Answering the Doubt Regarding Killing Protected Non-Muslims on Account of the Actions of Their States
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner:
Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, these are two questions asking about a doubt and how to answer it. The doubt is that those who argue that the disbelievers who have a treaty with the Muslims kill Muslims in other Muslim lands, as is happening in Iraq, thereby break their treaty and it becomes permissible to kill them. How is this objection answered?
The Shaykh:
The answer is clear, my brother.[Al-An'am 6:164] How can we hold our servant accountable for something he did not do? How can we hold him responsible for the crime of another or the crime of his state? This is a person under a treaty who has done nothing wrong, so how can we hold him responsible for the actions of his state or the actions of some of his countrymen? Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says: [Al-An'am 6:164] This is injustice. If we kill him, it is injustice, because we are killing the innocent on account of the criminal. This is not permissible in Islam. Yes.
The questioner:
He says: Honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh:
These people have no fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence); they have no fiqh at all, even though they claim to be scholars and students of knowledge. They have no fiqh, just like their brothers, the earlier Khawarij (an early sect that declared sinners disbelievers). They have no fiqh; they have enthusiasm, they have religion and scrupulousness, but behind them is nothing that prevents them from shedding blood, may Allah protect us from that. So they have ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) and enthusiasm, but they have no fiqh. The lack of fiqh is a calamity; the lack of fiqh is a great calamity. Therefore, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) says that they have texts in which they fell short in understanding, and they came from this shortcoming in knowledge that leads them to this. The lack of fiqh in the religion of Allah and the lack of fiqh in the texts—perhaps they can memorize the Qur'an, and they can memorize al-Bukhari, Muslim, and the four Sunan collections, and they memorize them, but they have no fiqh. Memorization without fiqh is of no benefit; memorization without fiqh is never of any benefit. Rather, it may increase a person's extremism and transgression, and he thinks he is a scholar because he memorizes. Memorization without fiqh is of no benefit, so one must pay attention to this matter. Yes.
Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, these are two questions asking about a doubt and how to answer it. The doubt is that those who argue that the disbelievers who have a treaty with the Muslims kill Muslims in other Muslim lands, as is happening in Iraq, thereby break their treaty and it becomes permissible to kill them. How is this objection answered?
The Shaykh:
The answer is clear, my brother.
and no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another
وَلَا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَىٰand no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another
وَلَا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَىٰThe questioner:
He says: Honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh:
These people have no fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence); they have no fiqh at all, even though they claim to be scholars and students of knowledge. They have no fiqh, just like their brothers, the earlier Khawarij (an early sect that declared sinners disbelievers). They have no fiqh; they have enthusiasm, they have religion and scrupulousness, but behind them is nothing that prevents them from shedding blood, may Allah protect us from that. So they have ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) and enthusiasm, but they have no fiqh. The lack of fiqh is a calamity; the lack of fiqh is a great calamity. Therefore, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) says that they have texts in which they fell short in understanding, and they came from this shortcoming in knowledge that leads them to this. The lack of fiqh in the religion of Allah and the lack of fiqh in the texts—perhaps they can memorize the Qur'an, and they can memorize al-Bukhari, Muslim, and the four Sunan collections, and they memorize them, but they have no fiqh. Memorization without fiqh is of no benefit; memorization without fiqh is never of any benefit. Rather, it may increase a person's extremism and transgression, and he thinks he is a scholar because he memorizes. Memorization without fiqh is of no benefit, so one must pay attention to this matter. Yes.
Source
الفوزان -أشرطة- شرح زاد المستقنع مع الأسئلة - 091-كتاب الجنايات - ديات النفس — archive.org (21:49)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.