Some students of knowledge issued a fatwa permitting the killing of thieves who took advantage of the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait and began looting houses. What is your opinion of this fatwa?

The questioner : In Kuwait, there were thefts and looting, naturally, by some Muslim neighbors. Your neighbor steals right in front of you in the street. Some students of knowledge permitted killing them if the situation leads to you killing them, meaning these thieves, even if they are your relative. What is your opinion of this fatwa?

The Shaykh : Some students of knowledge issued a fatwa to kill whom?

The questioner : The one who steals.

The Shaykh : The one who steals.

Another questioner : His neighbor.

The Shaykh : Meaning, even if he is a Muslim?

The questioner : Even if he is a Muslim.

The Shaykh : These Muslims are the ones who deserve Saddam. Where did they get this fatwa from? Does a thief deserve to be killed in Islam? No, he does not. Cutting off the hand is the first point. Second, does every individual Muslim have the right to execute the prescribed Islamic punishments? The answer is no. So where is this student of knowledge? He has not even smelled knowledge. This type of student is one of the causes of this calamity that struck Kuwait directly, and then its effects spread to other countries. The Saudi lands were occupied by the Americans because, as I am saying for the first time, I have not said this before, because of the Kuwaitis. Pay attention. The Saudi lands were occupied because of the Kuwaitis. How is that? If the Kuwaitis had not transgressed and sought their rulers and the general public, our Lord would not have sent down their Saddam upon them, do you see? Then, when our Lord sent down their Saddam upon them, He sent down the disbelieving Europeans, Americans, and others upon the Saudi lands. What is the reason? Kuwait, because Kuwait was not attacked by injustice from Allah at all. And I say this about every land of Islam that is struck by calamities.

The questioner : .

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner:

The Shaykh : There is absolutely no problem with it. And we fear, as the common proverb says in our area, I do not know if you have it or not, "If your neighbor shaves, you should shave too." Do you have something like that?

The questioner : Prepare yourself.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : Prepare yourself.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is the point. We fear that the rest of the lands of Islam will be struck by what struck Kuwait, and what struck Palestine before, and Syria after, and Egypt, and so on. These are all calamities that should serve as a warning to awaken the Muslims to return to their Lord, otherwise the Sunnah of Allah . So my point is that your statement that some students of knowledge issued a fatwa, Allahu Akbar! This is among the calamities of the Muslims today: that some of our brother students, who know nothing of fiqh, nothing of hadith, raise their heads to the sky and their tongues are in a state saying, "O earth, be firm, no one is upon you." And he is ignorant, still in the shallow waters, in the depths of knowledge, yet he takes the lead in gatherings, issues fatwas, forbids what Allah has made lawful, and permits what Allah has forbidden. And this is the example now before you: that the thief is killed. A Muslim ruler, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, is not permitted to kill a Muslim without right. Rather, if he steals, his hand is cut off, and nothing more. If he commits zina, he is not stoned if he is not muhsan, not married. And so on. The Islamic rulings are clear as the sun, clear in the fourth hour of the day. But ignorance does to its people what disbelief does to its people. Now, is there anything else? Please.

The questioner : What is your advice to every Muslim in this fitnah? Should he engage in speech or remain silent? I mean, advice from you, if Allah wills?

The Shaykh : This advice was given previously when we first sat here and discussed it at length. We said that he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in the time of trials: Do you know the language you have forgotten? What does "al-ahlas" mean? "Al-ahlas" is the plural of "hals," and a "hals" is a mat that has become dirty and worn out from frequent use. It is a metaphor: stick to the mats you always sit on, and do not go out for fighting or war. I do not say for jihad, because among the things discussed before the 'Isha' prayer, a questioner asked if we should do jihad. We said: Today, there is no jihad. There is no banner raised for jihad except in Afghanistan, and unfortunately, that banner has stopped advancing for reasons, some known and some unknown. Allah knows what is in the breasts. But if Muslims are attacked in their own homes, for example by the Jews, then it is obligatory for everyone who is able to fight to fight the Jews. As for jihad without a state, it will not happen; without a Rightly Guided Caliphate, it will not happen. But defense is a necessity. As for when factions fight each other among Muslims, and they are not under an Islamic banner, then the aforementioned hadith applies: We said, among the things we mentioned in the session referred to earlier, and in many sessions and recorded tapes, we wished that when Saddam attacked Kuwait, the state that would stand against Saddam's aggression on Kuwait with its creed, Shari'ah, and strength would be Saudi Arabia. But unfortunately, the hope was dashed and the expectation fell, because Saudi Arabia has never thought, not for a day, to strive in the path of Allah. Why? Because you all know that Saudi Arabia today, in its worldly, economic, social, and medical aspects—and I do not know what they call it, modern words are many today and I do not memorize them—has become an example to be followed in the present age among what? The Arab states. But it has never thought, not for a day, to train the people and prepare them for such a shock as it was shocked by Saddam. Because it sought help from whom? It sought help from the disbelievers. And which disbelievers? The most stubborn enemies of Islam and Muslims, and those who enabled the Jews: first the British, and second the Americans. It sought their help against whom? They said against the Ba'ath. And unfortunately, letters were written by some Saudis permitting seeking help from disbelievers against the atheists. And the atheists are in their own home, of the same type and merchandise that they wanted to fight with the Americans. So the Syrian Ba'ath and the Iraqi Ba'ath are one; disbelief is one religion. So the Syrian Ba'ath is in Saudi Arabia. What is the difference? You do not know? Yes, you know. Like my story: the Syrian Ba'ath is my illness, but since it is from the Americans, and the Americans are the commander, I obey and execute. So the Syrian Ba'ath is in the middle of Saudi Arabia. And if the Americans had ordered the presence of the Iraqi Ba'ath in Saudi Arabia, the matter would have been the same, unfortunately. We have become slaves to the disbelievers, from the president to the lowest employee, and between them. Allah is the Helper. And the cure is that we return to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) as individuals, and then groups are formed from individuals. We also mentioned before the 'Isha' prayer the saying of Allah the Exalted: As soon as the incident occurred, some of the brothers from Kuwait contacted me, saying that they are now forming a resistance front against the Iraqis in Kuwait. What is your opinion? I told them: Beware. They said: Why? We are defending our land, our country, our wealth, etc. I told them: You will not be able to do anything against the Iraqi army, which left you face to face with the Syrian army, the Saudi army, and the Egyptian army. So what will you do against the Iraqi army? You will destroy yourselves without compensation, just as is the case now in Palestine, exactly. This is what they call the Intifada. The Arab states themselves destroy the Palestinians with empty words, they glorify them and raise their status, with "children of stone" and very sweet words. And every day, dozens of them die, if not hundreds. And finally, the Arab states look on and help them with what? With words only. Not a single bullet is supplied to them. Thus, the people today are completely heedless. So what can these young men do who wanted to gather to face the Iraqi army? The Saudi army fled from it, and the other armies fled. And with the help of all the armies, no army stood until today. No army stood against the Iraqi army. So this poor Kuwaiti people, they have no weapons, they have no numbers, they have no preparation. What will they do with Iraq? I advised them for the sake of Allah: Do not do anything at all. I do not know if they did what they did; their affair is with Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). But I advise Muslims now not to involve themselves by entering into a battle with these or those, because neither these nor those are striving in the path of Allah, but they are striving in the path of personal interests. And if we want to enlarge it a little, governmental interests. We enlarge it a little: popular interests. Islam has no interest except the interest of the Muslim community. And so we said, and we also said today before the 'Isha' prayer: Where was Saudi Arabia? Why did it not seek help to eliminate the Russian army that occupied the Afghan lands? Why did it not seek help from the Americans at that time? Because these lands are not Saudi. Is this Islam? Islam does not distinguish between one land and another, as long as it is all Islamic land. But we do not rule by Islam today, no matter how much we pretend and no matter how much we say "the Book and the Sunnah." As individuals, we, as individuals, often deceive ourselves, saying "Book and Sunnah," but he does not act by the Book and the Sunnah. Similarly, some states declare that they rule by the Book and the Sunnah, but in many aspects, they do not rule by the Book or the Sunnah, nor by any of the Islamic schools of jurisprudence. And this reminds me that some people today say that seeking help from disbelievers is permissible. And I say: In the past, some scholars said this permissibility, despite the fact that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said the opposite. He said: Some scholars said seeking help from disbelievers is permissible, but they set a very important condition that those who sought help from disbelievers did not adhere to. So they said a saying and did an action that no scholar of the Muslims, without exception, says. Because the scholars divided into two groups regarding seeking help from disbelievers: some say it is not permissible, acting on the aforementioned hadith, and we are with these, because if the hadith is authentic, it is our school. And some said seeking help is permissible, but with the condition that the dominance be for the Muslims. Look at this restriction: that the dominance be for the Muslims. That is, if the Muslim army, which constitutes, for example, ten thousand, seeks help from ten disbelievers, these do not have a surge, they do not have a state, they do not have dominance. But if the Muslim army, composed of one thousand soldiers, seeks help from ten thousand, from one hundred thousand disbeliever soldiers, who says that this is permissible to seek help from? And they will occupy the Muslim land that its people want to repel the evil from. And behold, they brought all the evil to the middle of their lands. So the truth is that this is one of the greatest trials we know in Islamic history: that a Muslim state seeks help from the greatest disbeliever state, and not just one state, but other states from the greatest states of the world. So to Allah we complain, and to Him is the return.