Jump to content

User:Sarfipour: Difference between revisions

From Encyclopedia of Contemporary Jurisprudence
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
Sarfipour (talk | contribs)
32 edits
No edit summary
Sarfipour (talk | contribs)
32 edits
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Sculpture ==
Author: Mostafa Haqqani-Fazl
Author: Hamza Ahmadi
* '''abstract'''
The book The Jurisprudential Foundations of Espionage and Counter-Espionage is a summary and compilation of the jurisprudential discussions by Shaykh [[Najm al-Din Tabasi]] at the Islamic seminary in Qom. This work was printed and published after being reviewed and corrected by him. In this book, jurisprudential discussions regarding espionage are presented in five sections. The author uses Quranic verses, narrations, and historical texts to present and analyze the different aspects of espionage. After defining and categorizing various types of espionage, the author proceeds to detail the ruling (hukm) for each category. Throughout the main discussion, related secondary issues concerning espionage have also been addressed.
== A Brief Look at the Book  ==
The Jurisprudential Foundations of Espionage and Counter-Espionage, authored by [[Najm al-Din Moravveji Tabasi]], is a scholarly work within the domain of political jurisprudence. It was published in collaboration with Markaz e-Takhasussi e-Aimmah al-Athar (A). This book is a transcript and compilation of the jurisprudential discussions by Shaykh Najm al-Din Tabasi at the Islamic seminary in Qom, which has been published after his review and revision. This work aims to study the rulings regarding espionage — which has been categorized into several types in the text — through an examination of relevant narrations and the legal rulings of jurists from both sects (Shia and Sunni), along with issues related to it. These issues include matters such as committing unlawful acts for the purpose of espionage, the status of agreements and granting protection to spies, torturing spies, extracting confessions from them, and interpreting the legitimacy of espionage based on narrations concerning the appointment of an Arif (a recognized leader or expert in a community) and Naqib (a representative or head of a tribe).
=== About the Author ===
Najm al-Din Maruji Tabasi (born 1334 SH ) is a professor of Dars al-Kharij (advanced studies in Islamic jurisprudence) at the Islamic seminary of Qom. He has authored over 27 works, some of which adopt a jurisprudential approach. His notable works include:
- Al-Dirasat al-Fiqhiyya fi Masa'il Khilafiyya (Jurisprudential Studies on Controversial Issues)
- Al-Zawaj al-Muwaqqat 'inda al-Sahaba wa al-Tabi'in (Temporary Marriage Among the Companions and Followers)
- Al-Irsal wa al-Takfir bayn al-Sunna wa al-Bid'a (Excommunication Between Tradition and Innovation)
- Tab’id dar Islam (Exile in Islam)
- Huquq e-Zindani wa Mawarid Zindan dar Islam (Rights of Prisoners and the Conditions for Imprisonment in Islam)
- Mawarid al-Sajin fi al-Nusus wa al-Fatawa (Cases of Imprisonment in Texts and Jurisprudential Rulings)
== Structure of the Book ==
The book The Jurisprudential Foundations of Espionage and Counter-Espionage is organized into five sections (maqām), with each section further divided into chapters, depending on the depth of the discussion, and presenting various topics.
First Section: The Meaning of Espionage
In this section, the linguistic and terminological meanings of espionage are examined.
Second Section: Types of Espionage and Spies
Here, the author categorizes espionage into five types and classifies spies into two categories.


'''Sculpture''' has become a prominent topic in contemporary jurisprudence, gaining more attention due to the increasing use of sculptures and statues, leading to the emergence of new issues. Most Shi’a and Sunni jurists consensually consider the creation of sculptures depicting living beings, such as humans and animals, as prohibited (haram) based on narrations. However, the construction of sculptures depicting non-living entities has not received significant attention.
Third Section: The Ruling on Espionage
Some jurists, however, reject the absolute prohibition of crafting sculptures of living beings. They base their argument on criteria derived from narrations, deeming the prohibition applicable only to cases involving [practices] misleading from the path of God, idolatry, resembling the actions of the Creator, or imitating polytheists.
This section is presented in two chapters:
Exceptions to the prohibition of crafting sculptures of living beings include making incomplete or partial sculptures, as per the fatwa of S[[Ayyid Abolqasem Khoei|ayyid Abolqasem Khoei]], creating sculptures using machinery, according to the fatwa of [[Sayyid Ruhollah Khomeini]], and creating sculptures for medical education, as suggested by [[Naser Makarem Shirazi]]. In Shi’a jurisprudential works, there is no distinct section dedicated to sculpture, but relevant discussions are intertwined within chapters on prayer and trade. However, there are independent works dedicated to this subject.
1. Espionage benefiting disbelief (kufr) and in its interests.
2. Espionage benefiting Islam and the Islamic government.
The first chapter includes three discussions:


== Exposition of the Issue  ==
a) The ruling on a Muslim spy according to the fatwas of Shia jurists.
Sculpture is one of the significant and challenging contemporary jurisprudential issues<ref>1. Montazeri, Darasat Fi al-Makasib al-Muharammah, Vol. 2, p. 542.</ref>, alongside painting, and is addressed under the categories of “image,” “form,” and “statue” in Shi’a and Sunni narrative sources<ref>2. For example, see Hur Ameli, Wasa'il al-Shi'a, Vol. 5, pp. 174-176; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad Ahmad, Vol. 4, p. 65; Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 3, p. 136.</ref>. Some Shi’a jurists have emphasized the importance of sculpture in their works and have advocated for addressing its legal rulings. For instance, Makarem Shirazi highlights the use of sculpture in commemorating national<ref>Makarem Shirazi, Istifta’at -Jadid, Vol. 2, p. 239.</ref>, religious, and cultural figures in Islamic societies. Similarly, [[Mohammad Javad Fazel Lankarani]] sees sculpture as a tool for expressing truths and societal issues, which can be used to promote religious concepts and counter anti-religious propaganda. He also deems sculpture and related matters as necessities of human life<ref>Fazel Lankarani, Mouzu’at wa Melakat dar Fiqh Honar, p. 27.</ref>. Considering the circumstances of the time, the needs, and the necessities of the Islamic community, he sees it necessary for jurists to pay attention to these matters when deducing legal rulings<ref>Fazel Lankarani, Mouzu’at wa Melakat dar Fiqh Honar, p. 27.</ref>.
According to Makarem Shirazi, computerized robots and dolls also fall under the category of sculpture<ref>Makarem Shirazi, Istifta’at -Jadid, Vol. 3, p. 168.</ref>. [[Mohammad Eshaq Fayaz]] regards the creation of sculptures of humans and their body parts as a tool for educating medical students, replacing the need for human dissection<ref>Faiyyaz, Istifta’at al-Shar'iyah, Vol. 1, p. 109.</ref>.
According to [[Alireza A'rafi]], the discussion on the prohibition and legal rulings related to sculpture was first introduced by Sheikh Mufid in the discourse of the jurists<ref>Abidinzadeh,Mujassameh wa Naqqashi: Taqrirat-e Dars-e Ayatollah A’arafi, p. 24.</ref>. There is no independent section dedicated to sculpture in Shi’a jurisprudential sources; rather, its legal rulings are discussed within chapters on purity (rulings related to ritual ablution)<ref>Naraghi, Mustanad al-Shi'a, Vol. 2, p. 180.</ref>, prayer (clothing and location of prayer and rulings for mosques)<ref>Najafi, Jawahir al-Kalam, Vol. 8, p. 383.</ref>, and trade (impermissible trades)<ref>Rouhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Vol. 14, p. 218.</ref>. However, Sheikh Ansari, in his book “Kitab al-Makasib,” allocates a section to examining the juristic rulings of sculpture and the rulings related to earning income through it, under the general title “Inherently forbidden sources of income.”<ref>12. Sheikh Ansari, Kitab al-Makasib, Vol. 1, p. 183.</ref> The discussion on the juristic rulings of sculpture has made its way into the discourse of contemporary jurists through the teaching of this book and the commentaries written on it<ref>13. For example, see Tohidi Tabrizi, Misbah al-Fiqhaheh: Taqrirat-e Dars-e Ayatollah Khoei, Vol. 1, p. 353; Khomeini, Al-Makasib al-Muharramah, Vol. 1, p. 168; Montazeri, Darasat Fi al-Makasib al-Muharammah, Vol. 2, p. 541.</ref>.
=== Jurisprudential Discussions Focused on Sculptures of Living Beings ===
Jurists have separated the jurisprudential rulings on crafting sculptures of living beings from non-living ones and have primarily focused their discussion and jurisprudential examination on sculptures of living beings, while sidelining the issue of crafting sculptures of non-living beings. While most jurists have considered creating sculptures of non-living entities permissible, Sheikh Ansari believes that if the sculpture of non-living entities evokes admiration and impresses the viewer, creating such sculptures is problematic<ref>14. Sheikh Ansari, Kitab al-Makasib, Vol. 1, p. 188.</ref>.
Additionally, Ja’far Sobhani asserts that the statements of Abul Salah Halabi<ref>15. Halabi, Al-Kafi fi al-Fiqh, p. 281.</ref> and Ibn Barraj<ref>16. Ibn Barraj, Al-Muhadhab, Vol. 1, p. 344.</ref>, regarding the impermissibility of creating sculptures apply even to sculptures of non-living beings<ref>17. Ya'qoubi Isfahani, Al-Mawahib fi Tahreer Maksab al-Muharramah, p. 377.</ref>.
== Fatwas and Reasons for Prohibition and its Exceptions ==
According to Sheikh Ansari, the prohibition of crafting sculptures of living beings is generally accepted among Shi’a jurists<ref>18. Sheikh Ansari, Kitab al-Makasib, Vol. 14, p. 183.</ref>, a view also embraced by Sunni scholars, as stated by Sayyid Abolqasem Khoei<ref> Tohidi Tabrizi, Misbah al-Fiqhaheh, Vol. 1, p. 353.</ref>. Among contemporaries, jurists such as Sayyid Abolqasem Khoei<ref>20. Khoei, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 262.</ref>, [[Sayyid Ali Sistani]]<ref>21. Sistani, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 423.</ref>, Sayyid Ruhollah Khomeini<ref>22. Khomeini, Tahreer al-Wasilah, Vol. 1, p. 472.</ref>, Mohammad Ishaq Fayaz<ref>23. Faiyyaz, Al-Istifta'at al-Shar'iyyah, Vol. 2, p. 13.</ref>, [[Sayyid Mousa Shobeiri Zanjani]]<ref>24. Shobeiri Zanjani, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 80.</ref>, Naser Makarem Shirazi<ref>25. Makarem Shirazi, Istifta'at Jadid, Vol. 1, p. 158.</ref>, and Lutfullah Safi Golpayegani<ref>26. Safi Golpaygani, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 409.</ref> have all deemed crafting sculptures of living beings, such as humans and animals, as prohibited.
=== Evidence of Prohibition  ===
Those jurists who advocate for the prohibition of crafting sculptures of living beings have focused solely on the matters mentioned in the textual evidence (Qur’an, narrations, and traditions), considering them the subject of the ruling and regarding them as what God intended. Most jurists who approve of sculpture creation do not consider these matters as independent but rather take into consideration broader concepts like “[practices] misleading from the path of God,” and criteria such as “idolatry,” “mimicking the Creator,” or “imitating polytheists” and have permitted creation of sculptures in the absence of these specific concepts and criteria. Accordingly, jurists have relied on narrative reasoning, namely narrations, and rational reasoning, like consensus [among jurists], to deduce the legal ruling on sculpture.
==== Narrations  ====
The most important reason that jurists have relied on to examine the ruling of sculpting is narrations<ref> Najafi, Jawahir al-Kalam, Vol. 22, p. 41.</ref>. Sayyid Abulqasim Khoei considers narrations from both Sunni and Shia sources regarding the prohibition of sculpture living beings as beneficial<ref>28. Tohidi Tabrizi, Misbah al-Fuqaheh, Vol. 1, p. 359.</ref>, meanwhile Seyyed Mohammad Sadeq Rohani has categorized such narrations into four main groups:
1. Narrations indicating an absolute prohibition of images, whether sculptures or paintings, and whether representing living or non-living beings. For example, a narration by from Imam Sadiq (AS) narrated by Muhammad ibn Muslim explicitly forbids all forms of image-making (sculpture and painting)<ref>29. Rouhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Vol. 14, p. 218; Nuri, Mustadrak al-Wasail, Vol. 13, p. 210.</ref>.
2. Narrations specifically prohibiting the creation of sculptures, regardless of whether they represent living or non-living entities<ref> Rouhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Vol. 14, p. 218.</ref>.
3. Narrations only prohibiting the depiction of living beings, regardless of whether they are sculptures or not. For instance, a narration from Sheikh Saduq attributed to Imam Sadiq (AS) where the Prophet (PBUH) prohibited both sculpting and painting animals on rings<ref>Rouhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Vol. 14, p. 221; Hur Ameli, Wasa'il al-Shi'a, Vol. 17, p. 297.</ref>.
4. Narrations exclusively emphasizing the prohibition of crafting sculptures of living beings. An example is an authentic narration from Imam Sadiq (AS), allowing the creation of images or sculptures only for non-living entities like trees, the sun, the moon, and similar objects<ref>Rouhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Vol. 14, p. 221; Hur Ameli, Wasa'il al-Shi'a, Vol. 17, p. 296.</ref>.
In the same vein, Sayyid Ruhollah Khomeini has enumerated another category of narrations. Given the necessity of observing the proportionality of the legal ruling to the subject, he asserts that prohibitions on sculptures or statues apply only to cases where they are used for worship<ref>33. Khomeini, Al-Makasib al-Muharramah, Vol. 1, p. 169.</ref>. For instance, narrations that label sculpting as one of the heinous acts, mention severe punishments for the perpetrator<ref>34. Nouri, Mustadrak al-Wasail, Vol. 13, p. 210.</ref>. According to Ayatollah Khomeini, the promised punishments in these narrations are so severe that they do not align with merely sculpting or painting. Sculpting, in terms of the intensity of its reprehensibility, is not higher than major sins such as unjust killing and sodomy These narrations, according to Ayatollah Khomeini, consider sculpture creation a heinous act deserving severe punishments, but the severity is not equivalent to major sins like unjust killing, homosexuality, etc. Therefore, he concludes that the prohibitions in this category of narrations specifically target sculptures used as idols for worship<ref>Khomeini, Al-Makasib al-Muharramah, Vol. 1, p. 169.</ref>.
==== Consensus Among Jurists and its Critique ====
There has not been a consensus among jurists regarding the prohibition of sculpture. However, according to Hossein Ali Montazeri, the first person to claim consensus on this issue was Muhaqqeq Karaki<ref>Muhaqqeq Karaki, Jame' al-Maqasid, Vol. 4, p. 23.</ref> and no previous jurists have claimed consensus on this matter. This purported consensus has been criticized by jurists such as Sayyid Taqi Tabatabai Qomi and Hossein Ali Montazeri. They argue that this consensus is not a clear or probable proof and believe that there are numerous narrations, transmitted through both Shia and Sunni sources, which may provide plausible evidence for the permissibility of sculpture creation. Hence, they contend that consensus is not an independent proof for this matter.
There is no consensus among jurists regarding the prohibition of sculpture. Seyyed Taqi Tabatabai Qomi and Hossein-Ali Montazeri criticized the alleged consensus, claiming it to be a consensus with known origins<ref>Ijma’ al Madraki is a type of consensus whose origins are currently available in other jurisprudential sources i.e. Qur'an and Prophetic narrations.</ref>  or probable evidence and believe that there is a likelihood that the evidence for the jurists' verdict on the prohibition of sculpture comes from numerous narrations in both Shia and Sunni sources. Therefore, they believe that this consensus does not qualify as an independent proof for this matter<ref>Montazeri, Darasat Fi al-Makasib al-Muharammah, Vol. 2, p. 557.</ref>.
=== Exceptions to the Prohibition ===
Despite the widely accepted prohibition on creating sculptures of living beings, some jurists have made exceptions, including:
1. Naser Makarem Shirazi: Embossed patterns seen in plasterwork, carving, toreutics, and similar crafts, as well as dolls, and items considered toys, sculptures created for deceiving enemies and are a strategic necessity, and sculptures made from various pieces used in medical education are exceptions to the prohibition<ref>Montazeri, Darasat Fi al-Makasib al-Muharammah, Vol. 2, p. 569; Tabatabai Qomi, Umdat al-Matalib fi Taliq 'ala al-Makasib, Vol. 1, p. 167.</ref>.
2. Sayyid Ruhollah Khomeini: If a sculpture is made using machinery, it is not considered prohibited because the evidence for the prohibition of sculpture only applies to cases where an individual manually creates sculptures<ref>Makarem Shirazi, Istifta'at Jadid, Vol. 3, p. 168.</ref>.
3. Sayyid Abolqasem Khoei, Lutfollah Safi Golpayegani, and Ja’far Sobhani: Creating incomplete or partial sculptures of humans and other animals is permissible. However, Safi Golpayegani deems crafting a sculpture that includes major parts such as the head, face, and chest as problematic, adding that crafting sculptures of hands, feet, or heads alone is not problematic<ref>Khomeini, Al-Makasib al-Muharramah, Vol. 2, p. 177.</ref>.
== Fatwas and Reasons for Permission ==
Many jurists who have issued fatwas permitting sculpture base the reason for its prohibition on criteria derived from narrations. They argue that if these criteria are not present, even crafting sculptures of living beings is considered permissible. Some of these viewpoints are as follows:
• According to Hussein Ali Montazeri, the prohibition of sculpture creation and similar acts in narrations is due to the fact that, at the time these narrations were issued, crafting sculptures was associated with worshipping beings other than God and associating partners to Him. Therefore, if sculpture does not serve this purpose and solely has artistic and cultural aspects, it is considered permissible<ref>Tohidi Tabrizi, Misbah al-Fuqaheh, Vol. 1, p. 369; Safi Golpaygani, Jame' al-Ahkam, Vol. 1, p. 307; Ya'qoubi Isfahani, Al-Mawahib fi Tahreer Ahkam al-Makasib, p. 399.</ref>.
• Mohammad Ibrahim Jannati considers sculpture creation as one of the valuable arts and argues that, since sculpture in the Islamic Republic of Iran today does not have any impure motives or polytheistic inclinations, the act is permissible<ref>Safi Golpaygani, Jame' al-Ahkam, Vol. 1, p. 308.</ref>. However, he emphasizes that crafting sculptures for the purpose of worship, veneration, and imitating idolaters and polytheists is prohibited<ref> Montazeri, Risaleh Istifta'at, Vol. 2, p. 325.</ref>.
• Mohammad Javad Moghniyah believes that if sculpture making is not done for illegitimate purposes but serves intellectual goals, such as highlighting the grandeur and glory of civilizations and their history, it is not problematic<ref> Janati, Nazariyeh Ijtihadi Tafri’ei va Tatbighi, p. 38.</ref>. He also believes that the fatwas prohibiting sculpture lack evidence and are simply precautionary<ref>Janati, Nazariyeh Ijtihadi Tafri’ei va Tatbighi, p. 38; Hosseini, Jawaz Mujassameh-Sazi va Naqashi, p. 213.</ref>.
• According to the fatwa of Yousef Saanei, sculpture making itself is not prohibited, and if it is done for intellectual purposes, it is permissible<ref>Mughniyeh, Falsafat Islamiyah, p. 921.</ref>.
• Sheikh Javad Tabrizi believes that crafting sculptures of living and non-living beings is permissible, though it is recommended to avoid it<ref>Mughniyeh, Falsafat Islamiyah, p. 921.</ref>.
• Sayyid Ali Khamenei considers crafting sculptures of living beings as permissible and states that buying, selling, keeping, and even displaying them in exhibitions is not problematic<ref>"Mujassameh-sazi va Hunarhay Tajassumi," Website of Grand Ayatollah Sanei.</ref>.
== Issues Related to Sculpture ==
In addition to discussing the fundamental ruling on sculpture, jurists have also addressed related topics such as the “keeping, buying and selling of sculptures” and “destroying sculptures.”
=== Keeping, Buying, and Selling Sculptures: ===
Most jurists have considered buying, selling, and keeping sculptures, even those depicting living beings, as permissible<ref>Tabrizi, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 358.</ref>. According to Khoei, the available evidence only indicates the prohibition of sculpture making, and there is no evidence prohibiting its keeping, buying, and selling<ref>51. For example, see Khoei, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 356; Tohidi Tabrizi, Misbah al-Fuqaheh, Vol. 1, p. 382; Sistani, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 423; Khomeini, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 275; Vahid Khorasani, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 582; Fazel Lankarani, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 395; Shobeiri Zanjani, Tawzih al-Masa'il, p. 80.</ref>. Among contemporary jurists, figures like Lutfollah Safi Golpayegani and Naser Makarem Shirazi have deemed buying, selling, and owning sculptures of living beings, earning a living out of it and earning wages by making sculptures as prohibited<ref> Tohidi Tabrizi, Misbah al-Fuqaheh, Vol. 1, p. 240.</ref>. Sheikh Ansari considers keeping, buying, and selling sculptures of living beings as reprehensible<ref>Sheikh Ansari, Kitab al-Makasib, Vol. 1, p. 197.</ref>.
=== Destroying Sculptures: ===
According to Alireza A’rafi, while explicit statements from early scholars regarding the prohibition to keep sculptures or the obligation to destroy them are not found, some jurists' statements can be interpreted to imply this obligation<ref>Abidinzadeh, Mujassameh wa Naqqashi: Taqrirat-e Dars-e Ayatollah A’arafi, p. 552.</ref>. The evidence that may indicate the obligation to destroy sculptures and the prohibition to keep them include:
• Just as creating a sculpture is considered reprehensible by God, its existence is also reprehensible<ref>Rouhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Vol. 14, p. 238.</ref>. Therefore, what implies the prohibition of sculpture-making also suggests the obligation to destroy it<ref>Sheikh Ansari, Kitab al-Makasib, Vol. 1, p. 193.</ref>. However, Sheikh Ansari believes that, based on narrations, only creating a sculpture is prohibited, but its existence is not reprehensible in the view of God to conclude that destroying it is obligatory. Similarly, Mohammad Fazel Lankarani believes that there is no explicit obligation between the prohibition of sculpture and the necessity to destroy it<ref>Fazel Lankarani, Tafsil al-Shari'ah: Al-Makasib al-Muharramah, p. 157-158.</ref>.
• There are narrations where breaking sculptures is commanded<ref>Kulayni, Al-Kafi, Vol. 13, p. 233.</ref>. However, scholars like Sayyid Mohammad Sadeq Rouhani and Mohammad Fazel Lankarani argue that these narrations specifically refer to cases where sculptures are used as idols for worship and veneration<ref>Rouhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Vol. 14, p. 240; Fazel Lankarani, Tafsil al-Shari'ah: Al-Makasib al-Muharramah, p. 142.</ref>.
== Perspective of Sunni Schools ==
According to the four main Sunni schools of thought, namely Maleki, Shafe’i, Hanafi, and Hanbali, creating sculptures of living beings, such as humans and animals, is considered prohibited<ref>Jazayri, Kitab al-Fiqh 'ala al-Madahib al-Arba'ah, Vol. 2, p. 40-41.</ref>. Abdul Rahman bin Muhammad Jaziri, an Egyptian jurist and scholar, argues that if sculpture serves legitimate purposes such as education and training, it falls outside the realm of the prohibition<ref>Jazayri, Kitab al-Fiqh 'ala al-Madahib al-Arba'ah, Vol. 2, p. 40.</ref>. He mentions that some Sunni schools, like the Maliki school, consider the creation, buying, and selling of dolls for girls permissible, that they learn child-rearing through play<ref>Jazayri, Kitab al-Fiqh 'ala al-Madahib al-Arba'ah, Vol. 2, p. 40.</ref>.
== Study Resources ==
Original Article: Sculpture (Study Resources)
The topic of sculpture has been addressed in contemporary jurisprudential works in two ways:
1. Sculpture has been discussed alongside other jurisprudential topics in some works, including “Masbah al- Fiqaha" – jurisprudential lectures by Sayyid Abulqasim Khoei, “Al-Makasib al-Muharramah" – written by Sayyid Ruhollah Khomeini, “Darasat fi al-Makasib al-Muharramah" – authored by Hussein Ali Montazeri, “Fiqh al-Sadiq" – composed by Sayyid Mohammad Sadeq Rouhani, “Al-Mawahib fi Tahrir Makasib al-Muharramah" – lectures of higher Islamic studies by Ja’far Sobhani.


2. Monographs: Independent works written specifically on the subject of sculpture, such as:
b) The perspectives of Sunni jurists.
• Sculpture and Painting: Lectures of higher Islamic studies by Alireza A’rafi on the topic of sculpture and painting, transcribed by Alireza Abedinzadeh.
• Image and Sculpture in Shia Jurisprudence: A work by Sayyid Abbas Sayyid Karimi, written in Persian and spanning 224 pages, it explores the viewpoints of Shia jurists and their evidences regarding the legal rulings on images and sculpture.        


=== References:  ===
c) The jurisprudential evidence for the ruling.
# Ibn Barraj, Abdul Aziz, Al-Muhadhab, Qom, Islamic Publishing Institute, 1406 AH.
# Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad Ahmad, Beirut, Al-Risalah Institute, 1416 AH.
Fourth Section: On Arif and Naqib
# Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Ismail, Sahih Bukhari, Damascus, Dar Tawq al-Najah, 1st edition, 1422 AH.
Can narrations that encourage the appointment of an Arif (recognized leader) and Naqib (representative) be used to justify the permissibility of espionage?
# Tabrizi, Mirza Javad, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Qom, Hijrat Publications, 1382 SH.
   
# Tohidi Tabrizi, Muhammad Ali, Misbah al-Fuqaheh: Taqrirat-e Dars-e Ayatollah Khoei, Qom, Davari Publications, 1st edition, 1377 SH.
Fifth Section: Committing Prohibited Acts During Espionage
# Jazayri, Abdul Rahman, Kitab al-Fiqh 'ala al-Madahib al-Arba'ah, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyah, 1424 AH.  
Is it permissible to commit sinful acts in the process of espionage?
# Janati, Muhammad Ibrahim, " Nazariyeh Ijtihadi Tafri’ei va Tatbighi," Political Science, No. 21, 1382 SH.
== Meaning and Types of Espionage ==
# Hur Ameli, Muhammad ibn Hasan, Wasa'il al-Shi'a, Qom, Moassaseh Al al-Bayt Alayh al-Salam le Ahya al-Turath, 3rd edition, 1416 AH.  
In the first section, the author discusses the linguistic meaning of Tajassus (espionage) using various lexical sources. After examining the different definitions, the author concludes that Tajassus refers to investigating hidden matters, whether for personal knowledge or other purposes, whether with good or malicious intent, and whether the matters themselves are virtuous or evil.
# Hosseini, Ahmad, "Jawaz Mujassameh-sazi va Naqashi," Fiqh Magazine, No. 4 and 5, Summer and Autumn 1374 SH.
In the second section, espionage is classified based on its benefit or lack thereof:
# Halabi, Abu Salah, Al-Kafi fi al-Fiqh, Isfahan, Maktabat al-Imam Amir al-Mu'minin Alayh al-Salam, 1st edition, 1403 AH.
1. Investigating personal affairs without any rational motivation (i.e., meddling).
# Khamenei, Sayyid Ali, Risaleh Ajwabat al-Istifta'at, Tehran, International Printing and Publishing Company, 1388 SH.
2. Espionage driven by corrupt intentions.
# Khomeini, Ruhollah, Al-Makasib al-Muharramah, Qom, Institute for Compilation and Publication of Imam Khomeini's Works, 1st edition, 1415 AH.
3. Espionage with a rational and legitimate purpose.
# Khomeini, Ruhollah, Tahreer al-Wasilah, Tehran, Institute for Compilation and Publication of Imam Khomeini's Works, 1379 SH.
The third category is further divided into:
# Khomeini, Ruhollah, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Tehran, Organization for Printing and Publishing the Works of the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, 9th edition, 1372 SH.
 
# Khoei, Sayyid Abul-Qasim, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Qom, Mehr Publications, 1412 AH.
a) Espionage for a necessary purpose, such as preserving the Islamic government.
# Rouhani, Mohammad Sadiq, Fiqh al-Sadiq, Qom, Imam Sadiq (AS) Seminary, 1412 AH.
 
# Sistani, Sayyid Ali, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Qom, Mehr Publications, 1415 AH.
b) Espionage for a commendable purpose, such as identifying qualified individuals.
# Shobeiri Zanjani, Musa, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Qom, Wila Research Institute, 1384 SH.
# Sheikh Ansari, Morteza, Kitab al-Makasib, Qom, Bagheri Publications, 1415 AH.
Regarding spies, the author categorizes them into two types, irrespective of their religion (Muslim, dhimmi—non-Muslim under Islamic protection, or harbi—enemy combatant):
# Safi Golpaygani, Jame' al-Ahkam, Qom, Office for the Compilation and Publication of the Works of Ayatollah Safi Golpaygani, 1385 SH.
1. Spies working in favor of the enemies of Islam.
# Safi Golpaygani, Lotfollah, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Mehr Publications, 1414 AH.
2. Spies working in favor of the Islamic state.
# Safi Golpaygani, Lotfollah, Hidayat al-‘Ibad, Qom, Dar al-Qur'an al-Karim, 1416 AH.
==Espionage Benefiting Disbelief (Kufr)==
# Tabatabai Qomi, Sayyid Taqi, 'Umdat al-Matalib fi al-Ta'liq 'ala al-Makasib, Qom, Mahallati Publications, 1st edition, 1414 AH.
===  The Ruling on a Muslim Spy ===
# Abedinzadeh, Ahmad, Mujassameh va Naqashi: Taqrirat Dars Kharij Alireza A'arafi, Qom, Eshraq va Erfan Institute, 1390 SH.
In this section, the author discusses the ruling on a Muslim spy under three main headings.  
# Fazel Lankarani, Mohammad, Tafsil al-Shari'ah: al-Makasib al-Muharramah, Qom, Markaz Fiqhi Aimmah Athar (AS), 1st edition, 1385 SH.
1. Fatwas of Shia Jurists: After presenting various opinions, the author summarizes that, according to Shia jurists, a Muslim spy is generally not subject to execution. However, some contemporary scholars have ruled for the death penalty in cases where espionage is considered muharaba (waging war against God and the Islamic state) or ifsad (corruption).
# Fazel Lankarani, Mohammad, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Qom, Mehr Publications, 7th edition, 1374 SH.
# Fazel Lankarani, Mohammad Javad, " Mouzu’at wa Melakat dar Fiqh Honar," Elahiyat-e Honar Journal, No. 10, Autumn 1396 SH.
2. Opinions of Sunni Jurists: The author surveys a range of Sunni views, which include imprisonment, execution, or corporal punishment for a Muslim spy. Ultimately, the predominant Sunni opinion favors imprisonment.
# Faiyyaz, Mohammad Is'haq, Al-Istifta'at al-Shar'iyyah, Al-Kalamat al-Tayyibah, 1st edition, 1434 AH.
# Kulayni, Muhammad ibn Ya'qub, Al-Kafi, Qom, Dar al-Hadith, 1st edition, 1387 SH.
3. Jurisprudential Evidence: The author presents five pieces of evidence:
# Mujassameh-sazi va Hunarhay Tajassumi, Website of Grand Ayatollah Sanei, Date of Access: 30 Shahrivar 1400 SH.
 
# Muhaqqeq Karaki, Ali ibn Hussein, Jame' al-Maqasid, Qom, Al al-Bayt Institute, 2nd edition, 1414 AH.
- Shia Narrations (the narration about Hatib, the actions of Imam Hasan, and a narration from Da'a'im al-Islam).
# Mughniyah, Muhammad Jawad, Falsafat Islamiyyah, Beirut, 6th edition, 1993 CE.
 
# Makarem Shirazi, Naser, Estifta'at Jadid, Qom, Madrasat al-Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS), 2nd edition, 1427 AH.
- A Sunni Narration from Sunan Abi Dawood: In this narration, the Prophet (PBUH) initially ordered the execution of a spy, but when it was revealed that the spy was Muslim, the Prophet pardoned him.
# Montazeri, Hossein Ali, Darasat Fi al-Makasib al-Muharammah, Qom, Tafakkor Publications, 1415 AH.
 
# Montazeri, Hossein Ali, Risalah-e Estifta'at, Tehran, Tafakkor Publications, 1373 SH.
- A Historical Account: The exile of Hakam ibn Abi al-'As, reportedly for espionage.
# Najafi, Sheikh Muhammad Hasan, Jawahir al-Kalam, Beirut, Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, 7th edition, 1362 SH.
In the first three evidences, after questioning the authenticity and the implications of the texts, he concludes that there is no reliable evidence to justify the execution of a Muslim spy. Based on the principle of precaution and available evidence, he argues that the appropriate ruling for a Muslim spy is ta'zir (discretionary punishment).
# Naraghi, Mullah Ahmad, Mustanad al-Shi'ah fi Ahkam al-Shari'ah, Qom, Al al-Bayt Institute, 1415 AH.
Regarding the Sunan Abi Dawood narration, the author contrasts it with another narration (Musannaf), where the term “ayn” is absent. He then discusses two scenarios: one where the individual was Muslim during the espionage, and another where the person converted to Islam after committing espionage. In both cases, he finds the narration insufficient to justify execution.
# Nouri, Hossein ibn Muhammad Taqi, Mustadrak al-Wasail, Qom, Al al-Bayt Institute, 1408 AH.
As for the historical account of exile, the author believes that if it is proven that the reason for Hakam's exile was espionage, exile could be classified as a form of ta'zir. The author does not provide a definitive conclusion, however from the points made, it is clear that he aligns with the rulings of Shia jurists.
# Vahid Khorasani, Hossein, Tawzih al-Masa'il, Qom, Madreseh Baqer al-Ulum (AS), 1421 AH.
=== Ruling on a Non-Muslim Spy ===
# Yaqoubi Isfahani, Sayfullah, Al-Mawahib fi Tahrir Ahkam al-Makasib, Qom, Imam Sadiq (AS) Institute, 1424 AH.
There is no explicit ruling in Shia jurisprudence concerning non-Muslim spies, but historical and maghazi (early Islamic battles) accounts from Sunni sources suggest that the Prophet (PBUH) ordered the execution of non-Muslim spies. However, these narrations are not considered authoritative for deriving legal rulings, and they are included in the book mainly to provide a comprehensive discussion.
== Footnotes<small><big>Small text</big></small> ==
The author then presents two narrations from the historian al-Waqidi, which indicate that the ruling for a non-Muslim spy is execution. Nevertheless, in certain circumstances, a ruler may pardon the spy for strategic reasons and might even use the spy to harm the enemy. According to these narrations, it is also permissible to threaten or physically harm the spy to extract a confession.
[[fa:مجسمه‌سازی]]
==== The Dhimmi Spy and the Musta'min Spy ====
In the context of non-Muslim spies, the author explores two jurisprudential branches:
a) Does espionage violate the Dhimmah (pact of protection for non-Muslims under Islamic rule)? There are two opinions:
1. Espionage immediately breaks the Dhimmah covenant, turning the Dhimmi into an enemy (Harbi), who is no longer protected.
2. It depends on the terms of the Dhimmah agreement. If refraining from espionage is one of the conditions, then their blood is forfeit. However, the conditions of the Dhimmah contract are not fixed, meaning that the ruler, based on his discretion, can add or remove certain conditions.
The author also refers to various Sunni opinions, including execution or taking the spy as a prisoner. He concludes this discussion with a citation from Ahmad ibn Yahya al-Zaidi's Uyun al-Azhar, which states: "The enforcement of legal punishments (hudud) is solely in the hands of the Imam... including the execution of spies."
 
b) The Ruling on a Mu'ahid or Musta'min Spy
The ruling on a spy who is a treaty-holder (Mu'ahid) or a person under temporary protection (Musta'min), someone who enters Islamic lands under a protection agreement but not to reside there permanently:
In this section, the author presents the views of Shia scholars, who state that if the Imam finds that the spy has committed an offense punishable by hudud (legal punishment) or ta'zir (discretionary punishment), the appropriate punishment is carried out. However, if no legal claim is established against the spy, they are sent back to their homeland. Moreover, Muslims are permitted to prevent an enemy spy from returning to their own territory.
=== Torture of Spies and the Validity of Confession Under Torture ===
Regarding the discussion of torturing spies and the validity of confessions obtained under torture, the author presents two viewpoints: one permitting and the other prohibiting torture, as well as rejecting the validity of confessions made under duress. The proponents and their reasoning for each stance are also discussed.  
Under the section titled “Additional Narrations from Sunnis Regarding Torture,” ten narrations are cited. Afterward, under two headings, "Views of Shia Jurists" and "Views of Sunni Jurists," the opinions of some scholars from are presented.
In the end, the author concludes that torturing someone to force a confession from them is unlawful. Such an act constitutes a form of domination or authority over another person, and the basic principle is that no one has authority over another, except when justified by a valid reason (such as necessity or public interest).
== Espionage for the Benefit of Islam and the Islamic System ==
In this section, the author examines three Qur'anic verses and eight narrations (hadiths), offering his analyses of each:
In this section, the author presents three Quranic verses and eight narrations, offering his analysis of each:
1. [[Surah Al-Hujurat, verse 12]]: The conclusion is that the verse addresses spying for the benefit of disbelievers or, at the very least, in matters of individual and social affairs. The verse forbids investigating hidden matters and faults.
2. [[Surah An-Nur, verse 19]]: The conclusion is that this verse does not relate to espionage or have any direct connection to the topic.
3. [[Surah Al-Anfal, verse 27]]:
 
- The context of the verse is debated:
 
1. A hypocrite informed Abu Sufyan that Muhammad was pursuing him.
 
2. Some individuals would overhear the Prophet’s words and reveal them to the polytheists.
 
3. The story of Abu Lubaba during the war with Banu Qurayza.
 
Based on the first and third explanations, the verse is related to the prohibition of espionage. However, the second explanation pertains more to the prohibition of spreading and disclosing secrets, which may not be entirely relevant to espionage.
== Supplementary Discussions ==
====Juridical or Subject-Specific Exception?====
Is espionage for the benefit of the Islamic system and national security considered unlawful? If it is not prohibited, is the exception due to a juridical or subject-specific exemption?
The author, in response to this question, writes that contrary to his earlier view, this type of espionage falls under a juridical exemption, not a subject-specific one. In fact, this type of espionage still constitutes a form of prohibited espionage. In this type of espionage, expediency merely is not sufficient to lift the prohibition; a stronger expediency must exist because, in cases of conflict, the more important takes precedence (similar to the case of not executing a coerced murderer or exceptions to gossip). Espionage is prohibited, but the preservation of the [Islamic] system is obligatory, and in the presence of conflict and the prioritization of the more significant matter, espionage is permissible; thus, the exemption here is judicial in nature. However, some instances of espionage have a subjective exemption; for example, if they do not fall under the category of probing into the faults of others (such as polling public satisfaction regarding the government) or if they do not involve uncovering hidden matters, like when a person openly commits a sin and does not conceal their wrongdoing.
==== The Use of Spies in the Lives of the Infallibles ====
To prove the appropriateness and necessity of this practice, the author presents eight historical and narrational examples from the lives of the Infallibles. These instances demonstrate either direct involvement in espionage, or sending of spies or approval of spy operations. Any objections to these texts do not pose a problem, as their abundance has reached the level of certainty, confirming that some of them were indeed sanctioned by the Infallibles.  
=== Sunni Narrations on Military Affairs during the Prophet’s Time ===
In this section, the author lists fifteen narrations that show how the Prophet (PBUH) used intelligence provided by others about enemy movements during wars and different circumstances, or how he himself ordered espionage. The author highlights the narration from Ibn Hisham as one of the most significant examples. This narration refers to when the Quraysh abandoned their siege of Medina and retreated toward Mecca. The Prophet (PBUH) instructed Imam Ali (A.S) to spy on them to ensure their intentions. The Prophet told Imam Ali: “If they are riding camels and their horses are loose, they are headed for Mecca. But if they are riding horses and their camels are untied, they intend to return and attack.” This is because the Infallible (the Prophet) orders espionage, and another Infallible (Imam Ali) is tasked with spying.
Furthermore, the author believes that the narration from Ibn Sa'd (in the expedition of Usamah ibn Zayd ibn Harithah, the Messenger of God instructed Usamah: “Take guides with you and send out spies ahead of you”) conveys a meaning that goes beyond mere permissibility of espionage; it indicates its obligation.
====The Role of Arif and Naqib====
In the fifth section of the book, the author discusses the terms Arif and Naqib, beginning with their linguistic meanings. The word Naqb refers to searching for secrets and hidden information, and a Naqib was someone in charge of a tribe who was knowledgeable about its affairs and of the means to recognize them. The Arif, on the other hand, was a person responsible for the affairs of a group or tribe, aware of their conditions, but of a lower status than the cheif. The author also references a hadith from Imam Ali (A.S.) where Arraf with a particular pronunciation refers to an astronomer or priest.
The author then addresses the statement of Ayatollah Kharazi, who asserted that “the numerous narrations encouraging the designation of an Arif and Naqib indicate that inquiry, in principle, has been encouraged.” The author presents two points: 1. The term Arif means caretaker and does not imply inquiry or espionage. 2. The reasoning based on these narrations requires further contemplation, as the admonitory narrations (five in total) do not prohibit undertaking this responsibility but rather highlight its serious nature. It is also possible that the term Arif in the prohibitive context refers to a astronomers or priests. Moreover, the encouraging narrations (six in total) cannot be used to support Ayatollah Kharazi's claim. If there were clear evidence that these narrations endorse the appointment of Naqibs, then relying on them to validate the legitimacy of espionage and inquiry is acceptable.
====Committing Forbidden Acts during Espionage====
In the sixth section of the book, the author raises a key question: “If espionage requires committing forbidden acts, is it permissible to engage in them?” The author notes that it has been stated that if the only available means is a forbidden act, then engaging in such acts can be justified based on certain evidences and texts. He then presents these evidences and critiques them.
==Notes on the Book==
# The book is a transcription of Najm al-Din Tabasi’s advanced jurisprudence class (Dars-e-Kharij), penned by one of his students. Perhaps for this reason, various side discussions and unrelated topics are frequently raised throughout the book. In different sections, the author digresses from the main topic into secondary discussions as deemed appropriate. For instance, while narrating a tradition from Tabarsi’s works, the author critiques the last part of the narration that states, "Perhaps God has turned His attention to the people of Badr and forgiven them, telling them: 'Do whatever you wish, for I have forgiven you'" (p. 39). He then brings in Allama Tabatabai’s response to this objection, which takes up about seven pages of the book. Additionally, the author introduces discussions on the narrators (rijal) whenever names of individuals are mentioned, which seems unnecessary. Similarly, when discussing the chain of narrators for one tradition, a biographical discussion is initiated due Nofali being accused of extremism (ghuluw), leading to a lengthy discussion on the Qom scholars’ view on extremism, followed by criticisms of their stance (pp. 88–93).
# The presence of these tangential discussions disrupts the cohesion of the book, leaving the reader with a less structured and consistent narrative. As a result, the flow of the discussion is sometimes lost, and the reader may occasionally feel that the discussion lacks a clear conclusion.
# In many instances, the author could have included topics that are less relevant to the main discussion as footnotes or endnotes instead of integrating them into the main text.
# The author, in discussing the first verse concerning the permissibility of espionage for the benefit of Islam and the Islamic system, argues that the verse on espionage is not general but specifically refers to espionage benefiting the enemy. He interprets "suspicion" in the verse to mean acting on and avoiding backbiting and slander (which do not benefit Muslims), thus restricting the prohibition of espionage to cases that do not benefit Muslims. Therefore, no conflict arises here, as this matter is categorically excluded, and from the outset, espionage for the benefit of Muslims is not included in the type of espionage that the verse addresses; rather, it is specifically excluded and is not prohibited, so no conflict occurs (p. 133). Here, in addition to the reasoning seeming inadequate, the author later states that contrary to our previous opinion, it appears that the exception is a juridical one, not a subjective one. In fact, this type of espionage is one of the instances of prohibited espionage (p. 157).
# In discussing the torture of spies and the validity of confessions obtained under torture, the author refers to two narrations that were related to cases where someone was concealing information; however, it seems that the narrations generally prohibit torture. However, he concludes that narrations prohibiting torture are absolute and, based on this, deduces that torture for extracting confessions from spies is forbidden.
# None of the ten narrations in the section titled "Additional General Narrations on Torture" directly concern espionage; rather, they are general or related to theft and failure to pay tribute or taxes.
# The author could have integrated the discussion on Arif and Naqib under the broader section on narrational evidence regarding espionage. Similarly, the topic of committing forbidden acts during espionage could have been treated as a subsidiary issue within the legal rulings on espionage, rather than being assigned separate chapters or sections.
[[fa:مبانی فقهی جاسوسی و ضدجاسوسی (کتاب)]]
[[category:Books by Najm al-Din Tabasi]]

Latest revision as of 19:43, 18 May 2025

Author: Mostafa Haqqani-Fazl

  • abstract

The book The Jurisprudential Foundations of Espionage and Counter-Espionage is a summary and compilation of the jurisprudential discussions by Shaykh Najm al-Din Tabasi at the Islamic seminary in Qom. This work was printed and published after being reviewed and corrected by him. In this book, jurisprudential discussions regarding espionage are presented in five sections. The author uses Quranic verses, narrations, and historical texts to present and analyze the different aspects of espionage. After defining and categorizing various types of espionage, the author proceeds to detail the ruling (hukm) for each category. Throughout the main discussion, related secondary issues concerning espionage have also been addressed.

A Brief Look at the Book

The Jurisprudential Foundations of Espionage and Counter-Espionage, authored by Najm al-Din Moravveji Tabasi, is a scholarly work within the domain of political jurisprudence. It was published in collaboration with Markaz e-Takhasussi e-Aimmah al-Athar (A). This book is a transcript and compilation of the jurisprudential discussions by Shaykh Najm al-Din Tabasi at the Islamic seminary in Qom, which has been published after his review and revision. This work aims to study the rulings regarding espionage — which has been categorized into several types in the text — through an examination of relevant narrations and the legal rulings of jurists from both sects (Shia and Sunni), along with issues related to it. These issues include matters such as committing unlawful acts for the purpose of espionage, the status of agreements and granting protection to spies, torturing spies, extracting confessions from them, and interpreting the legitimacy of espionage based on narrations concerning the appointment of an Arif (a recognized leader or expert in a community) and Naqib (a representative or head of a tribe).

About the Author

Najm al-Din Maruji Tabasi (born 1334 SH ) is a professor of Dars al-Kharij (advanced studies in Islamic jurisprudence) at the Islamic seminary of Qom. He has authored over 27 works, some of which adopt a jurisprudential approach. His notable works include: - Al-Dirasat al-Fiqhiyya fi Masa'il Khilafiyya (Jurisprudential Studies on Controversial Issues) - Al-Zawaj al-Muwaqqat 'inda al-Sahaba wa al-Tabi'in (Temporary Marriage Among the Companions and Followers) - Al-Irsal wa al-Takfir bayn al-Sunna wa al-Bid'a (Excommunication Between Tradition and Innovation) - Tab’id dar Islam (Exile in Islam) - Huquq e-Zindani wa Mawarid Zindan dar Islam (Rights of Prisoners and the Conditions for Imprisonment in Islam) - Mawarid al-Sajin fi al-Nusus wa al-Fatawa (Cases of Imprisonment in Texts and Jurisprudential Rulings)

Structure of the Book

The book The Jurisprudential Foundations of Espionage and Counter-Espionage is organized into five sections (maqām), with each section further divided into chapters, depending on the depth of the discussion, and presenting various topics. First Section: The Meaning of Espionage In this section, the linguistic and terminological meanings of espionage are examined.

Second Section: Types of Espionage and Spies Here, the author categorizes espionage into five types and classifies spies into two categories.

Third Section: The Ruling on Espionage This section is presented in two chapters: 1. Espionage benefiting disbelief (kufr) and in its interests. 2. Espionage benefiting Islam and the Islamic government. The first chapter includes three discussions:

a) The ruling on a Muslim spy according to the fatwas of Shia jurists.

b) The perspectives of Sunni jurists.

c) The jurisprudential evidence for the ruling.

Fourth Section: On Arif and Naqib Can narrations that encourage the appointment of an Arif (recognized leader) and Naqib (representative) be used to justify the permissibility of espionage?

Fifth Section: Committing Prohibited Acts During Espionage Is it permissible to commit sinful acts in the process of espionage?

Meaning and Types of Espionage

In the first section, the author discusses the linguistic meaning of Tajassus (espionage) using various lexical sources. After examining the different definitions, the author concludes that Tajassus refers to investigating hidden matters, whether for personal knowledge or other purposes, whether with good or malicious intent, and whether the matters themselves are virtuous or evil. In the second section, espionage is classified based on its benefit or lack thereof: 1. Investigating personal affairs without any rational motivation (i.e., meddling). 2. Espionage driven by corrupt intentions. 3. Espionage with a rational and legitimate purpose. The third category is further divided into:

a) Espionage for a necessary purpose, such as preserving the Islamic government.

b) Espionage for a commendable purpose, such as identifying qualified individuals.

Regarding spies, the author categorizes them into two types, irrespective of their religion (Muslim, dhimmi—non-Muslim under Islamic protection, or harbi—enemy combatant): 1. Spies working in favor of the enemies of Islam. 2. Spies working in favor of the Islamic state.

Espionage Benefiting Disbelief (Kufr)

The Ruling on a Muslim Spy

In this section, the author discusses the ruling on a Muslim spy under three main headings. 1. Fatwas of Shia Jurists: After presenting various opinions, the author summarizes that, according to Shia jurists, a Muslim spy is generally not subject to execution. However, some contemporary scholars have ruled for the death penalty in cases where espionage is considered muharaba (waging war against God and the Islamic state) or ifsad (corruption).

2. Opinions of Sunni Jurists: The author surveys a range of Sunni views, which include imprisonment, execution, or corporal punishment for a Muslim spy. Ultimately, the predominant Sunni opinion favors imprisonment.

3. Jurisprudential Evidence: The author presents five pieces of evidence:

- Shia Narrations (the narration about Hatib, the actions of Imam Hasan, and a narration from Da'a'im al-Islam).

- A Sunni Narration from Sunan Abi Dawood: In this narration, the Prophet (PBUH) initially ordered the execution of a spy, but when it was revealed that the spy was Muslim, the Prophet pardoned him.

- A Historical Account: The exile of Hakam ibn Abi al-'As, reportedly for espionage. In the first three evidences, after questioning the authenticity and the implications of the texts, he concludes that there is no reliable evidence to justify the execution of a Muslim spy. Based on the principle of precaution and available evidence, he argues that the appropriate ruling for a Muslim spy is ta'zir (discretionary punishment). Regarding the Sunan Abi Dawood narration, the author contrasts it with another narration (Musannaf), where the term “ayn” is absent. He then discusses two scenarios: one where the individual was Muslim during the espionage, and another where the person converted to Islam after committing espionage. In both cases, he finds the narration insufficient to justify execution. As for the historical account of exile, the author believes that if it is proven that the reason for Hakam's exile was espionage, exile could be classified as a form of ta'zir. The author does not provide a definitive conclusion, however from the points made, it is clear that he aligns with the rulings of Shia jurists.

Ruling on a Non-Muslim Spy

There is no explicit ruling in Shia jurisprudence concerning non-Muslim spies, but historical and maghazi (early Islamic battles) accounts from Sunni sources suggest that the Prophet (PBUH) ordered the execution of non-Muslim spies. However, these narrations are not considered authoritative for deriving legal rulings, and they are included in the book mainly to provide a comprehensive discussion. The author then presents two narrations from the historian al-Waqidi, which indicate that the ruling for a non-Muslim spy is execution. Nevertheless, in certain circumstances, a ruler may pardon the spy for strategic reasons and might even use the spy to harm the enemy. According to these narrations, it is also permissible to threaten or physically harm the spy to extract a confession.

The Dhimmi Spy and the Musta'min Spy

In the context of non-Muslim spies, the author explores two jurisprudential branches: a) Does espionage violate the Dhimmah (pact of protection for non-Muslims under Islamic rule)? There are two opinions: 1. Espionage immediately breaks the Dhimmah covenant, turning the Dhimmi into an enemy (Harbi), who is no longer protected. 2. It depends on the terms of the Dhimmah agreement. If refraining from espionage is one of the conditions, then their blood is forfeit. However, the conditions of the Dhimmah contract are not fixed, meaning that the ruler, based on his discretion, can add or remove certain conditions. The author also refers to various Sunni opinions, including execution or taking the spy as a prisoner. He concludes this discussion with a citation from Ahmad ibn Yahya al-Zaidi's Uyun al-Azhar, which states: "The enforcement of legal punishments (hudud) is solely in the hands of the Imam... including the execution of spies."

b) The Ruling on a Mu'ahid or Musta'min Spy

The ruling on a spy who is a treaty-holder (Mu'ahid) or a person under temporary protection (Musta'min), someone who enters Islamic lands under a protection agreement but not to reside there permanently: In this section, the author presents the views of Shia scholars, who state that if the Imam finds that the spy has committed an offense punishable by hudud (legal punishment) or ta'zir (discretionary punishment), the appropriate punishment is carried out. However, if no legal claim is established against the spy, they are sent back to their homeland. Moreover, Muslims are permitted to prevent an enemy spy from returning to their own territory.

Torture of Spies and the Validity of Confession Under Torture

Regarding the discussion of torturing spies and the validity of confessions obtained under torture, the author presents two viewpoints: one permitting and the other prohibiting torture, as well as rejecting the validity of confessions made under duress. The proponents and their reasoning for each stance are also discussed. Under the section titled “Additional Narrations from Sunnis Regarding Torture,” ten narrations are cited. Afterward, under two headings, "Views of Shia Jurists" and "Views of Sunni Jurists," the opinions of some scholars from are presented. In the end, the author concludes that torturing someone to force a confession from them is unlawful. Such an act constitutes a form of domination or authority over another person, and the basic principle is that no one has authority over another, except when justified by a valid reason (such as necessity or public interest).

Espionage for the Benefit of Islam and the Islamic System

In this section, the author examines three Qur'anic verses and eight narrations (hadiths), offering his analyses of each: In this section, the author presents three Quranic verses and eight narrations, offering his analysis of each: 1. Surah Al-Hujurat, verse 12: The conclusion is that the verse addresses spying for the benefit of disbelievers or, at the very least, in matters of individual and social affairs. The verse forbids investigating hidden matters and faults. 2. Surah An-Nur, verse 19: The conclusion is that this verse does not relate to espionage or have any direct connection to the topic. 3. Surah Al-Anfal, verse 27:

- The context of the verse is debated:

1. A hypocrite informed Abu Sufyan that Muhammad was pursuing him.

2. Some individuals would overhear the Prophet’s words and reveal them to the polytheists.

3. The story of Abu Lubaba during the war with Banu Qurayza.

Based on the first and third explanations, the verse is related to the prohibition of espionage. However, the second explanation pertains more to the prohibition of spreading and disclosing secrets, which may not be entirely relevant to espionage.

Supplementary Discussions

Juridical or Subject-Specific Exception?

Is espionage for the benefit of the Islamic system and national security considered unlawful? If it is not prohibited, is the exception due to a juridical or subject-specific exemption? The author, in response to this question, writes that contrary to his earlier view, this type of espionage falls under a juridical exemption, not a subject-specific one. In fact, this type of espionage still constitutes a form of prohibited espionage. In this type of espionage, expediency merely is not sufficient to lift the prohibition; a stronger expediency must exist because, in cases of conflict, the more important takes precedence (similar to the case of not executing a coerced murderer or exceptions to gossip). Espionage is prohibited, but the preservation of the [Islamic] system is obligatory, and in the presence of conflict and the prioritization of the more significant matter, espionage is permissible; thus, the exemption here is judicial in nature. However, some instances of espionage have a subjective exemption; for example, if they do not fall under the category of probing into the faults of others (such as polling public satisfaction regarding the government) or if they do not involve uncovering hidden matters, like when a person openly commits a sin and does not conceal their wrongdoing.

The Use of Spies in the Lives of the Infallibles

To prove the appropriateness and necessity of this practice, the author presents eight historical and narrational examples from the lives of the Infallibles. These instances demonstrate either direct involvement in espionage, or sending of spies or approval of spy operations. Any objections to these texts do not pose a problem, as their abundance has reached the level of certainty, confirming that some of them were indeed sanctioned by the Infallibles.

Sunni Narrations on Military Affairs during the Prophet’s Time

In this section, the author lists fifteen narrations that show how the Prophet (PBUH) used intelligence provided by others about enemy movements during wars and different circumstances, or how he himself ordered espionage. The author highlights the narration from Ibn Hisham as one of the most significant examples. This narration refers to when the Quraysh abandoned their siege of Medina and retreated toward Mecca. The Prophet (PBUH) instructed Imam Ali (A.S) to spy on them to ensure their intentions. The Prophet told Imam Ali: “If they are riding camels and their horses are loose, they are headed for Mecca. But if they are riding horses and their camels are untied, they intend to return and attack.” This is because the Infallible (the Prophet) orders espionage, and another Infallible (Imam Ali) is tasked with spying. Furthermore, the author believes that the narration from Ibn Sa'd (in the expedition of Usamah ibn Zayd ibn Harithah, the Messenger of God instructed Usamah: “Take guides with you and send out spies ahead of you”) conveys a meaning that goes beyond mere permissibility of espionage; it indicates its obligation.

The Role of Arif and Naqib

In the fifth section of the book, the author discusses the terms Arif and Naqib, beginning with their linguistic meanings. The word Naqb refers to searching for secrets and hidden information, and a Naqib was someone in charge of a tribe who was knowledgeable about its affairs and of the means to recognize them. The Arif, on the other hand, was a person responsible for the affairs of a group or tribe, aware of their conditions, but of a lower status than the cheif. The author also references a hadith from Imam Ali (A.S.) where Arraf with a particular pronunciation refers to an astronomer or priest. The author then addresses the statement of Ayatollah Kharazi, who asserted that “the numerous narrations encouraging the designation of an Arif and Naqib indicate that inquiry, in principle, has been encouraged.” The author presents two points: 1. The term Arif means caretaker and does not imply inquiry or espionage. 2. The reasoning based on these narrations requires further contemplation, as the admonitory narrations (five in total) do not prohibit undertaking this responsibility but rather highlight its serious nature. It is also possible that the term Arif in the prohibitive context refers to a astronomers or priests. Moreover, the encouraging narrations (six in total) cannot be used to support Ayatollah Kharazi's claim. If there were clear evidence that these narrations endorse the appointment of Naqibs, then relying on them to validate the legitimacy of espionage and inquiry is acceptable.

Committing Forbidden Acts during Espionage

In the sixth section of the book, the author raises a key question: “If espionage requires committing forbidden acts, is it permissible to engage in them?” The author notes that it has been stated that if the only available means is a forbidden act, then engaging in such acts can be justified based on certain evidences and texts. He then presents these evidences and critiques them.

Notes on the Book

  1. The book is a transcription of Najm al-Din Tabasi’s advanced jurisprudence class (Dars-e-Kharij), penned by one of his students. Perhaps for this reason, various side discussions and unrelated topics are frequently raised throughout the book. In different sections, the author digresses from the main topic into secondary discussions as deemed appropriate. For instance, while narrating a tradition from Tabarsi’s works, the author critiques the last part of the narration that states, "Perhaps God has turned His attention to the people of Badr and forgiven them, telling them: 'Do whatever you wish, for I have forgiven you'" (p. 39). He then brings in Allama Tabatabai’s response to this objection, which takes up about seven pages of the book. Additionally, the author introduces discussions on the narrators (rijal) whenever names of individuals are mentioned, which seems unnecessary. Similarly, when discussing the chain of narrators for one tradition, a biographical discussion is initiated due Nofali being accused of extremism (ghuluw), leading to a lengthy discussion on the Qom scholars’ view on extremism, followed by criticisms of their stance (pp. 88–93).
  2. The presence of these tangential discussions disrupts the cohesion of the book, leaving the reader with a less structured and consistent narrative. As a result, the flow of the discussion is sometimes lost, and the reader may occasionally feel that the discussion lacks a clear conclusion.
  3. In many instances, the author could have included topics that are less relevant to the main discussion as footnotes or endnotes instead of integrating them into the main text.
  4. The author, in discussing the first verse concerning the permissibility of espionage for the benefit of Islam and the Islamic system, argues that the verse on espionage is not general but specifically refers to espionage benefiting the enemy. He interprets "suspicion" in the verse to mean acting on and avoiding backbiting and slander (which do not benefit Muslims), thus restricting the prohibition of espionage to cases that do not benefit Muslims. Therefore, no conflict arises here, as this matter is categorically excluded, and from the outset, espionage for the benefit of Muslims is not included in the type of espionage that the verse addresses; rather, it is specifically excluded and is not prohibited, so no conflict occurs (p. 133). Here, in addition to the reasoning seeming inadequate, the author later states that contrary to our previous opinion, it appears that the exception is a juridical one, not a subjective one. In fact, this type of espionage is one of the instances of prohibited espionage (p. 157).
  5. In discussing the torture of spies and the validity of confessions obtained under torture, the author refers to two narrations that were related to cases where someone was concealing information; however, it seems that the narrations generally prohibit torture. However, he concludes that narrations prohibiting torture are absolute and, based on this, deduces that torture for extracting confessions from spies is forbidden.
  6. None of the ten narrations in the section titled "Additional General Narrations on Torture" directly concern espionage; rather, they are general or related to theft and failure to pay tribute or taxes.
  7. The author could have integrated the discussion on Arif and Naqib under the broader section on narrational evidence regarding espionage. Similarly, the topic of committing forbidden acts during espionage could have been treated as a subsidiary issue within the legal rulings on espionage, rather than being assigned separate chapters or sections.
Retrieved from "https://ency.feqhemoaser.com/en/index.php?title=User:Sarfipour&oldid=135"