What is the position of Muslims toward Muslim men and women who are in the ranks of the communists if they are taken as prisoners?

The Shaykh : Okay, otherwise.

The questioner : The second or third question: What is the ruling on the Afghan Muslims residing among the communists, and what is the ruling on Afghans residing outside Afghanistan, whether for education or other work or otherwise? And what is the position of the people of the Sunnah—the position that must be held by the people of the Sunnah—toward the Shi'ah who spare no effort in killing or abducting the Sunni Muslims there? They abducted some of our Egyptian brothers there; they abducted three or four of them. Some escaped, and about others we know nothing. And what if a Muslim fights in the ranks of the disbelievers, in the ranks of the communists, under a doubt? And this exists a lot as well.

The Shaykh : How is that?

The questioner : Some of the Afghans in the ranks of the communists fight the mujahideen because of a doubt in their minds that these are Muslims and these are Muslims. But the issue of tribes, of course, influences them through the media, claiming that this is a tribal issue and that, by Allah, America is supporting these people just as Russia supports us, and that these people want your land and want to kill your women and take your money, and so on. So all these are doubts present in some of the communists, and indeed many Muslims in their ranks are in this state, if that is the correct expression. So what is your opinion, our Shaykh, on these rulings?

The Shaykh : What is my opinion of these Muslims who live with the ruling communist state when they fight the mujahideen? What is my opinion of them from any angle?

The questioner : Their ruling.

The Shaykh : I think that for the question to be complete, it should be said, for example, if they are taken as prisoners in the hands of the mujahideen, are they to be killed? Or is the question something else? For example, is it permissible for the mujahideen to bombard the town where the communist rulers are, and where these Muslim individuals are? I want to clarify the question.

The questioner : All right, in any case, may Allah reward you for answering this and that.

The Shaykh : I will answer this and that.

The questioner : And the ruling on their women.

The Shaykh : All right, what is the crux of the question? Is it only this?

The questioner : The crux is in the second part, which is the issue of fighting them, or for example, bombarding that area.

The Shaykh : Well, the question might be like this, and it might be like that, so that we do not stray from the intent of the question. I assumed that the question has two branches, and it turned out that the intended one is the other branch. So I say that if the mujahideen have reached the stage of attacking one of the two capitals, whose names are now Kabul and Jalalabad, then they must take the means of conveying the message. They must convey the truth to the residents there. Of course, these are the individuals who are thought to be Muslims but are misled by those advertisements you referred to. They must be conveyed the truth that we are now a bowshot or less from taking over this town or that one, but we cannot take it over while the ruler among you, the disbelieving communist, is openly determined and tyrannical in his persistence in power. And one who warns has fulfilled his duty. Whoever among you is concerned for the safety of his person and his religion, let him leave this town.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, they have no means to leave.

The Shaykh : They have no means to leave?

The questioner : Yes, because there are landmines and the army, and also the police prevent them from leaving.

The Shaykh : But we hear that many do leave.

The questioner : This one leaves by sneaking out.

The Shaykh : If he sneaks out.

The questioner : But for the majority and the common case, it is difficult for him to do so.

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner : That is, the most common and general case is that it is truly difficult for him to leave because he is surrounded, but the one who sneaks out has ways and knowledge.

The Shaykh : No problem, let us assume this as well. For every answer, it is not reasonable or prescribed that we remain outside the town fighting your rulers, and they fight us, and our blood and your blood are wasted in vain. This is absolutely unreasonable. So either you leave, if you are able, and we will take precautions, or you leave your rulers and become our aid against them, for you are from the inside and we are from the outside. Because it is not reasonable for the situation to remain like this, with two fronts for years, these hitting from here and those hitting from there. In the military expression we used at that time, "hold your position." So either you leave and they are saved and safe, or they leave against them. And this is the way, I believe, and Allah knows best.

The questioner : All right, Shaykh, what about killing them if they are not taken as prisoners?

The Shaykh : Their ruling if they are taken as prisoners is that they should be offered the chance to repent. And indeed, if they are Muslims, their leaders will say, "We are Muslims, and we were misled," and so on.

The questioner : Of course, this is for their senior leaders, all of them, our Shaykh. They say such things. So what is the ruling on them? Are they to be treated as Muslims?

The Shaykh : No, without doubt. It is not permissible, meaning, for those among them whose disbelief is not known, these...

The questioner : The head of the general intelligence there in one of the regions, a very senior man, a commander in the Afghan intelligence, was taken as a prisoner. He said, "I am a Muslim, I pray, and so on, and I have repented..."

The Shaykh : Did he say that while he was a combatant, or after he was taken as a prisoner?

The questioner : After he was taken as a prisoner.

The Shaykh : After he was taken as a prisoner. All right, then he is not to be killed as long as he testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. He is not to be killed, but precautions must be taken regarding him. And on this occasion, I ask myself in my heart, whenever I hear that forty or fifty people from the Afghan government army have joined the mujahideen, including such-and-such a commander, and so on. I wonder what the mujahideen do with them. Does their kindness in their hearts reach the point where they say, "These people have left the communist authority and joined us, so now we must give them all our secrets and all our plans"? Or do they hold back from them?

The questioner : They hold back from them.

The Shaykh : It should be so, good. If that is the case, then that president and the others are all the more reason to hold back from them regarding them.

The questioner : Meaning, they are not to be killed...?

The Shaykh : Yes, they are not to be killed, I say.

The questioner : Because sometimes this happens: the group sees, for example, a group fighting in one of the communist centers, and they enter upon them at night and so on, and take them as prisoners. They say, "I testify that there is no god but Allah, and I pray, and I fast, and by Allah, such and such." So we say to them, "Why do you fight us?" And they say, "By Allah, we were deceived," and one says, "We are good people." This talk is real and exists. So many of the brothers take the machine guns and shoot them.

The Shaykh : No, this is not permissible. Because I cannot imagine these Afghan communists to be worse than the polytheists of the Arabs. If the Arab polytheist, when he sees that there are only moments between him and death, says, "I testify that there is no god but Allah," the Muslim hastens to kill him, thinking that he did not say it except out of fear, except out of fear of being killed. Yet with that, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Why did you not slit open his heart?" or what do you do with the word "There is no god but Allah"? These Afghans are originally Muslims, do you see? Their origin is not polytheism. The polytheist himself, as you know from the Prophetic jurisprudence, if he is taken as a prisoner in the hands of the Muslims, it is not obligatory to kill him; rather, he is treated in one of four ways. In the Qur'an, two types are mentioned: and the second type is enslavement and expulsion, and the last is killing. So killing returns to the opinion of the Muslim ruler. Indeed, any of these four types returns to his opinion, either this or that, regarding the polytheist. As for the one whose origin is Muslim and then he confirms his Islam by the testimony, it is absolutely not permissible to kill him, except in very narrow circumstances where the ruler sees that he should be killed by way of disciplining others. Otherwise, the original ruling is that it is not permissible to kill him. Therefore, I do not see that shooting the prisoners—these who used to fight us and then become prisoners—is the way. Rather, they should be kept in places until their treachery and their turning against us are secured against. This is what I see, and Allah knows best.

The questioner : If he does not testify to the two testimonies and keeps crying and saying, "Forgive me, and I, and I..."?

The Shaykh : Islam is offered to him. "What is the matter with you? You are a Muslim?" And here the truth of his case appears. I mean, the truth of his case appears in what is evident from him. He may be a hypocrite, and the hypocrites were in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), yet they were left on the apparent Islam of theirs. I mean, there is nothing ambiguous in Islam. I mean, either this or that.