see it coming.

The second view is that a brigand is someone who fights openly, whereas the fate of someone who murders by stealth is left to the victim’s next of kin. The first view is more consistent with the principles of Islamic law. Indeed, the harm of such murder may be greater, because one does not see it coming.

The jurists also differed concerning those who kill the ruler, such as the murderers of ʿUthmān and the murderer of ʿAlī—may Allah be pleased with them both. Are they treated like brigands and executed as a prescribed punishment, or is their fate left to the victims’ next of kin? There are two views within the school of Ahmad and elsewhere, for killing the ruler causes harm to society at large.

Section

All of this applies when they have been brought under control. But if the ruler or his deputies seek to apprehend them to carry out the prescribed punishment without committing any injustice, and they resist him, then the Muslims must fight them, by scholarly consensus, until all of them have been brought under control. If they will submit only through fighting that leads to all of them being killed, they must be fought even if it leads to that outcome, whether or not they have killed anyone.

During the fighting, they may be killed by whatever means are possible, whether by striking the neck or elsewhere. Those who fight alongside them, protecting and assisting them, must also be fought. This is combat, whereas the former is the enforcement of a prescribed punishment. Fighting these people is even more imperative than killing groups that refuse to submit to the laws of Islam.