Are Jihadis Non-Muslims if They Kill Other Muslims?

One frequently hears the suggestion that jihadists, like Al-Qa’ida and ISIS members, are not Muslims because they kill other Muslims. People who advance this reasoning would have us believe that killing other Muslims is sufficient for being a non-Muslim.Those who argue for this position are clearly not familiar with Islamic history, which is filled with Muslim groups killing other Muslim groups. Indeed, intra-Muslim conflict goes all the way back to what is called The First Fitna (656-661 A.D), which was precipitated by the assassination of Uthman Ibn Affan, the third “rightly guided” caliph. The First Fitna saw the likes of A’isha, the then widowed wife of Muhammad, pitted against Ali ibn Abi Talib, the cousin of Muhammad and, according to Ibn Ishaq, the first male convert to Islam. If anyone was a Muslim, it was surely A’isha and Ali. But it seems clear that the fact that they fought each other, e.g., in the Battle of the Camel (656 A.D), is not sufficient to render them non-Muslims.

Therefore, the claim that jihadists like ISIS and al-Qa’ida members are non-Muslims because they kill other Muslims is false. Muslims can and do kill other Muslims—they have been doing so for centuries.The more interesting question is not whether people are non-Muslims in virtue of killing other Muslims; the question is not even whether fighting against other Muslims en masse is sufficient to make one a non-Muslim. Rather, the question is whether fighting against other Muslims en masse is good evidence for being a non-Muslim. If Islamic apologists want to accept this weaker principle, then they must also accept that we have good evidence that the likes of A’isha and Ali were not Muslim. However, many such apologists will no doubt find conclusion unpalatable, and for good reason.