Volume 4, Book 52, Number 67 :
Narrated by ‘Ikrima
That Ibn ‘Abbas (radiallaahu `anhu) told him and ‘Ali bin ‘Abdullah to go to Abu Said (radiallaahu `anhu) and listen to some of his narrations; So they both went (and saw) Abu Said (radiallaahu `anhu) and his brother irrigating a garden belonging to them. When he saw them, he came up to them and sat down with his legs drawn up and wrapped in his garment and said, “(During the construction of the mosque of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam)) we carried the adobe of the mosque, one brick at a time while ‘Ammar (radiallaahu `anhu) used to carry two at a time. The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) passed by ‘Ammar (radiallaahu `anhu) and removed the dust off his head and said, “May Allah be merciful to ‘Ammar. He will be killed by a rebellious aggressive group. ‘Ammar will invite them to (obey) Allah and they will invite him to the (Hell) fire.”
This post will focus on the story of the death of `Ammar (radiallaahu `anhu) instead of his life. Here’s a brief account of the Battle of Siffin (657 CE):
Muʿāwiyah, governor of Syria, refused to recognize ʿAlī as the new caliph before justice for the murder of his kinsman, the third caliph, ʿUthmān, was done; for his part, ʿAlī relied on the support of individuals who had been implicated in ʿUthmān’s murder and was therefore reluctant to prosecute them. ʿAlī gathered support in Kūfah, where he had established his centre, and invaded Syria. The two armies met along the Euphrates River at Ṣiffīn (near the Syrian-Iraqi border), where they engaged in an indecisive succession of skirmishes, truces, and battles, culminating in the legendary appearance of Muʿāwiyah’s troops with copies of the Qurʾān impaled on their lances—supposedly a sign to let God’s word decide the conflict. ʿAlī agreed to bring the matter to arbitration on the basis of the Qurʾān and delegated Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī as his representative, while Muʿāwiyah sent ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ. By agreeing to arbitration, ʿAlī conceded to deal with Muʿāwiyah on equal terms, thus permitting him to challenge ʿAlī’s claim as leader of the Muslim community. This concession aroused the anger of a large group of ʿAlī’s followers, who protested that “judgment belongs to God alone” (Qurʾān 6:57) and believed that arbitration would be a repudiation of the Qurʾānic dictum “If one party rebels against the other, fight against that which rebels” (49:9). A small number of these pietists withdrew (kharajū) to the village of Ḥarūrāʾ and so became known as Khārijites (Arabic: Khawārij).
Accounts of what precisely transpired at the arbitration vary. [Britannica]
It was in this battle that `Ammar (radiallaahu `anhu) was martyred. He was in the army of `Ali (radiallaahu `anhu) so it’s obvious which side killed him.
Coming to the hadith narrated above which says in the end: “May Allah be merciful to ‘Ammar. He will be killed by a rebellious aggressive group. ‘Ammar will invite them to (obey) Allah and they will invite him to the (Hell) fire.”
It’s important to know that there are other versions of this hadith available as well, having words less direct than these. For example:
- Abu Huraira narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “Rejoice Ammar, the transgressing party shall kill you.”
(Sunan Thirmidhi : Hadith Number 3800)
- Allah’s messenger (PBUH) said to Ammar: “A group of rebels would kill you.”
(Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, Tradition #6968)
- Umm Salama narrated that Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) said: “A band of rebels would kill Ammar.”
(Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, Tradition #6970)
It’s safe to say that according to the hadith mentioned above, `Ammar (radiallaahu `anhu) made the right choice siding with `Ali (radiallaahu `anhu) since he was the caliph at that time and his obedience was waajib on all Muslims. But the question arises, what about those who sided with Mu`awiyah (radiallaahu `anhu)? He himself was a companion of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) and many of the companions were on his side too. So what do we say about them? Were they calling `Ammar (radiallaahu `anhu) towards Hellfire?
The answer to that according to scholars is that they were doing the right thing in their opinion. It was a complex matter and everyone had their own views. They were mujtahids (those who do Ijtihad) so there’s no blame upon them because:
Amr ibn Al-As reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If a judge makes a ruling, striving to apply his reasoning (ijtihad) and he is correct, then he will have two rewards. If a judge makes a ruling, striving to apply his reasoning and he is mistaken, then he will have one reward.” [Sahih Bukhari 6919, Sahih Muslim 1716]
And Allah has elevated the status of Sahabah in the Quran by saying He’s pleased with them and promising them Paradise. Who then are we to talk bad about any one of them?
“And the foremost to embrace Islam of the Muhaajiroon and the Ansaar and also those who followed them exactly (in Faith). Allaah is well-pleased with them as they are well-pleased with Him. He has prepared for them Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise), to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success.” [al-Tawbah 9:100]
I’d like to end with these words of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him):
“Whoever among you wishes to follow (someone), let him follow one who has died, for the one who is still alive is not safe from fitnah. The companions of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) were the best of this ummah, the most righteous of heart and the deepest in knowledge and the most straightforward, people whom Allaah chose to accompany His Prophet and establish His religion. So acknowledge their virtue and follow in their footsteps, and adhere as much as you can to their morals and religion, for they were following right guidance.
Narrated by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Jaami’, no. 1810.
May Allah forgive us our sins, remove doubts and ill feelings from our hearts concerning his slaves, may He make us love those whom He loves, and hate those whom He hates. May He guide us to the truth always, and enter us into Jannat-ul-Firdaws.
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 64 :
Narrated by Anas bin Malik (radiallaahu `anhu)
Um Ar-Rubai’ bint Al-Bara’, the mother of Hartha bin Suraqa (radiallaahu `anhu), came to the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) and said, “O Allah’s Prophet! Will you tell me about Hartha?” Hartha has been killed (i.e. martyred) on the day of Badr with an arrow thrown by an unidentified person. She added, “If he is in Paradise, I will be patient; otherwise, I will weep bitterly for him.” He said, “O mother of Hartha! There are gardens in Paradise and your son got the Firdaus-al-A’laa (i.e. the best place in Paradise).”
This narration does not identify the person who threw the arrow, but there are other reports (not proven either authentic or weak to my knowledge) that say it was a Muslim whose arrow got Hartha (radiallaahu `anhu) by mistake killing him.
Even if we take the first scenario, there’s still a possibility that a Muslim could’ve shot that arrow. That is why his mother was upset and wanted confirmation from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam).
We could discuss the fate of the person who killed Hartha (radiallaahu `anhu) here, presuming he was a Muslim, but I believe it’s unnecessary. If the companions didn’t feel the need to do so, why should we?
And as for Hartha (radiallaahu `anhu), since his intention to set out for jihad was pure and sincere, any kind of death would have been considered martyrdom in his case. It was the same with Umm Haram (radiallaahu `anhaa), she died by merely falling off a camel, but since she was making the journey for jihad, it was considered martyrdom.
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 46 :
Narrated by Abu Huraira (radiallaahu `anhu)
I heard Allah’s Apostle (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) saying, “The example of a Mujahid in Allah’s Cause– and Allah knows better who really strives in His Cause—-is like a person who fasts and prays continuously. Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Cause into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty.”
Shahaadah in Arabic has several meanings: definitive news, being present, seeing something, openness, and dying for the sake of Allaah.
In Islamic terminology it refers to those Muslims who die fighting the kuffaar and because of the fighting. With regard to the Hereafter, it may refer to other things as well, as we shall see below.
See: al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (26/214, 272).
Martyrs are of different types.
Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
It should be noted that martyrs are of three types:
1 – The one who is killed in a war against the kuffaar by any means of fighting. He comes under the heading of martyrs who are rewarded in the Hereafter and he comes under the rulings on martyrs in this world, i.e. he should not be washed and the funeral prayer should not be offered for him.
2 – The one who is given the reward of the martyr but does not come under the rulings on martyrs in this world. This refers to those who die of stomach diseases, the plague, being crushed under a falling wall, those who are killed defending their wealth and others who are mentioned in the saheeh ahaadeeth as being described as martyrs. Such a person should be washed and the funeral prayer should be offered for him, but in the Hereafter he will have the reward of the martyrs, but it will not necessarily be the same as the reward for those in the first category.
3 – Those who steal from the war booty etc, who it says in the reports cannot be regarded as martyrs if they are killed in a war against the kuffaar. Such a person comes under the ruling of martyrs in this world, so he should not be washed and the funeral prayer should not be offered for him, but he will not have the full reward in the Hereafter. End quote.
Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Muslim (2/164).
Degrees of martyrs:
The status of the martyr is high indeed, coming after the Prophets and Siddeeqs in status.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah(may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Then they will be in the company of those on whom Allaah has bestowed His Grace, of the Prophets, the Siddeeqoon (those followers of the Prophets who were first and foremost to believe in them, like Abu Bakr As‑Siddeeq رضى الله عنه ), the martyrs, and the righteous.” [al-Nisa’ 4:69]
These are the four degrees of Allaah’s slaves: the best of them are the Prophets, then the Siddeeqs, then the martyrs, then the righteous. End quote.
Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (2/223).
Allaah has made Paradise of varying levels or degrees, of which the Mujaahideen (those who strive in jihad) will have one hundred degrees, as it was narrated in al-Saheeh from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), therefore the martyrs are not all of the same status, rather they vary in status.
Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, after listing the martyrs other than those who are killed in battle:
We have compiled from excellent sources more than twenty types…
Ibn al-Teen said: All of these ways of dying are painful. Allaah has favoured the ummah of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by making it a means of purifying them from sin, increasing their reward and causing them to attain thereby the status of the martyrs.
I (Ibn Hajar) say: It seems that those mentioned are not all of the same status. This is indicated by the report narrated by Ahmad and Ibn Hibbaan in his Saheeh from Jaabir, and by al-Daarimi, Ahmad and al-Tahhaawi from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Hubshi, and by Ibn Maajah from ‘Amr ibn ‘Anbasah: that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was asked: What type of jihad is best? He said: “The one whose horse is killed and whose blood is shed.” End quote.
Fath al-Baari (6/43, 44).
In the saheeh Sunnah there are reports from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) which indicate this difference in status among the martyrs.
It was narrated from Nu’aym ibn Hammaar that a man asked the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): Which of the martyrs is best? He said: “Those who, when they took up their position in the ranks, did not turn their faces away until they were killed. They will be in the dwellings on high in Paradise, and their Lord smiles upon them, and when your Lord smiles upon a slave in this world, he will not be brought to account.”
Narrated by Ahmad (21970); classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah (2558).
It was narrated that ‘Utbah ibn ‘Abdin al-Sulami said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The slain are of three types: (the first is) a believing man who fought with his life and his wealth for the sake of Allaah, and when he met the enemy he fought them until he was killed. That is the proud martyr who resides in the tent of Allaah beneath His Throne; the Prophets are no better than him except by virtue of their being Prophets. (The second is) a believing man who committed some sins, but he fought with his life and his wealth for the sake of Allaah, and when he met the enemy he fought until he was killed. His sins are erased, for the sword erases sins, and he will be admitted through whichever of the gates of Paradise he wishes, for it has eight gates, and Hell has seven gates, and some of them are better than others. (The third is) a hypocrite who strove with his life and his wealth, and when he met the enemy he fought for the sake of Allaah and was killed. He will be in Hell, for the sword does not erase hypocrisy.”
Narrated by Ahmad (17204). Its isnaad was classed as jayyid by al-Mundhiri in al-Targheeb wa’l-Tarheeb(2/208), and as hasan by al-Albaan in Saheeh al-Targheeb (1370).
It was narrated from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Hubshi al-Khath’ami that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was asked: What type of jihad is best? He said: “The one who strives against the mushrikeen with his wealth and his life.” It was said: What kind of death is noblest? He said: “The one whose blood is shed and his horse is killed.” Narrated by Abu Dawood (1449) and al-Nasaa’i (2526); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Targheeb (1318).
It was narrated from Jaabir (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The leader of the martyrs is Hamzah ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib and a man who stood up before a tyrant and enjoined good and forbade evil, and he killed him.” Narrated by al-Haakim and classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah (374).
Volume 3, Book 49, Number 865 :
Narrated by Sahl bin Abu Hathma (radiallaahu `anhu)
Abdullah bin Sahl and Muhaiyisa bin Mas’ud bin Zaid (radiallaahu `anhumaa) went to Khaibar when it had a peace treaty (with the Muslims).
Here’s the complete story (narrations found elsewhere in Bukhari):
Volume 4, Book 53, Number 398 :
Narrated by Sahl bin Abi Hathma (radiallaahu `anhu)
‘Abdullah bin Sahl and Muhaiyisa bin Mas’ud bin Zaid (radiallaahu `anhumaa) set out to Khaibar, the inhabitants of which had a peace treaty with the Muslims at that time. They parted and later on Muhaiyisa came upon ‘Abdullah bin Sahl (radiallaahu `anhu) and found him murdered agitating in his blood. He buried him and returned to Medina. ‘Abdur Rahman bin Sahl, Muhaiyisa and Huwaiuisa (radiallaahu `anhum), the sons of Mas’ud came to the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) and ‘Abdur Rahman (radiallaahu `anhu) intended to talk, but the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) said (to him), “Let the eldest of you speak.” as ‘Abdur-Rahman was the youngest:. ‘Abdur-Rahman kept silent and the other two spoke. The Prophet said, “If you swear as to who has committed the murder, you will have the right to take your right from the murderer.” They said, “How should we swear if we did not witness the murder or see the murderer?” The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) said, “Then the Jews can clear themselves from the charge by taking Alaska (an oath taken by men that it was not they who committed the murder).” The!y said, “How should we believe in the oaths of infidels?” So, the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) himself paid the blood money (of ‘Abdullah).
Volume 9, Book 83, Number 36:
Narrated by Sahl bin Abi Hathma (radiallaahu `anhu)
(a man from the Ansar) That a number of people from his tribe went to Khaibar and dispersed, and then they found one of them murdered. They said to the people with whom the corpse had been found, “You have killed our companion!” Those people said, “Neither have we killed him, nor do we know his killer.” The bereaved group went to the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! We went to Khaibar and found one of us murdered.” The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) said, “Let the older among you come forward and speak.” Then the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) said, to them, “Bring your proof against the killer.” They said “We have no proof.” The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) said, “Then they (the defendants) will take an oath.” They said, “We do not accept the oaths of the Jews.” Allah’s Apostle (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) did not like that the Blood-money of the killed one be lost without compensation, so he paid one-hundred camels out of the camels of Zakat (to the relatives of the deceased) as Diya (Blood-money).
Since there was no proof, Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) could not take an action against the Jews without getting an oath from them. But the bereaved ones were not going to accept the oath of Jews assuming they’d repeat the same story: “Neither have we killed him, nor do we know his killer”. So Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) arranged for the blood money to close the case.
Allaah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“O you who believe! Al-Qisaas (the Law of Equality in punishment) is prescribed for you in case of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. But if the killer is forgiven by the brother (or the relatives) of the killed against blood money, then adhering to it with fairness and payment of the blood money to the heir should be made in fairness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord. So after this whoever transgresses the limits (i.e. kills the killer after taking the blood money), he shall have a painful torment”
The great scholar ‘Abd al-Rahmaan al-Sa’di said in his Tafseer: Allaah reminds His believing slaves that He has enjoined qisaas upon them in the case of murder, i.e., there should be equal recompense in that, and that the killer should be killed in the way in which he killed his victim, so as to establish justice and fairness among people. End quote.
Qisaas by killing the killer can only be in cases of deliberate killing, according to scholarly consensus. Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni (8/214): The scholars are unanimously agreed that qisaas is not required except in the case of deliberate killing, and we do not know of any difference of opinion with regard to qisaas being required for deliberate killing if all conditions are met. This is indicated by the general meaning of the verses and reports. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And whoever is killed wrongfully (Mazlooman intentionally with hostility and oppression and not by mistake), We have given his heir the authority [to demand Qisaas, __Law of Equality in punishment __or to forgive, or to take Diyah (blood money)]. But let him not exceed limits in the matter of taking life (i.e. he should not kill except the killer)” [al-Isra’ 17:33]
“Al-Qisaas (the Law of Equality in punishment) is prescribed for you in case of murder”
“And there is (a saving of) life for you in Al-Qisaas”
What is meant – and Allaah knows best – is that the requirement of qisaas deters the one who wants to kill from doing do, out of compassion towards himself so that he will not killed, and so that the one whom he wanted to kill will remain alive. And it was said that the killer would generate enmity between himself and the tribe of the one whom he killed, so he wants to kill them for fear of them and they want to kill him and his tribe in revenge. If he is executed as a punishment according to sharee’ah, that will prevent the reason for fighting between the two tribes. And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye”
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If a person’s relative is killed, he has the choice of two options: either (the killer) may be killed or the fidyah (ransom, blood money) may be paid.” Agreed upon. Abu Shurayh al-Khuzaa’i said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever is killed or is wounded, has the choice of three things, and if he wants the fourth then restrain him. He may kill (the killer), or forgive him, or take the diyah (blood money). Narrated by Abu Dawood. According to another version: “Whoever has a relative killed after what I have said, his family has two options: to accept the diyah or kill (the killer).” And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There is qisaas for deliberate killing, unless the heir of the slain lets him off.” End quote.
There was no difference of opinion among the scholars that it is valid for the heirs of the victim to forego qisaas and accept the diyah. This is what is indicated by the ahaadeeth quoted above.
In that case, the killer may be set free and he should be obliged to pay the diyah.
Taken from IslamQA
Hadith no. 1566 (below) is a repeat. Read it here.
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas (radiallaahu `anhu):
The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) fixed Dhul-Hulaifa as the Miqat (the place for assuming Ihram) for the people of Medina, and Qaran-al-Manazil for the people of Najd, and Yalamlam for the people of Yemen. These Mawaqit are for those people and also for those who come through these Mawaqit (from places other than the above-mentioned) with the intention of (performing) Hajj and Umra. And those living inside these Mawaqit can assume Ihram from the place where they start; even the people of Mecca can assume Ihram from Mecca.
Narrated Anas bin Malik (radiallaahu `anhu):
Allah’s Apostle (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) entered Mecca in the year of its Conquest wearing an Arabian helmet on his head and when the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) took it off, a person came and said, “Ibn Khatal is holding the covering of the Ka’ba (taking refuge in the Ka’ba).” The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) said, “Kill him.”
Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) was most probably not in Ihraam when he entered Makkah during the conquest, as it says in the narration that he was wearing an Arabian helmet on his head. Scholars have differed in their opinions:
- It is permissible to enter Makkah without Ihraam – without the intention of performing Hajj/`Umrah
- This was special to the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) and no one else is allowed to enter Makkah without Ihraam. Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) had said:
“Beware! (Mecca is a sanctuary) Verily! Fighting in Mecca was not permitted for anyone before me nor will it be permitted for anyone after me. It (war) in it was made legal for me for few hours or so on that day.”
Ibn Khatal, as mentioned in stories (having unreliable sources), killed a Muslim slave and then apostatized. The only thing having a strong back to it is that he was a poet and used to recite verses abusing the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam). On the day of Makkah’s Conquest, Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) had ordered for a few men to be killed. Ibn Khatal was one of them.
There’s a lot of discussion on this matter. Some people are trying to prove how unfair the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) was in this decision of his, and others are trying to prove that this guy deserved it. I feel uninterested because I don’t need a reason to believe in the correct judgement of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam). If you feel the need to read up on it, avoid Google. Too many pseudo-Islamic-content-pushers out there. :P
Read books of reliable scholars, or indulge in discussions with the knowledgeable ones.
Side note, this proves how Makkah is NOT a sanctuary for criminals.