The discouragers say: How can we fight jihad alongside the Afghans when their president (Mujaddidi) holds beliefs of disbelief, such as the permissibility of seeking aid from the dead and the belief that the world is governed by

The Shaykh : Do you have anything on this?
Al-Halabi : Some of our brothers from Afghanistan sent some questions.

The Shaykh : Pakistan?
Al-Halabi : Afghanistan, specifically in the Peshawar area. They say that some people are raising several doubts to discourage people from the reality of jihad. You know your fatwas regarding the obligation of jihad in Afghanistan. These discouragers or doubters say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: to the end of the hadith . These mujahideen have a president, Mujaddidi, who believes that the world is controlled by four poles. He also believes in supplicating to the dead and many other statements of disbelief that take one out of the religion. So he asks: Is not one who believes such things a disbeliever? If he is a disbeliever, is not one who pledges allegiance to him like him? How can we fight alongside these people when they are in this state?

The Shaykh : Yes, I say first that there is no pledge of allegiance, because there is no Caliph to whom Muslims are called to pledge allegiance. All that can be said is that there is cooperation with this man who is said to be a Sufi and who believes in the four poles, which is undoubtedly disbelief according to the people of the Sunnah and the community. Second, in my opinion, it is not just in any way to attribute this belief to all the mujahideen in Afghanistan, otherwise we would have contradicted His saying, the Exalted: . Third, perhaps many of our brothers present here now have heard, and this is a return to the previous topic, that what some feared was if Saddam had attacked Saudi Arabia and occupied the Saudi lands, or at least occupied the sensitive economic areas, the oil mines at least. This does not mean that the Ba'ath Party controlled Saudi Arabia. This is because Saddam and his government, although they represent the Ba'ath Party, which is undoubtedly a non-Islamic party, indeed a disbelieving one, but Saddam does not represent the Iraqi people, just as the Syrian Ba'ath Party does not represent the Syrian people. There are some Syrians here now; do we say that he represents us? No. He does not represent, perhaps, a thousand or less. So just as we used to say and still say that the Ba'ath Party in Iraq or in Syria does not represent the Muslim Iraqi people and the Muslim Syrian people, so we say that this one whom you called, what was it, Mujaddidi?
Al-Halabi: Yes.

The Shaykh : Ah. We cannot say that this represents the belief of the commanders and heads of the fighters there, who raised the banner of jihad in the path of Allah for the first time in an Islamic land. We cannot say that all the Afghans who raised the banner of jihad and fighting in the path of Allah are all, without exception, believing in the belief of Mujaddidi regarding the four poles. So, with caution, if the reports that are transmitted are true—and I regret that the soul is reassured in believing them due to their abundance, and we do not rule out their existence in such a man, because we have been afflicted with their like in Syria often and very often—but the sensitive point in the matter is that we cannot say that he represents the entire Afghan people or represents all the commanders of the mujahideen in the path of Allah. So it is not permissible for this to be a discouragement for those who truly want to fight jihad in the path of Allah from among the Muslims, whether they are Afghans or other non-Arabs, or whether they are Arabs. Islam has gathered them. In fact, I believe that if there were unity of thought, it is obligatory for Muslims, and especially the Salafis among them, in all Islamic lands to direct their full attention to those lands to fight jihad twice. The first time, to fight the communists whom the Russians are still helping and supporting; this is the first jihad. And the second jihad is to correct some beliefs and some concepts that may exist in the Afghan people, and not only in this man, because these are non-Arabs. So jihad should remain continuous there. I have been asked repeatedly and over and over: Do you still believe that jihad there is an individual obligation, as you used to say before, despite the division and disagreement and conflict among the commanders? I said: Rather, this increases its obligatoriness until one of two things happens. The first thing is that the communist rule is eliminated there and the Islamic banner is raised for the first time in an Islamic country. Or, may Allah forbid, the other thing, which is that the war lays down its arms due to the defeat of the mujahideen because of their differences with one another. In that case, the ruling of jihad in Afghanistan remains like the ruling of jihad in Palestine. And you know what the ruling of jihad in Palestine is. Do not think that the ruling of jihad in Palestine has fallen away; it is standing, but it is not possible to perform, whereas in Afghanistan it was standing and possible. If the other thing happens, may Allah forgive us, and the war lays down its arms based on acceptance of this painful reality of division, then the matter there becomes like the matter here. And we hope that the matter will not be so.