The Shaykh Al-Albani's statement regarding the ruling on assassinating disbelievers.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The student : ... .
The Shaykh : This is a response to those who imagine that I am saying that these assassinations are a matter specific to the Messenger of Allah. I am responding to these people, and I do not think there is anyone who says this, but what can be said—and this is what we say—is that the deputy of the Messenger of Allah must be present. If he sees that it is permissible to assassinate a war-making disbelieving Muslim, then his command to do so is permissible. What does it have to do with it being a specific attribute of the Messenger such that the matter is not repeated for others? But there are no individual assassinations where so-and-so sees that he should assassinate so-and-so based on personal opinion. The matter must be taken from the responsible prince who organizes the affairs of the state in general and the affairs of war and battles in particular. If he manages the matter, then the one who claims that this is a specific attribute of the Messenger—no one says this. Then, the logic of minds is this strange oddity: is it possible for him to say that if there are four or five, for example, in Egypt, and he is at their head, even though he is blind, and they say, "We want to fight," that he says, "This is jihad," while he has not acted in accordance with his saying: [At-Tawbah 9:46] It is not reasonable to say that yes, jihad is obligatory in this situation before the means of jihad are available.
The questioner : I mean, my Shaykh, so the Shaykh 'Umar who is speaking.
The Shaykh : Shaykh 'Umar, that is right.
The questioner : ... I want to ask, by Allah, who is he.
Another questioner : ... .
Another questioner : My Shaykh ... I heard him personally in Egypt.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : His voice, glory be to Allah, is completely different.
The Shaykh : Strange.
The questioner : His voice here is as if my Shaykh is young, meaning closer to ... whereas he is actually an elderly man, advanced in age.
The Shaykh : Elderly.
The questioner : Yes, my Shaykh is advanced in age.
The Shaykh : I was told that he is forty, meaning.
The questioner : No, my Shaykh, what is forty.
The Shaykh: By Allah.
The questioner : He has passed fifty.
The Shaykh: No.
The questioner : His beard is gray, yes, my Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Strange.
The questioner : Yes, I met him and sat with him personally.
The Shaykh : 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman, what is 'Abd al-Rahman's position? How is it that 'Abd al-Rahman rebuked Abu Malik because Abu Malik denied what? The obligation of jihad.
The questioner : Yes, yes.
The Shaykh : A lie and a fabrication, and this is a response to a person who seems to be denying the obligation of jihad.
The Shaykh : This is a response to those who imagine that I am saying that these assassinations are a matter specific to the Messenger of Allah. I am responding to these people, and I do not think there is anyone who says this, but what can be said—and this is what we say—is that the deputy of the Messenger of Allah must be present. If he sees that it is permissible to assassinate a war-making disbelieving Muslim, then his command to do so is permissible. What does it have to do with it being a specific attribute of the Messenger such that the matter is not repeated for others? But there are no individual assassinations where so-and-so sees that he should assassinate so-and-so based on personal opinion. The matter must be taken from the responsible prince who organizes the affairs of the state in general and the affairs of war and battles in particular. If he manages the matter, then the one who claims that this is a specific attribute of the Messenger—no one says this. Then, the logic of minds is this strange oddity: is it possible for him to say that if there are four or five, for example, in Egypt, and he is at their head, even though he is blind, and they say, "We want to fight," that he says, "This is jihad," while he has not acted in accordance with his saying:
And prepare against them
وَأَعِدُّوا لَهُمْAnd if they had intended to go forth, they would have prepared for it [some] preparation
وَلَوْ أَرَادُوا الْخُرُوجَ لَأَعَدُّوا لَهُ عُدَّةًThe questioner : I mean, my Shaykh, so the Shaykh 'Umar who is speaking.
The Shaykh : Shaykh 'Umar, that is right.
The questioner : ... I want to ask, by Allah, who is he.
Another questioner : ... .
Another questioner : My Shaykh ... I heard him personally in Egypt.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : His voice, glory be to Allah, is completely different.
The Shaykh : Strange.
The questioner : His voice here is as if my Shaykh is young, meaning closer to ... whereas he is actually an elderly man, advanced in age.
The Shaykh : Elderly.
The questioner : Yes, my Shaykh is advanced in age.
The Shaykh : I was told that he is forty, meaning.
The questioner : No, my Shaykh, what is forty.
The Shaykh: By Allah.
The questioner : He has passed fifty.
The Shaykh: No.
The questioner : His beard is gray, yes, my Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Strange.
The questioner : Yes, I met him and sat with him personally.
The Shaykh : 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman, what is 'Abd al-Rahman's position? How is it that 'Abd al-Rahman rebuked Abu Malik because Abu Malik denied what? The obligation of jihad.
The questioner : Yes, yes.
The Shaykh : A lie and a fabrication, and this is a response to a person who seems to be denying the obligation of jihad.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.