Some scholars and Muslim religious figures describe armed struggle based on Islamic principles as the Lesser jihad.
These rulings evolved in accordance with the interpretations of the Qur'an (the Islamic Holy scriptures) and Hadith (the recorded traditions, actions (behaviors), sayings and consents of Muhammad).
[2] Fighting is justified for legitimate self-defense, to aid other Muslims and after a violation in the terms of a treaty, but should be stopped if these circumstances cease to exist.
The most important of these were summarized by Muhammad's companion and first Caliph, Abu Bakr, in the form of ten rules for the Muslim army:[8] O people!
You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone.According to Tabari, the ten bits of "advice" that Abu Bakr gave was during the Expedition of Usama bin Zayd.
[9] During the Battle of Siffin, the Caliph Ali stated that Islam does not permit Muslims to stop the supply of water to their enemy.
And Abba Benjamin, the patriarch of the Egyptians, returned to the city of Alexandria in the thirteenth year after his flight from the Romans, and he went to the Churches, and inspected all of them.
And every one said: 'This expulsion (of the Romans) and victory of the Moslem is due to the wickedness of the emperor Heraclius and his persecution of the Orthodox through the patriarch Cyrus.
These jurists therefore maintain that only combatants are to be fought; noncombatants such as women, children, clergy, the aged, the insane, farmers, serfs, the blind, and so on are not to be killed in war.
[17] Abdulaziz Sachedina argues that the original jihad according to his version of Shi'ism was permission to fight back against those who broke their pledges.
This has been complicated by the early Muslim conquests, which he argues were although considered jihad by Sunni scholars, but under close scrutiny can be determined to be political.
[citation needed] The Qur'an had similarly commanded Muhammad to give his enemies, who had violated the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, a time period of four months to reconsider their position and negotiate.
[30] According to professor Sayyid Dāmād, no explicit injunctions against use of chemical or biological warfare were developed by medieval Islamic jurists as these threats were not existent then.
However, Khalil al-Maliki's Book on jihad states that combatants are forbidden to employ weapons that cause unnecessary injury to the enemy, except under dire circumstances.
[32] The Hanafi, Hanbali and Maliki schools forbid killing of those who are not able to fight, including monks, farmers, and serfs, as well as mentally and physically disabled.
[34][38] However, 14th century Fiqih Ibn Hudayl of Granada says:[39][40] It is permissible to set fire to the lands of the enemy, his stores of grain, his beasts of burden—if it is not possible for the Muslims to take possession of them—as well as to cut down his trees, to raze his cities, in a word, to do everything that might ruin and discourage him, provided that the imam deems these measures appropriate, suited to hastening the Islamization of that enemy or to weakening him.
Indeed, all this contributes to a military triumph over him or to forcing him to capitulate.Commentators of the Qur'an agree that Muslims should always be willing and ready to negotiate peace with the other party without any hesitation.
[26] If, however, non-Muslims commit acts of aggression, Muslims are free to retaliate, though in a manner that is equal to the original transgression.
[43] The "sword verse", which has attracted attention, is directed against a particular group who violate the terms of peace and commit aggression (but excepts those who observe the treaty).
In earlier times, the ransom sometimes took an educational dimension, where a literate prisoner of war could secure his or her freedom by teaching ten Muslims to read and write.
[50] However, there are special condition regarding the allowance the conduct of using torture as method of interrogation, This ruling of torturing testified and accepted by Islamic researcher as particular affirmative proposition in certain case against war criminal, which modern time Islamic jurisprudence law theorists agreed on by viewing the measure as the necessity of law upholding, rather than degradation of the rights of the prisoner as human.
According to Ali's rules, wounded or captured enemies should not be killed, those throwing away their arms should not be fought, and those fleeing from the battleground should not be pursued.
In this category, Muslim jurists included abductions, poisoning of water wells, arson, attacks against wayfarers and travellers, assaults under the cover of night and rape.
Some modern commentators have argued that the classical precedent of harsh punishments for rebels engaging in attacks that harmed civilian populations can be taken as evidence that the religious justifications used by Islamist groups such as al Qaeda and ISIL are in fact, not grounded in the Islamic tradition.