Fi Mustalah al-Irhab wa Hukmihi Qiraa Naqdiyya fi al-Mafhum wa al-Hukm min Manzur Shari
- Author died
- -
- Editions
- The book is published on the website of the Saudi Ministry of Awqaf without metadata
Fi Mustalah al-Irhab wa Hukmihi: Qiraa Naqdiyya fi al-Mafhum wa al-Hukm min Manzur Shari ("On the Term Terrorism and Its Legal Ruling: A Critical Reading of the Concept and Ruling from a Sharia Perspective") is a contemporary jurisprudential study by Qutb Mustafa Sano that examines the definition, classifications, and legal rulings surrounding terrorism in Islamic law.
Background and Purpose
The study was written in the wake of the September 11 attacks in the United States and the subsequent surge in political violence and extremist discourse globally. Sano observed a stark divide in contemporary legal opinions (fatawa): one current hastily legitimized violence and sabotage under the mantle of armed struggle, misleading youth into acts of destruction; another current issued blanket condemnations without providing rigorous conceptual grounding or distinguishing terrorism from legitimate warfare and resistance.
Sano intended the treatise to supply a systematic, objective critique anchored in legal theory (usul al-fiqh) and the higher objectives of Islamic law (maqasid al-sharia). He emphasized the foundational legal maxim that "ruling on a matter is a branch of properly conceptualizing it" ( الحكم على الشيء فرع عن تصوره ) and stressed the necessity of distinguishing between establishing an abstract legal ruling (thubut al-hukm) and verifying its application to specific circumstances (tahqiq al-manat).
Structure and Methodology
The work employs an analytical and critical method (al-manhaj al-tahlili al-naqdi) and is structured into three main chapters followed by a conclusion summarizing its findings:
- Defining the Term and Forms of Terrorism from a Sharia Perspective (Fi Mustalah al-Irhab wa-Ashkalihi min Manzur Shari): reviews classical and contemporary usages, critiques existing formulations, and provides a typological definition.
- The Sharia Ruling on Terrorism and Its Forms (Fi Hukm al-Irhab bi-Ashkalihi min Manzur Shari): analyzes the concepts of security (aman), intent, state authority, and the scriptural rulings assigned to each form of violence.
- Application to Contemporary Events (Mada Intibaq Hukm al-Irhab 'ala al-Ahdath al-Akhira): applies the theoretical framework to incidents in Saudi Arabia, Morocco, the United States, and Palestine.
Concept and Classification of Terrorism
Sano notes that classical Islamic jurisprudence and Quranic texts did not define irhab as an independent technical legal term, though the root r-h-b appears in approximately eight Quranic verses denoting fear, reverence, or deterrence. Classical jurists treated related offenses under categories such as unlawful banditry (hirabah) and armed rebellion (baghy).
The author critiques contemporary definitions—such as those formulated by the Islamic Research Academy in Cairo and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)—for embedding moral or legal verdicts directly into the definition rather than describing the act itself, and for failing to account for the status of the target and the nature of the actor's goals. Sano offers his own definition: terrorism is intentional physical or psychological intimidation directed either against someone protected by religion or territory, or someone unprotected, in pursuit of an objective that is definitively legitimate, probably legitimate, or entirely illegitimate.
Based on the interplay between the target's status in the Islamic security framework (manzumat al-aman) and the actor's objective, Sano outlines six distinct forms of terrorism and their rulings:
- Form 1: Intimidating a protected person (by religion or territory) for a definitively legitimate goal (e.g., individuals claiming to enforce divine law). This is strictly prohibited (haram), categorized as rebellion (baghy) and hirabah, because state enforcement and defense are exclusive prerogatives of the legitimate political authority (wali al-amr).
- Form 2: Intimidating a protected person for a probably legitimate goal (such as political pluralism or individual rights). This is prohibited and subject to the penalty for hirabah if it involves violence against life or property.
- Form 3: Intimidating a protected person for an illegitimate goal. This is strictly prohibited and punished as hirabah.
- Form 4: Intimidating an unprotected enemy (such as combatants in dar al-harb) for a definitively legitimate goal. This constitutes lawful military deterrence and state warfare (jihad), which is an obligation (wajib) exclusively entrusted to the ruler, not to private individuals or groups.
- Form 5: Intimidating an unprotected person for a probably legitimate goal without state mandate. This is prohibited and subject to discretionary punishment (ta'zir).
- Form 6: Intimidating an unprotected person for an illegitimate personal or malicious goal (such as wanton destruction or revenge). This is prohibited and subject to ta'zir.
Sano underscores that Surat al-Anfal (8:60), وَأَعِدُّوا لَهُمْ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ مِنْ قُوَّةٍ وَمِنْ رِبَاطِ الْخَيْلِ تُرْهِبُونَ بِهِ عَدُوَّ اللَّهِ وَعَدُوَّكُمْ ("And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy"), is directed to political rulers responsible for national defense and armed forces, not to private actors.
Application to Contemporary Events
Applying classical territorial classifications, Sano categorizes countries into three groups:
- Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam): Countries where Islamic norms are manifest and Muslims practice freely, such as Saudi Arabia and Morocco. Bombings and attacks against civilians in these territories are categorized as hirabah and rebellion.
- Abode of Treaty (Dar al-'Ahd): Non-Muslim states tied to Muslim countries by formal treaties, international conventions, or diplomatic recognition, such as the United States. Sano concludes that residents of these countries possess territorial security (aman al-dar), rendering acts of violence such as the September 11 attacks strictly forbidden under Islamic law and a breach of general covenants.
- Abode of War (Dar al-Harb): Entities actively engaged in hostile occupation and conflict, such as Israel. Sano affirms that resisting occupation is legitimate under state authority, while condemning Israeli violence against Palestinians as criminal aggression.
Answer updated