The question that should be asked before you ask or direct other questions is one I want to ask through the lines of the message you mention, a paragraph of which is:

The questioner : The question that should be asked before you ask or direct other questions is one I want to ask based on the lines of the message you mentioned, a paragraph of which states: "And the leader of that group believes that the Somali people are not inviolable in their blood, and that he—this leader, of course—has pledged to Allah to shed much blood until they stand firm upon the law of Allah. And the young men believe that such a leader must be obeyed and disobeying him is forbidden. On this basis, they rush to carry out what he orders them to do." We want our Shaykh, may Allah bless him, to answer this specific paragraph for us. What is the ruling on obeying this leader? Is it permissible to obey him in such a matter where he has pledged to Allah to shed this much blood until they stand firm upon the law of Allah? Knowing that the Somali people are not inviolable in their blood as he claims, and Allah—Mighty and Majestic—wants otherwise. We ask you to answer this question, and may Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : I say: Praise be to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. In light of what I heard regarding the details of the situation in Somalia, concerning the disagreement among the Islamic parties after the disbeliever ruler was defeated—who first did not rule by what Allah revealed, and second, who had altered much of the law of Allah—what I understand from this statement I heard and recorded on this tape, whose answer you are hearing, is that there is no obligatory obedience for such a leader as mentioned. This is because he was not given a general pledge of allegiance from the Muslims, at least in that land, the land of Somalia. Rather, he was pledged by a party that follows him, and they follow him without insight, contrary to the saying of Allah—Blessed and Exalted is He: . This leader’s statement that the blood of the Somalis is not inviolable is a serious and very serious boldness in making the blood of Muslims lawful without right. This is because the matter is not in his hand to appoint himself as the ruler of the land of Somalia, just because some naive youth were deceived by the one chosen by the general Muslim population. I mean the general population, not even the common people or the ignorant, and perhaps the open sinners, but rather the elite of the Muslim scholars who know whom they choose to be a ruler who judges between them by what Allah revealed. This leader mentioned does not have a pledge of allegiance from the necks of those who pledged to him, let alone those who opposed him and did not pledge to him. This is because he is one of the Khawarij who rebelled against the Islamic groups. It would only be correct to say, if it were permissible to say, that the blood of a people among the Muslim peoples is not inviolable, only if they rebel against the Muslim ruler—the Muslim ruler who was pledged by the Muslims in the detail I mentioned earlier. As for this leader mentioned in the question, he was not pledged to except by a small group and a faction of naive people. So he has no pledge of allegiance from these people, let alone from the other Muslims. Therefore, we do not advise the other Muslims not to be deceived by him; rather, I advise him himself not to claim for himself what has not been given to him from the Book of his Lord and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). We hope that the Somalis will all unite and agree upon a common word, which is ruling by the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and upon the methodology of the righteous Salaf. I hope they will all agree upon this so that they may pledge allegiance to whom they choose. This should not be a party choice or a tribal choice, but rather a scholarly choice. This is because the one chosen to be a ruler there must meet the conditions of the Muslim ruler, the first of which is that he be a Muslim who holds fast to the Book and the Sunnah. The second is that he be knowledgeable of the Book and the Sunnah. The third, which may not be available in such a country or elsewhere, is that he be an Arab from the Quraysh tribe, based on his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): , and his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): . I do not believe there is anyone there who meets all these conditions. If we overlook the third condition, which is being from Quraysh, the first two conditions are necessary: that he be a righteous, pious Muslim, and that he be knowledgeable of the Book and the Sunnah, and upon the methodology mentioned in the question raised earlier, and upon the methodology of the righteous Salaf. I do not think at all that a man who understands the Book and the Sunnah and is upon the methodology of the righteous Salaf would dare to say, just because some naive people pledged to him, that the blood of the Somalis is not what did he say? Protected.

The questioner : Not inviolable.

The Shaykh : Not protected, meaning that he has the right to kill from among them those who did not pledge to him. So he appointed himself a leader and imposed the pledge of allegiance on his followers. And on that basis, he built upon this pledge of allegiance, which has no basis, that those who do not pledge to him are rebels. And at that time, the noble verse comes: . So he considers these people rebels against whom? Against this person who was not given a general pledge of allegiance, but was only given a specific pledge. And these pledges, if I may express it this way, are in my opinion among the causes of the division of the Muslims and among the causes of their weakness and the dominance of the enemy over their land and their countries. Because, as it is said:
"And every one claims a connection to Layla *** And Layla does not approve of that for them"
All of them claim that from these parties, who pledged to them? Their followers. And there is another party who was pledged to by whom? Their followers. And so on. So all these pledges increase the fire’s blaze and increase the fitnah’s burning. It is enough for the Muslims this division that has occurred among them due to their distance from the methodology of the Book and the Sunnah. It is enough for them this division, so it is not permissible for them to increase in division by organizing the division and making it into blocks and parties that fight each other and attack each other. This is what I am able to answer regarding the question raised earlier.

The questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : And may He reward you.