“Whoever fights so that Allah’s word is supreme is in the cause of Allah” (1).

As for the one who fights out of zeal, we say to him: Why do you fight out of zeal? Is it out of concern for your people, or out of a desire for Islam to remain in your land?

If he gives the first answer, then he is not a martyr; but if he gives the second, then he is a martyr—such as if he says, “I fight out of concern for my people, so that Islam may remain in my land.”

His statement, “and one wrongfully slain,” means that one who is wrongfully slain is likewise not to be washed, because one who is wrongfully slain is a martyr. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Whoever is killed defending his life is a martyr, and whoever is killed defending his property is a martyr” (2).

The correct view is that one who is wrongfully slain is washed like other people, because he falls under the general texts indicating that washing is obligatory. Nothing may be excluded from these general texts except what the evidence specifically establishes—namely, the martyr of the battlefield.

One who is wrongfully slain cannot be equated with the martyr of the battlefield, even though he may be called a martyr. The victim of plague is a martyr, the one who dies of an abdominal illness is a martyr, the drowning victim is a martyr, and the one who dies in a fire is a martyr. Yet not everyone who is called a martyr is subject to the same rulings as the martyr of the battlefield. For the battlefield martyr has willingly exposed his neck to his enemy to be cut for the sake of Allah, whereas the one wrongfully slain was compelled into the fight until he was killed. There is a vast difference between the two.