Regarding the Explosions In the Lands of the Muslims

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon all of his Household and Companions.

As for what follows:

It has been requested of me to write some words in regards to some of the recent explosions that took place in an Arab African nation. So, I excused myself from doing so, due to my lack of knowledge as to the causes, executors, and reality of the attacks. So, when it was insisted that I do so, I decided to write something in regards to the methodology of explosions, without referring to any particular event or group, as the issue is much bigger than this.

So, with Allah’s Assistance, I say: in regards to these events that are not supported by any logic or Divine Law, it is necessary to ask about the causes and realities when the fingers of accusation are pointed to Islam and Islamic personalities. During the course of asking these questions, it is also necessary to keep in mind the following issues:

  • Does the news of these attacks come by way of trustworthy news sources? Allah has commanded us to confirm any news that comes our way, Saying: {“O you who believe! If a fasiq comes to you with news, verify it, lest you harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful to what you have done.”} [al-Hujurat; 6]
  • So, if it turns out to be from a trustworthy source, is the reality as they have painted it, or did they fabricate something in accordance with the desires of the ruling powers, without considering the consequences of doing so?

By saying this, I do not call to ignoring the clear and evident realities. However, it is necessary to observe these events with logic, knowledge, and consideration, as it is the case that some criminals might have some actions emanate from them that have no connection to the Shar’, and despite this, they try to beautify their actions in the name of the Shar’. Such a person might do this despite the fact that his actions are the result of his following his whims, or his desire to exact revenge for some wrong that he or his family might have experienced, and will then try to paint his actions as being in accordance with the Shari’ah. This is the affair of every criminal and culprit who commits a crime against those he sees as being criminals, and is then called by his whims, desires, and soul to beautify his actions by clothing the executor of these actions in the garments of the Shari’ah.

It might even be the case that his actions started off with the intention of giving victory to what he assumes to be the Religion, although without any insight or knowledge.

In any case, there is not a big difference between the two scenarios, as they both have a common trait between them: ignorance of the Religion. You would find that one of them has never even attended a religious halaqah, and has never been nurtured at the hands of the scholars, and does not even know the different categories in the Shari’ah, and has never studied the aims and goals of the Shari’ah, and has never acquainted himself with its principles! After all of this, he comes and seeks to establish an Islamic state, without even relying on a fatwa of a reputable scholar! In fact, he might even throw various accusations of shortcomings at these scholars in order to make his own da’wah more believable! So, subhan Allah! How can someone strive to attain such a lofty goal without even being qualified to discuss it, let alone fulfill it!

Let’s assume that the regime ruling this state does not implement the Shari’ah: what does the society and Ummah have to do with this? How can you spill innocent blood and take protected life with such flimsy justifications? Did the one who is braver than all of them – peace be upon him – traverse this path with those whose disbelief couldn’t be more apparent, and whose harm to him couldn’t have been greater, of the leaders of Quraysh in Makkah during his period of weakness prior to his migration?

Can any fair-minded person say that blowing up a building or killing a tourist – even if such a person has no pact of security – will cause a regime to collapse, and establish another one in its place? Do these people not consider the repeated attempts that have taken place in the past, and which have resulted in their doers returning and admitting their mistaken methodology – all after having lost all sense of insight?

We do not call for the recognizing of falsehood, or to abandoning taking it to account, or to submitting to it. However, it is obligatory that this all take place by means sanctioned in the Shari’ah, not by killing those who are supposed to be secure, killing the weak, and those whose blood and wealth are protected.

The Messengers of Allah were as patient as they were when calling their people. For example, we have Nuh, who stuck with his people for 950 years, calling his people to Allah, and he did not take one single life, nor did he kill a single disbeliever! So, how patient have you been?

Indeed, it is a call to think logically, and to look to the consequences of one’s actions, and to act according to the true manhaj of Islam in Da’wah, and to apply its manhaj in initiating change upon insight and knowledge. Otherwise, a sincere intention – if it truly is sincere – is not enough on its own, until it is applied according to the Prophetic manhaj and the way of the believers.

Our Prophet – peace be upon him – stayed in Makkah for over ten years, along with men who would not hesitate in presenting their lives in order to inflict damage upon the disbelievers if this was sanctioned in the Shari’ah. So, by Allah, the youth of today are not any braver or more jealous over the Religion than they were. In fact, some of the Companions even fled with their religion to distant lands in order to protect themselves from harm. Also, the one who looks to the Islamic state following the migration to Madinah will find that, during the period of strength of the state, there were two groups who were plotting against the believers and harming them: a group that made an outward display of Islam while hiding their kufr, with their leader being ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Abi Salul, and this group was not confronted. Rather, the Prophet dealt with them according to the Islam that they outwardly displayed. He even took off his shirt to use as a shroud when burying their leader!

As for the second group, this is manifested in the groups of disbelievers from amongst the Jews, who had harmed the Messenger and the believers by way of insults and hurtful poetry, and their leader was Ka’b bin al-Ashraf. When the Islamic state was established in Madinah, the Messenger of Allah took Ka’b to account for his crimes – and Ka’b alone. So, he alone was assassinated, and not any of his aides, collaborators, advisers, or co-religionists. Rather, he was drawn out so that he was alone so as to avoid needlessly spilling the blood of those who were with him. This was not repeated, from the time of the emergence of the Prophet to his death, and this indicates to you that this was a specific situation, with its own specific circumstances. So, how is it that we can then lay in wait for those whose outer actions indicate Islam – with the basic principle regarding him being that we believe him and are obliged to act according to his outer appearance – and even if he was a hypocrite, he can’t be worse than Ibn Salul!

Indeed, what is obligatory towards the rulers is to hear and obey them in that which is good – so long as they do not exit the fold of Islam – even if they become tyrannical, oppressive, whip your back, and confiscate your wealth. If an observer observes – and he is from those whose observations are given weight and credibility – that some of them have freed themselves from Islam, this is still not a grounds to rebel against them until he gathers with others whose opinions are given credence, as the Prophet said: “…except if you see from them open, clear cut disbelief, for which you have a clear proof from Allah.” So, it is not enough that one person sees this disbelief, just as it is not enough for a group of those whose opinion is given consideration to see this without having a clear proof that cannot be interpreted in any other way. Rather, the mere presence of a doubt regarding possible interpretations prevents this proof from being clear and certain.

So, if the conditions that allow for rebellion are present, it is then necessary to take into consideration the benefits and harms that would result from such actions, including those that cannot be imagined as the result of blowing up public buildings, killing individuals with pacts of security or amnesties. And if the issue is as such, then the path of blowing things up must be openly rejected in the Islamic societies.

In fact, traversing this path of causing these explosions in the lands of the Muslims is tantamount to committing deadly and major sins, as it is rare that such events spare those who outwardly profess Islam, or at least those whose kufr is impossible to confirm. Read and reflect upon the Saying of Allah: {“They are the ones who disbelieved and hindered you from the Sacred Mosque and the sacrificial animals, detaining them from reaching their place of sacrifice. Had there not been believing men and believing women whom you did not know, that you may kill them, and on whose account a sin would have been committed by you without your knowledge, that Allah might bring into His Mercy whom He Wills. If they (the believers and the disbelievers) should have been apart, We would have punished those of them who disbelieved with a painful torment.”} [al-Fath; 25]

So, how is it that we can go against the texts that render blood protected based on such doubts and interpretations that are in no way understood from apparent meanings of the texts, such as the corrupted qiyas (analogical deduction) in regards to the ruling of human shields? Those who use this ruling to support their actions do not even understand it in the way that it is understood by scholarly consensus, which is that it is implemented when the bulk of the Muslim army would be eradicated if this shield were to not be attacked. So, they take this ruling, and they then apply it unrestrictedly, essentially as if attacking a so-called human shield is unrestrictedly permissible, and after this, they come out and claim that there is consensus between the entire Ummah on this falsehood!

They carry out this qiyas, going against the clear cut texts without any established principles! In the ‘Sahihayn,’ it is narrated on the authority of Usamah bin Zayd that the Messenger of Allah sent a party to raid the tribe of Juhaynah in the morning. So, Usamah caught hold of a man who said: ‘There is none worthy of worship but Allah,’ and Usamah then attacked him with a spear, thinking that he had said this only to save himself. When he informed the Messenger of Allah, he said: “Did he not profess that there is none worthy of worship but Allah, and even then, you killed him?” I said: “O Messenger of Allah, he said it out of the fear of the weapon!” He then said: “Did you tear his heart open in order to see whether it had professed or not?” And (Usamah said) he went on repeating it to me till I wished I had embraced Islam that day. Sa’d then said: “By Allah, I would never kill any Muslim so long as Usamah would not kill him.” Upon this, a person remarked: “Did Allah not Say: {“And fight them until there is no more fitnah, and the Religion is all for Allah…”}?” Sa’d replied: “We fought so that there would be no fitnah, while you and your companions wish to fight so that there would be fitnah!”

And reflect upon the story of Musa’s killing of the tyrannical Coptic disbeliever in the disbelieving nation headed by Fir’awn. Despite this, Musa asked his Lord to forgive him. In fact, he said: {“This is from the doings of Satan. Indeed, he is a clear and misguiding enemy.”} [al-Qasas; 15], and he did not refer to it as Jihad. Rather, he judged himself to have been a wrongdoer, and he will excuse himself from carrying out the Great Intercession on the Day of Resurrection due to this action of his. This is all despite the fact that he did not even mean to kill him! So, what would those say who hastily give themselves the excuse in spilling the blood of the Muslims and those who are supposed to be secure? And Allah is the source of Assistance.

And if people enter into fitnah, and their hands become soaked in blood, it becomes difficult to then remove one’s self from these fitan. In ‘Sahih al-Bukhari,’ Ibn ‘Umar said: “Verily, from the most entangled of situations that one can fall into and cannot remove himself from is the spilling of forbidden blood without any right.” Ibn ‘Umar also reported that the Messenger of Allah said: “The believer is within the confines of his religion so long as he does not spill forbidden blood.”

Commenting on this, Ibn Hajar said: “And it has been authentically established that Ibn ‘Umar said to the one who intentionally killed someone wrongfully: “Take your share of cold water now, as you will never enter Paradise.””

And at-Tirmidhi reported that Ibn ‘Umar said: “The destruction of the entire world is lighter with Allah than the killing of a Muslim.” at-Tirmidhi then commented: “This is a hasan hadith,” and an-Nasa’i reported it with the wording: “The killing of a believer is greater with Allah than the destruction of the entire world.” Commenting on this, Ibn al-‘Arabi said: “The prohibition of wrongfully killing an animal is authentically established, as is the severe threat for doing so. So, how much more would it be for killing a human being? How much more would it be for a Muslim? And how much more for a righteous one?”

Therefore, let those who have fallen into such danger fear Allah, repent to Him before meeting Him with sacred blood on their hands, and are included in the ranks of the spreaders of mischief.

Verily, it is upon us to stick to the manhaj of the Prophets and Messengers: {“So, is there upon the Messengers except clearly relaying the message?”} [an-Nahl; 35] As for the Jihad, it will go forth until the Day of Resurrection, and it has its proper places and conditions, as in Palestine, Iraq, etc., and killing those who should be safe and spilling the blood of the Muslims has nothing to do with Jihad!

This is what I have to say, and I ask Allah to grant us insight into the Religion, and to draw out for us the path of those foremost in knowledge, of the Companions and those who follow them in good until the Final Day, and praise be to Allah, firstly and lastly, and peace and prayers be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon all of his Household and Companions.

Original Arabic

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: