Clarifying the error of Abu al-A'la al-Mawdudi in his statement that "if a Muslim kills a dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection), he is killed in retaliation, and that the blood money for a dhimmi is the same as that for a Muslim in the case of accidental killing."

The Shaykh : If a Muslim kills a dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection), he is killed in retaliation. This is a Hanafi ruling adopted by one of the greatest Islamic preachers, who excelled some other preachers in the comprehensiveness of his knowledge of politics, economics, military affairs, and the like. It is not hidden from you that he is Abu al-A'la al-Mawdudi (may Allah have mercy on him). He wrote a long study defending the school of jurisprudence in which he lived, arguing that if a Muslim kills a dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection), he is killed in retaliation, and he cited some hadiths that have no strength or validity. He also argued that if a Muslim accidentally kills a non-Muslim from among the People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) under protection, the blood money for this disbeliever is the same as that for a Muslim. From our knowledge of them, they argue with the general Qur'anic texts even when the Sunnah of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) has provided details, because they claim that the Sunnah does not specify the Qur'an or restrict its absolute terms unless it is mass-transmitted (mutawatir). We have known them to reject the authentic Sunnah for this reason: because the condition they require, which is that it be mass-transmitted (mutawatir), is not met. So why did they here cling to the weak Sunnah first, and then turn away from the authentic Sunnah that states and turn away from the hadith of 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather that the Prophet, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), set the blood money for a dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection) at half the blood money of a Muslim? After all this, we say to them, as our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) said in the Noble Qur'an: How have you made the blood money for a dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection) the same as that for a Muslim, and a Muslim is killed for killing this disbeliever? If the Islamic state were to be established in Afghanistan, it would be based on this narrow school of jurisprudence, and not on the basis of the purification we have been singing about for this long time. Therefore, the Muslim state will not be established even if an Islamic group exists. In fact, they tried to make Islam the ruler on earth, but it is their Islam, not the Islam taken from the Book and the Sunnah.