Some claim that the frequent responses among scholars are a pathological phenomenon and that it is obligatory to abandon that and respond to the people of misguidance, such as secularism and Zionism, so what
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner :-May Allah reward you with good and reward you- He saysThe questioner : Some claim that the frequent responses among scholars are a pathological phenomenon, and in this there is a scattering of thought and a stabbing at one another. This is not the time for responses, but rather it is a time for unity and standing firm against the Crusades, communism, capitalism, Zionism, and secularism. It is necessary to abandon those responses and turn to the greatest danger. What is your comment on that, may Allah reward you with good?
The Shaykh : We hear this in many countries where there are some young people enthusiastic about Islam who, if you asked them what Islam is, would say like that non-Arab man who was cited as an example of his ignorance of his Islam when he met a man from the Jews—those whom they call today "citizens," and this naming is from the innovations of the present age, whereas their name in Islam is: the dhimmis, because the word "citizens" implies that there is no difference between a Muslim and a disbeliever residing among the Muslims. As for the Shari'ah name, it is: that they are from the People of the Dhimma, meaning: they were given the covenant of Allah that their wealth and honor be protected in exchange for their submission to the ruling of Islam in the land in which they live. The point is that this non-Arab man met a man from the Jews from the People of the Dhimma, so he drew the dagger from its sheath and threatened this man with killing him. He said to him: "Islamize or I will kill you." So the limbs of this Jew trembled, and he said: "I don't know what to say? He said: I don't know". This enthusiast for Islam, who even intended to kill a dhimmi, when the dhimmi submitted to his command to Islamize, asked him what to say. He did not know how to say to him: "Say: There is no god but Allah," because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said:Sahih Muslim 22. And despite that, this non-Arab, out of his ignorance, did not know that this dhimmi's blood is protected, because he is from the People of the Dhimma, so it is not permissible to impose Islam upon him, because regarding his like, the Lord of Mankind said: [Al-Baqarah 2:256].
This type of question only stems from people who do not appreciate Islam with its due appreciation and do not care about acting upon it. Who are these Muslims who are said to have to unite to fight the disbelievers in their forms and types, as mentioned in the question? Those who understood Islam, or those who were ignorant of it?!
There is no doubt that if he were just and free from partisanship and the pre-Islamic age of ignorance tribalism, he would say in answer to this question: They are only those who knew Islam. We say: You have known, so adhere to it.
So the second question comes to you: Who are those who can stand before the disbelievers in their types and differences in their beliefs? Are these the Muslims who understood Islam and applied it to themselves and their offspring and their families, or those who neglected Islam to the side and were content with shouting and wailing and saying: "Leave the differences among you and turn to fighting the enemies"? He said earlier that if these people are not knowledgeable about Islam, they cannot fight the disbelievers, so we said to him: You have known, so adhere to it.
And now we say: They are knowledgeable about Islam but do not act upon Islam. Can these people stand against these enemies, or must they be those who act upon Islam, not just content with knowing it?!
If he says, as is expected of him: They must also be those who act upon Islam, then at that time we say to him and to his like of those deluded by empty claims: "Rise up and fight the disbelievers and leave the differences." We say to him as the Lord of the Worlds said:[At-Tawbah 9:105]. And action, as we mentioned earlier, should be based on knowledge. So how do you do it, O poor one, if you find two opinions from the scholars from those many opinions that you turned a blind eye to and commanded them to respond to this ugly command of yours to agree?
The Shaykh : We hear this in many countries where there are some young people enthusiastic about Islam who, if you asked them what Islam is, would say like that non-Arab man who was cited as an example of his ignorance of his Islam when he met a man from the Jews—those whom they call today "citizens," and this naming is from the innovations of the present age, whereas their name in Islam is: the dhimmis, because the word "citizens" implies that there is no difference between a Muslim and a disbeliever residing among the Muslims. As for the Shari'ah name, it is: that they are from the People of the Dhimma, meaning: they were given the covenant of Allah that their wealth and honor be protected in exchange for their submission to the ruling of Islam in the land in which they live. The point is that this non-Arab man met a man from the Jews from the People of the Dhimma, so he drew the dagger from its sheath and threatened this man with killing him. He said to him: "Islamize or I will kill you." So the limbs of this Jew trembled, and he said: "I don't know what to say? He said: I don't know". This enthusiast for Islam, who even intended to kill a dhimmi, when the dhimmi submitted to his command to Islamize, asked him what to say. He did not know how to say to him: "Say: There is no god but Allah," because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah
أمرت أن أقاتل الناس حتى يشهدوا أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدًا رسول اللهThere shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong.
لا إكراه في الدين قد تبين الرشد من الغيThis type of question only stems from people who do not appreciate Islam with its due appreciation and do not care about acting upon it. Who are these Muslims who are said to have to unite to fight the disbelievers in their forms and types, as mentioned in the question? Those who understood Islam, or those who were ignorant of it?!
There is no doubt that if he were just and free from partisanship and the pre-Islamic age of ignorance tribalism, he would say in answer to this question: They are only those who knew Islam. We say: You have known, so adhere to it.
So the second question comes to you: Who are those who can stand before the disbelievers in their types and differences in their beliefs? Are these the Muslims who understood Islam and applied it to themselves and their offspring and their families, or those who neglected Islam to the side and were content with shouting and wailing and saying: "Leave the differences among you and turn to fighting the enemies"? He said earlier that if these people are not knowledgeable about Islam, they cannot fight the disbelievers, so we said to him: You have known, so adhere to it.
And now we say: They are knowledgeable about Islam but do not act upon Islam. Can these people stand against these enemies, or must they be those who act upon Islam, not just content with knowing it?!
If he says, as is expected of him: They must also be those who act upon Islam, then at that time we say to him and to his like of those deluded by empty claims: "Rise up and fight the disbelievers and leave the differences." We say to him as the Lord of the Worlds said: