*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
{ Sila lawat Laman Hizbi-Net - http://www.hizbi.net }
{ Hantarkan mesej anda ke: [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
{ Iklan barangan? Hantarkan ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
PAS : KE ARAH PEMERINTAHAN ISLAM YANG ADIL
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fatwa on Events Following 11 September 2001
by Sheikh Hammoud Al-Uqlaa Ash-Shuaybi (Arabian Peninsula)
Back to Fatawa
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy
Q: To proceed, Sheikh Hammoud ibn 'Abdullaah Ash-Shuaybi, there have been a
lot of talks on what happened in America some supporting and blessing others
opposing and condemning it. What is the correct stand in these two opinions
according to your view? We similarly hope you will go into details in the
issue because of the ambiguities in it.
A: Praise is due to Allah Lord of the Worlds, may the Salaat and Salaam be
with the unlettered Prophet, his family, his companions and all who live
according to his path till the Day of Judgment.
Before answering the question we should know that whatever decision the non-
Muslim state, America, takes -especially critical decisions which involve
war - it is taken based on opinion poll and/or voting within the house of
representatives and senate, which represent directly, the exact opinion of
the people they represent - the people of America - through their
representatives in the Parliament. Based on this, any American who voted for
war is a like a fighter, or at least a supporter, as we will explain later.
Let it also be understood that the guide and final decision on the
interactions of Muslims with the Unbelievers are the Book of Allah and the
Sunnah of His Prophet may the Salat and Salam be with him; And not politics
or personal benefits. And the Qur'an has explicitly explained this issue and
clarified it because of its importance and danger. When we refer to the
Qur'an we realize that it has left no one in doubt nor did it leave any gay
areas on this issue.
And all the various verses which discuss this issue emphasize two things,
namely Al-Walaa' (love and alliance) and Al-Baraa'ah (hate and opposition),
which confirms the fact that Al-Walaa' and Al-Baraa'ah are strong pillars in
the Islamic Shari'ah, an issue on which the scholars - both the past and
contemporary - have consensus. Allah says warning against Loving the
unbelievers, taking sides with them and leaning towards them:
"O believers! Take not Jews and Christians as your (protecting) friends,
they are allies of one another. Whosoever allies with them, amongst you,
then he is one of them..."
"O Believers! Do not take My enemy and your enemy, as friends, giving them
your affection..."
And Allah said: "O Believers! Take not private friends from among your
enemies expressing open love to them.."
And He said on the necessity of rejecting the unbelievers "certainly you had
an excellent example in Ibrahim and those with him, when they said to their
people we are free from you and from whatever ye worship other than Allah,
we have rejected you hostility has stated between us and you till the Day of
Judgment..." And the Exalted said: "Never will you find a people who believe
in Allah and the Last Day making friendships with those oppose Allah and His
messenger even though they were their parents or their sons.."
And the Exalted and praised said: "Say: if your parents, your children, your
brothers, your wives, your kindred, the weath you have acquired, the
commerce in which you fear decline, or the dwellins you are pleased with,
are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and striving hard and
fighting in His cause, then wait until Allah brings His Decision. And Allah
guides not the Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient)"
These verses and tens of others are clear statements on the obligation and
necessity of opposing unbelievers and hating them, as well as rejecting
them. And I don't think any person with the slightest level of knowledge is
ignorant of this.
Having said this, you should know that America is a Kufr State that is
totally against Islam and Muslims. In fact it has reached the peak of that
arrogance in the form of open attacks on several Muslim Nations as it did in
Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philistine, Libya and others, where it - America -
allied with the forces of Kufr such as Britain, Russia and others in
attacking and trying to exterminate them. Similarly, America expelled the
Palestinians from their homes and housed the 'brothers of Pigs and Apes' in
them; and stood firmly in support of the criminal Zionist State of the Jews,
giving them all they need in the form of wealth, weapons and training. How
then can America after all these things not be considered an enemy of the
Muslim Nations and at war with them?
But, because they have reached the peak of tyranny and arrogance; because
they have seen the collapse of the Soviet Union in the hands of the Muslims
in Afghanistan, they thought that they are the Ultimate Power above which
there is no power. Unfortunately, they forgot that Allah, the Exalted and
Mighty, is Stronger than them and can humble and destroy them.
On the other hand, it is unfortunate and disturbing to see that a lot of
fellow scholars have preferred the side of mercy and emotion and forgotten
or ignored what that Kufr Nation (America) is doing such as killing,
destroying and spoiling most of the Muslim Lands, and showing no mercy or
kindness in that.
Consequently, I find it incumbent upon me to refute some false claims and
misconceptions that some fellow scholars are relying upon in trying to
support their positions.
MISCONCEPTION No. 1
One of them is what I heard from some of them, "that we have agreements and
pacts between us and America and hence it is binding on us to fulfil them."
My response to this is from two points of view:
1. The person saying this has already concluded that it is Muslims who
committed the act, and up to now, no proof of law has been established to
the effect that Muslims are behind the attack, or that they participated in
it, in which case it may be said that they have broken the covenant. So,
since, it is yet to be established that we committed the act, nor that we
did partake in its execution, how then can it be said that we have broken
the 'Pact'?
Of course expressing our hatred for those unbelievers and rejecting them has
nothing to do with breaking covenants or pacts. It is just something Allah
has compelled upon us in clear texts of His Glorious Book.
2. Even if we accept that there are covenants and pacts between Muslims and
America, why then did America not fulfill its side of the agreement?
Why has it not stopped its aggression and harming a lot of Muslims? Is it
not an established fact that: all pacts are binding on both parties; and
that whenever they do not fulfill their roles, the pact becomes invalid and
the covenant broken? Allah the Exalted said:
"But if they break their covenants after its solemnizing it, and attack your
religion, then, fight ye the leaders of Kufr, for they (deserve) no
covenant..."
MISCONCEPTION No. 2
They say that: "among the victims were some, innocent and sinless"
Response to this is from several points of view:
1. Sa'ab bin Jathamah (may Allah be pleased with him) reported from that the
Prophet was asked about the people in the homes of Mushrikun (Polytheist)
when they are attacked at night and their women and children are affected,
he said: "they are part of them".
So, this Hadith shows that women, children and all those the killing of whom
is forbidden, when they are separate, it is permissible to kill them when
they are mixed up with the fighters and it is not possible to separate. This
is because they had asked the Prophet about the case which is "attacking at
night", in which case it is not possible to differentiate, and he permitted
them because "things may be allowed when they occur along the way but be
forbidden when separate".
2. Also, Muslim commanders have always used Catapult when fighting the
Kuffar (a kind of weapon that was used in the past when trying to break into
an enemy camp which is fully fortressed - it destroys whatever it meets by
its weight, i.e. something like a catapult - translator), and it is obvious
that a Catapult when applied in a war does not differentiate between a
fighter and others, hence it may afflict some those so-called 'innocent
souls', but that not withstanding this is an established practice among
Muslims in their wars.
Ibn Qudamah may Allah have mercy on him, said: "And it is permissible to use
Catapult because the Prophet may the Salaat and Salaam be with him used
Catapult on the people of Ta'if; and Amr bin al-As did the same to the
people of Alexandria (Al-Mughniy, vol. 10, p503).
And Ibn al-Qasim said "it is permissible to use Catapult against Kuffar even
if children, women and old men and monks are killed inadvertently, because
'Nikayah' (doing what will weaken the enemy) is allowed according to the
consensus of Ulama. Ibn Rushd said: "'Nikayah' is permissible according to
Ijama' and on any type of polytheists" (Al-Hashiyah ala' Ar-Raudh, vol. 4, p
271)
Here, there is a question we will like to ask those who use the word
"Terrorism" on what happened in America, and I want their reply.
The question is: When America attacked a Pharmaceutical firm in Sudan, using
its planes and bombs, destroying it and killing everybody in it, staff and
laborers, what was this called? Shouldn't the action of America in the
Sudanese firm be considered as an act of terrorism? Else how can what those
people did in America be treatest as an act of terrorism? Why is everybody
condemning and rejecting what was done to those buildings in America and yet
we did not hear any such condemnations on the destruction caused by America
in the Sudanese firm?
I certainly don't see any difference between the two acts, except that the
money that was used in building the firm is Muslims' and the workers and
staff killed by destroying the firm were Muslims; Whereas, the buildings
destroyed by those hijackers was built with the money of non-Muslims and the
victims of the explosion were non-Muslims.
So, is this the difference that made some fellow brothers to call what
happened in America 'Terrorism'!! While at the same time they neither
condemned what happened in Sudan, nor called it TERRORISM?
Similarly, what happened to the Libyans of deliberate and imposed
'starvation'; 'starvation' of the Iraqis plus almost daily attacks; the
sanctions and attacks launched against Afghanistan, a Muslim Nation: all
these, why are they not termed "terrorism"? What else can we term them if
not terrorism?
In addition, we should ask those people, what do you mean by "innocent and
sinless"?
Those are one of three categories/groups:
The first category:
They may be among those who neither fought, nor supported their country by
their persons, wealth or opinion and suggestions or anything else. It is not
permissible to kill this category, on condition that they can be
differentiated from the rest, but if they are mixed up such that they can't
be separated, then it is allowed to kill them along with the others and by
extension, like old men, women, children, the sick and the disabled or
devoted monks.
Ibn Qudamah said: "It is allowed to kill women and children in night attacks
and in demolished buildings or ditches, so far as the intention is not to
kill them in particular; And it is allowed to kill their (the enemies')
animals as a means for killing and subduing them; there is no difference of
opinion on this." (Al-Mughniy, with the Sharh -commentary, 10/503)
Similarly he said: "It is permissible to attack enemies at night. Ahmad bin
Hanbal said: 'there is no problem with night attacks, were the Romans not
attacked at night?' And he said: 'we don't know anybody who disliked night
attacks" (Al-Mughniy 10/503)
The second category: Or, they (the victims) may be part of those who did not
participate directly in the war but helped with their wealth or opinions,
these cannot be called "innocent", nay they are among the fighters and part
of the strength of the enemy.
Ibn Abdil Barr may Allah has mercy on him, said in Al-Istizkar: "There is no
dispute among the scholars that whoever fights among women or old men,
killing him is allowed, similarly, any child capable of fighting , if he
does may be killed." (Al-Istizkar vol. 14, p 74). Similarly, Ibn Qudamah
reported the Ijamaa' on killing women, children and old men if they help
their people; Ibn Abdil Barr said: "They have a concensus on the fact that
the Prophet killed Duraid bin on the Day of the Battle of Hunayn because he
was an experienced in war and contributed his opinions. Thus whoever is like
that among old men deserves to be killed according to all (scholars).
(At-Tamheed, vol. 16 p 142)
And an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him related the Ijama' (in Sharh
Muslim in "the Book of Jihad") that elderly men among the non-Muslims should
be killed if they have knowledge of war strategies.
Ibn Qasim also quoted in Al-Hashiyat that: "they had Ijmaa' that the ruling
concerning any strategist is that of any fighter in Jihad. This Ijmaa' was
reported from Ibn Taimiyyah. Similarly, he related from Ibn Taimiyyah that
"those who assist a group and their helpers are (to be considered) part of
them, in whatever is for or against them"
The third Category:
Or they may be Muslims, and it is not permissible for these to be killed
separately; But when they are mixed up with others in such a way that they
have to be killed with them, then it is allowed, and these is the case known
as 'Mas'alatut Tatarrus' (when non-Muslims hold Muslims as shield against
attack), which was discussed earlier.
Thus, what many are babbling and repeating on the case of the "innocent
victims", is nothing but the effect of the West and its media, to the extent
that many an unwary person repeats the words and expressions of our enemies,
which are in direct contradiction with the expressions of Shari'ah.
Let us not, also, forget that it is permissible for us to treat non-Muslims
similar to the way they treated us; and in this there is a reply and clear
proof to all those who repeat the words "innocent victims", because Allah
the Exalted has made that. Among the texts on that:
"Thus, if you retaliate, retaliate with what equals the aggression afflicted
upon you" and He said:
"...and those whom, when an aggression afflicts them, they revenge, but the
reward of an evil is an evil equal to it".
Also among the sayings of scholars on the permissibility of taking revenge:
Ibn Taimiyyah said: "it is their right to mutilate. So it is their right to
do it in revenge and payback in the same coins, OR they may waive it, but
patience is better. This is in a case where the mutilation does not lead to
a gain in the Jihad, and it is not for an equal treatment from them (the
enemies); But when Mutilating them will lead to their accepting the faith or
warn them against another aggression, then, it is - in this case - part of
recommended Jihad and retribution." (This was quoted by Ibn Muflih in
Alfuru' vol.6 p.218)
Else, whoever says that there are "innocent victims" without any
differentiation between their categories, must accept that he is accusing
the Prophet and the Companions and those after them that they killed
"innocent victims", according to them! Because the Prophet used Catapult in
his war against Ta'if, and it is the nature of Catapult that it does not
differentiate.
Similarly, the Prophet (saw) killed all whom those who had attained puberty
among the Jews of Bani Quraidah without differentiating between them.
Ibn Hazm, commenting on the Hadith that "Banu Quraidah were paraded before
the Prophet, and he ordered the killing of all those who had attained
puberty", said: "this is a general ruling from the Prophet, since he did not
leave out an old man, a merchant, a farmer or any other person; this was
related from him with genuine Ijmaa' (Al-Muhallaa vol. 6 p. 299)
Ibn al-Qayyim said in 'Zaadul Ma'aad': "it is part of his guidance (i.e. the
Prophet's) that whenever he made a pact with some people and they broke the
covenant, or some of them broke the agreement, and the rest supported them
on that , and accepted it; he fights all of them and considers all as having
broken the covenant. As he did to Banu Quraizah and Banun Nadheer and Banu
Qainuqa', and as he treated the people of Mecca. So this is Sunnah (method
or approach to those who betray their covenants.
Similarly, he said: "Ibn Taimiyyah has certainly ruled that the Christians
of Mashriq should be fought when they assisted the enemies of the Muslims
against them, and helped them with their wealth and weapons, despite the
fact that they did not did not fight us. He considered them to have broken
the covenant as Quraish did during the time of the Prophet by helping Banu
Bakr bin Wa'il in fighting those in alliance with the prophet"
In conclusion, we all know that the non Muslim west, especially America will
definitely seize this opportunity and utilize that in its favor and through
fresh injustice to the Muslims in Afghanistan and Palestine, Chechnya and
other areas, whoever the perpetrators may be. And they will try to eradicate
Jihad and those who engage in it and it will never succeed; and they will do
that in the name of fighting Terrorism; and they will go ahead and fight our
brothers in faith, in the Taliban ruled, Muslim Nation of Afghanistan, the
only nation that has given a cover for genuine Mujahiddin and assists them
at a time when everybody has forsaken them, and who never bowed down to the
Non-Muslim Western nations.
Thus, it is compulsory to assist this Islamic Nation in Jihad, with whatever
we can Allah the Exalted says:
"The Believers, men and women, are helpers of one another"
And He said "Help each other in righteousness and obedience"
Thus, it is compulsory to assist them with wealth and persons and opinions
and advices and through the Media by defending them and their honor and
their public image; and through prayers for them that they vanquish the
enemy and have steadfastness.
And like we said, it is compulsory upon all Muslims to help the Taliban
Government it is also equally compulsory upon the Muslim Governments
especially the neighboring countries to assist them against the Kufr of the
West.
And let those know that that failing to assist Taliban that is being fought
for its religion and because of the help it gives to Mujahideen and,
assisting the kuffar against them is the kind of friendship and support of
the kuffar that Allaah warned against when He said:
"Believers, take not my enemy and your enemy as friends in whom you put
love"
And He said "Believers take not my enemy and yours as Protecting friends."
Certainly it will go down in history that these countries betrayed their
brothers and it will remain as a kind of bad record on them and their people
that will remain forever!!
Similarly let those neighboring and nearby countries be ware that if they
refuse to help the brothers and allowed the enemy to attack them, that Allah
may face them with His Natural Disasters and terrible situations as a
punishment and chastisement on them. The Prophet said a Muslim is a brother
of a Muslim, he does not forsake or betray him.. and he also said in a
Hadith Qudsi: "Allah said "Whoever fights my Friend should get ready for war
with Me And He said "Whoever allowed a Muslim to be humiliated while he
could assist him, Allah will humiliate him in front of the entire creation
on the Day of Judgment (reported by Ahmad). And we wish to remind the
Pakistan Government that allowing the Americans, the enemies of Muslims, to
use their land is not informed by wisdom nor borne out of experience
politics at all because it will lead to giving the opportunity for America
to discover their secrets of their country and know the location of its
nuclear power with all precision and something that has terrified the West,
and that may lead to the Americans giving the Jews the chance to attack the
Nuclear Plants in Pakistan as they did those of Iraq earlier. And how come
does Pakistan trust America is enemy that has been warning and warning them!
I really think that the reasonable personalities in Pakistan will not allow
it, not to mention their Good Muslims will ever accept this nor will they
just fold their arms and watch surrender to their enemies of yesterday.
We pray to Allah that He helps His Religion and raises His Word and exalts
Islam and the Muslims and the Mujahideen and to destroy America and its
followers and those who assist them. Verily He has that Power and is Able to
do so.
Wa-sallaahu wa-sallam 'alaa Muhammad wa aalihi wa sahbihi was-sallam.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
( Melanggan ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body : SUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Berhenti ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body: UNSUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Segala pendapat yang dikemukakan tidak menggambarkan )
( pandangan rasmi & bukan tanggungjawab HIZBI-Net )
( Bermasalah? Sila hubungi [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pengirim: "firdaus taib" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
