Has your opinion changed regarding the ruling on jihad in Afghanistan, given that your scholarly opinion was that it is an individual obligation, whereas practically, it was understood from your words that one should not go there?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : All right, please, what do you have?
The questioner : May Allah reward you. We sat with Your Eminence about two years ago on the same topic.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And Your Eminence’s words from the scholarly perspective have not changed.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : At that time, you said it was an individual obligation for every Muslim.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And today you say it is an individual obligation for every Muslim.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : As for the practical aspect, there is some change in the wording, perhaps to take into account some of the reality or something.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : At that time, Your Eminence’s words were that due to certain circumstances surrounding the jihad there, the conditions of Muslims in their lands, the method of infiltrating there, and the possibility of having a sufficient amount of weapons for whoever wants to go, and so on, the words were understood to mean that a person should not go there. I even asked you about this, and it was understood from that as well, so you said yes. You said: “We want the explicit wording, not the implied meaning.” You mentioned, may Allah reward you, that the explicit wording is that it is an individual obligation from the Sharia perspective and the scholarly perspective, but as for the practical aspect, for such and such and such, I do not see going there. And now, and also what we heard in a previous tape, the practical aspect, your words have changed slightly from the previous time. We want to know if there is something new in the reality or in Your Eminence’s knowledge of the current conditions there that caused the change in the practical aspect, or what?
The Shaykh : I honestly do not find any change in myself, unless the words you attribute to me were recorded, in which case I would listen to them again and compare them with what I remember now. Otherwise, I think the issue involves generality and specificity, like the issue of jihad in Muslim lands that I mentioned previously. I was among the first to deny the recent jihad in Syria; I denied it because it was carried out randomly, with no organization, no media, no cooperation with other groups, and nothing at all. I was pessimistic, and while pessimism is not correct, I was pessimistic about their actions because this revolution would then not bear its fruit, and unfortunately, that is what happened. Some people, as I heard on this trip, thought that I was also contradictory. At that time, I used to condition that the fighting be under one imam, and now you know the situation in Afghanistan, yet you tell me it is an individual obligation. I do not find a contradiction between this and that. Likewise, I cannot say now that my previous fatwa, in the explicit wording and not the implied meaning as you say, differs from my current opinion. What is new? I cannot say that I have found in myself, between two years and this moment, that my opinion on the subject has changed. But if you have a recording of the session you are referring to, it is possible, as they say today, to put the dots on the letters and say, “No, this matches what I am upon,” or I would say, “No, a new opinion has emerged for me, and this previous statement is specified by the subsequent situation.” That is all I have. Yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you. We sat with Your Eminence about two years ago on the same topic.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And Your Eminence’s words from the scholarly perspective have not changed.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : At that time, you said it was an individual obligation for every Muslim.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And today you say it is an individual obligation for every Muslim.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : As for the practical aspect, there is some change in the wording, perhaps to take into account some of the reality or something.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : At that time, Your Eminence’s words were that due to certain circumstances surrounding the jihad there, the conditions of Muslims in their lands, the method of infiltrating there, and the possibility of having a sufficient amount of weapons for whoever wants to go, and so on, the words were understood to mean that a person should not go there. I even asked you about this, and it was understood from that as well, so you said yes. You said: “We want the explicit wording, not the implied meaning.” You mentioned, may Allah reward you, that the explicit wording is that it is an individual obligation from the Sharia perspective and the scholarly perspective, but as for the practical aspect, for such and such and such, I do not see going there. And now, and also what we heard in a previous tape, the practical aspect, your words have changed slightly from the previous time. We want to know if there is something new in the reality or in Your Eminence’s knowledge of the current conditions there that caused the change in the practical aspect, or what?
The Shaykh : I honestly do not find any change in myself, unless the words you attribute to me were recorded, in which case I would listen to them again and compare them with what I remember now. Otherwise, I think the issue involves generality and specificity, like the issue of jihad in Muslim lands that I mentioned previously. I was among the first to deny the recent jihad in Syria; I denied it because it was carried out randomly, with no organization, no media, no cooperation with other groups, and nothing at all. I was pessimistic, and while pessimism is not correct, I was pessimistic about their actions because this revolution would then not bear its fruit, and unfortunately, that is what happened. Some people, as I heard on this trip, thought that I was also contradictory. At that time, I used to condition that the fighting be under one imam, and now you know the situation in Afghanistan, yet you tell me it is an individual obligation. I do not find a contradiction between this and that. Likewise, I cannot say now that my previous fatwa, in the explicit wording and not the implied meaning as you say, differs from my current opinion. What is new? I cannot say that I have found in myself, between two years and this moment, that my opinion on the subject has changed. But if you have a recording of the session you are referring to, it is possible, as they say today, to put the dots on the letters and say, “No, this matches what I am upon,” or I would say, “No, a new opinion has emerged for me, and this previous statement is specified by the subsequent situation.” That is all I have. Yes.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.