regarding the permissibility of forming factions, and whether it is permissible for a person to remain with certain groups in order to call them to the truth? He also spoke about the pledge of allegiance.

The questioner : There is a tape you recorded with, I think, the voice ofThe Shaykh : Salim al-Hilali asking you about issues regarding factionalism and some other matters. Here is a small, or rather short, question: Was there any reason for these terms, such as "factionalism" and "sticking to a faction" and the like?

The Shaykh : No, these are matters that have occurred in both word and meaning.
The questioner: And even in terms of meaning, I mean.

The Shaykh : In both word and meaning.

The questioner: How, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : As for the word, it is clear.

The questioner : The word is clear, yes.

The Shaykh : As for the meaning, it should also be clear, because the intended meaning of factionalism is division.

The questioner : How, O our Shaykh?

The Shaykh : The intended meaning of factionalism today is division, meaning meaning these people form a faction on one methodology, and these people form a faction on another methodology, and so on.

The questioner : It seems you affirmed, O our Shaykh, when he asked you about factionalism and mentioned its conditions and so on, that you said there is no harm in this, and indeed it is obligatory.

The Shaykh : As long as the conditions were mentioned, then gathering upon the Book and the Sunnah

The questioner : Is there any reason for that?

The Shaykh : I am speaking about factionalism in the sense prevalent today.

Another questioner : The question is based on the first statement.

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.

Another questioner : He means, we have heard from our brothers that if a person is in a faction, he should remain.

The Shaykh : Should he?

Another questioner : He should remain in this faction if Allah the Exalted guides him to the correct creed, and he should teach these people. They quoted this from you, but it is conditional on conditions: that this man can sit in this organization to teach his brothers who are with him in the organization, who do not accept anyone at all except from their ranks. But they conditioned him to commit to several matters, one of which is that he pays a membership fee.

The Shaykh : To follow him?

Another questioner : That he pays a membership fee.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : From his wealth to this group.

The Shaykh : If the matter is stopped from the beginning, and then...

The questioner : And also, he must commit to a pledge of allegiance; he must pledge allegiance.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : But he can reconcile this pledge of allegiance with the reform of the group. And the third is that he commits to obedience: that he obeys them, attends their gatherings, and does what they order.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : Fourth, that he remains silent about some of the religious innovations that occur. So, is the predominant benefit for this brother? Also, there is a very important point: he has little knowledge; he has not gained experience. When he was in their ranks, they did not teach him the creed or all the matters. With these conditions, can this man who is in this faction and this organization, and who has a position with them, sit and teach his brothers the creed and so on, and continue with them?

The Shaykh : Without conditions.

The questioner : No, with these conditions.

The Shaykh : Without conditions.

The questioner : Then he cannot.

The Shaykh : He cannot. As for the first condition, there is no harm in it, and it is better for you not to mention it. Do you know which condition?

The questioner : The membership fee.

The Shaykh : Yes. You should have mentioned it at least at the end. Look, my brother, what I find among the dangers of the factionalism and partisanship existing today is that they launch these factions that divide the Ummah based on a non-Islamic principle that has become today as if it were a very necessary Islamic principle, which is "the end justifies the means." You must have heard of this alleged principle, "the end justifies the means." I think our brother 'Abd al-Rahman (may Allah have mercy on him), may He reward him with good and have mercy on us and him, living and dead, fell into this. We say in the language of the Levant, "the pit," meaning in this abyss, where he explicitly stated in some of his letters that the Muslim in this era must, in the path of seeking livelihood, necessarily deal with what is forbidden. Perhaps you remember something of this. Well, how can a Muslim say this while he reads the saying of Allah the Exalted: , and reads, for example, his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): ? How can a man, meaning if we do not call him a scholar, he is like us, a student of knowledge, walking in the pursuit of knowledge, old and new, how does he forget all these texts, which are explicit? "The end justifies the means" has reached them to the point that they apply the conditions of the major pledge of allegiance, blind obedience, the pledge . These are texts that came regarding the Caliph, and they explicitly state that there is no Caliph, but they say with their tongues what is not in their hearts, or in other words, their actions contradict their words. So, the pledge of allegiance in Islam, we do not know it except for the Caliphs. And this obedience that obligates the Muslim, or is obligatory upon the Muslim, such that a permissible matter becomes obligatory upon him because of the issuance of the order from one whose order must be executed, like a wife, for example, her husband orders her to do something that is not originally obligatory upon her by the Shari'ah, but it is originally permissible. He orders her to do it, and she is able and capable, so it becomes obligatory upon her to do it. Similarly, the Muslim ruler pledged allegiance to by a valid pledge. So, the Muslim Brotherhood established this bad practice, and then those who followed them, from those who wanted to combine being an Ikhwan with being a Salafi, imposed the pledge of allegiance and imposed obedience. We say there is no harm in imposing obedience in the path of organizing the teaching of people, guiding them, and educating them, and so on. But it is not the obedience that Allah the Mighty and Majestic commands in the Qur'an in obedience to Allah and His Messenger and those in authority among you. This is a specific obedience, and that is a general obedience. The rulings that follow from specific obedience do not follow from general obedience. In conclusion, I say that this member you are referring to, if they do not allow him except to submit to their pledge of allegiance and their blind obedience, and they know that his presence among them benefits them in the essence of their call and does not harm them, then this is from the misfortune of factionalism. The answer is clear.

The questioner : May Allah reward you, O Shaykh.