Intended Meaning
The text holds that assassinations and the bombing of civilians are not part of combat; rather, they are a departure from its meaning. Combat confrontation is one thing, and targeting civilians and assassination is another that does not fall within this framework.
The Atom’s Structure in the Atlas
- Type of argument: Critical
- Movement of the argument: Assassinations and the bombing of civilians are not combat, but a departure from its meaning.
- Key terms: assassinations, bombing of civilians, combat.
- Degree of centrality: Central.
This atom separates combat as a specific confrontation from targeting civilians as a deviation from it. In this way, it prevents the justification of indiscriminate violence in the name of combat.
Links to Assist Reading
- Muhammad Shahrur: Draining the Sources of Terrorism
- Jihad, Combat, and the Critique of Violence
- combat
Support
- Supporting text: “Assassinations and the bombing of civilians are considered a departure from the meaning of combat.”
Place of the Support in the Book
- Book: Draining the Sources of Terrorism.
- Location: At the beginning of the book, within the discussion of spending, combat, and civilians.
- Type of support: Close evidence.
- Marker that helps verification: Not spending in the way of God
- Reading note: This passage is suitable as support because the witness explicitly states that bombing markets with civilians is not in the way of God, and it directly reinforces the atom.
Degree of Documentation
- Level: Directly documented
- Meaning of the level: The atom relies on an explicit witness close to the wording of the claim.
- Limits of the reading: The formulation above is an analytical summary and should not be treated as a verbatim quotation unless the witness is transmitted word for word.
Editorial Note
This atom fits with atoms that deny absolute violence and define the scope of combat.