خلاصة:
The protection of non-combatants such as women, children, and the sick in wars and armed conflicts is one of the religious principles and established tenets of Imami jurisprudence. Based on this principle, Shia jurists believe that during wars, Muslim combatants must exercise such precision when attacking military targets that no harm or damage is caused to civilians, non-military targets, and individuals who do not participate in the war. This issue has been emphasized in numerous verses and traditions, and this article seeks to answer the question of how these verses and traditions indicate the necessity of protecting such individuals. Additionally, this article answers the following questions: 1. What is the jurisprudential ruling on aggression against women, children, and non-combatants during wartime? Is it prohibited or disliked? 2. Is the immunity of the lives and souls of non-combatants in wars limited to the individuals mentioned by jurists, or can other individuals besides them also be considered among those to whom aggression and attack are not permitted? 3. What are the exceptional circumstances under which jurists have allowed civilians to be subject to aggression and attack?
ملخص الجهاز:
Suyuti also says regarding this: "The purpose of the verse is the prohibition of aggression against non-combatants; meaning, do not commit oppression and tyranny against non-combatant enemies and only fight those who are at war with you; as it has been narrated from "Ibn Abbas" that the meaning of "la ta'tadu" is "do not kill women, children, the elderly, and those who offer you peace; for if you do so, you have transgressed".
In this regard, a number of jurists have held that the killing of women, children, and in general, non-combatants in war is forbidden (haram), and to prove their claim, they have relied on the absolute application of the aforementioned narrations.
However, another group of jurists has held it to be disliked (karahah) and believes that various narrations exist that indicate the permissibility of killing and slaughtering women and children in wars.
In this matter, I did not find any dissenting opinions from any jurists; rather, Allamah al-Hilli, in the book al-Muntaha, has claimed consensus (ijma') regarding the impermissibility of killing the women and children of the enemy's followers—even if they participate in military combat (Najafi, 1404 AH, Vol. 21, p.
Among the individuals possessing immunity are the paralyzed and the blind, just as al-Fadil explicitly stated and the narration of Hafs also indicates; however, it is appropriate that this ruling be qualified, meaning that where these individuals do not possess military thought, do not participate in the war, and there is no necessity for killing them, such as when the enemy uses them as a human shield (Najafi, 1404 AH, Vol. 21, p.
(
, 
, 
)
