Thank you for the article, but what seems problematic to me is an environment, found often in our communities, in which the term “shahid” is used quite loosely – to the point that it loses its religious dimension and becomes a form of political praise. It may seem satisfying to call individuals like Hassan al-Banna and Malcolm X as “shaheed,” but there are also some people in the world who would call bin Laden, Awlaki, Qaddafi, or a suicide bomber who targets innocent individuals “shuhadaa” – how are we to respond to that? Though we can debate about the legitimacy of their actions, it is always true that final determination of someone’s state in the hereafter is God’s alone. And these same people may say that Banna and Malcolm X were definitely NOT shaheed because of some aspect of Banna or Malcolm’s ideology that doesn’t align their religious or political views.

It is definitely good to keep a good opinion of one’s brothers and sisters and speak of them in the best of ways, knowing well that God knows the truth about each individual and makes the final say. But when a shaikh or Islamic leader refers to someone as a “shaheed,” those nuances often are not passed on to the congregation. What the congregation hears is “X is a shaheed, and thus he’s in unquestionably heaven,” and that’s very problematic. Shouldn’t our shuyukh and Islamic leaders be far more responsible when using the term “shaheed” to historical figures?

JazakAllah khair