"If they return, and if not, fight them"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The author said "If they return, and if not, fight them" as an obligation, not as a recommendation or permissibility. If they return, go back, sheathe their swords, and go to their homes, that is what is sought, and that is what brings security and stability. If they refuse, fight them as an obligation, or is it permissible? Fight them as an obligation to repel their evil. For this reason, the author said "fight them". Now, do we say "fight them" or do we say "kill them"?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : Fight them.
The Shaykh : What is the difference?
The questioner : Fight them means ... .
The Shaykh : The difference is that if the combatant stops fighting, one must stop fighting him, and it is not permissible to pursue him, nor to finish off his wounded, nor to take his wealth as booty, because fighting him is permissible only, not killing him. So if they turn their backs and flee, we do not pursue them, nor do we finish off their wounded, nor do we take their wealth; rather, we stop fighting them. There is a difference between fighting and killing; not everyone whom it is permissible to fight is someone whom it is permissible to kill. For this reason, people are fought if they abandon the call to prayer, for example, but is it permissible to kill them?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : No, meaning, if a group of people in a village of one hundred and fifty persons abandon the call to prayer and the imam, and the imam is able to destroy them all in a quarter of an hour, it is not permissible for him to kill them, but he fights them in the sense of compelling them, even if it leads to fighting, to perform the call to prayer. From this, the secret in the saying of Allah the Exalted becomes apparent:[Al-Baqarah 2:191] Did He say? He did not say "so fight them," He said [Al-Baqarah 2:191] This can be understood in two ways. One is: if they fight you, Allah will grant you dominance until you kill them, just as He said in the Exalted: [Al-Isra 17:33] This contains an indication that whoever is killed unjustly, Allah will expose his killer and he will be killed. For this reason, He said [Al-Isra 17:33] So the meaning is: if they fight you, the state will be yours over them, so kill them. Or the meaning is another possibility: [Al-Baqarah 2:191] And if they put down their weapons, because by violating the sanctity of the Sacred Mosque, they became deserving of killing. The important point is that there is a difference between fighting and killing. So these rebels, if they do not return, the imam must fight them. Now, is it obligatory for his subjects to assist him in fighting them?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Did I say? Yes, it is obligatory for them. If the subjects say, "We do not fight a group of Muslims, how can we fight them? How can we take up arms against them?" We say: because they are rebels, fighting them is a matter of reform. And if reform is not possible except by fighting them, it becomes obligatory. So it is obligatory for the subjects to obey the imam when he orders them to go out with him to fight these people. It remains to be said here that there is a third situation, because the author mentioned two situations. One situation is that these people stop fighting when the matter is explained to them. In this situation, what do we do?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : We stop fighting them. As long as they have stopped, we stop fighting them. The second situation is that they do not return but continue in their rebellion. In that case, is it obligatory for the imam to fight them? Yes, it is obligatory for the imam to fight them, and it is obligatory for the subjects to assist the imam. The third situation is if the doubt is not clarified and the injustice is not removed. They say, "We want you to remove such-and-such injustice," and he says, "No, I will not remove it." Or they say, "We want you to clarify to us the basis of what you did and the basis of your ruling from the Book and the Sunnah," and he says, "No." In this situation, if they return, the matter is clear and the problem is resolved. But if they refuse and say, "As long as you have not removed the injustice and clarified the doubt for us, we will fight," the imam must fight them, or is it not obligatory?
The questioner : It is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : It is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : Is it not obligatory?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Now, if he fights them, is it obligatory for the subjects to assist him?
The questioner : It is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Let us see. We say: if the imam persists in his injustice and in obscuring the matter and does not clarify the basis to them, is it permissible for them to fight him or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, it is not permissible for them to fight him. Do not be Khawarij. It is not permissible for them to fight him, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said regarding the ruler:Sahih Muslim 1847b And he prohibited a person from withdrawing his hand from obedience unless he sees clear disbelief with proof from Allah. For this reason, we say: if these people go out and ask the imam to remove injustices or clarify doubts, but he persists, we say: without doubt, he is sinful for that. As for the first, which is not removing the injustice, that is clear. And as for the second, it is because it is obligatory for him to clarify the matter to avert harm. If he does not do so, he is sinful without doubt. But it is not permissible for these people to go out against him, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited that. And because it is not permissible for them to go out against him, do we say that it is permissible for him to fight them to avert harm, or not? Because the reason for which they stood up, yes, fighting for that reason is not permissible for them? Fighting is not permissible for them. So they are aggressors, and repelling the aggression of an aggressor is obligatory. So I am hesitant here: is it obligatory for him to fight them and obligatory for his subjects to assist him, or not? The issue needs review. As for the author's statement, it is apparent that he only fights them if he has clarified the doubt to them and removed the injustice. Now, if these people who were fought are defeated, is it permissible for us to pursue them? No. If a wounded person is found among them, is it permissible to finish him off and kill him? No. If wealth or descendants are found for them, it is not permissible to take their wealth as booty or to take their descendants as captives.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : Fight them.
The Shaykh : What is the difference?
The questioner : Fight them means ... .
The Shaykh : The difference is that if the combatant stops fighting, one must stop fighting him, and it is not permissible to pursue him, nor to finish off his wounded, nor to take his wealth as booty, because fighting him is permissible only, not killing him. So if they turn their backs and flee, we do not pursue them, nor do we finish off their wounded, nor do we take their wealth; rather, we stop fighting them. There is a difference between fighting and killing; not everyone whom it is permissible to fight is someone whom it is permissible to kill. For this reason, people are fought if they abandon the call to prayer, for example, but is it permissible to kill them?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : No, meaning, if a group of people in a village of one hundred and fifty persons abandon the call to prayer and the imam, and the imam is able to destroy them all in a quarter of an hour, it is not permissible for him to kill them, but he fights them in the sense of compelling them, even if it leads to fighting, to perform the call to prayer. From this, the secret in the saying of Allah the Exalted becomes apparent:
And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you
ولا تقاتلوهم عند المسجد الحرام حتى يقاتلوكم فيه فإن قاتلوكمthen kill them
فاقتلوهمBut if they fight you, then kill them
إن قاتلوكم فاقتلوهمAnd whoever is killed unjustly - We have given his heir authority, but let him not exceed limits in [the matter of] taking life
ومن قتِل مظلوما فقد جعلنا لوليه سلطانا فلا يُسرف في القتلbut let him not exceed limits in [the matter of] taking life
فلا يسرف في القتلBut if they fight you, then kill them
إن قاتلوكم فاقتلوهمThe questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Did I say? Yes, it is obligatory for them. If the subjects say, "We do not fight a group of Muslims, how can we fight them? How can we take up arms against them?" We say: because they are rebels, fighting them is a matter of reform. And if reform is not possible except by fighting them, it becomes obligatory. So it is obligatory for the subjects to obey the imam when he orders them to go out with him to fight these people. It remains to be said here that there is a third situation, because the author mentioned two situations. One situation is that these people stop fighting when the matter is explained to them. In this situation, what do we do?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : We stop fighting them. As long as they have stopped, we stop fighting them. The second situation is that they do not return but continue in their rebellion. In that case, is it obligatory for the imam to fight them? Yes, it is obligatory for the imam to fight them, and it is obligatory for the subjects to assist the imam. The third situation is if the doubt is not clarified and the injustice is not removed. They say, "We want you to remove such-and-such injustice," and he says, "No, I will not remove it." Or they say, "We want you to clarify to us the basis of what you did and the basis of your ruling from the Book and the Sunnah," and he says, "No." In this situation, if they return, the matter is clear and the problem is resolved. But if they refuse and say, "As long as you have not removed the injustice and clarified the doubt for us, we will fight," the imam must fight them, or is it not obligatory?
The questioner : It is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : It is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : Is it not obligatory?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Now, if he fights them, is it obligatory for the subjects to assist him?
The questioner : It is not obligatory.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Let us see. We say: if the imam persists in his injustice and in obscuring the matter and does not clarify the basis to them, is it permissible for them to fight him or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, it is not permissible for them to fight him. Do not be Khawarij. It is not permissible for them to fight him, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said regarding the ruler: