What is the ruling on one who goes to Afghanistan solely to train with weapons in order to practice fighting in the future?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Then, like the Afghan jihad, my brothers now, or some of my brothers, say: We want to go to jihad to train with weapons and gain experience with weapons, so that if we fight the Jews or the enemy in the future, we will be trained. What is the ruling on this action? That is, as if his intention is not to fight the enemy.
The Shaykh : If it is like that, he does not go.
The questioner : That is, he trains with weapons to fight the enemy in the future, so that he has experience in it.
The Shaykh : Look, I am telling you now that people, or Muslims, are of three types. The first type: goes to jihad in the path of Allah there; this is in the highest ranks. The second: the one you mentioned, who goes to practice using a type or types of weapons; this is next to him in rank.
The third: neither the first nor the second; this is the worst of them. But the second is in a better state than the first, but he fell short in performing the obligatory duty. Is that clear?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Because using weapons is a means, not a goal. The goal, as you expressed it just now, is that he goes to use weapons so that one day he will, for example, fight in Palestine. So learning is a means, and the goal is jihad. Why does he not fight now? The issue has thus become tribal, local, or racist.
The questioner : No, he says, "My country is more deserving..."
The Shaykh : Racism. This is disbelief; it is not permissible.
The Shaykh : If it is like that, he does not go.
The questioner : That is, he trains with weapons to fight the enemy in the future, so that he has experience in it.
The Shaykh : Look, I am telling you now that people, or Muslims, are of three types. The first type: goes to jihad in the path of Allah there; this is in the highest ranks. The second: the one you mentioned, who goes to practice using a type or types of weapons; this is next to him in rank.
The third: neither the first nor the second; this is the worst of them. But the second is in a better state than the first, but he fell short in performing the obligatory duty. Is that clear?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Because using weapons is a means, not a goal. The goal, as you expressed it just now, is that he goes to use weapons so that one day he will, for example, fight in Palestine. So learning is a means, and the goal is jihad. Why does he not fight now? The issue has thus become tribal, local, or racist.
The questioner : No, he says, "My country is more deserving..."
The Shaykh : Racism. This is disbelief; it is not permissible.