The issue of seeking assistance from disbelievers.

Abu Layla : I am repeating the question, Shaykh, because I want to record it. Our Shaykh, some people claim and say that there are opinions among the jurists regarding the permissibility of seeking assistance from a disbeliever. Is this correct? Are there opinions from the jurists on this matter?

The Shaykh : Yes, but with conditions. These conditions render the instance of seeking assistance that occurred as scattered chaff. I have researched this hadith; its wording is meaning the Jews This hadith is munkar (denounced). Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi narrated it in *Mushkil al-Athar* and so on, with his chain He mentioned it for what reason? You are People of the Book, and we are People of the Book, and it is incumbent upon the People of the Book to support the People of the Book, and so on. I said this is a weak chain, and I spoke in detail to explain the weakness of the hadith. I said this is a weak chain, and so on. Ibn Hisham also mentioned in *al-Sirah* from Muhammad ibn Ishaq from al-Zuhri: This is the opposite of that one. This one is weak in chain, like that one. But what did I say? And Ibn Kathir mentioned the same in *al-Bidaya* part such-and-such page such-and-such, and before him Ibn al-Qayyim in *Zad al-Ma'ad*, which agrees with the authentic hadith of A'ishah: It is published in *al-Sahihah* as mentioned recently. Therefore, I say: If the weakness of the hadith of the translation becomes clear to you, and what is in it of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) offering to the Jews to fight with him; then there is no need at that time to reconcile it with the authentic hadith of A'ishah, as al-Tahawi did when he said: "Because the Jews whom the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) invited to fight Abu Sufyan with him; are not from the polytheists about whom the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said in the earlier narrations: ; those are worshippers of idols, and these are People of the Book, and we have mentioned the difference between what they are upon and what the worshippers of idols are upon, in the chapter that preceded this."
The Shaykh : I said: He is referring to some rulings that were specific to the People of the Book and not the polytheists, such as the permissibility of their slaughtered animals, and marrying their women, and other things, some of which are subject to scrutiny. And he based his statement on that : "So every shirk (associating partners with Allah) is kufr (disbelief), but not every kufr is shirk"!
The Shaykh : So I say: Even if we hypothetically accept his statement; there is no need for the mentioned interpretation for two reasons. The first: That interpretation is a branch of authentication, as is known. And as long as the hadith is not authentic, as we have clarified; there is no justification for interpreting the authentic hadith for its sake, as is apparent and not hidden from anyone, if Allah wills.
The Shaykh : And the second: How is it correct to say of the Jews and Christians: That they are not from the polytheists, while Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said in Surat al-Tawbah after the verse: , , . So whoever makes a son for Allah, how can he not be from the polytheists?! This is a strange slip from an imam like al-Tahawi. And this does not contradict that they have those rulings in which no one other than the People of the Book from the polytheists shares with them; for they all share in other rulings, as is not hidden from those of understanding.
The Shaykh : And the researcher jurist whom Allah has saved from taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) in the Book and the Sunnah may not lack what confirms what preceded, and invalidates al-Tahawi's previous statement: What did al-Tahawi say? "And not every kufr is shirk." Among that is that dialogue between the believer and the disbeliever who boasted of his wealth and his two gardens; as Allah the Exalted said in Surat al-Kahf ; so this is kufr that did not associate in al-Tahawi's opinion! But the context refutes it; so follow me in the saying of the Exalted: ; so reflect on how he described his companion the disbeliever with kufr, then he expressed himself from it with its synonym, which is shirk; so he said: . And this shirk is what the disbeliever described himself with in what follows; so follow his saying of the Exalted after He mentioned what his companion the believer admonished him with: .
The Shaykh : I said: So this statement of his, with the context of the story, is very clear that his shirk is only his doubt in the Hereafter, and this is kufr and not shirk in al-Tahawi's opinion! So it is clearly false.
The Shaykh : And what confirms that from the Sunnah is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) : Narrated byThe Shaykh : An and others from Ibn Abbas, and it is published in *al-Sahihah* with number such-and-such, for the intended meaning is the Jews and Christians; as other hadiths indicate, among them the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) : . Narrated by Muslim and others.
The Shaykh : And al-Tahawi claimed that Ibn Uyaynah made a mistake, so he said "Because he used to narrate from memory; so it is possible that he put the polytheists in place of the Jews and Christians, and he did not have the fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) to distinguish between that"! So he said, may Allah forgive him! For he knows that the narration of a trustworthy memorizer like Ibn Uyaynah from memory is not a defect; rather it is a point of pride for him. And that blaming a trustworthy person based on mere possibility is not the practice of fair scholars. But it is sectarian bias; we ask Allah for safety! And according to al-Tahawi's madhhab (school of jurisprudence), Allah could forgive kufr for his saying of the Exalted: And with this verse, Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) argued against Abu Hanifah, who is the one al-Tahawi follows in the claimed distinction; so he said after it: "If there were here a kufr that is not shirk; it would be forgiven for whom Allah wills, unlike shirk, and this is not said by a Muslim." Then he followed that with other very strong proofs, then he said: "So it is established that every kufr is shirk, and every shirk is kufr, and that they are two legal terms, which Allah the Exalted placed upon one meaning." And if not for the fear of lengthening; I would have quoted all his words for their excellence and rarity, so let whoever wants more knowledge and fiqh refer to it.
The Shaykh : And the summary is that the hadith is weak in chain, denounced in text, and that seeking assistance from the People of the Book in jihad against the disbelievers is included in the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) : .
The Shaykh : In it, before this hadith, with this occasion I say I must speak in light of the previous speech about this great fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) that struck the Muslims due to the baghy (armed rebellion against legitimate authority) of Iraq against Kuwait and its annexation to it in the middle of the month of Muharram of this year 1411, which is the seeking of assistance by the Saudi state from the American and British states and other disbelieving states, fearing that what struck its neighbor Kuwait would strike it, so they would defend it. And in my opinion, this seeking of assistance was not done after consulting the people of knowledge in it, at least asThe Shaykh : Ibn Baz and other eminent scholars did, acting on the saying of the Exalted Because this seeking of assistance is not permissible according to all the previous opinions on the ruling of seeking assistance from disbelievers. As for the stronger opinion, which is the absolute prohibition, it is clear. And as for the other opinion, it is because they conditioned that Islam be the dominant force, and that the disbeliever have a good opinion of the Muslims, and that there be with the imam a group of Muslims who can manage the implementation of the rulings of the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) over those they sought assistance from. And if we know what preceded of clarification, we must look at this great fitnah that descended upon the Muslims due to the aggression of Iraq, and so on. The point is that those who permitted seeking assistance said with the condition that the one seeking assistance be the dominant one.

The questioner : Yes, these predecessors, our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes, and now there is none. Either they return and argue with the hadith or they argue with the statements of the scholars. The statements of the scholars: One says it is not permissible to seek assistance from polytheists absolutely, based on the hadith. And one says they distinguished, saying it is permissible to seek assistance with the condition that the Muslims seeking assistance be the dominant ones. And this is what we said here, we distinguished the statement and said it in some words to those seeking fatwa: If the Americans occupied Khaybar, who would drive them out?

The questioner : And no one.

The Shaykh : And no one. So we ask Allah (Mighty and Majestic) for safety.