The Shaykh’s discussion regarding the issue of Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait and that this was due to Kuwait’s conspiracy with America against Iraq.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Now, a question arises here to know the precision in handling these issues: When was this agreement discovered? First, second: Did the Kuwaiti state inform Iraq of this fact, or did they not inform them? These are questions that come up. So, I am hearing for the first time that there are, I mean, official documents and so on. Are you aware that this agreement you mentioned, which was agreed upon between Kuwait and the Americans to enter and dominate Iraq from there, was Iraq aware of it or not? What do you think?
The questioner : What I know is that when he became aware of it, he did what he did. When he became aware and these news reached him that America would enter Kuwait, the Kuwaitis, by their nature, as has now become clear, their loyalty is to the disbelievers. So they asked them to protect Kuwait from Iraq. When this agreement reached him and out of fear for his country, he acted. So what we want to reach is: Would they, if they did that, be the cause of the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation), or is he the cause of the fitnah? This is all we want to reach.
The Shaykh : This is correct and beautiful speech. I say: The Kuwaitis are indeed the cause of the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation).
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But you know that the open sin is more dangerous than the hidden sin. I think you know this.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And you know the reason that the hidden sin does not harm in the same way the open sin harms. The open sin helps in the spread of evil among those in whom the sin is open, and the opposite is exactly the case for the hidden sin. So we say, if this is true, there is no doubt—and we are not partisan for one state over another—it is sufficient that we have taken an opposing stance against the state of tawhid (the oneness of Allah) because it violated the Shari'ah of tawhid (the oneness of Allah). It is even more so, and even more so, that we are not with Saddam against Kuwait, nor are we with Kuwait against Saddam. Rather, we are with the truth. If this fact is without doubt, the Kuwaitis would be the cause of what Iraq did, and Iraq is the cause of what Saudi Arabia did. These are, I mean, links each taking the necks of the others in misguidance, I mean, if this basis is established.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So the great corruption that occurred, the Kuwaitis are without doubt the cause.
The questioner : This is what we ask about, that they are the cause!
The Shaykh : I agree with you in this, but I condition this with the establishment of these documents.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : Yes, but from a practical standpoint, does the matter differ? We need to look at the practical side now. Does the matter differ? I mean, are we with Iraq now in its remaining in Kuwait?
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : Because tonight, and before tonight, a question came to me from the Algerians, from the very good group, and what Allah willed, many, millions. One is following up with me on the research with some precision that indicates awareness. And it may be that this, and the praise is for Allah first and last, is that we are saying now that jihad (struggle in the path of Allah) is not practically possible for two reasons: No one from the fighting states or the states being fought raises the banner of jihad (struggle in the path of Allah). Second: Practically, it is not possible for a people to go to Iraq to fight in the path of Allah from the door of supporting the oppressed from the disbelievers, these people, as I explained earlier and we said that with you.
It was said: Well, if it is possible for a people to compel their state to fight with the people to support Iraq, what is your opinion? I said: Yes, this is obligatory to support the Iraqi people against the British and the disbelievers, with two conditions. The first condition: That the fighting of the Iraqi Muslims and the Muslims supporting Iraq is against the disbelieving American or British state, and that there are no other Islamic peoples with them, because then the fighting would be between Muslims and not between Muslims and disbelievers. Yes, this is the first condition. And the second condition—and I was pleased that heThe questioner : and it pleased me that he understood me—said to me: May Allah bless you, this is a precise condition, and it is: It is not permissible to support the Iraqis in fighting the disbelievers, their enemies, while they are in Kuwait. If they return to their country and the aggression of the disbelievers continues upon them in their homeland, here support is obligatory. But if Iraq is still in the country it aggressed upon and you go to support it, then you are not supporting Islam, you are supporting the aggressor, the transgressor. I was pleased with his saying that.The questioner : He said to me: By Allah, O Shaykh, this is, may Allah bless you, a precise condition. And indeed, and I said to him at the end: But this is a theoretical jurisprudential answer that cannot be applied to those who want to actually fight in jihad (struggle in the path of Allah).
And so the issue remains: is the rule.
The questioner : What I know is that when he became aware of it, he did what he did. When he became aware and these news reached him that America would enter Kuwait, the Kuwaitis, by their nature, as has now become clear, their loyalty is to the disbelievers. So they asked them to protect Kuwait from Iraq. When this agreement reached him and out of fear for his country, he acted. So what we want to reach is: Would they, if they did that, be the cause of the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation), or is he the cause of the fitnah? This is all we want to reach.
The Shaykh : This is correct and beautiful speech. I say: The Kuwaitis are indeed the cause of the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation).
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But you know that the open sin is more dangerous than the hidden sin. I think you know this.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And you know the reason that the hidden sin does not harm in the same way the open sin harms. The open sin helps in the spread of evil among those in whom the sin is open, and the opposite is exactly the case for the hidden sin. So we say, if this is true, there is no doubt—and we are not partisan for one state over another—it is sufficient that we have taken an opposing stance against the state of tawhid (the oneness of Allah) because it violated the Shari'ah of tawhid (the oneness of Allah). It is even more so, and even more so, that we are not with Saddam against Kuwait, nor are we with Kuwait against Saddam. Rather, we are with the truth. If this fact is without doubt, the Kuwaitis would be the cause of what Iraq did, and Iraq is the cause of what Saudi Arabia did. These are, I mean, links each taking the necks of the others in misguidance, I mean, if this basis is established.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So the great corruption that occurred, the Kuwaitis are without doubt the cause.
The questioner : This is what we ask about, that they are the cause!
The Shaykh : I agree with you in this, but I condition this with the establishment of these documents.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : Yes, but from a practical standpoint, does the matter differ? We need to look at the practical side now. Does the matter differ? I mean, are we with Iraq now in its remaining in Kuwait?
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : Because tonight, and before tonight, a question came to me from the Algerians, from the very good group, and what Allah willed, many, millions. One is following up with me on the research with some precision that indicates awareness. And it may be that this, and the praise is for Allah first and last, is that we are saying now that jihad (struggle in the path of Allah) is not practically possible for two reasons: No one from the fighting states or the states being fought raises the banner of jihad (struggle in the path of Allah). Second: Practically, it is not possible for a people to go to Iraq to fight in the path of Allah from the door of supporting the oppressed from the disbelievers, these people, as I explained earlier and we said that with you.
It was said: Well, if it is possible for a people to compel their state to fight with the people to support Iraq, what is your opinion? I said: Yes, this is obligatory to support the Iraqi people against the British and the disbelievers, with two conditions. The first condition: That the fighting of the Iraqi Muslims and the Muslims supporting Iraq is against the disbelieving American or British state, and that there are no other Islamic peoples with them, because then the fighting would be between Muslims and not between Muslims and disbelievers. Yes, this is the first condition. And the second condition—and I was pleased that heThe questioner : and it pleased me that he understood me—said to me: May Allah bless you, this is a precise condition, and it is: It is not permissible to support the Iraqis in fighting the disbelievers, their enemies, while they are in Kuwait. If they return to their country and the aggression of the disbelievers continues upon them in their homeland, here support is obligatory. But if Iraq is still in the country it aggressed upon and you go to support it, then you are not supporting Islam, you are supporting the aggressor, the transgressor. I was pleased with his saying that.The questioner : He said to me: By Allah, O Shaykh, this is, may Allah bless you, a precise condition. And indeed, and I said to him at the end: But this is a theoretical jurisprudential answer that cannot be applied to those who want to actually fight in jihad (struggle in the path of Allah).
And so the issue remains:
Be like the carpets in your houses.
كونوا أحلاس بيوتكم
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.