Chapter 58

The predecessors stated: The utterance of such words is only disliked when done for the sake of boasting, as was the practice in the Age of Ignorance (Jahiliyyah). And Allah knows best. ¶

- Regarding the rajaz (martial poetry) of Ali ibn Abi Talib during his duel with the Jew 'Marhab', Al-Nawawi said: 'Know that this hadith contains various types of knowledge, among them: ... the permissibility and desirability of praising one who has done a good deed if it serves a public interest... the desirability of reciting rajaz during war, and the permissibility for the archer, the lancer, or the swordsman to say: "Take this, for I am the son of so-and-so."' ¶

- It is stated in Fath al-Bari: 'Chapter: Regarding one who says: "Take this, for I am the son of so-and-so." This is a phrase used when boasting. Ibn al-Munir said: Its status in Islamic law is that it falls outside the forbidden form of boasting because the circumstances necessitate it. I (Ibn Hajar) say: It is akin to the permissibility of showing pride during war, but not otherwise.' ¶

- Also in Fath al-Bari, in the commentary on the hadith: "I am the Prophet, there is no lie, I am the son of Abdul-Muttalib," it says: 'This demonstrates the legitimacy of identifying oneself with one's ancestors, even if they died in the Age of Ignorance, and the prohibition of such action is restricted to situations outside of war.' ¶

I (the author) say: From what has been presented, it becomes clear to us that for a person to say, for instance, in normal circumstances, "I am so-and-so, son of so-and-so," when not in the context of introducing themselves to those who do not know them, but rather for the purpose of self-aggrandizement and highlighting their lineage—such speech for this purpose is a form of vanity and boasting which is not commendable. However, such highlighting and announcement is permissible in war because it strikes terror into the enemy and is a form of psychological warfare, especially if the fighter’s name repeated in the ears of the enemy is linked in their minds to a record filled with heroism and glory. ¶

Based on this, there is no objection for broadcasts directed against the enemy during wartime to highlight the deeds of our heroes. ¶

The breasts of the blessed Muslims thunder and their mouths roar with threats, warnings, and poems of pride and enthusiasm. Even if these expressions include highlighting lineage and enumerating the war exploits and military glories of these heroes, it is done with the intention of casting fear into the hearts of the enemy and spreading terror among their ranks. ¶

Finally, two hadiths are mentioned here: ¶

The first: It aligns with the aforementioned permissibility of taking pride in lineage during war. This is what was narrated in Sunan Abu Dawud from Ibn al-Hanzaliyyah, who said: 'The Messenger of Allah ﷺ sent out a detachment. When it returned, one of the men came and sat in the gathering where the Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to sit. He said to a man beside him: If you had seen us when we encountered the enemy, such-and-such person attacked, thrusting his spear and saying: Take this, for I am the Ghifari youth! What is your opinion of his statement? The other replied: I consider his reward to have been voided! Another heard this and said: I do not see any harm in that. They argued until the Messenger of Allah ﷺ heard it and said: SubhanAllah!! There is no harm in him being rewarded and praised!' ¶

The second: This hadith does not approve of such praise of lineage during war. It is what was narrated in Sunan Ibn Majah: 'From Abu Uqbah, a freed slave of the Persians, who said: I witnessed the day of Uhud with the Prophet ﷺ. I struck one of the polytheists and said: Take this from me, for I am the Persian youth. This reached the Prophet ﷺ, and he said: Why did you not say: Take this from me, for I am the Ansar youth!' ¶

Some hadith scholars have classified this second hadith as weak. Even if it were considered authentic, the hadith contains no evidence suggesting... ¶

It is not intended to rebuke what 'Abu Aqaba' said... rather, it is an encouragement towards what is better in this context, which indicates support for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. ¶

Furthermore, we have now concluded the first point in this research, and we move on to the second point. ¶

2 - The Second Point: What is 'Khuyala' (pride/arrogance)? What is its ruling in general? And what is its ruling in a state of war? ¶

- What is Khuyala? - It is stated in Mukhtar al-Sihah: 'Al-Khuyala: ... arrogance; you say of it: ikhtala (he acted arrogantly), so he is dhu khuyala (possessor of pride), dhu khal, and dhu mukhayala. Meaning: Possessor of pride'(1). - In Al-Misbah al-Munir: 'It is said: ikhtala al-rajul (the man acted arrogantly), and he has khuyala, which is arrogance and self-admiration'(2). - In Al-Qamus al-Muhit: 'Al-Akhyal, al-khuyala, al-khayl, al-khayla, and al-mukhayala: all mean pride'(3). This is what has been stated regarding the meaning of khuyala. ¶

As for its general ruling, Imam al-Nawawi says in this regard: 'The scholars said: Khuyala (with the elongated vowel) and al-mukhayala, and al-batr (insolence), and al-kibr (pride), and al-zahw(4), and al-tabakhtar (strutting), all share the same meaning, and it is haram (forbidden)'(5). ¶

- Imam al-Dhahabi said in his book 'Al-Kaba'ir' while discussing the verse of Allah: {Do not turn your cheek away from people in contempt, nor walk on the earth exultantly; indeed, Allah does not like every arrogant boaster}(6). He said: 'Meaning: Do not turn your cheek away from people in aversion and arrogance; and al-marah means al-tabakhtar (strutting)'(7). ¶

Al-Qurtubi said: "'And do not walk upon the earth with pride' (al-Isra: 37) means: strutting and being arrogant." ¶

He stated in another place: "This contains a form of warning. The 'mukhtal' (arrogant) is one who possesses 'khuyala', which means: pride." ¶

In Sahih Muslim, a chapter is titled: "The Prohibition of Strutting While Walking Out of Admiration for One's Garments." ¶

It is narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "While a man was walking and strutting, dressed in his two garments, admiring himself, Allah caused the earth to swallow him up, and he will continue to sink into it until the Day of Resurrection." ¶

In Al-Mustadrak 'ala al-Sahihayn by al-Hakim: "'Ikrimah ibn Khalid ibn Sa'id ibn al-'As al-Makhzumi met Abdullah ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab and said: 'O Abu Abd al-Rahman, we, the Banu al-Mughirah, are a people in whom there is 'nakhwa' (arrogance). Have you heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say anything regarding that?' Abdullah ibn Umar replied: 'I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: No man acts arrogantly within himself or struts in his walk, except that he will meet Allah while He is angry with him.'" ¶

This is what is stated regarding the ruling on 'khuyala' (pride) and similar traits in general circumstances. ¶

[Footnote summary: Due to this trait of pride in the Banu al-Mughirah, Umar ibn al-Khattab advised Abu Bakr to remove Khalid ibn Sa'id ibn al-'As from the command of one of the armies sent to the Levant (al-Sham), saying: "He is a man who boasts and handles affairs through dominance and partisanship." Consequently, Abu Bakr removed him.] ¶

As for arrogance (khuyala') in a state of war, what is the ruling regarding it? ¶

- Imam al-Qurtubi says: "His saying, the Almighty: 'Do not walk upon the earth arrogantly' (Surah al-Isra: 37). This is a prohibition against arrogance and a command for humility... Sometimes arrogance, and what carries its meaning, is praiseworthy; this applies when directed towards the enemies of Allah and the oppressors." ¶

It is stated in Tafsir al-Alusi: "'Do not walk upon the earth arrogantly,' i.e., with pride and haughtiness. Qatada stated this. Furthermore, arrogance in walking is a major sin (kabira), as indicated by authentic hadiths. This, however, applies to situations outside of the battlefield! As for between the ranks (on the battlefield), it is permissible due to a report authenticated in this regard." ¶

Moreover, Al-Alusi's statement regarding the discussion of pride has previously been mentioned, the text of which is: "Allah has shown grace by permitting the arrogance of the mujahideen between the ranks and permitting pride regarding wealth or the like for a good purpose." ¶

Likewise, Ibn Hajar's statement has been mentioned in the same context: "In this is the permissibility of identifying oneself by one's forefathers, even if they died in Jahiliyyah. The prohibition regarding this is interpreted as applying to what is outside of war. Similar is the concession for arrogance during war, but not otherwise." ¶

Furthermore, in Muntaqa al-Akhbar and its commentary Nayl al-Awtar, under the heading (The Desirability of Arrogance in War), the following hadith is recorded: "On the authority of Jabir bin 'Atik that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: 'Indeed, there is a type of jealousy that Allah loves and a type that He hates. And there is a type of arrogance that Allah loves and a type that He hates. As for the jealousy that Allah loves, it is the jealousy in..." ¶

regarding suspicious matters. As for the jealousy (ghirah) which Allah dislikes, it is jealousy regarding matters that are not suspicious. As for the pride (khu'ala) which Allah loves, it is a man displaying pride in himself during battle, and displaying it when giving charity. As for the pride which Allah dislikes, it is a man displaying pride out of boasting and oppression. ¶

Al-Shawkani says: 'A man displaying pride in himself during battle is among the types of pride that Allah loves, because it entails striking awe into the enemies of Allah and invigorating His allies. From this is the saying of the Prophet ﷺ to Abu Dujana when he saw him displaying pride during battle: "Indeed, this is a gait that Allah and His Messenger dislike, except in this situation." Likewise is the display of pride when giving charity, for it may be a cause for increasing it and desiring it.' ¶

This matter—to which (Al-Shawkani) alluded regarding the pride of Abu Dujana during battle—is narrated in the Sirah of Ibn Hisham as follows: 'The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Who will take this sword with its due right?" Several men stood up for it, but he withheld it from them until Abu Dujana Simak bin Kharasha, an ally of Banu Sa'ida, stood up and said: "And what is its right, O Messenger of Allah?" He replied: "That you strike the enemy with it until it bends." He said: "I will take it, O Messenger of Allah, with its right." So he gave it to him. Abu Dujana was a brave man who would display pride during war when it commenced. And whenever he would mark himself with his red headband—and he would tie it on—the people knew that he would fight. So when he took the sword from the hand of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, he brought out that headband of his, tied it around his head, and began to strut between the two lines.' ¶

Ishaq: Ja'far bin Abdullah bin Aslam, the freed slave of Umar bin Al-Khattab, narrated to me from an Ansari man from the tribe of Banu Salama, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ, upon seeing Abu Dujana strutting, said: 'Indeed, this is a gait that Allah dislikes, except in a situation like this (the battlefield).' ¶

Included in this category is military arrogance as a form of psychological warfare against the enemy. This encompasses the practices of the Prophet ﷺ, his companions, and those who followed them regarding the care of their weapons and war equipment. They would adorn them with silver embellishments or hang such ornaments upon them, as if they were brides unveiling themselves before their peers, decorating themselves for their weddings. Yet, their 'weddings' are nothing but the arenas of combat and fields of war, where they embrace their rivals and dance above the heads and necks! ¶

- 'On the authority of Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The na'l (lower tip/ferrule) of the sword of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was made of silver, the qabi'a (pommel) of his sword was of silver, and the space between them consisted of silver rings.' ¶

- In Sahih al-Bukhari: 'On the authority of Hisham bin Urwah, from his father (Urwah bin al-Zubayr), who said: The sword of Al-Zubayr was adorned with silver. Hisham said: And the sword of Urwah was adorned with silver.' ¶

(Summary of footnotes): There is a discussion among scholars regarding the ornamentation of swords. While some Hadith indicate that the early warriors used simple materials like raw leather, lead, and iron, others confirm that some companions used silver embellishments on their swords. This is reconciled by the view that such adornment was permissible if intended to strike awe into the hearts of the enemy, while simplicity remains the preferred state for the righteous. ¶

In summary, that which is forbidden under normal circumstances—such as pride and arrogance—becomes permissible, or even recommended, during war and related situations. Dr. Muhammad Sa'id Ramadan al-Buti, in his commentary on Abu Dujanah’s strutting between the ranks in 'Fiqh al-Sirah' (which serves as a summary of the detailed discussion above), stated: 'This indicates that all manifestations of forbidden pride lose their prohibition during states of war and on the fields of battle. This includes walking with a proud gait and adorning weapons of war with silver. Thus, all such things are not forbidden' (1). With this, we conclude this topic and proceed—with the help and guidance of Allah—to the next. (Note): This was not a general phenomenon; it is possible that Abu Umamah was unaware of it, or if he was aware, its scarcity rendered it as if it did not exist. Therefore, his statement is correct that those who achieved the conquests did not have silver adornments on their swords. The negation here applies to what is mostly apparent, as such adornment was not the prevailing practice among them. His intention was to divert the Mujahideen’s attention from these peripheral matters... for Allah (mighty and majestic is He) prepared the conquests for His companions through their faith and their support of His religion, not through the decoration of their war equipment! (1) Fiqh al-Sirah: Dr. Muhammad Sa'id Ramadan al-Buti: p. 216. Regarding the adornment of war equipment with silver, see: 'Al-Fiqh al-Islami wa Adillatuhu' by Dr. Wahba al-Zuhayli: 3/545–546. Some jurists even hold the view that it is permissible for men to wear silk in war with the intention of intimidating the enemy, and that this falls under the same category we are currently discussing. See: 'Zad al-Ma'ad' by Ibn al-Qayyim: Vol. 3/488, and 'Fath al-Bari': Vol. 6/101. ¶

Fifth Topic: The Ruling on Muslim Spies or Non-Muslim Subjects (Dhimmi) Acting Against the Islamic State. In this research, we will discuss specific issues related to espionage on behalf of the enemy, excluding other facets of this subject, as they will be addressed in a future chapter of this book, with the help of Allah Almighty. This is in accordance with the general division of this subject into several issues, some of which pertain to this research, while others find their more appropriate place in different sections of this chapter. Although all these issues relate to espionage and its rulings, the different aspects they address within this topic necessitated their distribution across various sections. Here, in this chapter which we have dedicated to the treatment of members of the Islamic army during war, the issue of espionage arises; for one of these individuals might become involved in an act of espionage on behalf of the enemy against the Islamic army, the Muslims, or their subjects in general. Whether this spy belongs to Islam or is among the Ahl al-Dhimmah (non-Muslim subjects), what is the Shariah ruling regarding them? This is the subject we intend to address. Furthermore, since passing judgment on a matter is a branch of understanding it, we must first know: what... ¶

What is espionage (tajassus)? What acts are considered espionage? And what are not? Consequently, a ruling must be established for those who perform such acts that are classified under espionage. Accordingly, this research revolves around the following issues: First Issue: What is the linguistic meaning of espionage? And what acts are considered espionage in the context of our current research? Second Issue: The ruling on a Muslim spy. Third Issue: The ruling on a spy from the Ahl al-Dhimmah (non-Muslim citizens). 1 - First Issue: What is the linguistic meaning of espionage? And what acts are considered espionage in the context of our current research? A - Espionage in the Arabic language: - In Mukhtar al-Sihah: 'Jassahu bi-yadihi: meaning he touched it... and Jassa al-akhbar, wa tajassasaha: meaning he investigated them, and from this comes the word al-jasus (spy)'(1). - In al-Misbah al-Munir: 'Jassa al-akhbar wa tajassasaha: meaning he followed them up. From this comes the word al-jasus; because he follows up on news and investigates the inner details of matters, then it was metaphorically applied to the act of looking with the eye'(2). - In al-Qamus al-Muhit: 'Al-Jass: .. investigating news, like tajassus, and from this comes the jasus... and jassahu bi-aynihi: he looked at him intently to verify/scrutinize him'(3). - In al-Nihayah by Ibn al-Athir: '... Al-Tajassus: searching into the hidden depths of matters'(4). - In Asas al-Balaghah by al-Zamakhshari: 'The doctor felt his hand... and among the metaphors: they 'felt' (jassuhu) him with their eyes... and they spied (tajassasu) on the news, and he is one of the enemy's spies'(5). ¶

As far as the linguistic meaning of espionage (tajassus) is concerned, all these meanings—insofar as they are relevant to us—revolve around the same core concepts: tracking information and news, examining them for verification, and searching for secrets or the underlying aspects of matters. ¶

B - Regarding the actions considered as espionage, in the context of the research we are conducting, these actions are: ¶

Spying on the vulnerabilities ('awrat) of the Muslims, conveying information considered secret news in war, and attempting to obtain information related to the military situation of the Islamic army or the Islamic state. ¶

- As for what is intended here by the 'vulnerabilities of the Muslims' ('awrat al-Muslimin), it is what is stated in 'Al-Misbah al-Munir': «'Awrah' in the context of frontiers and war: a gap or vulnerability that is feared, and its plural is 'awrat» (1). Regarding some of the acts performed by a spy in this regard for the benefit of the enemies, the jurists state: «For instance, writing a letter to them or sending a messenger stating that a certain location of the Muslims has no guard, for example, so that they may approach from that side» (2). ¶

- Regarding the transfer of information considered secret news in war: an example is what Imam al-Shafi'i mentioned concerning the acts of a spy, saying: «Writing to the polytheists (mushrikin) who are at war (ahl al-harb) that the Muslims intend to launch an expedition against them» (3). This applies when the Islamic state desires to keep its military preparations for such a purpose confidential and secret, but someone discovers this matter and attempts to inform the enemy about it. ¶

- As for attempting to obtain information related to the military status of the Islamic army or the Islamic state, it is similar to the story of the 'spy' ('ayn) who ate with the Muslims while they were preparing for the war of 'Hawazin' at 'Hunayn' in order to observe the Muslim army. ¶

In Sahih al-Bukhari, it is recorded: «A spy from the polytheists came to the Prophet (ﷺ)... and sat with his companions...» ¶

In Sahih Muslim, regarding the same story: '...Then he proceeded and ate lunch with the people, and he began to look, while among us were weak and thin individuals, on the mounts, and some of us were on foot, when suddenly he set off at a fast pace.' ¶

In Musnad Ahmad, regarding the same story: 'He came to his camel, sat upon it, and rode it off quickly, while acting as a scout (tali'ah) for the disbelievers.' ¶

Based on this, 'espionage' (tajassus) in this discussion does not merely mean obtaining any information concerning the conditions of the Muslims and transmitting it to non-Islamic states. Rather, it refers to obtaining that information from which the enemy could benefit to inflict harm upon the Muslims, specifically that which relates to their vulnerabilities ('awrat)—that is, the weak points in the Islamic front—what is intended to be concealed from the enemy, what relates to the military situation of the Islamic state, and the like. ¶

Therefore, obtaining information related to, for example, sports matches, cultural seminars, and similar activities that are manifest to the eye and which the state does not attempt to hide from the enemy—even if they occur during times of war—I say: such information and reports—tracking them, collecting them, and transmitting them to other states by ordinary individuals, radio correspondents, journalists, or news agencies, regardless of whether the means of transmission is audio, visual, or written reports—are not considered acts of espionage. Furthermore, these individuals are not considered spies if they collect such news, information, and events, and send them to the entities for which they work. This is in contrast to the former reports that were classified as acts of espionage, as those are the ones to which the label of espionage applies. ¶

The term 'tajassus' (espionage), in its linguistic sense, means to search for something, to investigate it, and to scrutinize it with the intent of seizing it. Due to the high-stakes nature of such information, the state endeavors to conceal it, surrounding it with veils of secrecy and confidentiality. Anyone attempting to uncover such information is considered a suspicious person working for the interests of the enemy. These critical news and information were the focus of the Shariah texts that addressed the subject of espionage during wartime, as previously indicated. They were also the focus of the recommendations of the Rightly-Guided Caliphate to those entrusted with military command, as they strictly warned them not to allow the enemy access to any of the information we have referred to. An example is the testament of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq to Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan when he sent him to lead an army for the conquest of al-Sham: '...And if the messengers of your enemy come to you, treat them with honor, but shorten their stay so that they leave your camp while still ignorant of it. Do not show them [your forces], so they do not see your vulnerabilities (i.e., weaknesses in your military preparations) or learn your secrets. Settle them among the bulk of your army, forbid those around you from speaking with them, be the only one to converse with them, and do not make your secret like your public, lest your affairs become confused...' ¶

Modern Islamic thought has also addressed the meaning of espionage and spies in this context. Sheikh Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani stated: 'Espionage is the investigation of news... the spy is derived from this, whether they investigate overt or covert news. However, if one sees things naturally without investigation, or collects news for publication, all of that does not constitute espionage as long as one has not investigated [secrets]. Therefore, one who follows and collects news, like newspaper correspondents and news agencies, is not called a spy unless their work is espionage and they have adopted reporting as a cover, as is the case with many correspondents, especially the combatant (harbi) disbelievers among them.' ¶

Dr. Abdul Karim Zaydan states: 'By espionage here, we mean the attempt to uncover the vulnerabilities of the Muslims, their affairs, and the conditions of the Islamic state, and to inform the enemy thereof. There is no doubt that this act is a major crime that threatens the security of the state, especially in times of war'(1). ¶

Furthermore, the definition of espionage in modern terminology is stated as: 'Working secretly and under a false pretext so that a person may acquire, or attempt to acquire, vital information for the purpose of communicating it to the enemies'(2); or 'The secret investigation of the efforts of foreign states to verify their strength and movements, and then reporting such information to the relevant authorities'(3); or 'Colluding with any party against any other party'(4). ¶

This is some of what has been said regarding espionage. The purpose of this is to shed more light on aspects of this subject, rather than to debate what we have mentioned or to arrive at a comprehensive and restrictive definition of espionage. In any case, as far as our research is concerned, the subject of espionage is as we have defined it before: it is the attempt to obtain information related to war, or preparation for it, which the state needs to conceal from other states, regardless of whether that attempt succeeds or fails, and regardless of whether that information was communicated to the enemy or not. ¶

With this, we conclude the first issue in this research and proceed to the second issue. ¶

Second Issue: The ruling on the Muslim spy who works for the enemy against the Muslims. ¶

We will address this issue through the following points: 1. First Point: The Shariah texts related to this issue. 2. Second Point: The Fiqhi (juridical) opinions regarding the judgment on the Muslim spy. 3. Third Point: The opinion we prefer regarding this issue. ¶

(1) Ahkam al-Dhimmiyin wa al-Musta'minin fi Dar al-Islam - Dr. Abdul Karim Zaydan: p. 240. (2) Al-Qamus al-Siyasi: Ahmed Attia Allah, p. 367. (3) Al-Harb al-Khafiyya, Falsafat al-Jassusiya wa Muqawamatuha: Salah Nasr: p. 12. (4) Sirr al-Jassusiya: Ibrahim al-Arabi: p. 34. ¶

1 - The First Point: The Shariah texts regarding the ruling on a Muslim spy. Among the texts most relevant to this issue are three hadiths: ¶

A - The First Hadith: It is what is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, Muslim, and others regarding the story of the Companion Hatib ibn Abi Balta’a, concerning the letter he sent to the Quraysh, informing them of the Muslims' preparation for the conquest of Mecca after the Quraysh had violated the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. The hadith, as recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari under the chapter 'The Spy,' is as follows: 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent me, al-Zubayr, and al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad (1), and said: "Go until you reach Rawdat Khakh (2), for there is a woman there (3) carrying a letter; take it from her." We set off, our horses galloping with us until we reached the meadow, and there we found the woman. We said: "Produce the letter." She said: "I have no letter." We said: "You must produce the letter, or we will strip you." She then took it out from her hair braid (4). We brought it to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and it contained: "From Hatib ibn Abi Balta’a to some people of Mecca, informing them of some of the affairs of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him)." The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: "What is this, Hatib?" (5) Hatib replied: "O Messenger of Allah, do not be hasty with me. I was a man attached to the Quraysh, not one of their own kin (6). Those among the Muhajirun who are with you have relatives in Mecca through whom they protect their families and wealth. Since I lacked that lineage..." ¶

among them, intending that I might have a favor with them by which they would protect my relatives. I have not done this out of disbelief, nor apostasy, nor out of satisfaction with disbelief after Islam. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: He has told you the truth. Umar said: O Messenger of Allah, let me strike the neck of this hypocrite (1)! He ﷺ said: He has witnessed Badr. And what do you know, perhaps Allah has looked upon the people of Badr and said: Do what you wish, for I have forgiven you (3)(4). ¶

B - The Second Hadith: It is reported in Sunan Abi Dawud - with a Sahih (authentic) chain of narration (5) - under the chapter 'The Dhimmi Spy': 'On the authority of Furat bin Hayyan, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ ordered his execution, as he was a spy for Abu Sufyan and an ally of a man from the Ansar. When he passed by a gathering of the Ansar, he said: I am a Muslim. An Ansar man said: O Messenger of Allah, he says: I am a Muslim. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: Verily, among you are men whom we entrust to their faith, and among them is Furat bin Hayyan' (6). ¶

C - The Third Hadith: It is reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim, on the authority of Abdullah bin Mas'ud, who said: 'The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: The blood of a Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah is not lawful except for one of three reasons: a life for a life, a married person who commits adultery, and one who abandons his religion and separates from the community' (7). ¶

And in a narration by An-Nasa'i from Uthman ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him): «I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: The blood of a Muslim man is not lawful except for one of three reasons: a man who commits kufr (disbelief) after his Islam, or commits adultery after ihsan (marriage), or kills a person without a life being taken in retaliation...» (1). These are the most prominent hadiths presented by the jurists while discussing the ruling on a Muslim who spies on Muslims on behalf of the enemy. Now we turn to the second point to see how the jurists viewed the aforementioned hadiths, which resulted in a multiplicity of their opinions on this issue. 2 - The Second Point: The Fiqhi (jurisprudential) opinions regarding the ruling on a Muslim who spies for the benefit of the enemy against the Muslims. First Opinion: It is forbidden to kill the spy if he is a Muslim, and it is permissible to inflict a discretionary punishment (ta'zir) according to what is deemed necessary. This is the opinion of the Hanafis, the Shafi'is, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. - Abu Yusuf, of the Hanafi school, says while addressing Harun al-Rashid: «You asked, O Commander of the Faithful, about the spies? ... If they are from the people of Islam and are well-known, inflict upon them painful punishment and keep them imprisoned for a long time until they repent» (2). - It is stated in 'Sharh al-Siyar al-Kabir', in the context of arguing against the killing of a Muslim spy: «It is argued based on the hadith of Hatib ibn Abi Balta'ah... If this act were kufr necessitating death, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) would not have spared him, whether he was a veteran of Badr or not. Likewise, if he were liable for the death penalty as a hadd (prescribed punishment), the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) would not have left it unexecuted...» (3). - Imam al-Shafi'i says in 'Al-Umm': «The blood of one for whom the sanctity of Islam is established is not lawful except if he kills, or commits adultery after marriage, or commits clear kufr after faith and persists in that kufr. Disclosing the vulnerabilities (awrah) of a Muslim, or supporting a disbeliever by warning him that the Muslims intend to catch him off-guard so that he may protect himself, does not warrant the death penalty». ¶

Proceeding in causing harm to the Muslims—with open kufr (disbelief)—(1). Then Imam al-Shafi'i mentions what implies that any espionage against the Muslims is less severe than the espionage of (Hatib) against the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Regarding this, he says: 'And there is no one who is more severe in such a matter, appearing to be greater than this!' (2). Despite this, 'the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) ruled regarding him, that he should not be killed' (3); and based on this, whoever's situation is lesser than that of (Hatib)—is not to be killed, 'and it is more appropriate that what was accepted from him (Hatib) should be accepted from him [the spy]!' (4). Then al-Shafi'i mentions that the punishment for a spy is ta'zir (discretionary punishment) according to what the Imam deems appropriate, and he prefers pardoning him if such an act is committed by a person of high standing who is not suspected in his Islam and sincerity, and was only driven to espionage out of ignorance. Al-Shafi'i says: 'Punishments (ta'zirat) are not the same as hudud (fixed punishments). As for hudud, they cannot be suspended under any circumstances, but as for ta'zirat, it is for the Imam to waive them based on ijtihad... If this was done by a man of standing out of ignorance, just as it was done by (Hatib) out of ignorance, and he was not suspected, I would prefer that he be pardoned. And if he is not of standing—it is for the Imam, and Allah knows best, to subject him to ta'zir' (5). ¶

Imam al-Nawawi says: 'The school of al-Shafi'i and a group of scholars is that the Muslim spy is to be subjected to ta'zir, and it is not permissible to kill him' (6). ¶

Imam Ibn Taymiyyah clarifies the opinion of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal on the issue of the Muslim spy, stating: 'Regarding the likes of a Muslim spy, when he spies for the enemy against the Muslims—then Ahmad refrains (tawaqquf) from ordering his execution' (7). ¶

Ibn al-Qayyim also says regarding this: 'Al-Shafi'i and Abu Hanifah said: He is not to be killed, and this is the apparent position of Ahmad's school' (8). ¶

Following this, this is the summary of the first opinion which holds that a Muslim who spies on fellow Muslims for the enemy should not be killed, along with a summary of the evidence they used to support this view. ¶

The second opinion: The Muslim spy must be killed. This view is held by the Malikis and some Hanbalis; however, within the Maliki school, there are several trends regarding this opinion: ¶

- The First Trend: The obligatory killing of a Muslim spy, absolutely. Ibn al-Qayyim states: "Sahnun said: If a Muslim writes to the people of war (the enemy), he is to be killed and not asked to repent, and his wealth goes to his heirs. . . Ibn al-Qasim said: He is to be killed, and no repentance is recognized for him; he is like a zindiq (heretic)."(1) ¶

- The Second Trend: The obligation to kill a Muslim spy if they are caught in the act of spying before announcing their repentance, or if spying is a habit for them. It is stated in Manh al-Jalil: "The spying Muslim is like a zindiq. That is, one who manifests Islam while concealing kufr (disbelief), in the determination of his killing, even if he manifests repentance after being caught. His repentance is accepted if he manifests it before being caught."(2) ¶

In Ibn al-Arabi’s Ahkam al-Qur’an: "And Abd al-Malik(3) said: If that was his habit, he is to be killed, because he is a spy."(4) ¶

In Tafsir al-Qurtubi: "Perhaps Ibn al-Majishun based the repetition (as a condition) here because Hatib was caught at the beginning of his action, and Allah knows best."(5) ¶

(1) Zad al-Ma'ad by Ibn al-Qayyim: 5/64-65. (2) Manh al-Jalil, Sharh on Mukhtasar Sidi Khalil: 3/163. See also al-Sharh al-Kabir by al-Dardir: 2/182. (3) He is: Ibn al-Majishun. (4) Ahkam al-Qur’an by Ibn al-Arabi: 4/1771. See also al-Jami' li-Ahkam al-Qur’an by al-Qurtubi: 18/53. (5) Al-Jami' li-Ahkam al-Qur’an by al-Qurtubi: 18/53. I say: Imam al-Dhahabi also adopted the view of the obligation of killing a Muslim spy, specifically if grave harm resulted from his spying. He says in his book (al-Kaba’ir): "The seventy-sixth major sin: Whoever spies on the Muslims and points out their vulnerabilities. Regarding this chapter is the hadith of Hatib bin Abi Balta'a, and that Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) wanted to kill him for what he did, but the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbade him because he had participated in Badr. However, if his spying results in weakness for Islam and its people, the killing of Muslims, captivity, seizure, looting, or anything of that nature, then such a person is of those who strive to cause corruption in the land, destroying crops and progeny, and his killing becomes mandatory." p. 169. ¶

The third viewpoint: The execution of a Muslim spy is subject to the ijtihad (legal discretion) of the authority (ruler). They have the prerogative to sentence him to death or impose another form of punishment. Ibn al-Arabi, from the Maliki school, states: 'Whoever frequently spies on the vulnerabilities of the Muslims, alerts the enemy against them, and informs their enemy of their affairs... if we say that he does not become a disbeliever through this act... then should he be executed as a hadd punishment or not? Malik, Ibn al-Qasim, and Ashhab said: The Imam shall exercise ijtihad in his case.' Some Hanbali scholars also adopt this position. Ibn al-Qayyim states in 'Al-Turuq al-Hukmiyya': 'Is it permissible for ta'zir (discretionary punishment) to reach the point of execution? There are two opinions: one is that it is permissible, such as the execution of a Muslim spy if the public interest (maslahah) necessitates it. This is the view of Malik and some companions of Ahmad, and it was chosen by Ibn Aqil.' Ibn al-Qayyim prefers this opinion, stating in 'Zad al-Ma'ad': 'The correct position is that his execution is subject to the Imam's discretion; if he sees a benefit for the Muslims in his execution, he may execute him, and if keeping him alive is more beneficial, he may spare him, and Allah knows best.' The summary of what has been mentioned on this issue is that the majority of scholars hold the view that a Muslim spy should not be executed. The evidence for this is that espionage is not among the three acts that permit the shedding of a Muslim's blood, which are: apostasy from Islam, unlawful killing of a human life, and adultery by a previously married person (muhsan). Furthermore, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) refrained from executing Hatib bin Abi Balta'ah when he fell into the error of espionage. The opposing view to the majority is that the Muslim spy is to be executed, either as an obligation or as a permissibility, according to the aforementioned details, and they also used the story of Hatib bin Abi Balta'ah as evidence. Ibn Hajar, in clarifying the reasoning of those who hold this opinion based on this story, writes: 'The angle of inference is that he (ﷺ) acknowledged...' ¶