation of waging war against the disbelievers several times. ¶

In a given year, just as circumstances might dictate refraining from war for several years, even when it is feasible, or declaring any non-defensive war forbidden when the interest of Islam and the Muslims demands it. Regarding leaving the matter to circumstances in this issue, the author of Al-Muhadhdhab states: 'If the need arises more than once in a year, it becomes obligatory, because it is a Fard Kifayah (communal obligation), so whatever the need dictates from it becomes mandatory. If the need demands delaying it due to the weakness of the Muslims, or a lack of necessary military equipment, or hope for their conversion to Islam, or similar excuses, then it is permissible to delay it. This is because the Prophet (peace be upon him) delayed fighting the Quraish via a truce, and delayed fighting other tribes without a truce, and because the benefit hoped for by delaying it is greater than the benefit hoped for by initiating it; therefore, it is obligatory to delay it.' (1). This is what al-Shirazi said in Al-Muhadhdhab. If it is asked: How can the ruling of the necessity of repeating the collective Jihad (Jihad al-Kifa'i) be valid whenever Muslims are able to do so and there is a preponderant interest in it, given that the imperative form in the words of the Almighty: 'Fight those who do not believe in Allah...' (2) does not imply repetition according to the majority of legal theorists (Usuliyyun), as indicated by Dr. Al-Zuhayli? The answer is that the majority of Usuliyyun agree that: 'If a valid context (Qarina) exists that indicates repetition, one must adopt the repetition indicated by that context.' (3). Here, in the verse: 'Fight those who do not believe in Allah... until they pay the Jizya willingly while they are humbled' (4), the obligation to fight the disbelievers is contingent upon the cause of them being disbelievers who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day. The ultimate goal, 'until they pay the Jizya willingly while they are humbled' (5), signifies the necessity of repeating and continuing that combat until that goal is achieved. Based on this, the verse contains a context indicating that the imperative form in 'Fight those who do not believe in Allah...' (6) is intended to mean repetition and continuity if there is an interest in doing so, as is the requirement of the evidence. ¶

The other Shariah perspective — as long as there are disbelievers in the world who do not pay the jizya while being in a state of submission! We now move to the final point of this discussion, which is: 5- The fifth point: Is the existence of a Caliph for the Muslims a condition for performing the collective duty (fard kifaya) of jihad for the sake of the call (da'wah)? The answer is that the Shariah texts from the Quran and Sunnah do not indicate such a condition. The author of 'Al-Rawdah al-Nadiyyah' says regarding the ruling on jihad: 'This is an obligation among the obligations of the religion, which Allah the Almighty has made binding upon His Muslim servants without restriction to a time, place, person, justice, or injustice.' In this regard, Sheikh Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani also states: 'Jihad is an absolute obligation; it is not restricted to anything, nor is it conditional upon anything. The verse is absolute (Fighting has been ordained for you); therefore, the existence of a Caliph has no bearing on the obligation of jihad. Rather, jihad is an obligation whether there is a Caliph for the Muslims or not. However, when the Muslims have a Caliph whose caliphate has been established legally and who has not been removed for any of the reasons for removal, then the command of jihad is entrusted to the Caliph and his ijtihad, even if he is a transgressor (fajir). The subjects are required to obey him in what he deems appropriate in that regard, even if he commands any one of them to fight alongside a corrupt leader. This is based on what Abu Dawood narrated with his chain of authority to Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'Jihad is obligatory upon you alongside every leader, whether he is righteous or corrupt.' Thus, if there is no Caliph... ¶

Jihad must not be delayed under any circumstances, because its benefit is lost by delaying it (1). ¶

I say: This is the ruling that has come down in the books of Islamic Fiqh. Ibn Qudamah says in Al-Mughni: 'The matter of jihad is entrusted to the Imam and his ijtihad (legal reasoning), and it is incumbent upon the subjects to obey him in what he deems appropriate in this regard... He then says: Each people shall fight those who are nearest to them, unless there is a front where the local people are not sufficient, in which case the Imam shall move other people to them. He shall instruct those he appoints as commanders not to lead the Muslims into destruction... If there is no Imam, jihad is not to be delayed, because its benefit is lost by delaying it (2).' ¶

Accordingly, the Muslim leaders in Islamic countries today, even if there is no Caliph for all Muslims, are obligated—as part of their duties regarding Islamic affairs—to raise the banner of jihad in the way of Allah for the sake of the Islamic Da'wah, in the manner detailed previously. If they were to do so, it would then be mandatory for Muslims to fight under their banner to fulfill this communal obligation (fard kifayah). But what is the role of the Muslims if the leaders fall short in performing this communal obligation, while all excuses for not rising to fulfill it have vanished? ¶

The answer to this question has been detailed in the discussion on 'Raiding for the sake of acquiring enemy wealth' in the first chapter of this treatise. ¶

Dr. Fayid Hammad Muhammad Ashur addresses this issue, saying: 'If the state of jihad and its obligation is a permanent issue, then it is not permissible for the guardian (Wali al-Amr) of the Muslims to abandon jihad or neglect calling for it. If he does not do so, the Muslims have a duty to urge him toward it and express their disapproval of him. If he still does not do so, it becomes mandatory for them to withdraw their obedience, renounce his approval, and necessarily replace him with another (3) who will perform the duty of jihad and combat, because the interest of Islam and the general body of Muslims requires this. These are among the important issues linked to the life of the Ummah of Islam, and the Shariah of Islam does not accept compromise. Muslims have a duty to destroy any power that opposes the path of the Da'wah to Islam and anyone who stands in the way of conveying it to the people... He then says: The princes of Islam would not abandon jihad, either out of fear of Allah...' ¶

Exalted, and in implementation of the Shariah of Jihad, or out of fear of a general uprising by the Muslims against them, because the sentiments of the Muslims would not allow those who were hesitant or cowardly to remain in the leadership of the Ummah for long. (1) Here, we conclude our discussion on Jihad when it is a Fard Kifayah (collective obligation)... and we now move on to a new topic. (1) Jihad al-Muslimin fi al-Hurub al-Salibiyyah: al-'Asr al-Fatimi wal-Saljuqi wal-Zanki: by Dr. Fayid Hammad Muhammad Ashur, pp. 14-15. 873 ¶

This book has been prepared for smartphones (Android and iOS), which you can download on your phone free of charge. To do so, click on the following link: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.islamic.apps.book ¶

Second Topic: Jihad - When does it become a Fard 'Ayn (Individual Obligation)? ¶

The primary objective of this research encompasses several points, which are as follows: 1 - What is Fard 'Ayn (individual obligation) or Wajib 'Ayni (individual duty)? 2 - A review of the scholars' opinions regarding Jihad being a Fard 'Ayn, considering the various perspectives within which this ruling is established. 3 - When does Jihad become a Fard 'Ayn according to the majority of jurists? Including the evidence. 4 - Is the existence of a Caliph for the Muslims a condition for undertaking Jihad when it is a Fard 'Ayn? And how is the execution of this Jihad fulfilled? ¶

1 - First Point: What is Fard 'Ayn or Wajib 'Ayni? Dr. Muhammad Mustafa al-Zuhayli says in his definition of the Wajib 'Ayni: "It is what the Lawgiver (al-Shari') has demanded to be performed by every individual among the legally competent persons (mukallafin). It is called Wajib 'Ayni because the address of the Lawgiver is directed at every competent person who is subject to it; thus, it must be performed by all competent persons, such as prayer, zakat, hajj, fulfilling covenants, and avoiding wine and gambling. Its ruling is that every competent person is bound by it, and their conscience remains burdened by it until they perform it themselves. If they perform it, they receive reward and merit; if they abandon it, they are sinful and subject to punishment. The Lawgiver intends two things from this obligation: the performance of the duty on one hand, and the commitment of every specific individual to it on the other." Dr. al-Zuhayli comments on the last part of his statement in the footnote of his book, saying: "Sometimes the Wajib 'Ayni might be required from one specific individual, and this occurs in cases of inversion... ¶

The transformation from Fard Kifai (collective duty) to Fard Ayni (individual duty), such as when there is only one doctor in a city, or one swimmer in front of a drowning person, or one scholar who is fit for Qada (judiciary) and possesses all the necessary qualifications; in such cases, it becomes an individual obligation (Fard Ayni) upon them to perform the task.(1) ¶

I say: From this definition, it becomes clear to us that Fard Ayni or an individual obligation does not necessarily mean that it must apply to every single Mukallaf (legally competent individual). It is permissible in some circumstances for it to apply to one or more individuals, and yet be a Fard Ayni for them and not for others. This was exemplified by the doctor, the swimmer, and the scholar in the circumstances described in the previous discourse, and as will be shown in further examples during this research concerning the ruling of Jihad. ¶

2- Review of the second point: (Reviewing the opinions of scholars on Jihad being a Fard Ayni, based on their varying views regarding the different contexts in which this ruling is established.) We will first present the opinions which state that the ruling of Jihad is that of Fard Ayni, and the scope in which this ruling applies. Then, we will present some excerpts from the texts of scholars from which we have derived those opinions. First: The opinions stating that Jihad is Fard Ayni. 1. Jihad was Fard Ayni only upon the Muhajirun (emigrants) during the era of the Prophet ﷺ, either absolutely or in the case of offensive combat, meaning the Muslims fighting the disbelievers initially for the sake of Da'wah (inviting to Islam). 2. Jihad was Fard Ayni only upon the Ansar (helpers) during the era of the Prophet ﷺ, either absolutely or in the case of defense to repel aggression against Medina. 3. Jihad was Fard Ayni upon all Muslims during the era of the Prophet ﷺ only in the Ghazwah (expedition) in which he himself participated, excluding other Ghazawat and Sariyahs (expeditions). ¶

4- Jihad was fard al-ayn (individual obligation) upon the Sahaba specifically, to the exclusion of other Muslims, without distinction between the Muhajirun and the Ansar, or between offensive and defensive combat. 5- Jihad was fard al-ayn upon those Muslims whom the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) designated to go out for combat, regardless of whether the Messenger (ﷺ) himself went out for that combat or not. 6- Jihad is fard al-ayn in every era for every accountable person (mukallaf) from the inhabitants of the land that the enemy has invaded, and upon those near them if they are unable to repel the aggression. 7- Jihad is fard al-ayn in every time and place for the person designated by the Imam (the leader) to go out for combat. 8- Jihad is fard al-ayn upon every Muslim in every time and place. This statement, in its absolute sense, includes defensive combat as well as offensive combat for the purpose of carrying the dawah (call to Islam). 9- Jihad is fard al-ayn only upon the people of the lands bordering the lands of the disbelievers. 10- Jihad may become fard al-ayn in a state of offensive. This applies if Muslims are so few in the world that it is impossible for them to perform the jihad that is fard al-kifayah (communal obligation) unless all of them go out. Secondly: We mention the texts of the scholars from which we extracted these opinions. - It is stated in Fath al-Bari: 'People have two conditions regarding Jihad: The first is in the time of the Prophet (ﷺ), and the second is after him. As for the first: ... Al-Mawardi said: It was fard al-ayn upon the Muhajirun, not others, and this is supported by the obligation of migration (hijrah) to Medina before the Conquest (of Mecca) for everyone who embraced Islam, in order to support Islam. Al-Suhayli said: It was fard al-ayn upon the Ansar, not others, and this is supported by their pledge to the Prophet (ﷺ) on the night of al-Aqaba to shelter the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and support him. It follows from their statements that it was fard al-ayn upon both groups, and fard al-kifayah for others. Furthermore, it was not universal for both groups, but rather for the Ansar when a raider reached Medina, and for the Muhajirun when an initiation of combat against one of the disbelievers was intended. This is supported by what occurred.' ¶

The story of Badr, as mentioned by Ibn Ishaq, is almost explicit in this regard. It is also said that it is fard 'ayn (individual obligation) for whom the Prophet (PBUH) has personally designated, even if he—the Prophet (PBUH)—did not personally depart for the expedition. ¶

The second situation: After the time of the Prophet (PBUH), jihad is, according to the well-known opinion, fard kifaya (communal obligation), unless a necessity arises such as an enemy surprise attack, in which case it becomes fard 'ayn for the person whom the Imam appoints. ¶

Regarding the verse, 'It was not for the people of Medina and those around them of the bedouins to remain behind the Messenger of Allah' (Surah At-Tawbah: 120), the statement of Qatadah is cited: 'This was specific to the Prophet (PBUH). When he went on an expedition himself, no one was permitted to remain behind without a valid excuse. As for other Imams and rulers, it is permissible for any of the Muslims to remain behind if there is no urgent need or necessity for the people.' ¶

Regarding the verse, 'O you who have believed, what is the matter with you that, when you are told to go forth in the cause of Allah, you adhere heavily to the earth?' (Surah At-Tawbah: 38), Imam Al-Jassas says: 'It has been mentioned in its interpretation that this occurred during the Battle of Tabuk when the Prophet (PBUH) called upon the people. Therefore, going forth with the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) was an obligation upon those who were summoned, and this is similar to: 'It was not for the people of Medina and those around them of the bedouins to remain behind the Messenger of Allah.' Scholars have stated that going forth with anyone else is not like this.' ¶

It is stated in Tafsir al-Qurtubi: 'Said ibn al-Musayyib said: Jihad is a fard 'ayn upon every Muslim at all times; this was narrated by Al-Mawardi.' ¶

It is stated in 'Qawanin al-Ahkam al-Shar'iyya': 'Al-Dawudi said: It is fard 'ayn (individual obligation) for those who are adjacent to the disbelievers.' And in Al-Dardir’s 'Al-Sharh al-Kabir': 'Jihad becomes fard 'ayn when the enemy attacks a people suddenly... and it becomes fard 'ayn for those near them if they (the attacked) are unable to repel the enemy from themselves.' And in 'Hashiyat Ibn Abidin': 'Our discussion pertains to its obligatory nature initially, and this cannot be fard 'ayn except if there is a shortage of Muslims—may Allah protect us—such that some are unable to perform it; in that case, it becomes fard 'ayn upon each one of them.' ¶

Furthermore, these are some of the texts that indicate the opinions stating that Jihad is a fard 'ayn, depending on the varying considerations under which Jihad takes on this ruling. We now move to the next point to examine the preponderant (rajih) opinions among the majority of scholars regarding this issue. ¶

3. Third Point: When does Jihad become a fard 'ayn according to the majority of scholars? Along with the supporting evidence. We learned in the previous point from the survey of opinions on this issue that the discussion revolved around two aspects: First aspect: The ruling of Jihad during the era of the Prophet (ﷺ). Second aspect: The ruling of Jihad after the era of the Prophet (ﷺ). The preponderant view among the verifying jurists (muhaqqiqun) is that the ruling of Jihad is the same during the era of the Prophet (ﷺ) as it is in the subsequent eras until the Day of Judgment. Imam al-Nawawi says: 'Our companions (the Shafi'i jurists) said: Jihad today is a fard kifaya (communal obligation) unless the disbelievers descend [upon a land]...' ¶

If a Muslim territory is attacked, Jihad becomes fard al-ayn (an individual obligation) upon them. If the people of that territory are not sufficient to repel the enemy, it becomes mandatory for those who are nearest to them to fulfill the requirement of sufficiency. As for the time of the Prophet (PBUH), the more correct view among our scholars (Shafi'i jurists) is that it was also fard kifayah (a communal obligation). The second view is that it was fard al-ayn, and those who argued that it was fard kifayah based their reasoning on the fact that the Prophet (PBUH) used to send out sariyyah (military detachments) consisting of some, but not all, of the people. ¶

I (the author) say: It is clear that the meaning of Jihad being a fard kifayah during the time of the Prophet (PBUH), according to the preferred opinion, refers to situations other than defense. However, in the case of the disbelievers raiding the Muslims during the time of the Prophet (PBUH), Jihad for the purpose of defense becomes fard al-ayn in that situation, just as the ruling is for other Muslims after the era of the Prophet (PBUH). ¶

In this regard, it is stated in Mughni al-Muhtaj: 'Jihad during his (PBUH) era could be fard al-ayn, such as when an enemy surrounds the Muslims, like the Ahzab (Confederates) from among the disbelievers who gathered around Medina; this necessitates that Jihad against them becomes an individual obligation (fard al-ayn) for the Muslims.' ¶

Based on this, the preferred view is that the ruling of Jihad is the same during the era of the Prophet (PBUH) and in the subsequent eras until the Day of Judgment, whether it is in the category of fard al-ayn or fard kifayah. ¶

Consequently, we now move to mention the situations in which Jihad is fard al-ayn, regardless of the era in which this ruling is established, as it is a ruling that encompasses all eras. ¶

Jihad is fard al-ayn in the following situations: 1. If an enemy occupies a country of the Muslims, or moves its armies to occupy it, or launches an attack on it, or intends evil or aggression against its people—or a group or any individual among them—such as imprisonment, killing, or terrorizing... and the like. These are some excerpts from the statements of scholars that support what we have mentioned: - Al-Qurtubi says: 'There may be a situation in which the mobilization of all is mandatory... and that is when Jihad becomes fard al-ayn.' ¶