Blog released for the works of Imam Anwar al Awlaki rh - click the picture

Blog released for the works of Imam Anwar al Awlaki rh - click the picture
Insha Allah we will keep on posting the works of the sheikh in this blog, please visit frequently

Important Announcement

As-Salam Alaikum
Brothers and Sisters,

We Have a New Page Dedicated for the Works of Imam Ibn Qayyim Al Jawziyya (Rahimahullah)

Hope this would be of benefit :)



Wednesday, March 9, 2011

the hukm of Allah about fighting them (ibn thaymiyya)

The Hukm of Allaah about Fighting Them
Ibn Taymiyyah said as mentioned in Majmu’a al-Fataawa: “Fighting
the Tartars who came over to Syria is obligatory by the Quraan and
Sunnah, because Allaah I says in the Quraan:
‘And fight them until there is no more Fitnah, and the religon will
be for Allaah Alone.’57
And the religion means obedience, so if some part of the religion is
for Allaah I and another is for other than Allaah I, fighting becomes
obligatory until all of the religion is for Allaah I and that is why
Allaah I says:
‘O you who believe! Be afraid of Allaah and give up the remains
of the from the usury if you are believers, and if you do not then
take on a notice of war from Allaah and His Messenger.’58
This verse was revealed about the ahl at-Taif (the people of Taif),
who embraced Islaam and took it as their duty to pray and fast, but
they refused to abandon Riba (usury). Thus Allaah I showed that they
were at war with Him and His Messenger r. Therefore if they were at
war with Allaah I and His Messenger r and fighting them was
obligatory, how will it be then with those who abandon several
Islamic laws or most of them such as the Tartars?
Indeed the scholars of the Muslims are agreed that if the rebellious
group abstain from mutawaatir (clear) obligations of Islaam, fighting
them becomes obligatory. Besides, if they pronounce the Shahaadah
but refuse to pray, pay Zakaah, fast in the month of Ramadhan,
perform Hajj, (do not) Judge between themselves by the Quraan and Sunnah, or fail to prohibit al-Fawahish (evil deeds) or wine, or
marrying those whom it has been prohibited to wed, or legalise killing
and taking wealth unjustly, or (dealing in) usury, gambling, (failing)
to fight the disbelievers, or refusing to impose the Jiziah on the
‘People of the Book’ or other things from the Islamic Shari’ah, they
must be fought until all of the religion is for Allaah I.
It was confirmed that when ‘Umar t was debating with Abu Bakr t
about those who refused to pay the Zakaah, Abu Bakr t said to him:
“Why should I not fight the one who has abandoned the laws that
Allaah and His Messenger have made obligatory such as Zakaah,
even if he has already embraced Islaam?” Then he said: “Verily
Zakaah deserves that, by Allaah if they refuse to give me a rein (e.g.
of a camel or horse) which they used to give the Messenger of Allaah
r, I will fight them for refusing to do so.” ‘Umar said: “I saw that
Allaah opened the breast of Abu Bakr for fighting, therefore I knew
that it was the truth.”59
Also it was indeed confirmed in the Saheehain60 in different ways
that the Prophet r mentioned the Khawaarij and said about them:
“One of you (meaning his companions) will underestimate his
prayers comparing to their prayers, his fasting, and his recitation of
the Quraan to their recitation, they read the Quraan but it does not
go beyond their throats, they go out of the religion as the arrow goes
out of game. Wherever you find them, kill them, because the person
who has killed them shall have a great reward with Allaah on the Day
of Judgement. If I catch them 1 will kill them the way ‘Ad61 were
killed.”
The salaf (predecessors) and the Imaams are agreed upon fighting
those (al-Khawaarij). The first one ever to fight them was ‘Ali ibn
Abi Talib t and the Muslims kept on fighting them during the
Khilaafah of the ‘Umayyads and ‘Abbasids along with the leaders
even though they were oppressors, and al-Hajjaaj62 and his delegates
were some of those who used to fight against them. So all the Imaams
of the Muslims commanded that they must be fought. The tartars and
the like (the rulers of today) have more greatly rebelled against the
Islamic Shari’ah than those who refused to pay Zakaah, al-Khawaarij
and ahl at-Taif who refused to give up usury. Thus he who has doubts
about fighting them is the most ignorant of people about religion of
Islaam, and as fighting them has become obligatory then they must be
fought by the consensus of Muslims, even if the one who is forced (to
fight with their army) is among them.”63


Fighting Them as Rebels
Ibn Taymiyyah said in Majmu’a al-Fataawa: “Indeed some people
may think that those Tartars are misconceived rebels.64 Therefore they should be judged by the same rules that those who refused to pay
Zakaah after the death of the Prophet r and al-Khawaarij were judged
by.” We shall clarify the corruption of this illusion, Insha-Allaah.
Ibn Taymiyyah said: “As the Prophet r said: “The one who dies while
defending his property is a martyr; the one who dies in his own
defence is a martyr; and the one defending his family is a martyr.”65
How then about fighting those (Tartars) who have rebelled against the
Islamic laws and engaged themselves in war against Allaah U and His
Messenger r, and whose tyranny and rebellion are the least (evil
deeds) within them? Verily fighting those who oppose and transgress
is confirmed by the Sunnah and Ijmaa’ (consensus), and those
(Tartars) have oppressed and abused the Muslims in their lives,
wealth, honour and religion, and are some of the most evil and
misconceived rebels. But the person, who has claimed that they
should be fought in the same way as the misconceived rebels are
fought, has made a dreadful mistake and been lead far astray. This is
because the least thing that the misconceived should have is an
acceptable interpretation by which they act as rebels; and that is why
they (scholars) said, “the Imaam must send them a letter, so if they
have a misconception he should clarify it, and if they have an
oppression he should remove it. But what misconception is there for
those (Tartars) who have engaged themselves in war with Allaah and
His Messenger r, exerted themselves in spreading corruption on earth
and rebelled against the Islamic laws? Undoubtedly, they are not
saying that they establish more of the Islamic religion than this group
as far as knowledge and actions are concerned.”66  Befriending them against the Muslims
Ibn Taymiyyah said: “Whoever has joined them from the military
leaders or others then the ruling on him is the same as the ruling on
them, and that is they have apostated from the laws of Islaam. And if
the salaf indeed called those who refused to pay the Zakaah apostates
despite that they used to fast, pray and they did not fight (against) the
Muslims. How would it be then with the one who is killing Muslims
alongside the enemies of Allaah U and His Messenger r?”67
Ibn Taymiyyah also said: “Thus it becomes clear that the one who is
with them and is a Muslim by origin is more evil than the Turks who
are disbelievers (at that time), because when the Muslim apostatises
from some of the Shari’ah, his case becomes worse than the one who
has not entered into it yet, such as those who refused to pay the
Zakaah and the likes of those whom as-Siddeeq (Abu Bakr t) fought
against. Even if the apostates understand, write or practice some
aspects from the laws of Islaam they are worse than those Turks who
have not entered into the fold of Islaam and its laws. Accordingly
the Muslims find that they harm the religion more than the others
(Turks), and they criticise the laws of Islaam. So obedience to Allaah
and His Messenger is greater than saving those whom have apostated
from part of the religion and show hypocrisy in part, even if they
display some connection with Islamic knowledge and religion.”68
Those Forced to Fight in Their Ranks
Ibn Taymiyyah also said: “None of those who behave as Muslims
would voluntarily join them unless he is a hypocrite zindiq or a
wicked sinner. And the one they took out with them by force will be
resurrected according to his intention. But we have to fight the whole army, because it is not possible (for us) to distinguish between the
one who is forced and the one who is not.”69
To warn the one who is forced, Ibn Taymiyyah said: “How will it be
then with the one who is forced to kill Muslims along with the group
which has rebelled against the Islamic Laws, such as those who
refused to pay Zakaah, the apostates and the like? Such a person must
not engage in fighting when forced to attend even if the Muslims kill
him. Likewise when the disbelievers force someone (a Muslim) to
their front-line to fight the Muslims, or when a man forces another
man to kill a innocent Muslim, he is not allowed to kill him (and that
is) according to the consensus of the Muslims; even if he (the forcer)
uses killing as a means to force him. This is because saving his own
life is not to be given priority over that of an innocent. So he must not
be unjust to someone else by killing him so as not to be killed
(himself).”70

No comments: