When does Jihad become fard 'ayn?
The fuqahaa' have generally agreed that Jihad becomes fard 'ayn in any one of the following cases:
1. If the disbelievers enter the land of the Muslims it becomes fard 'ayn on the inhabitants of that country and on those close by.
2. If the rows meet in battle and they begin to approach each other.
3. If the Imam calls a person or a people to march forward, then they must march.[1]
Likewise the fuqahaa' have also stated that if a part of a Muslim land is unable to expel the enemy then the obligation spreads to those surrounding them. This obligation will continue to spread until the obligation of repelling the enemy is fulfilled.
Based on the last point, many have stated that Jihad (with one's self) today is fard 'ayn upon every Muslim in the world since many Muslim lands are being occupied by disbelieving forces and the Muslims in those occupied countries have been unable to expel the enemy. This statement needs to be examined a little closer since there are some fine fiqhi masaa'il regarding this point:
Firstly, it has to be precisely determined as to what the actual 'illah (legal reasoning) is for the spreading of the obligation of Jihad. Based on that we can answer the second point:
Secondly, if it is fard 'ayn, then what aspects of the Jihad is fard 'ayn?
The following discussion will revolve around the two main points mentioned above followed by a conclusion.
"The ruling revolves around its legal reasoning in its presence and absence"
This means that if the legal reasoning is present then the ruling is likewise present. Likewise, if the legal reasoning is not present then the ruling is not present.
Thus, if the legal reasoning for the obligation of Jihad is present, then Jihad will become an obligation. Likewise, if the legal reasoning of Jihad is not present then Jihad will not become an obligation.
One therefore has to ask, what is the claimed legal reasoning for Jihad being fard 'ayn upon every individual (with one's body) in today's circumstances?
The legal reasoning of a ruling can be determined in different fashions. In this particular case the method of taqseem & sabr[2] will be used to determine the 'illah.
Possible 'ilal that are claimed:
If a country is attacked and the inhabitants are unable to expel the occupiers the obligation spreads to those around them. Thus, the perceived 'illah here would be the lack of ability (istitaa'ah) to expel the enemy. This means that that if a country became under attack and the inhabitants were unable to expel the enemy it becomes an obligation (with one's body) to go to that land in order to repel the enemy.
However, upon closer inspection this 'illah is not comprehensive enough. An example will be given to illustrate this: Muslim country X is attacked and is unable to expel the enemy. They have enough men to fight the enemy but lack in arms and wealth. Thus, essentially what they require is not men, rather arms and wealth. Thus it becomes and obligation upon the rest of the Muslims to fund them with arms and wealth since as the usooli principle states:
"A wajib that is not completed except by that thing becomes waajib"
Thus if sending more reinforcements does not help in expelling the enemy then it is not an obligation to go since it will not fulfil the obligation of expelling the enemy. Rather that which is required from the Muslim army becomes an obligation to fulfil. From this example it becomes clear that to say that the lack of ability alone to expel the enemy obligates one to go with one's self to that particular land is not accurate. Rather it actually comprises of two elements: the first being the lack of ability to expel the enemy and in addition to that the confirmed need of assistance with one's self.
According to this author's understanding this particular point has not been stressed enough in this modern age due to a number of reasons:
1. When the classical scholars wrote about this topic the nature of warfare was that soldier numbers played a huge role in defeating the enemy since that was the nature of warfare at that time.
2. Due to the destruction of the Khilafah, the Muslims have had no choice except to resort to guerrilla warfare which has had many implications. From amongst the greatest implications, is the fact that the number of combatants becomes much more restricted since this is what guerrilla warfare entails.
Thus, if it is the case that a Muslim country (in our times) is under attack and is unable to expel the enemy, the leadership of the Jihad should make it clear what is required from the Muslims in the surrounding areas and across the globe. The author is not implying that the requirements have to be explicitly mentioned rather what is important is that those who are needed are aware of the fact that they are in need.
Based on this, one cannot claim that Jihad is fard 'ayn (by one's self) unless it is definitely confirmed that that individual is needed to go, since one cannot change a ruling from its asl to a far'[3] unless he provides clear evidence. And since communications are established between the leaderships of Jihad and the Ummah, there really should be no ambiguity as to whom or what is required. Also, if it is confirmed that the land which is under attack is in need of external support then to say Jihad becomes fard 'ayn (with one's self) cannot be applied until it is confirmed that those surrounding that country are not responding to their needs or are unable, since the concept of the enlarging circle has to be applied.
This understanding (of the 'illah) can be gathered from the statement of Ibn 'Aabidin al Hanafi:
"Jihad becomes fard 'ayn if the enemy attacks one of the borders of the Muslims and it becomes fard 'ayn upon those close by. For those who are far away, it is fard kifaayah if their assistance is not required. If they are needed, perhaps because those near the attack cannot resist the enemy, or are lazy and do not fight Jihad, then it becomes fard 'ayn…"[4]
The issue of whether Jihad (with one's self) is compulsory or note is an important issue to us all. From one perspective it is a serious matter since if one leaves his parents without seeking their permission (and Jihad at that time is fard kifaayah) then the validity of his Jihad will fall under scrutiny. Regarding Allah's statement, "…and upon it (i.e. al a'raaf) will be men…" (6:46) many Mufassiroon where of the opinion that the ashaab al 'a'raaf will be the people who were killed in Jihad but left without their parents permission. Thus their disobedience will prevent them from entering paradise whilst their martyrdom will prevent them from entering the Hell fire, [5] and according to Muhammed ibn Muhammed al Mukhtaar ash-Shinqeeti this view is the stronger opinion. One may also say the opposite and claim that imagine if Jihad was fard al 'ayn and one did not march forward, then he will be in great sin. However, there is a difference between the two since one is not to blame if he stuck to the original ruling of a ruling due to a lack of evidence to making it compulsory upon him. However, if one abandoned the original ruling of a hukm based upon conjecture,
then he is to blame, and as the famous qaa'idah fiqhiyyah states:
"Certainty is not removed by doubt"
Thus the certainty of the original ruling of Jihad (which is fard kifaayah) cannot be removed by conjecture.
The issue of training.
It is a view of some that training for Jihad in its original ruling is fard 'ayn based upon the verse:
"And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and steeds of war…" (8:60)
However, this author has not come across any statement from a scholar from the past or a mufassir claiming that training is fard 'ayn as its original ruling, rather upon research this author has come across the contrary.
Imam al Qurtubi says regarding the above mentioned verse: "learning horse riding, and the use of weapons is fard kifaayah, but it could become fard 'ayn."[6]Ibn Nuhas also mentioned the same view in Mashaari' al Ashwaaq 1/494 and likewise Imam al Qaasimi in his Tafseer 5/326 Dar al Hadeeth, Cairo.
And Allah knows best.
[1] Sheikh ibn 'Uthaimeen adds a fourth instance where it becomes fard 'ayn: "The fourth case (where it becomes obligatory) if when a person is needed it becomes obligatory upon him. For example: If we had tanks and planes and nobody knows how to drive/fly them except for this particular individual then it becomes fard 'ayn upon him to fight since the people are in need of him. However, we could possibly say that this fourth issue is taken from our statement that it is fard kifaayah, since if nobody took the responsibility to fulfill this requirement and this particular individual was required then the fard al kifaayah becomes fard 'ayn upon him…" (ash-Sharh al Mumti' 8/10, Dar ibn al Jawzi )
[2] This is whereby one gathers all the possible reasoning and then deducts away the non-feasible reasoning until one is left with the only possible reason.
[3] In this case the asl is that Jihad is fard kifaayah and that it can change to fard 'ayn.
[4] Ibn 'Aabideen, Haashiyah Ibn Aabideen 3/238
[5] See Zaad al Maseer ibn al Jawzi, 2/123, dar al Kitaab al 'Arabi, and al Qurtubi 7/212.
[6] Tafseer alQurtubi 8/36. Dar 'aalam al Kutub.
Note: All that has mentioned is the personal view of the author of the article. If you believe that there are mistakes/mis-understandings in this piece of writing please inform the author.
With regards to da'wah I'll be posting my write up when it finish.
I remain Eisa Batallones
