Chapter 52

And women are excluded from the mandate [of offensive jihad] due to specific evidences regarding their exemption from jihad, which is a fard kifaya (communal obligation). This concludes the discussion on the first issue. B - Response to the second issue: Does jihad become a fard ayn (individual obligation) for a woman? And when? We will mention what the jurists have said in this regard. In Hanafi fiqh, in 'Al-Durr al-Mukhtar bi Sharh Tanwir al-Absar' and the accompanying 'Hashiya Ibn Abidin', during the discussion on when jihad becomes a fard ayn, it states: 'It becomes a fard ayn if the enemy attacks; then everyone must go out, meaning everyone mentioned, such as women, slaves, debtors, and others. This applies even without permission [of others], and it is a sin for a husband or similar guardian to forbid them.' In Maliki fiqh, the 'Sharh al-Kabir' by al-Dardir states in this same context: 'It also becomes obligatory (fard ayn) when the Imam appoints a specific person, even if it is a woman.' In Shafi'i fiqh, 'Al-Minhaj' and its commentary 'Mughni al-Muhtaj' state in summary: 'The second scenario regarding the disbelievers is when they enter one of our towns. The residents are then obligated to defend them to the best of their ability, and at that point, jihad becomes a fard ayn (though some say it remains a fard kifaya). If the residents are able to prepare for battle, it becomes wajib (obligatory) upon every one of them who is capable, including the poor, children, debtors, and slaves, without needing permission from parents, creditors, or masters. Their approach to the city is treated the same as their entry into it. Women are like slaves if they are capable of defense; otherwise, they should not attend. Al-Rafi'i said: It is permissible that a woman would not need the husband's permission [in this specific circumstance].' This is what is stated in Shafi'i jurisprudence regarding the obligatoriness of combat upon a woman as an individual duty in a state of defense, provided she is capable. ¶

Regarding the position of the Hanbali school on this issue, it is stated in Mukhtasar al-Khiraqi: 'It is obligatory upon the people, when the enemy arrives, to mobilize—the poor among them and the rich...' Commenting on this text, Ibn Qudamah writes: 'His statement, "the poor among them and the rich," refers—and Allah knows best—to the wealthy and the destitute. Its meaning is that mobilization is general for all people who are among those capable of fighting when there is a need for their mobilization due to the arrival of the enemy. It is not permissible for anyone to refrain, except for those whose remaining behind is necessary for the protection of the place, the family, and property, those whom the Amīr (leader) prevents from going out, or those who lack the ability to go out and fight...' (1). ¶

I say: His statement, 'It is obligatory upon the people, when the enemy arrives, to mobilize...' might suggest that women are included in the generality of 'the people' (al-nās) (2). However, limiting this generality in the commentary by the phrase 'among those capable of fighting' appears to exclude women from that generality. Based on this, jihad does not become an individual obligation (fard 'ayn) upon women, even in the event of disbelievers attacking Muslim lands; thus, they do not incur sin if they do not go out to fight... This is according to what the aforementioned text implies. Furthermore, the fact that women are not among those capable of fighting has been explicitly stated by Ibn Qudamah: 'It is disliked for young women to enter the land of the enemy; because they are not among those capable of fighting...' (3). ¶

In summary: Jihad, in its combat sense, may become an individual obligation for women according to the three schools (other than the Hanbali), as previously mentioned, but it is not so in the Hanbali school. ¶

C - The third issue: If jihad is not an individual obligation (fard 'ayn) nor a communal obligation (fard kifāya) for women, is it permissible for them to carry weapons and engage in combat? The answer is: Yes, it is permissible for them. We have previously provided a citation from 'Fath al-Bārī' that indicates this permissibility, as a commentary on the hadith: 'Your jihad is Hajj' (4). We repeat here what we quoted previously, due to its relevance to our current discussion: 'Ibn Battāl said: The hadith of Aisha indicates that jihad is not obligatory upon women...' ¶

However, his ﷺ statement, 'Your jihad is Hajj,' does not mean that it is impermissible for women to perform jihad voluntarily... (1). ¶

In 'Al-Mughni' by Ibn Qudamah, there is text indicating the permissibility of women directly engaging in combat, even though Ibn Qudamah holds the view that women are not among those mandated to fight, and jihad is not incumbent upon them, neither as a collective obligation (fard kifaya) nor as an individual obligation (fard ayn). He writes: ¶

'Umm Sulaym and Nusaybah bint Ka'b used to participate in battles with the Prophet ﷺ. As for Nusaybah, she used to fight, and her hand was severed on the day of Yamamah...' (2). Regarding the allocation of some war spoils to women for their presence on the battlefield, he states: 'The Imam or commander should prioritize the female fighter—as well as those who provide water, treat the wounded, and provide utility—over others' (3). ¶

Thus, we conclude our discussion on the second point and proceed to the third point: ¶

3 - Third Point: Does a woman have a place in the regular army? Or is her place in the reserve army—should the need arise? And what is the natural role she performs in the army? ¶

The answer—in brief—to this point is: ¶

The regular army is, in principle, for men who are obligated to perform jihad as a collective duty (fard kifaya), as its members remain under arms, with fingers on the triggers, in a state of maximum alert to respond to any emergency requiring immediate engagement in war, whether for defense or offense. By doing so, they absolve other eligible individuals from this collective obligation. Since women are not fundamentally addressed by the obligation of collective jihad, the regular army is not their natural place. ¶

However, this does not prevent opening the doors of the regular army to female personnel if the public interest (maslaha) demands it—subject to the discretion of the authority in charge—as long as jihad is not inherently forbidden for women. In reality, the regular army is merely a tool to execute jihad in the best possible manner. Therefore, if we permit women to engage in jihad, it follows that entry into the tool that enables them to do so—the regular army—is naturally permissible. ¶

Nevertheless, as we mentioned earlier, the army is not the natural place for women, even though authorities may open its ranks to female elements if the public interest (maslaha) demands it. Therefore, what is the natural place for a woman when she joins the ranks of the mujahideen or is called to jihad? The answer is that her natural place is the reserve army, which is mobilized for jihad in times of need or necessity. The natural role of a woman in this army—or in the regular army, if she is integrated into it for the sake of public interest—is to perform tasks suitable to her nature that do not involve direct combat, such as logistics, medical services, and the like. However, this does not prevent her—if the situation demands—from occupying positions where she engages in combat activities, provided she is capable of fighting. In fact, she must engage in fighting in cases where jihad, in the sense of combat, becomes an individual obligation (fard 'ayn) for her, as previously explained. Hence, we hold that the Islamic state is obligated to establish training centers for women where they can learn to use weapons and study combat affairs. Since it is possible for jihad to become a fard 'ayn for a woman, it is mandatory to prepare her for such a situation so that she is capable of fulfilling this obligation. With this, we conclude our discussion on women in the army and move to a new section. ¶

Fourth Section: The Ruling on the Participation of Children in the Army and Their Role Therein. We will cover the following points on this subject: 1. First Point: The issue of taking children along in the Islamic army during the Prophetic era; what has been reported regarding this? 2. Second Point: What did the jurists (fuqaha) say regarding the ruling on children directly engaging in fighting the disbelievers? ¶

3. The third point: Should children be utilized in the Islamic army in the modern era? And what is their role within it? 1. The first point: The issue of taking children along in the Islamic army during the Prophetic era, and what has been narrated regarding it? We present in clarification of this issue a collection of narrations connected to it, and the comments of some scholars regarding them. It is stated in Sahih al-Bukhari, Muslim, and others: On the authority of Ibn Umar, he said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) reviewed me on the day of 'Uhud for combat while I was fourteen years old, and he did not permit me. He reviewed me on the day of 'al-Khandaq' (the Trench) while I was fifteen years old, and he permitted me. Nafi' said: I went to 'Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, who was the Caliph at that time, and I told him this hadith. He said: This is indeed the dividing line between a minor and an adult. He then wrote to his officials to enroll those who were fifteen years old, and those who were younger should be placed among the 'iyal' (dependents/non-combatants). In one narration: He wrote to his officials to enroll the fifteen-year-old among the 'muqatila' (combatants), and the fourteen-year-old among the 'dhurriyyah' (non-combatant children). In another narration: This is the distinction between grown men and boys. He then wrote to his officials not to permit anyone under the age of fifteen. In al-Nawawi's commentary on Sahih Muslim, it is stated in reference to this hadith: In this is proof for determining puberty at fifteen years of age, and this is the school of thought of al-Shafi'i. ¶

Imam al-Awza'i, Ibn Wahb, Ahmad, and others stated: Upon completing fifteen years of age, one becomes mukallaf (legally responsible), even if one has not reached puberty (ihtilam). Thus, all religious obligations and other legal injunctions apply to him. It is further stated regarding the phrase 'He permitted me' (ajazani): 'It means he was treated as a man with the status of the fighting men.' ¶

In Fath al-Bari, the commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari, it is stated regarding this hadith: ¶

'The "ard" (review) of the army means examining their conditions before the commencement of combat, to observe their preparedness, the arrangement of their stations, and so forth. And the Prophet’s statement, "So he permitted him" (fa-ajazahu), means he accepted him and granted him permission to fight.' It is also mentioned therein: ¶

'His statement, "That they should be assigned" (an yufradu), means to allot them a provision in the 'Diwan al-Jund' (military register). They used to differentiate between the combatants and others in terms of 'ata' (stipends), which is the provision gathered in the Bayt al-Mal (public treasury) and distributed to those entitled to it. The story of Ibn Umar was used as evidence that whoever reaches fifteen years of age is subject to the rulings of adults, even if they have not reached puberty. Al-Tahawi, Ibn al-Qassar, and others who do not follow this view responded that the mentioned permission was specifically for combat, which depends on strength and endurance. Some Malikis responded that this was a singular incident (waqi'at 'ayn), and thus carries no general ruling; it is possible he had reached puberty at that age, hence the permission. Furthermore, the hadith indicates that the Imam should review those going out with him to battle before the fighting begins; whoever he finds fit, he takes along; otherwise, he sends them back. This occurred for the Prophet in Badr, Uhud, and other battles. According to the Malikis and Hanafis: Permission to fight is not dependent on puberty; rather, the Imam may permit those youths who possess strength and bravery. Often, a youth approaching puberty (murahiq) is stronger than an adult.' ¶

And peace: 'O my son! Exert yourself here, O my son! Exert yourself here.' He was then wounded and fell. He came to the Prophet (ﷺ) who asked: 'O my son! Did you despair?' He replied: 'No, O Messenger of Allah!' (1). - It is stated in Kanz al-Ummal: 'From Sa'd, he said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) turned back 'Umayr ibn Abi Waqqas—that is, the brother of Sa'd—from setting out to Badr, as he considered him too young. 'Umayr wept, so he permitted him...!' (2). - Also in it: 'From 'Urwah, he said: On the day of Uhud, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) turned back a group of his companions, considering them too young, so they did not witness the combat. Among them were: 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, who was fourteen years old at the time, Usamah ibn Zayd, al-Bara' ibn 'Azib, 'Arabah ibn Aws, a man from Banu Harithah, Zayd ibn Arqam, Zayd ibn Thabit, and Rafi'. He said: Rafi' stood on his toes to appear taller, so he permitted him and he marched with them. The others were left behind, and they were assigned as guards for the women and children in Madinah' (4). - In al-Tabarani: 'From Rafi' ibn Khadij, he said: I and my uncle came to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) while he was intending to go to Badr. I said: O Messenger of Allah! I wish to go out with you. He began to gesture with his hand and said: I consider you too young, and I do not know what you will do when you meet the enemy? I said: Do you know that I am the most skilled of those who shoot? So he turned me back, and I did not witness Badr' (5). - In the Sirah of Ibn Hisham, it follows: 'Ibn Hisham said: And the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) permitted on that day—meaning the day of Uhud—Samurah ibn Jundab al-Fazari and Rafi' ibn Khadij, of Banu Harithah, and they were fifteen years old, although he had previously turned them back. It was said to him: O Messenger of Allah! Indeed, Rafi' is an archer, so he permitted him. When he permitted Rafi', it was said to him: O Messenger of Allah! Samurah can wrestle Rafi' (and win), so he permitted him!' (6). - In Sahih al-Bukhari: From Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him), he said: 'Was injured...' ¶

Harithah was a young boy on the day of Badr. His mother came to the Prophet (PBUH) and said: 'O Messenger of Allah! You know my bond with Harithah. If he is in Paradise, I shall be patient and seek reward; but if it is otherwise, you shall see what I do!' He replied: 'Woe to you! Have you lost your senses? Is there only one Paradise? There are many, and he is in the Paradise of Firdaws.' ¶

In another narration by Al-Bukhari: 'And your son has attained the highest Firdaws.' ¶

It is stated in Fath al-Bari: 'It occurred in the narration of Thabit via Ahmad that Harithah went out as an observer. Al-Nasa'i added in this chain: He did not go out for combat.' ¶

It is also mentioned in Sahih al-Bukhari under the chapter: 'Chapter: Whoever takes a young boy on a military expedition for service.' 'Anas bin Malik (RA) narrated that the Prophet (PBUH) said to Abu Talhah: 'Find me a boy from among your boys to serve me until I set out for Khaybar.' Abu Talhah took me with him, mounting me behind him; I was a boy approaching puberty, and I would serve the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) whenever he halted.' ¶

In this context, Fath al-Bari states: 'His statement (Chapter: Whoever takes a young boy on a military expedition for service) indicates that a child is not addressed by the obligation of jihad, but it is permissible to take them along in a subordinate capacity... He then said: The hadith indicates the permissibility of... taking children along on military expeditions. Some commentators have said this and others followed them, but this is open to debate, because Anas was over fifteen years old at that time; for the expedition of Khaybar took place in the seventh year of the Hijrah, and he was eight years old at the time of the Hijrah.' ¶

Following this, regarding the issue of whether children, women, and the People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimmah) are entitled to a share of the spoils—if they participate in combat—equivalent to the share of male Muslim fighters, or if they are only given what is called 'radkh' (i.e., an unspecified amount of wealth, less than the share of the men). ¶

I say: On this matter, it is stated in *Nayl al-Awtar* the following: 'Some have said that a full share (sahm) should be allotted to women and children. This is the opinion of al-Awza'i. From al-Zuhri: That a share is allotted to the dhimmi, but not to slaves, women, and children; rather, they are given 'radkh.' Then he said: The apparent conclusion is that no full share is allotted to women, children, slaves, or dhimmis. Any hadith that suggests the Prophet (ﷺ) allotted a share to any of them should be interpreted as 'radkh,' which is a small gift, in order to reconcile the ahadith.' ¶

Lastly, it is stated in *Sunan al-Tirmidhi*: 'Al-Awza'i said: The Prophet (ﷺ) allotted shares to the children at Khaybar.' ¶

In conclusion, this is some of what has been narrated regarding the participation of children with the combatant army during the time of the Prophet (ﷺ). The previous narrations and reports indicate the following regarding our issue: ¶

1. The Prophet (ﷺ) would inspect the army before entering into battle to examine the physical fitness of the individual fighters. Whoever he saw as young, and from whom he did not expect the ability to fight, he would exclude from the army. Some of these individuals might have reached the age of fifteen, yet they did not display the aptitude for combat. However, if the proficiency of any of them was proven in any aspect of military capacity, he would allow them to join the fighters. This is demonstrated by his (ﷺ) action in sending back Samurah bin Jundub and Rafi' bin Khadij along with other youngsters on the day of 'Uhud, even though they had both reached the age of fifteen—as mentioned by Ibn Hisham—but after the proficiency of 'Samurah' and 'Rafi'' in certain combat skills was proven to him, he permitted them among those he had authorized. This contains evidence that the age... ¶

Fifteen years of age, although it is the beginning of the age of legal capacity (taklif) for Shariah rulings (1)—of which Jihad is one—nevertheless, alongside this, physical fitness and martial skills are also considered for the purpose of obtaining permission to join the ranks of combatants in practice. ¶

2 - The person in authority has the right to permit or refuse the minors to join the combatants, in light of the interest (maslaha) he perceives in granting or withholding such permission. This is evident from the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) turning away of Rafi’ ibn Khadij during the Battle of Badr, even though he was skilled in archery, and his granting permission to Umayr ibn Abi Waqqas in the same battle, even though the Prophet (peace be upon him) initially considered him too young. However, when he wept out of anguish at being deprived of Jihad, the Prophet (peace be upon him) granted him permission. ¶

This is also clear from his (peace be upon him) acceptance of the boy offered by his mother on the day of Uhud to defend the Prophet (peace be upon him). This, it seems, was when the Muslims were defeated and only a small number remained with the Prophet (peace be upon him). The woman said, "O Messenger of Allah! This is my son; he will fight for you." So he accepted him and began directing him in the fighting here and there, as the narration states. ¶

3 - Those minors and adolescents who are eager for Jihad but are not permitted to go out to fight the enemy may be assigned other tasks that do not involve direct combat on the country's borders. Examples include performing guard duty in the city to protect the inhabitants—such as women and children—either from the conspirators among the people of sedition (fitna) and hypocrisy within, or from those among the external enemy who might infiltrate the city to cause corruption and harm. Thus, these guards would be ready to intercept them. This is clear from the report regarding those whom the Prophet (peace be upon him) turned back from attending the Battle of Uhud: "They were made guards for the children and women in Medina." ¶

4 - Minors may be permitted to go out with the fighting army, not to engage in combat, but either for service or merely to witness the scenes of war if the interest of the situation requires it. ¶

(1) This is the opinion of the majority. It is stated in Al-Fiqh al-Islami wa Adillatuhu by Dr. Wahba al-Zuhayli (Vol. 1, p. 91): "Puberty: It has five signs: nocturnal emission, growth of pubic hair, menstruation, pregnancy, and reaching a certain age, which is fifteen years; some say seventeen. Abu Hanifa said: eighteen years." ¶

The exposure of youths to military life and their close observation of battles results in the breaking of the barrier of fear of combat in their hearts and serves as a psychological preparation for them regarding the obligation of Jihad once they reach the age of accountability (bulugh). ¶

This is evident from the Prophet’s (PBUH) search for a young boy to serve him during his journey to the Battle of Khaybar. Abu Talha presented Anas bin Malik to him for this purpose, as Abu Talha was his stepfather. Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) says about himself—as recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari—that he was a boy approaching puberty (murahiq al-hulum), meaning he was near maturity but had not yet attained it. If it is accurate that Anas was, at that time, over fifteen years old—as Ibn Hajar established—then the meaning of Anas's statement is that he had not yet reached puberty through the manifestation of nocturnal emission, even though he had turned fifteen or was slightly older; this is certainly possible. ¶

We say: What the aforementioned narrations indicate is that minors may be permitted to accompany the fighting army simply to observe scenes of war, as is confirmed in Sahih al-Bukhari in the story of the martyrdom of Haritha bin Suraqa, a young boy who was killed on the day of Badr; he was among the spectators and not among the combatants. ¶

It is also noted that the word 'ghulam' (boy/youth) is primarily used for one who has not reached the age of puberty, as in the statement of Umar bin Abd al-Aziz regarding the age of fifteen: 'This is the dividing line between men and boys (ghilman).' Although, this does not preclude the word from being used metaphorically for adults at times, as they used to refer to the Prophet (PBUH) while in Makkah, after his mission began, as 'the boy of Banu Hashim.' ¶

5. The narrations which indicate that the Prophet (PBUH) gave portions of the spoils of war to boys—regardless of whether this was by way of a formal share like that of men or by way of a gift/allowance (radkh)—are evidence that... ¶

The emergence of children during the era of the Prophet (peace be upon him) with the combat army, as the fundamental principle is that the spoils of war belong only to those who attended the battles. ¶

Having said that, this is what is stated regarding the first point concerning the taking of children in the Islamic army during the Prophetic era. We now move to the second point. ¶

2. The second point: What have the jurists said regarding the ruling on children engaging in combat against enemies? ¶

- In Hanafi Fiqh: It is stated in Hashiya Ibn Abidin, commenting on what is in Al-Durr al-Mukhtar bi-Sharh Tanwir al-Absar regarding the statement: "Jihad is not obligatory upon a child," the following text appears: "In Al-Dhakhira: It is permissible for the father to grant the adolescent (murahiq) permission to fight, even if he fears for his life. Al-Sa'di said: It is essential that he does not fear for him; if he fears he will be killed, he should not grant him permission." Then, regarding the situation of the infidels attacking Muslim lands, the Hashiya also states: "Al-Sarakhsi said: ... Boys who have not yet reached puberty, if they are capable of fighting, there is no harm in them going out and fighting during a general mobilization (nafir 'amm), even if their fathers and mothers dislike it." ¶

Furthermore, in Al-Siyar al-Kabir and its commentary—following the text quoted by Ibn Abidin from Al-Sarakhsi—it reads: "In situations other than this—meaning other than a general mobilization—they should not be taken out unless their parents are willing and happy with it." ¶

- In Shafi'i Fiqh: It is stated in Al-Minhaj and its commentary, Mughni al-Muhtaj, regarding the ruling of Jihad, in brief: "There are two states for the disbelievers: One is when they are in their own lands... Jihad is a communal obligation (fard kifaya) as indicated by the practice of the Rightly Guided Caliphs... when those among them perform it, the burden of blame is lifted from the rest... and his statement: (those among them)." ¶

Kifayah) includes those who were not originally among the people of the obligation of Jihad... Thus, if adolescents perform it, the hardship is removed from those upon whom the obligation lies (1). Then he stated: 'The second of the two states of the disbelievers: They enter a city of ours, so it becomes incumbent upon its people to defend with whatever is possible... even upon a poor person, a child, a debtor, and a slave without permission' (2). It is stated in 'Al-Muhadhdhab': 'It is permissible for the Imam to grant permission [- i.e., for Jihad -] to women... and it is permissible to grant permission to those among the boys who have become strong, because there is assistance in them, but he shall not grant permission to a madman because he exposes himself to destruction without benefit' (3). ¶

In Maliki Fiqh: It is stated in (Qawanin al-Ahkam al-Shar'iyyah) the following: 'The Third Issue: Regarding those whose assistance is sought [- i.e., those whose assistance is sought in establishing Jihad -] and they are: Muslims, the free, and the adults. It is permissible to seek assistance from a slave with the permission of his master, and from strong adolescents...' (4). ¶

In 'Al-Sharh al-Kabir' and the 'Hashiyat al-Dasuqi' upon it, regarding the issue of when Jihad becomes Fard 'Ayn (individual obligation) - the text states: 'And Jihad becomes mandatory upon the sudden arrival of the enemy upon a people, even if the defense falls upon a woman or a bondsman... [- it is stated here in the Hashiya -] and likewise a boy who has the capacity for fighting.' Then it says in the Sharh: 'And it also becomes mandatory through the Imam appointing a person, even if it is a woman or a slave... And it says here in the Hashiya: His statement 'and through the Imam's appointment' means that everyone whom the Imam appoints for Jihad, it becomes mandatory upon him, even if he is a boy capable of fighting, or a woman, or a slave, or a child, or a debtor. And they must go forth even if the guardian, husband, master, or creditor forbids them. The intent of his appointment upon the boy during the sudden arrival of the enemy, and the Imam's appointment, is to urge him towards it (5) and compel him to it, just as one is compelled to that which improves his state, not in the sense of punishing him for abandoning it... Thus, it cannot be said: that the applicability of the obligation to the boy is a violation of consensus!' (6). ¶

This is what is stated in Maliki Fiqh... ¶

- As for Hanbali Fiqh, its position on this issue is summarized by the fact that a minor child is not subject to the obligation of Jihad at all; this is because puberty is one of the conditions for being subject to Shariah rulings, including Jihad, as previously mentioned. In Al-Mughni, Ibn Qudamah, after listing puberty as a condition for the obligation of Jihad, states: "A child is physically weak, and it is narrated from Ibn Umar who said: 'I was presented to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) on the day of Uhud when I was fourteen years old, and he did not permit me [to join] the combatants': Muttafaq 'Alayh (agreed upon)."(1) ¶

Furthermore, the absolute requirement of puberty for the obligation of Jihad indicates that a child does not fall under the obligation of Jihad, neither as a Fard Kifayah (communal obligation) nor as a Fard 'Ayn (individual obligation) even when the enemy attacks Muslim lands and a general mobilization (Nafeer 'Am) is declared. This is because Ibn Qudamah restricts the obligation of fighting during a general mobilization only to those who are 'Ahl al-Qital' (eligible for combat). Those eligible for combat are those who meet the conditions for the obligation of Jihad. He states: "Mobilization extends to all people who are eligible for combat when there is a need for their mobilization due to the enemy's approach."(2) ¶

However, despite this, it is permissible in Hanbali Fiqh for minors to go out with the army and engage in actual fighting, even if it is not obligatory upon them, just as in the case of women, as previously mentioned. This is evidenced by their ruling that if minors go out to fight, they are entitled to 'Radkh'. ¶

- Meaning: A small portion of the spoils of war that does not reach the amount of a man's share. And if one of them kills any of the disbelievers, he is entitled to his 'Salab' (the spoils taken directly from a killed combatant). That is: the clothing, war gear, and mount that the opponent possessed. ¶

In this regard, it is stated in Al-Mughni: "Indeed, the 'Salab' belongs to every killer who is entitled to a share (Sahm) or a gift (Radkh), such as a slave, a woman, a child, and a polytheist."(3) ¶

(1) Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudamah: Vol. 10 / 366. This Hadith was previously authenticated in the discussion of the first point. (2) Ibid: Vol. 10 / 389. (3) Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudamah: Vol. 10 / 419. ¶

Summary: Minors—those who have not reached the age of puberty—are not compelled to perform jihad unless there is a general mobilization (nafir) to defend Islamic lands and their people during an enemy invasion. According to the Maliki school, they may be compelled to fight if ordered to do so by the legitimate ruler, even outside of defensive situations, provided they are capable of performing the assigned task. This is the view of the jurisprudential schools other than the Hanbalis. As for the Hanbalis, they do not consider minors eligible to be forced to fight under any circumstances. However, all jurists, including the Hanbalis, permit minors to carry weapons and engage in combat against enemies, provided they are capable of doing so. With this, we conclude this point and move to the final point. ¶

3. Third point: Can children be utilized in a modern Islamic army at the time of its formation? And what is their role therein? Answer: The army, as previously stated, is divided into two parts: - Regular army (nizami): Its members are, in principle, those upon whom jihad is a fard kifaya (communal obligation). They are kept permanently under arms and remain in a state of immediate readiness for combat at the first sign. - Reserve army (ihtiyati): It consists of all other Muslims upon whom jihad is obligatory, as well as those who are permitted to participate in jihad or its related works and services. Since minors are not subject to the obligation of jihad as a fard kifaya, their place is not in the regular army. However, this does not prevent their utilization in this army if a necessity or public interest (maslaha) dictates it. This is because the regular army exists to facilitate jihad in the best possible manner, and since children are among those permitted to perform jihad, it is permissible to utilize them in this army. ¶

However, it remains that the natural place for young boys is not the regular army, but rather the reserve army, which brings together all those obligated to perform jihad outside the regular army, as well as anyone else permitted to participate in jihad despite not being under the formal obligation. This army—as previously stated—consists of civilians who are occupied with their own affairs and ordinary work, not dedicated to military life, but who are mobilized for combat when necessity or interest demands. Boys capable of bearing arms may be a component of this reserve army if the situation requires. As for what the role of boys is in this army, or in the regular army if interest necessitates their use there? The answer is that each of them is placed in the position that suits him. Therefore, whoever among them is capable of carrying weapons and trained in the arts of combat, the authorities are permitted to use him in this field, whether it be within the country in what is called civil defense work, or on the borders of the country to confront enemies. And whoever among the boys is more useful in the field of services than in the field of combat, he shall be utilized in the field where he is of benefit. We have seen in the narrations we cited in the first point how some boys would fight, some would perform guard duties or what is called civil defense, and others would serve the combatants in whatever they needed. With this, we conclude this branch and proceed to a new one. Fifth Branch: The ruling on the participation of non-Muslims among the subjects in the army, and their role within it. We will address this topic through the following points: ¶

1. First point: Participation of disbelievers in the Islamic army marching to battle during the Prophetic era and the Rightly-Guided Caliphate — what texts have been reported regarding this? 2. Second point: What is stated in books of Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) regarding the issue of seeking assistance from non-Muslims in fighting the enemy? 3. Third point: Should the doors of the regular army in the Islamic state be opened to non-Muslim subjects? Or is their place in the reserve army, if the need arises, and what is their role in the military? ¶

1. First point: Participation of disbelievers in the Islamic army marching to battle during the Prophetic era and the Rightly-Guided Caliphate.. The texts reported regarding this issue are of two categories: - Some suggest not seeking assistance from non-Muslims in war. - Others permit this assistance. We will now present a collection of texts reported in both directions. ¶

First: What has been reported regarding not seeking assistance from non-Muslims in war: - It is stated in Sahih Muslim: 'On the authority of Aisha, the wife of the Prophet (PBUH), who said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) set out before the Battle of Badr. When he reached the area of Harra al-Wabara (1), a man caught up with him who was known for his boldness and bravery. The companions of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) rejoiced when they saw him. When he caught up with him, he said to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH): I have come to follow you and to fight alongside you (to attain reward). The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said to him: Do you believe in Allah and His Messenger? He replied: No. He said: Then go back, for I will not seek the help of a polytheist (mushrik). She said: Then he (the Prophet) proceeded until we reached al-Shajara (2), where the man caught up with him again and said to him what he had said the first time. The Prophet (PBUH) said to him as he had said the first time: Go back, for I will not seek the help of a polytheist! He said: Then...' (1) A location about four miles from Medina (Al-Nawawi ala Muslim: 7/477). (2) 'This is how it appears in the copies: until we reached. It is possible that Aisha was among those bidding farewell, and she saw this. It is also possible that by saying "we", she meant the Muslims' (Al-Nawawi ala Muslim: 7/477-478). ¶

Then he returned, and the Prophet ﷺ caught up with him at Al-Bayda and said to him what he had said the first time: 'Do you believe in Allah and His Messenger?' He said: 'Yes.' The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: 'Then go.' (1) ¶

In Al-Mustadrak 'ala al-Sahihayn by Al-Hakim: 'Narrated from Habib bin Abd al-Rahman, from his father, from his grandfather, may Allah be pleased with him, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ set out for one of his military expeditions. Another man and I came to him before we had embraced Islam and said: 'We are ashamed that our people participate in a battle while we do not.' He asked: 'Have you embraced Islam?' We said: 'No.' He replied: 'We do not seek the assistance of mushrikin (polytheists) against the mushrikin.' So we embraced Islam and participated with the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. I killed a man, and the man struck me a blow, and [later] I married his daughter! She used to say: 'May I never lose the man who gave you this scar!' I would reply: 'May I never lose the man who hastened your father to the Fire!' (3) ¶

In the Musnad of Ishaq bin Rahwayh: 'Narrated from Abu Humayd al-Sa'idi, may Allah be pleased with him, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ set out on the day of Uhud. When he passed Thaniyat al-Wada', he looked behind him and saw a heavily armed battalion. He asked: 'Who are they?' They replied: 'This is Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Salul with his Jewish allies, who are from the tribe of Abdullah bin Salam.' He asked: 'Have they embraced Islam?' They said: 'No, they are still on their religion.' He said: 'Tell them to turn back, for we do not seek the assistance of mushrikin against the mushrikin.' (5) ¶

This is a portion of what has been narrated regarding not seeking the assistance of the mushrikin in war. ¶

Secondly: In contrast to these texts, other texts have been narrated which indicate the permissibility of the participation of the kuffar with the Muslims in war against the enemy. Here is a group of them: - In Sunan Abi Dawud, with a sahih isnad, 'from Hassan bin 'Atiyyah, may Allah be pleased with him, who said:' ¶

I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: 'You will make a secure peace with the Romans, and then you and they will fight an enemy behind you.' (1). ¶

In Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah and Sunan al-Bayhaqi: 'From al-Shaybani—who is Abu Ishaq—that Sa’d bin Malik—who is Ibn Abi Waqqas—fought alongside a group of Jews and granted them a share (of the spoils).' (2). ¶

Also in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, and cited by Ibn Hazm in al-Muhalla, the wording as per al-Muhalla is: 'From Jabir, who said: I asked al-Sha’bi about Muslims fighting alongside the People of the Book? Al-Sha’bi replied: I met the Imams—both the jurists among them and the non-jurists—they would fight alongside the people of the Dhimma, allocate shares for them, and remit a portion of their jizyah, and that is a virtuous supererogatory act (nafal) for them.' (3). ¶

Ibn Hazm said after citing this report: 'Al-Sha’bi was born during the early days of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and lived to see the subsequent Companions.' Then Ibn Hazm commented on the report of Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas fighting with a group of Jews, saying: 'We do not know of any Companion who opposed Sa’d in this; and Salman bin Rabi’ah (may Allah be pleased with him) used to seek the help of polytheists against polytheists.' (4). ¶

This instance, which Ibn Hazm indicated regarding the Companion Salman bin Rabi’ah seeking the help of polytheists against polytheists, is recorded in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. The text of the report is as follows: 'From Salman bin Rabi’ah al-Bahili, that he fought in Balanjar (5), and he sought the help of some polytheists and said: Let the enemies of Allah be set against the enemies of Allah.' (6). ¶

Among the events of the Battle of Hunayn, after the conquest of Makkah—that Safwan bin Umayyah, while still in his state of shirk... ¶

Before converting to Islam, he was present at this battle with the Prophet (PBUH)... and in it, Safwan rebuked his brother 'Kildah' for his joy or gloating over the defeat of the Muslims in the first encounter. The report says: 'Kildah ibn al-Hanbal shouted—while he was with his maternal brother Safwan ibn Umayyah ibn Khalaf, and Safwan was a polytheist on that day, during the period (1) granted to him by the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)—and said: "Behold, the magic has been undone today!" Safwan said to him: "Be silent, may Allah break your mouth! By Allah, that a man from the Quraish should rule over me is dearer to me than that a man from Hawazin should rule over me" (2).' ¶

- It is mentioned in 'Nasb al-Rayah': 'From Ibn Abbas, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) sought the aid of the Jews of Qaynuqa, and he gave them a gift (radhakh), but did not allocate a formal share (sahm) to them..." Al-Bayhaqi said: "Hasan ibn Amarah is solely responsible for this narration, and he is matruk (abandoned/unreliable)" (3).' ¶

- And in Sahih al-Bukhari, under the heading: (Chapter: Verily, Allah supports this religion with a wicked [fajir] man), the following hadith appears: 'From Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: We participated in a battle with the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), and he said regarding a man who claimed Islam: "He is one of the people of the Hellfire!" When the fighting began, the man fought intensely and was wounded. It was said: "O Messenger of Allah! The man you said would be of the people of the Hellfire has fought intensely today, and he has died!" The Prophet (PBUH) said: "He is in the Hellfire." The narrator said: Some people nearly doubted. While they were in that state, it was said: "He did not die, but he is severely wounded." When night fell, he could not bear the wounds and killed himself. The Prophet (PBUH) was informed of this, and he said: "Allahu Akbar! I bear witness that I am the servant of Allah and His Messenger." Then he commanded Bilal to announce to the people: "None shall enter Paradise except a Muslim soul, and verily Allah supports this religion with the wicked man" (4).' ¶