Continuing the discussion on the situation of the Palestinians in the face of occupation and how to deal with it according to the Shari'ah.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : If I understand correctly, is helping them stay alive not considered jihad with wealth?
The Shaykh : No, it is jihad.
The questioner : Jihad.
The Shaykh : It is jihad, but not jihad in the specific sense. I mean, if there were poor people...
The questioner : O Shaykh, is it charity or jihad, as I understand it?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Either with the body or with wealth.
The Shaykh : No, no, I meant jihad in the general sense. So if you mean jihad in the specific sense, then yes, it is so. No, it is not so. Yes, because I had in mind the general meaning of the well-known hadith when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) passed by with some of his noble Companions, and there was a young man, strong and robust. One of the Companions (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "If only this man were in the cause of Allah." So he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: I intended this general meaning.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
Another questioner : O our Shaykh, what prevents calling what they are doing there Islamic jihad, especially since a significant number of people in Gaza have declared Islamic jihad?
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : I mean, I want to speak also about the issue of capability[Al-Anfal 8:60] I mean, their capability is the stones and the bottles in which they put gasoline. They say, "This is our capability, and this is our enemy who has descended upon our land, and we must fight him," especially since the rulers are in the state that everyone knows.
The Shaykh: Are you finished?
The questioner : Until when?
The Shaykh : ... I mean, do you have more?
The questioner : It is there, it is there.
Another questioner : After you finish speaking, Professor, let us see how things are.
The questioner: The last one, so that he knows the way if it is clear, he relies on Allah and proceeds, or he turns back from near, and then a cup of water is with me and ready, praise be to Allah.
Another questioner : So that he can drink the water.
The Shaykh : Yes, what do you think of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) who remained in Mecca for thirteen years, and as you know, he and his Companions were being tortured by the polytheists. Do you think they were incapable of using the stones of Mecca, of which there are so many, and saying, "This is our capability"?
The questioner : They were not incapable of using stones.
The Shaykh : If.
The questioner : But the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used them.
The Shaykh : How did he use them in the context we are discussing?
The questioner: No...
The Shaykh : Why the deviation? Why the deviation? Why the deviation from the point!
The questioner : I am saying they were not incapable of using stones.
The Shaykh : Okay.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Why? Because they did not use them as those who are doing it now use them? He was incapable.
The questioner : The matter seems to me to be different.
The Shaykh : I did not ask you if it is different or not, because the facts do not appear except through this narrowing of the question and answer.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I asked you: was he incapable or not? Say he was incapable or not incapable.
The questioner : I said he was not incapable.
The Shaykh : After that, after that, the details come if necessary.
The questioner : I said he was not incapable.
The Shaykh : He was not incapable.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : Fine. Does his leaving it, i.e., not using these stones despite his ability to do so, indicate that using them is one of the means of jihad against the enemy armed with iron?
The questioner : It does not indicate that.
The Shaykh : So how did you argue with what does not indicate what it indicates?
The questioner : I said it does not indicate that because stones are not among the means of fighting.
The Shaykh : That is what I understood.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : I did not understand anything else.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But you said regarding those who are fighting now, the disbelievers are not armed with swords, spears, and lances.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But with all the modern means today. How did you make that a means of jihad and not make it a means of jihad in that time, even though it is easier in terms of inflicting harm on that enemy in that time than inflicting harm on this enemy now?
The questioner : Yes... In the first matter, where the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions were, they had not been permitted to fight.
The Shaykh : It was not the case.
The questioner : The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions had not been permitted to fight.
The Shaykh : Okay, the question comes to you based on this answer: is the lack of permission reasonable in meaning or not?
The questioner : Rather, it is reasonable in meaning.
The Shaykh : What is its reasonableness?
The questioner : Its reasonableness is preparing people for readiness for jihad.
The Shaykh : Okay, were the people at that time prepared for jihad and did not fight?
The questioner : They were not prepared.
The Shaykh : The same question now: these people whom some want to call mujahideen with stones.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Ready for jihad.
The questioner : Not ready.
The Shaykh : So, if...
The questioner : The matter seems to me to be different, in my opinion.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, we need to define.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And the matter is different for you and also different for me.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But the research is whether it is jihad.
The questioner : That is how the research began. The research began: why do we not call them mujahideen?
The Shaykh : I did not ask you if it began and ended. Is it jihad?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : This contradicts what you said earlier.
The questioner : Why?
The Shaykh : Repeat your words or repeat your thinking. Do you know why? Because you admitted that the lack of permission for jihad at that time was reasonable in meaning!
The questioner : A matter whose meaning is rational.
The Shaykh : And it is their lack of readiness.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : As a Muslim people for jihad. I asked you, and now this Muslim people is ready for jihad in the cause of Allah. You said no.
The questioner : Not ready. Yes.
The Shaykh : What do you mean by "not ready"? I want to repeat your words.
The questioner : As I understood from me.
The Shaykh : Okay, that is enough, do not speak. I will say: you said no. Yes, you agree with me.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So how do you say something contrary to what this premise leads to?
The questioner : I say it out of necessity.
The Shaykh : Out of necessity.
The questioner : Yes, the reality.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, out of necessity for what? Define what you are necessitated to do. What are you necessitated to?
The questioner : I mean, I say this statement out of necessity, otherwise the original...
The Shaykh : I did not understand. For the sake of the demonstrative pronoun, clarify it for me. What are you necessitated to? What is it?
The questioner : Their jihad.
The Shaykh : Their jihad.
The questioner : Yes, calling it that.
The Shaykh : You are necessitated to...
Another questioner : ... that despite the lack of readiness, nevertheless, what is available... I mean, which one is necessitated?
The questioner : The same thing. Calling them mujahideen means we approve their fighting with stones. The same meaning. If we approve that they are mujahideen, we approve their use of stones. This is in my opinion.
The Shaykh : I do not know if you understood or not. You say, may Allah reward you, you are necessitated to say that. The demonstrative pronoun "that," what is it?
The questioner : Their fighting and their use of stones, and consequently calling them mujahideen.
The Shaykh : This contradicts what you said, O Shaykh.
The questioner : Why?
The Shaykh : You established that it is not jihad because they are not ready, and then you say that I am necessitated to call them mujahideen!
The questioner : I did not establish that it is not jihad.
The Shaykh : How could she not?
The questioner : I did not establish it. I said, I am with you from the beginning that there is no readiness.
The Shaykh : How, how, my brother, did you not say it!
The questioner : I did not say that they are ready for jihad. I agreed with you that they are not ready, like the Companions around the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : Okay, the one who is not ready for jihad, without the method, if you say what you said, and this is the meaning of your words, without the method, is it said that the one who is not ready for jihad must fight?
The questioner : The answer in general: it is not permissible. Not ready, it is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : What does it mean, general form and specific form?
The questioner : The one who is not ready for jihad, it is not obligatory for him to fight.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : But these circumstances that happened in the West Bank.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And these long years that have passed for them have brought them out. They fought. We say this is not permissible for them to do this action. Is it not permissible for them or is it permissible?
The Shaykh : This is what I answered with. When you say "jihad is not obligatory before readiness," does it mean it is permissible?
The questioner : Jihad is not obligatory before readiness.
The Shaykh : I asked you.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You have the answer, and that is all. Does your saying "jihad is not obligatory before readiness" mean that it is permissible?
The questioner : I mean, is there any evidence that prevents it?
The Shaykh: There is no power nor strength except with Allah.
The questioner : If it is not obligatory, is there any evidence that prevents permissibility?
The Shaykh : Of course, because they violated[Al-Anfal 8:60].
The questioner : Return these stones and this gasoline and this glass.
The Shaykh : I hope no one else is listening to you.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Because this contradicts what you claimed regarding the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The questioner : "This is what you are able to do"[Al-Anfal 8:60].
The Shaykh : Okay, develop the question.
The questioner : And I will develop the answer, if Allah wills.
Another questioner : Develop it, do not get entangled.
The Shaykh : It is not on me, it is not on me, I say.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I mean, you say that it is not obligatory for them to fight, but it is permissible, is that not what you said?
The questioner : Excuse me, repeat, O our Shaykh, repeat.
The Shaykh : I said, you are with us: jihad is not obligatory as long as there is no readiness.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But nevertheless, this jihad is permissible.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Correct.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : The question comes to you now, and perhaps this is the final point: Is it better to engage in this jihad, or to focus on preparing for jihad?
The questioner : No, rather I say the best is to prepare for jihad.
The Shaykh : And this is what the Messenger did.
The questioner : And this is what the Messenger did.
The Shaykh : So do not exceed the limit.
The questioner : Okay.
The Shaykh : Okay.
The questioner : You have not clarified.
The Shaykh : You have not clarified. All right.
The questioner : The best is that we adhere to what has reached us from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), especially since we are not prepared now.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : But this means the silence of those we see and hear from among the Muslims, rulers and ruled, and the rest are silent, and even more than their silence is something else.
Another questioner : Things.
The questioner : Yes, and many things that make this people think of doing anything, as long as it is within the bounds of permissibility. Yes.
The Shaykh: Stay in your place.
The questioner : Why, Shaykh, stay in your place.
The Shaykh : The same question returns: Do you think there were no Muslims except in Makkah?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What do you mean? Yes, do you think or not?
The questioner : That there were some in al-Madinah.
The Shaykh : All right, so perhaps you now want to distinguish, because you said at first that I distinguish, so now you will distinguish between the large number of people now outside this group and the small number of people outside that group. This is a distinction, Professor, that does not benefit you, because you are talking about a group operating in a limited land.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And those around them are negligent, leaving the individual obligation, as we say, not in this country, but in Afghanistan and elsewhere. But your justification for saying that this answer rises from the circle of permissibility to recommendation because of the non-support of these people for them is a formal distinction, not substantive at all, because the issue of jihad is either an individual obligation or a collective obligation, and you know this fact, and there is no middle ground.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So what you called jihad in that land, either it is an individual obligation or it is a collective obligation. If the preparation is not present, as we all admitted, then it will not be a collective obligation a fortiori, as long as it is not an individual obligation, because a collective obligation means the facilitation of the means of jihad for the Ummah. If some of them do it, it drops from the rest. What do you say when this group that is fighting, as you say, there is a limited and restricted Ummah, and we agreed that they do not have the means of jihad and that they must work to prepare for true jihad?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And here a pause is necessary. Do you believe that the factions operating there and fighting, in your expression, are factions all of whom are Muslims?
The questioner : All of them? No, some of them.
The Shaykh : Fine. "Most of them" is my expression, which is better for you than your saying "some of them."
The questioner : ... Better ... .
The Shaykh : I say it is better for you.
The questioner : Most of them ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, most of them are Muslims. All right.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : We left the non-Muslims. Is this "most" agreed upon or disputed?
Another questioner : Disputed.
Another questioner : Disputed.
The questioner : By Allah, I see that it is agreed upon.
Another questioner : In what is the agreement or disagreement?
The questioner : As they conveyed to us that they are agreed upon because they are ... an organization.
The Shaykh : Never mind, I admit that I made a mistake in the question. What is your opinion? I mean, are they agreed upon in their understanding of Islam, in its foundations and first principles?
The questioner : I do not think so.
The Shaykh : You do not think so? I see you are speaking the language of politicians.
The questioner : No, that is not so.
The questioner : Shaykh, he wants to become a mayor, is he not?
The Shaykh : All right, when you say "I do not think," of course you think the predominant thought.
The questioner : Okay, the one that resembles certainty.
The Shaykh : All right, is not his saying ... instead of saying "certainly," it resembles certainty?
Another questioner : From the same distance.
The Shaykh : It remains from the same style.
Another questioner : It resembles 'Isa ibn Maryam.
The Shaykh : So if a large faction, numbering thousands upon thousands, are not agreed upon in the Islamic foundations, but rather they differ in that with the greatest difference, do you think they adopted the first means of jihad in the path of Allah?
The questioner : Which is the moral preparation, of course.
The Shaykh : Of course, and with it, of course.
The questioner : Meaning, you are saying now that this is what is said of all Muslims, wherever they are.
The Shaykh : Unfortunately.
The questioner : You did not answer me.
The Shaykh : I am saying more than what you say, unfortunately.
The questioner : Truly, this is it.
The Shaykh : Yes, but really I felt that you did not answer.
The questioner: By Allah.
The Shaykh : And this is recorded for you, not against you, like the others.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : All right, what is the answer?
The questioner : No, they did not prepare the moral preparation.
The Shaykh : The question was: Do you think they will succeed in fighting the enemies while they are differing in creed?
The questioner : Will they succeed while they are differing in creed? By Allah, this knowledge is with Allah, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Glory be to Allah!
Another questioner : I want to speak on a point. We all agree that what is happening now does not lead to success, but the purpose of it, excuse me, we agree that what is happening now does not lead to success and does not lead to support, but the goal of it is to move the issue, and thereby it may result in something. We agree that it does not lead to success.
The Shaykh : Never mind, Abu Yahya, your words are yours.
Another questioner : I am withdrawing, but I clarified.
The Shaykh : Never mind, half of your words are Muslim with certainty, and the other half, the "moving" needs research, perhaps we will return to it, but remind me, remind me of returning to the issue of "moving."
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But the research.
The questioner : You are reminding us, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : We often forget the hadith that you started with.
The Shaykh : No, it is jihad.
The questioner : Jihad.
The Shaykh : It is jihad, but not jihad in the specific sense. I mean, if there were poor people...
The questioner : O Shaykh, is it charity or jihad, as I understand it?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Either with the body or with wealth.
The Shaykh : No, no, I meant jihad in the general sense. So if you mean jihad in the specific sense, then yes, it is so. No, it is not so. Yes, because I had in mind the general meaning of the well-known hadith when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) passed by with some of his noble Companions, and there was a young man, strong and robust. One of the Companions (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "If only this man were in the cause of Allah." So he (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
If a man goes out to seek support for two old, elderly parents, he is in the path of Allah, and if he goes out to support his small children, he is in the path of Allah.
إن كان هذا خرج يسعى على أبوين شيخين كبيرين فهو في سبيل الله وإن كان يسعى على أولاد له صغار فهو في سبيل اللهThe questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
Another questioner : O our Shaykh, what prevents calling what they are doing there Islamic jihad, especially since a significant number of people in Gaza have declared Islamic jihad?
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : I mean, I want to speak also about the issue of capability
And prepare against them whatever you are able
وأعدوا لهم ما استطعتمThe Shaykh: Are you finished?
The questioner : Until when?
The Shaykh : ... I mean, do you have more?
The questioner : It is there, it is there.
Another questioner : After you finish speaking, Professor, let us see how things are.
The questioner: The last one, so that he knows the way if it is clear, he relies on Allah and proceeds, or he turns back from near, and then a cup of water is with me and ready, praise be to Allah.
Another questioner : So that he can drink the water.
The Shaykh : Yes, what do you think of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) who remained in Mecca for thirteen years, and as you know, he and his Companions were being tortured by the polytheists. Do you think they were incapable of using the stones of Mecca, of which there are so many, and saying, "This is our capability"?
The questioner : They were not incapable of using stones.
The Shaykh : If.
The questioner : But the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used them.
The Shaykh : How did he use them in the context we are discussing?
The questioner: No...
The Shaykh : Why the deviation? Why the deviation? Why the deviation from the point!
The questioner : I am saying they were not incapable of using stones.
The Shaykh : Okay.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Why? Because they did not use them as those who are doing it now use them? He was incapable.
The questioner : The matter seems to me to be different.
The Shaykh : I did not ask you if it is different or not, because the facts do not appear except through this narrowing of the question and answer.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I asked you: was he incapable or not? Say he was incapable or not incapable.
The questioner : I said he was not incapable.
The Shaykh : After that, after that, the details come if necessary.
The questioner : I said he was not incapable.
The Shaykh : He was not incapable.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : Fine. Does his leaving it, i.e., not using these stones despite his ability to do so, indicate that using them is one of the means of jihad against the enemy armed with iron?
The questioner : It does not indicate that.
The Shaykh : So how did you argue with what does not indicate what it indicates?
The questioner : I said it does not indicate that because stones are not among the means of fighting.
The Shaykh : That is what I understood.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : I did not understand anything else.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But you said regarding those who are fighting now, the disbelievers are not armed with swords, spears, and lances.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But with all the modern means today. How did you make that a means of jihad and not make it a means of jihad in that time, even though it is easier in terms of inflicting harm on that enemy in that time than inflicting harm on this enemy now?
The questioner : Yes... In the first matter, where the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions were, they had not been permitted to fight.
The Shaykh : It was not the case.
The questioner : The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions had not been permitted to fight.
The Shaykh : Okay, the question comes to you based on this answer: is the lack of permission reasonable in meaning or not?
The questioner : Rather, it is reasonable in meaning.
The Shaykh : What is its reasonableness?
The questioner : Its reasonableness is preparing people for readiness for jihad.
The Shaykh : Okay, were the people at that time prepared for jihad and did not fight?
The questioner : They were not prepared.
The Shaykh : The same question now: these people whom some want to call mujahideen with stones.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Ready for jihad.
The questioner : Not ready.
The Shaykh : So, if...
The questioner : The matter seems to me to be different, in my opinion.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, we need to define.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And the matter is different for you and also different for me.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But the research is whether it is jihad.
The questioner : That is how the research began. The research began: why do we not call them mujahideen?
The Shaykh : I did not ask you if it began and ended. Is it jihad?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : This contradicts what you said earlier.
The questioner : Why?
The Shaykh : Repeat your words or repeat your thinking. Do you know why? Because you admitted that the lack of permission for jihad at that time was reasonable in meaning!
The questioner : A matter whose meaning is rational.
The Shaykh : And it is their lack of readiness.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : As a Muslim people for jihad. I asked you, and now this Muslim people is ready for jihad in the cause of Allah. You said no.
The questioner : Not ready. Yes.
The Shaykh : What do you mean by "not ready"? I want to repeat your words.
The questioner : As I understood from me.
The Shaykh : Okay, that is enough, do not speak. I will say: you said no. Yes, you agree with me.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So how do you say something contrary to what this premise leads to?
The questioner : I say it out of necessity.
The Shaykh : Out of necessity.
The questioner : Yes, the reality.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, out of necessity for what? Define what you are necessitated to do. What are you necessitated to?
The questioner : I mean, I say this statement out of necessity, otherwise the original...
The Shaykh : I did not understand. For the sake of the demonstrative pronoun, clarify it for me. What are you necessitated to? What is it?
The questioner : Their jihad.
The Shaykh : Their jihad.
The questioner : Yes, calling it that.
The Shaykh : You are necessitated to...
Another questioner : ... that despite the lack of readiness, nevertheless, what is available... I mean, which one is necessitated?
The questioner : The same thing. Calling them mujahideen means we approve their fighting with stones. The same meaning. If we approve that they are mujahideen, we approve their use of stones. This is in my opinion.
The Shaykh : I do not know if you understood or not. You say, may Allah reward you, you are necessitated to say that. The demonstrative pronoun "that," what is it?
The questioner : Their fighting and their use of stones, and consequently calling them mujahideen.
The Shaykh : This contradicts what you said, O Shaykh.
The questioner : Why?
The Shaykh : You established that it is not jihad because they are not ready, and then you say that I am necessitated to call them mujahideen!
The questioner : I did not establish that it is not jihad.
The Shaykh : How could she not?
The questioner : I did not establish it. I said, I am with you from the beginning that there is no readiness.
The Shaykh : How, how, my brother, did you not say it!
The questioner : I did not say that they are ready for jihad. I agreed with you that they are not ready, like the Companions around the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : Okay, the one who is not ready for jihad, without the method, if you say what you said, and this is the meaning of your words, without the method, is it said that the one who is not ready for jihad must fight?
The questioner : The answer in general: it is not permissible. Not ready, it is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : What does it mean, general form and specific form?
The questioner : The one who is not ready for jihad, it is not obligatory for him to fight.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : But these circumstances that happened in the West Bank.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And these long years that have passed for them have brought them out. They fought. We say this is not permissible for them to do this action. Is it not permissible for them or is it permissible?
The Shaykh : This is what I answered with. When you say "jihad is not obligatory before readiness," does it mean it is permissible?
The questioner : Jihad is not obligatory before readiness.
The Shaykh : I asked you.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You have the answer, and that is all. Does your saying "jihad is not obligatory before readiness" mean that it is permissible?
The questioner : I mean, is there any evidence that prevents it?
The Shaykh: There is no power nor strength except with Allah.
The questioner : If it is not obligatory, is there any evidence that prevents permissibility?
The Shaykh : Of course, because they violated
And prepare against them whatever you are able
وأعدوا لهم ما استطعتم منThe questioner : Return these stones and this gasoline and this glass.
The Shaykh : I hope no one else is listening to you.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Because this contradicts what you claimed regarding the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The questioner : "This is what you are able to do"
prepare against them whatever you are able
أعدوا لهم ما استطعتمThe Shaykh : Okay, develop the question.
The questioner : And I will develop the answer, if Allah wills.
Another questioner : Develop it, do not get entangled.
The Shaykh : It is not on me, it is not on me, I say.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I mean, you say that it is not obligatory for them to fight, but it is permissible, is that not what you said?
The questioner : Excuse me, repeat, O our Shaykh, repeat.
The Shaykh : I said, you are with us: jihad is not obligatory as long as there is no readiness.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But nevertheless, this jihad is permissible.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Correct.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : The question comes to you now, and perhaps this is the final point: Is it better to engage in this jihad, or to focus on preparing for jihad?
The questioner : No, rather I say the best is to prepare for jihad.
The Shaykh : And this is what the Messenger did.
The questioner : And this is what the Messenger did.
The Shaykh : So do not exceed the limit.
The questioner : Okay.
The Shaykh : Okay.
The questioner : You have not clarified.
The Shaykh : You have not clarified. All right.
The questioner : The best is that we adhere to what has reached us from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), especially since we are not prepared now.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : But this means the silence of those we see and hear from among the Muslims, rulers and ruled, and the rest are silent, and even more than their silence is something else.
Another questioner : Things.
The questioner : Yes, and many things that make this people think of doing anything, as long as it is within the bounds of permissibility. Yes.
The Shaykh: Stay in your place.
The questioner : Why, Shaykh, stay in your place.
The Shaykh : The same question returns: Do you think there were no Muslims except in Makkah?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What do you mean? Yes, do you think or not?
The questioner : That there were some in al-Madinah.
The Shaykh : All right, so perhaps you now want to distinguish, because you said at first that I distinguish, so now you will distinguish between the large number of people now outside this group and the small number of people outside that group. This is a distinction, Professor, that does not benefit you, because you are talking about a group operating in a limited land.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And those around them are negligent, leaving the individual obligation, as we say, not in this country, but in Afghanistan and elsewhere. But your justification for saying that this answer rises from the circle of permissibility to recommendation because of the non-support of these people for them is a formal distinction, not substantive at all, because the issue of jihad is either an individual obligation or a collective obligation, and you know this fact, and there is no middle ground.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So what you called jihad in that land, either it is an individual obligation or it is a collective obligation. If the preparation is not present, as we all admitted, then it will not be a collective obligation a fortiori, as long as it is not an individual obligation, because a collective obligation means the facilitation of the means of jihad for the Ummah. If some of them do it, it drops from the rest. What do you say when this group that is fighting, as you say, there is a limited and restricted Ummah, and we agreed that they do not have the means of jihad and that they must work to prepare for true jihad?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And here a pause is necessary. Do you believe that the factions operating there and fighting, in your expression, are factions all of whom are Muslims?
The questioner : All of them? No, some of them.
The Shaykh : Fine. "Most of them" is my expression, which is better for you than your saying "some of them."
The questioner : ... Better ... .
The Shaykh : I say it is better for you.
The questioner : Most of them ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, most of them are Muslims. All right.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : We left the non-Muslims. Is this "most" agreed upon or disputed?
Another questioner : Disputed.
Another questioner : Disputed.
The questioner : By Allah, I see that it is agreed upon.
Another questioner : In what is the agreement or disagreement?
The questioner : As they conveyed to us that they are agreed upon because they are ... an organization.
The Shaykh : Never mind, I admit that I made a mistake in the question. What is your opinion? I mean, are they agreed upon in their understanding of Islam, in its foundations and first principles?
The questioner : I do not think so.
The Shaykh : You do not think so? I see you are speaking the language of politicians.
The questioner : No, that is not so.
The questioner : Shaykh, he wants to become a mayor, is he not?
The Shaykh : All right, when you say "I do not think," of course you think the predominant thought.
The questioner : Okay, the one that resembles certainty.
The Shaykh : All right, is not his saying ... instead of saying "certainly," it resembles certainty?
Another questioner : From the same distance.
The Shaykh : It remains from the same style.
Another questioner : It resembles 'Isa ibn Maryam.
The Shaykh : So if a large faction, numbering thousands upon thousands, are not agreed upon in the Islamic foundations, but rather they differ in that with the greatest difference, do you think they adopted the first means of jihad in the path of Allah?
The questioner : Which is the moral preparation, of course.
The Shaykh : Of course, and with it, of course.
The questioner : Meaning, you are saying now that this is what is said of all Muslims, wherever they are.
The Shaykh : Unfortunately.
The questioner : You did not answer me.
The Shaykh : I am saying more than what you say, unfortunately.
The questioner : Truly, this is it.
The Shaykh : Yes, but really I felt that you did not answer.
The questioner: By Allah.
The Shaykh : And this is recorded for you, not against you, like the others.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : All right, what is the answer?
The questioner : No, they did not prepare the moral preparation.
The Shaykh : The question was: Do you think they will succeed in fighting the enemies while they are differing in creed?
The questioner : Will they succeed while they are differing in creed? By Allah, this knowledge is with Allah, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Glory be to Allah!
Another questioner : I want to speak on a point. We all agree that what is happening now does not lead to success, but the purpose of it, excuse me, we agree that what is happening now does not lead to success and does not lead to support, but the goal of it is to move the issue, and thereby it may result in something. We agree that it does not lead to success.
The Shaykh : Never mind, Abu Yahya, your words are yours.
Another questioner : I am withdrawing, but I clarified.
The Shaykh : Never mind, half of your words are Muslim with certainty, and the other half, the "moving" needs research, perhaps we will return to it, but remind me, remind me of returning to the issue of "moving."
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But the research.
The questioner : You are reminding us, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : We often forget the hadith that you started with.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.