Firstly, there is a well-known jurisprudential disagreement regarding the interpretation of the phrase “in the cause of Allāh” (fī sabīl-Allāh) [Quran 9:60]. This disagreement is old and includes the view of the majority of scholars, including the four major schools of Islamic law, who restrict the meaning to jihād with the sword. A minority of scholars, including some followers of these schools, have a broader interpretation, including expenditures such as for students of knowledge or stranded pilgrims, among others.

However, a significant shift in interpreting what this phrase encompasses has emerged in more recent times, particularly in the modern era. Some have expanded the interpretation in ways that not only contradict the textual evidence and the miraculous nature of the text but also deviate from the understanding of the classical scholars regarding what the text can or cannot encompass.

Secondly, those who expand the use of the category “in the cause of Allāh” often justify their position with two main arguments:

• The existence of need.
• The changing times and circumstances.

Anyone considering these two points will find that they have existed in every era and place; we are not unique in this regard. The need to cover charitable avenues has always existed since the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), and it was even more pressing during their time as there was no state, taxes, or duties, and no natural sources of income. They managed their worldly needs through charity and donations. Yet, we do not find that they expanded the usage of this category as much as those in modern times, who have been blessed with ample means and have surplus beyond the obligatory zakāh, without facing any significant need or hardship.

Thirdly, it has been noted that those who expand the interpretation of the category “in the cause of Allāh” only do so in terms of spending but not in terms of collection. Zakāh involves both collection and distribution. These people broaden the criteria for who deserves and benefits from this category due to need and changing circumstances, showing personal reasoning in this aspect. However, they are equally stringent and literal in the criteria for zakāh eligibility, often exempting items like jewelry, tools of trade, and other assets due to the absence of explicit legal texts, despite the presence of reasons for ᾽ijtihād (personal reasoning) and analogy. They have no hesitation in taxing an elderly woman whose wealth barely reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold for zakāh), while exempting a princess, shaykhah, or businesswoman with vast amounts of jewelry and precious stones, citing the absence of explicit legal texts requiring zakāh on such items. Meanwhile, the legal text is clear and authoritative in governing analogues cases.

The general principle in acts of worship, including zakāh, is that they are based on restriction, while the general principle in transactions is based on expansion, each linked to the concept of wisdom in a negative or positive sense. Those who wish to exercise ᾽ijtihād in the areas of distribution should apply the same level of ᾽ijtihād in the areas of collection.

Fourthly, the current reality cannot be ignored; some who seek to broaden the category of “in the cause of Allāh” have vested interests in doing so, and I have witnessed astonishing things in this regard. Some individuals running institutions like schools, mosques, and organizations advocate for this opinion despite lacking the basic ability to recite Al-Fātiḥah correctly and having no understanding of jurisprudence (fiqh), neither its fundamentals nor its branches. Their primary source of funding has become zakāh, as it is a guaranteed income, due to the religious obligation associated with it.

The question for those who advocate for broadening this category: Do the authoritarian management boards we see in mosques serve the cause of da῾wah (Islamic propagation)? Do the cliques and ethnic favoritism we observe in organizations serve the cause of da῾wah? Why do we not see the significant impact of the jihād of da῾wah that is often mentioned?

The current reality shows that the wealth meant for the poor and needy is being spent on the extravagance of these individuals. One builds a mosque with marble, another is dissatisfied with the carpet and replaces it, yet another hosts banquets for politicians who are closer to corruption than anything else, selling promises at every chance set up for them, and so on and so forth. Amidst all this, the rights of the poor and needy are neglected.

I urge the esteemed scholars to consider this matter in light of the general objectives and comprehensive principles of Sharī῾h. It is acceptable to include the struggle (jihād) with words (advocacy and speech) within the concept of jihād in its general form, but we should not expand the interpretation to include what is not jihād out of greed or leniency.

One might argue: Do you not see that it is by Allāh’s wisdom that He says “in the cause of Allāh” instead of, for example, “in jihād” or even “in fighting (qitāl)” to restrict it to physical jihād? If He had said “in fighting,” the matter would be settled, and we would all say: We hear and obey. But the Wise and All-Knowing did not say that, and your Lord does not forget!

To respond to this question about the linguistic differences between the phrase “in the cause of Allāh” (fī sabīl-Allāh) and other terms indicating physical acts, I will clarify why the composite phrase [meaning, sabīl-Allāh] is used instead of single words [meaning, qitāl or jihad].

Firstly, no one disputes that the composite phrase “in the cause of Allāh,” when devoid of context, is general and indicates the purpose of the action, any action. It points to the intention and purpose behind the action. This includes everything done with the right intention, whether it pertains to worldly or religious matters.

For example, someone who eats merely out of love for food is different from someone who eats to gain strength for obedience and to maintain the blessing of a healthy body. The first acts for himself, while the second acts “in the cause of Allāh.” Thus, the phrase “in the cause of Allāh” is neutral in structure and indicates intention and purpose.

However, usage has specialized this linguistic meaning and established external guidelines that limit its absolute generality, making it a specific generality. For instance, someone who steals to feed the poor, even if their intention is good and aimed at pleasing Allāh, has acted without the permission of the lawgiver, who has forbidden theft.

Therefore, another criterion for an action to be considered “in the cause of Allāh” is that it must be for Allāh and according to His will. Allāh’s will is evident from His commands and prohibitions, as revealed in His Book and through the words of His Prophet (peace be upon him).

Secondly, there is a difference between the terms fī sabīl-Allāh (in the cause of Allāh) jihād (struggle), and qitāl (fighting):

Fighting refers to purely physical combat, and this usage is reflected in the Qur᾽ān. Examples include: “Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you.” [Qur᾽ān 2:216], “Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you.” [Qur᾽ān 9:123], and “And fight them wherever you find them.” [Qur᾽ān 2:191].

Fighting is a neutral term, used for both good and evil purposes. This is indicated in the Qur᾽ān: “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allāh, and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Ṭāghūt (false gods).” [Qur᾽ān 4:76].

Struggle is much broader in meaning and usage than fighting. Struggle (jihād) comes from the word “effort” (jahd), which involves intention, will, and action. Thus, a student studying is engaged in jihād, a family provider’s effort is jihād, a woman carrying a child is in jihād, the work of a preacher is jihād, and a soldier’s watch is jihād.

Jihād, like fighting, is a neutral term and can be for either good or evil. An example of the first type is the saying of Allāh: “And strive for Allāh (wa-jāhidū fī-Allāh) with the striving due to Him.” [Qur᾽ān 22:78] for good jihad. An example of the second type is the saying of Allāh: “But if they strive (jāhadāka) to make you associate with Me that of which you have no knowledge.” [Qur᾽ān 31:15] for evil jihād.

The phrase (fī sabīl-Allāh) “in the cause of Allāh” is exclusively for good purposes. It is a restrictive attribute applied to the words (jihād) and (qitāl) to make them legitimate acts. In the context of Sharī῾ah, jihād includes every effort made by a Muslim. Ar-Rāghib said: “Jihād is of three types: striving against the apparent enemy, striving against the devil, and striving against the self. All three are included in the verse: ‘And strive for Allāh with the striving due to Him.’ [Qur᾽ān 22:78].” [Al-Mufradāt fī Gharāb al-Qur᾽ān].

To align the meaning of jihād with the concept of exalting the word of Allāh, the Quranic usage often includes the prepositional phrase (fī sabīl-Allāh) “in the cause of Allāh” to be related to the action (fi῾l) or root (maṣdar). Thus, (wa-jāhidū fī sabīl-Allāh) “and strive in the cause of Allāh” has become a linguistic formula that conveys the Islamic jurisprudential concept of jihād. Examples from the Qur᾽ān include:

• “Indeed, those who have believed and those who have emigrated and strived in the cause of Allāh (wa-jāhidū fī sabīl-Allāh) – those hope for the mercy of Allāh. And Allāh is Forgiving and Merciful.” [Qur᾽ān 2:218].
• “O you who have believed, fear Allāh and seek the means [of nearness] to Him and strive in His cause (wa-jāhidū fī sabīl-hi) that you may succeed.” [Qur᾽ān 5:35].
• “Indeed, those who have believed and emigrated and striven (wa-jāhadū) with their wealth and their lives in the cause of Allāh” [Quran 8:72].
• “But those who have believed, emigrated, and striven for the cause of Allāh (wa-jāhidū fī sabīl-Allāh) and those who gave shelter and aided – it is they who are the believers, truly. For them is forgiveness and noble provision.” [Qur᾽ān 8:74].
• “The ones who have believed, emigrated, and striven in the cause of Allāh (wa-jāhidū fī sabīl-Allāh) with their wealth and their lives are greater in rank in the sight of Allah. And it is those who are the attainers [of success].” [Qur᾽ān 9:20].
• “Go forth, whether light or heavy, and strive (wa-jāhidū) with your wealth and your lives in the cause of Allāh. That is better for you, if you only knew.” [Qur᾽ān 9:41].

Examples from the Ḥadīth include:

• Ibn Mas῾ūd (may Allāh be pleased with him) said: I asked the Messenger of Allāh, “Which deed is most beloved to Allāh?” He said, “Prayer at its proper time.” I asked, “Then what?” He said, “Kindness to parents.” I asked, “Then what?” He said, “Jihād in the cause of Allāh.” [Agreed upon].
• ᾽Anas (may Allāh be pleased with him) reported that the Messenger of Allāh (peace be upon him) said, “Going out in the morning or evening for the cause of Allāh is better than the world and what is in it.” [Agreed upon].
• Abū Sa῾īd al-Khudrī (may Allāh be pleased with him) reported that a man asked the Messenger of Allāh (peace be upon him), “Who is the best among people?” He said, “A believer who strives in the cause of Allāh with his life and wealth.” The man asked, “Then who?” He said, “A believer who secludes himself in a mountain pass worshiping Allāh and leaving people safe from his mischief.” [Agreed upon].

Top of Form

Thirdly, one of the important aspects of understanding the Qur᾽ān is the concept of metonymy (kināyah):

For example, in the verse: “And We carried him on what is made of planks and nails.” [Qur᾽ān 54:13], the ship is implied through metonymy.

The purposes of metonymy are varied and many, and metaphor (majāz) often prevails over literal meaning. An example is the word “nikāḥ,” (consummation) which literally means “union” but is metaphorically used to mean “marriage contract” in most verses of the Qur᾽ān, including: “And do not resolve on the marriage contract (῾uqdata an-nikāḥ) until the decreed period reaches its end.” [Qur᾽ān 2:235]. Here, the term “nikāḥ” does not refer to the physical act but to the contract itself.

Another example is the word “᾽aqīqah,” originally referring to the hair on a newborn’s head, which is later used to denote the sacrificial animal slaughtered when the child’s hair is shaved, representing the cause by its effect.

Similarly, the phrase (fī sabīl-Allāh) “in the cause of Allāh” has come to be predominantly associated with the objectives of jihād and fighting.

Someone might ask: If the intended meaning is jihād in the cause of Allāh, why not explicitly mention the complete phrase?

The answer lies in the general principle of the Quranic composition, which favors brevity and conciseness. Anything that can be omitted without compromising the meaning is typically omitted. This principle of eloquence in the Qur᾽ān is evident in the works of scholars such as Al-῾Izz ibn ῾Abd as-Salām in his book Al-᾽Ishārah ᾽ilā al-᾽ijāz (Reference to Brevity). This brevity is part of the Quranic eloquence.

To provide a clear example:

In the verse: “Muḥammad is the Messenger of Allāh, and those with him (wa-al-ladhīna ma῾ahu) are forceful against the disbelievers.” [Qur᾽ān 48:29], there is an implicit omission, and the implied meaning is ” and those [who believed] with him.” This omission is clear in other verses, such as: “On the Day when Allāh will not disgrace the Prophet and those who believed with him (wa-al-ladhīna ᾽āmanū ma῾ahu).” [Qur᾽ān 66:8].

No one would argue that the intended meaning in the verse from Sūrah Al-Fatḥ [sūrah no. 48] is different from that in Sūrah At-Taḥrīm [sūrah no. 66].

Returning to the verse on zakāh in Sūrah At-Tawbah, we find it is dividing the categories into individuals and purposes:

The individuals are: the poor, the needy, those employed to collect [zakāh], those whose hearts are to be reconciled, captives, those in debt, and travelers.

The purposes are: slavery and jihād.

For the individuals, specific designation is necessary because they are the direct recipients of the zakāh. For the purposes, metonymy is used because the allocation is not directly to them but due to their needs, with an implied omission.

The implied meaning is: for the freeing of slaves and for jihād in the cause of Allāh.

Several factors justify this implied omission:

• The pursuit of brevity in accordance with the style used for other categories of zakāh.
• The metonymy’s potential to encompass a broader meaning than the apparent wording. In “the cause of Allāh,” it includes the mujāhid (fighter), his weapon, and anything that aids him in his jihād. This includes the khaṭīb (preacher) motivating the soldiers, support units like medical and logistical support, and intelligence and reconnaissance work, among other needs of jihād.

Fourthly, it is not appropriate to interpret the phrase (fī sabīl-Allāh) “in the cause of Allāh” in its apparent broad meaning of all acts of righteousness within this context. Doing so would disrupt the coherence of the structure. If it were placed at the beginning or the end of the passage, it might be plausible to interpret it as encompassing everything, either as a part representing the whole or the whole representing a part.

However, since it is positioned among individual categories, there is no similar usage in the language that I am aware of where some parts are listed, then the whole, and then some parts again. For instance, in the verse: “Whoever is an enemy to Allāh and His angels and His messengers and Gabriel and Michael – then indeed, Allāh is an enemy to the disbelievers.” [Qur᾽ān 2:98], it is permissible to list parts after the whole, but it would not be correct to say: “to Allāh and His messengers and Gabriel and His angels and Michael.”

Similarly, in the verse: “For you therein is warmth and [numerous] benefits.” [Qur᾽ān 16:5], it is permissible to list the whole after parts, but it would not be correct to say: “therein is warmth and benefits and meat.”

In summary: All indications point to the specification of the general term (fī sabīl-Allāh) “in the cause of Allāh” to mean jihād. It is not unreasonable to include within the meaning of jihād the supportive means in the war against the enemy. However, it is highly unlikely to interpret the text to mean “all acts of righteousness” for the reasons mentioned above.

Fatwā issued by Dr. Khālid Naṣr