Takfīr based upon the rule "the principle ruling over the people is Kufr" because the Dār is Dār Kufr

by Shaykh Abū Muhammad Al-Maqdisī, may Allāh preserve him

Excerpted from Ar-Risālah Ath-Thalathīniyah Fit-Tahdhīr Min Al-Ghūluw Fit-

Takfīr

At-Tibyān Publications

And from the monstrous errors in Takfīr, is Takfīr based upon the rule "the principle ruling over the people is Kufr" because the Dār is Dār Kufr, and that the dealings with them and permitting their blood and wealth and honor is based upon this ruling whose Usūl (foundations) is branched out from the fact that the Dār is Dār Kufr. And this is a matter that has spread amongst many of the extremists, and some of the ignorants have bore it without knowing its origin or its consequences. And we, and to Allāh is the praise and the grace, have never spoken with this foundation nor espoused ever on any day from the days. Rather, we were - and continue to be - from the strongest opposers to it, to the point that some of the extreme Takfīrīs pronounced Takfīr on me, due to what I opposed them in. And I debated them over its invalidity, and that day I did not witness with them anything that they could use as evidence for this foundation of theirs, except a disconnected phrase from Shaykh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah which they cut from a Fatwā from him about the land of Mārdīn, and it is his statement "Nor the status of Dār Harb whose people are Kuffār", and they distorted it and turned it into "Dār Al-Kufr whose people are Kuffār". So they extracted from this that every Dār Kufr - even if it became Tāri'ah [1] recently and not in origin - then its people are all Kuffār, except for those whose details of belief they know.. And I showed them on that day that this statement - especially in Mārdīn and its likes from the Diyār Al-Kufr At-Tāri'ah - it is not but a word for the Fuqāhā meaning a Dār in which Kufr has prevailed and its rulings have taken over. And there is no entering its inhabitants into the description of Kufr except if they perpetrate a cause from the causes of Takfīr. And I mentioned to them some of the details which will come, but they did not [find these details honorable], and they insisted on holding fast to this phrase. So I was astonished at how desire can flip the scales, and make one who believes that the the statement of a Sahābī cannot be used as a proof, and does not accept the statement of anyone else from the first three preferred generations in a branch (Far') from amongst the branches (Furū'), but uses the cut-up statement of a scholar from the seventh century as evidence, and in a matter from amongst the most dangerous areas of the Religion, when he thinks that this statement complies with his desires, or achieves his goal or his needs!! Though they acknowledge that the words all of the creation after the Messenger of Allāh, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س can be objected to and not used as evidence, and that [the ,وwords of all of the creation after the Messenger of Allāh] require evidence and proof, and on their own are not a proof or an evidence. And Allāh, وجل عز, clarified some of the motives of the people and their desires in

their hurrying towards the likes of Takfīr and rushing to it at times, in His Statement,

ال وا و قول من ت قى ل كم أل ي سالم إل ست ال نا ل ؛ مؤم

and say not to anyone who greets you (by embracing Islām): "You are not a believer" [2]

So he said :

غون ت ب ياة عرض ت ح يا ال دن ال

...seeking the perishable goods of the worldly life [3] And likewise the goal of these misguided ones, some of whom I was debating, they would wait for the easiest and closest opportunity to plunder or steal what fell in their hands from amongst the wealth and the possessions of those who they ruled to be upon Kufr, even if they were the Du'āt and the Mujāhidīn, or from the oppressed Muslims - their money was considered by them to be booty. And I witnessed examples of this, and at the conclusion of the matter they fought amongst themselves and differed over some of the wealth!! I ask Allāh ى عال to guide them to the correct path, and to keep these trials that تmisguide away from the Muslim youth, for the audacity to make Takfīr of the Muslims and make their blood and their wealth permissible without a Shar'ī cause, this is not something anyone except those with sick souls that have not smelled the fragrance of caution and Taqwā would advance towards. And indeed the Prophet, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س said in his Farewell Hajj, "Verily , وyour blood and your wealth and your honor are sacred, as the sacredness of this day of yours, in this [sacred] month of yours, in this [sacred] land of yours." And he also said in what is narrated by Al-Bukhārī and Muslim, "The blood of a Muslim is not made permissible except with one of three: the married adulterer, and a life for a life, and the deserter of his religion, an abandoner of the Jamā'ah." And he, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س said, "A Muslim will continue to be within the bounds , وof his Religion so long as he did not spill protected blood." Narrated by Al-Bukhārī from the Hadīth of Ibn 'Umar. And Ibn 'Umar said, "Indeed from the matters of dilemma for which there is no escape for the one who causes himself to fall in it is spilling of protected blood without its permissibility." And in Al-Bukhārī also, Maymūn Ibn Siyāh asked Anas Ibn Mālik, and said, "O Abā Hamzah, what protects the blood of a slave and his wealth?" So he said, "Whoever bears witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allāh, and faced our

Qiblah, and prayed our prayer, and ate from our slaughter, then he is a Muslim, for his is that which is for the Muslim, and upon him is that which is upon the Muslim." And what Al-Qādī 'Iyād mentioned in Ash-Shifā 2/277 was mentioned previously, from the scholars, their statement, "Indeed making the blood of those who establish the prayer, the Muwahiddīn, is dangerous. And the error in leaving a thousand disbelievers is lighter than the error of spilling a Mahjamah [4] from the blood of one Muslim." End quote. And it was transmitted from Al-Qābisī, his statement, "And the blood is not spilled except through a matter that is clearer, and in disciplining with a whip or with imprisonment is an exemplary example for the foolish ones. And if these [people] busy themselves with seeking Shar'ī knowledge and turning [the pages] of the books of the scholars and reading [about] al-Usool (the fundamentals) and the Furū' (the branches), they would know that before [making] the blood and wealth permissible, there might emerge a statement or action that would cause Takfīr, but there are levels and conditions and preventions that prevent Takfīr, not to mention permitting [their blood and wealth]... especially in the example of those they attacked, from amongst the oppressed or the Du'āt and the believers not abstaining with the power of the Tawāghīt or their systems and their laws... And that individual Takfīr does not follow the action or the speech of Kufr, as was mentioned previously, and from there, then the effects of the ruling that they desire and crave and seek are not imposed. Add to that that the majority of the scholars, and Ibn Al-Mundhir mentioned their Ijmā', that the possessions of the apostate are not taken just through his apostasy [5] if his apostasy was not Mughlathah [6], and if he was not abstaining (Mumtani')... for he is given a chance to repent, and it could be that he returns to Islām. And everyone who ponders upon the Fatwā of Shaykh Al-Islām that they they a little part of as their proof, found that, from its beginning to its end, it is a proof against them. So he, may Allāh have Mercy upon him, was asked about the country of Mārdīn, which the Tattār occupied and overpowered it and in it were Muslim people. So he answered, may Allāh have Mercy on him, "All praise is due to Allāh. The blood of the Muslims and their wealth is inviolable wherever they are, whether it is Mārdīn or others besides it... And the one residing in it, if he is unable to establish his Religion, then Hijrah is obligatory for him, otherwise it is preferred but not obligatory..." Until his statement "And it is not permissible to curse them generally or to accuse them of hypocrisy, for cursing and accusing of hypocrisy falls upon the characteristics mentioned in the Kitāb and the Sunnah, so some of the people of Mārdīn enter into it, and others besides them [7]. And as for its status as Dār Harb (war) or Dār Silm (peace), then it is Murakkabah (composite) - both meanings are in it. It is not at the status of Dār As-Silm where the laws of Islām are run just because its soldiers are Muslims, nor is it at the status of Dār Al-Harb where in its people are Kuffār. Rather, it is a third category, where the Muslim is treated

according to what he deserves, and the one outside of the Sharī'ah of Islām is fought according to what he deserves" End quote. Summarized from Majmū' Al-Fatāwā 28/135 [8]. So he reiterates: - That the original principle regarding the blood of the Muslims and their wealth is protection and forbiddance, wherever they may be, and a Dār or a country does not change this. Rather, the condition of this protection is a man's manifestation of Islām, not the Dār's manifestation of Islām. - And that it is not permissible to accuse a Muslim with any of the characteristics of hypocrisy or otherwise due only to the fact that the Dār has become under the dominance of the Kuffār, without those Muslims not committing anything. - And that the Dār that he was asked about and its likes, even if the Fuqahā's description of Dār Al-Kufr can be ascribed to it due to the Kuffār's dominance, with regard to the ruling of its [Muslim] inhabitants, it is [Dār] Murakkabah.

to be continued, In Shā' Allāh

-----

[1]Translator's Note: It is that a land that was Dār Al-Islām at one point but was then conquered by

original kuffār

[2]Translator's Note: An-Nisā':94[3] Translator's Note: An-Nisā':94

[4] Translator's Note: A Mahjamah is the quantity of blood released during the process of cupping,

around three or four drops of blood.

[5]See Al-Mughni, Kitāb Al-Murtadd, Chapter: It Is Not Ruled To Take the Possessions of the Murtadd

Due Solely To His Apostasy

[6] Translator's Note: Apostasy that is Mughlathah refers to apostasy that comes as a result of an

action considered to be war against Allāh and His Messenger and the believers. So whoever falls

into this type of apostasy is not given a chance to repent, and his repentence is not accepted of

him if he repents before he is executed.

[7] Meaning that the condition upon hich these characteristics rely is not the Dār [the person lives

in], rather, [the condition] is the presence and strength of these traits in the person himself,

whatever Dār he may be in.

[8]Translator's Note: For the full Fatwā see the At-Tibyān Publications release, A Call to Migrate

From the Lands of the Disbelievers to the Lands of the Muslims by Shaykh 'Abdul-'Azīz Al-Jarbū'

continued:

So it is not like Dār Al-Islām Al-Asliyyah (original Dār Al-Islām) where the people of the book are known by differentiation (like wearing clothes that distinguishes them), and the Murtadd is not to settle in it under any circumstance.. So the Asl in all its

inhabitants besides Ahl Al-Kitāb is that they are Muslims, and due to this, the Messenger of Allāh, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س ordered that in it a man should give Salām ,وto those who are known and those who are not known [9] and as such, the Fuqahā' wrote and frequently used his statement "The Asl in Dār Al-Islām is Islām" as evidence in the branches of Fiqh. Nor is it at the status of Dār Al-Harb, whose people are Kuffār and was not ever on any day Dār Al-Islām, nor were the majority of its people Muslims. So then, it is not Dār Kufr Asliyyah, but rather before the Kuffār overpowered it, it was Dār Al-Islām, and the majority of its people were Muslims. And due to this, it is not authorized to rule over its people and interact with them in accordance with these terminologies, due to their (the terminologies') lack of precision. Rather, whoever manifests Islām, his blood and wealth is protected, and he is treated with the treatment of the Muslims. And whoever is outside of the Sharī'ah of Islām is treated with what he deserves. So his (Ibn Taymiyyah's) words, may Allāh have Mercy on him, are clear, there is no deception in them. But the issue, as he mentioned, may Allāh have Mercy on him, is in a matter other than this... Indeed the gathering of desire with doubt will strengthen the cause for doubt and bequeath corruption of the knowledge and the understanding. And the people found within this unhealthy understanding what would strengthen their doubts and permit their desires (for booty), so they held fast to [Ibn Taymiyyah's] statement, "Nor the status of Dār Al-Harb whose people are Kuffār." So they made Kufr the Asl (original ruling) in regards to the people of every Dār that enters under the term Dār Al-Kufr, even if the description of Kufr in it was Tāri', due to the Kuffār's overpowering its laws, so they made Takfīr of all of its people even if the majority of them are affiliated with Islām, and they held fast to this and insisted upon it. This, and in the past I used to scrutinize the terms "Dār Al-Kufr" and "Dār Al-Islām" and I gathered the statements of many of the scholars and their definitions of the Dār, and I looked at the effect of this terminology on the inhabitants of the [Dār], so I did not find anything from any of the scholars like what these ones desired, especially in Dār Al-Kufr At-Tāri'ah who most of its people were Muslims. Yes, I found something resembling what they say.. with some of the misguided groups of the Khawārij. The Azāriqah, the people of Nāfi' Ibn Al-Azraq, said, "Indeed everyone who settles in Dār Al-Kufr is a Kāfir, there is no option for him except leaving." And it is known that they see the Dār of those who oppose them as Dār Kufr. And the Bayhasiyyah and the 'Awfiyyah said, "If the Imām disbelieves, his subjects disbelieve, the absent of them and the present." And this is all from there foolishness and their ignorance, and we will mention more in the fourth chapter of this book.

As for the true scholars, I analyzed the statements of many of them, and I did not find with them anything from amongst these generalizations. Nor does what was narrated in Ahkām Al-Qur'ān by Al-Jassās and others muddy this [unrestricted statement] of mine, which the hasty ones might believe to be similar to [the words of the Khawārij], for it is not like this, and this is because it was narrated in the land of the enemy, which they intend by it Dār Al-Harb or Dār Al-Kufr Al-Asliyyah, and in the shade of the presence of Dār Al-Islām and a Jamā'ah of Muslims who a Muslim is able to join them then he neglects this and stays increasing the majority of people of Shirk. As for generalizing this rule and this terminology and trying to generalize it to the inhabitants of the Dār which Kufr appeared suddenly, though the majority of its people affiliate to Islām, without acknowledging the oppression of the Muslims and the inexistence of Dār Al-Islām that the people can migrate to and that the Muslim can take refuge in, and without the Muslim colluding or assisting [others] in Kufr, then this is what I did not find at all. And I liked Ash-Shawkānī's statement in the close of [his book] As-Sayl Al-Jarīr, "Know that [the discussion of] Dār Al-Islām and Dār Al-Kufr is really of little benefit, due to what we mentioned to you previously in [our] words about Dār Al-Harb, and that the Harbī Kāfir's blood and wealth is permissible in every situation as long as he is not granted security from the Muslims, and the wealth and blood of the Muslim are inviolable [due to] the protection of Islām in Dār Al-Harb or others besides it" End quote (4/576). So this is what concerns us from this, and it is in accordance to the summary of the words of Shaykh Al-Islām about the people of Mārdīn and those besides them. And all of the scholars are upon this. So you extract from those who follow their definition of Dār Al-Kufr and Dār Al-Islām, that these names are Fiqhī terminologies that have no impact on those who it is possible to know their religion from the inhabitants of the Dār. And whoever manifests Islām and does not come with a negator from the apparent negators of Islām, [then his] blood and wealth are inviolable, wherever he may be. Ibn Hazm (456H) said, "And the statement of the Messenger of Allāh, لى ص هللا يه ل علم س I am free from every Muslim who resides between the Mushrikīn" he meant by" ,وthat Dār Al-Harb, for he appointed his governors over Khaybar, while they (the people of Khaybar) were Jews. And if Ahl Adh-Dhimmah were in their cities and those besides them (i.e. the Muslims) do not intermix with them, then the one residing amongst them for [the purpose of] ruling over them or to trade with them cannot be called a Kāfir, or sinful, rather he is a well-doing Muslim, and their Dār is Dār Al-Islām, not Dār Shirk, because the Dār is attributed to the one empowered in it and the ruler and king in it" End quote (Al-Muhallā 11/200). And Al-Qādī Abū Ya'lā Al-Hanbalī (458H) said, "Every Dār wherein the laws of Kufr have mastery over the Laws of Islām, it is Dār Kufr" End quote (Al-Mu'tamad Fī Usūl Ad-Dīn p.276).

Ibn Al-Qayyim (751H) said, "Whatever is not ruled by the Laws of Islām is not Dār Al-Islām, even if it borders Dār Al-Islām. At-Tā'if is very close to Makkah but it did not become Dār Islām with the conquering of Makkah" End quote (Ahkām Ahl Adh-Dhimmah 1/366). And Ash-Shawkānī (1250H) said in As-Sayl Al-Jarīr 4/575, "...If it the commands and the prohibitions in the Dār are for the people of Islām, then this Dār is Dār Islām, and it is not harmed by the manifestation of the Kufrī groups in it because it does not appear with the strength of the Kuffār nor with their authority, as is witnessed in Ahl Adh-Dhimmah from the Jews and the Christians and the inhabitants given covenants of security in the Islamic cities. And if it were the opposite, then the Dār is the opposite" End quote. And Sulaymān Ibn Suhaymān (1349H) said in poetry:

If a Kāfir overpowers *** Dār Al-Islām and fear descended upon it And the laws of Kufr are executed in it openly *** and he exhibits them in it publicly

and without exception And weakened in it the Laws of the Shar' of Muhammad *** And Islām was not

manifested in it and adopted So this is Dār Kufr to every truthful [scholar] *** As said by the people ascribed to

knowledge

And not everyone in it is said to be on Kufr *** For perhaps a man in it us upon righteous actions (Islām)

So you see from reading these definitions and others [that were not mentioned here] that they (the scholars) adopted these terminologies as a sign of the type of domination and laws that tower over the Dār, and they draw attention to the fact, as you saw, that the Muslim's blood and wealth are protected wherever he is, and that the Dār has no impact on the inhabitants, the Islām of most of them or their Kufr, on the rule over the Dār, just as the rule has no impact on the Dār itself in relation to their Islām or their Kufr, especially if it was a recent Dār Kufr Tāri'ah, not [Dār Kufr]Asliyyah.

And not everyone in it is said to be on Kufr *** For perhaps a man in it us upon righteous actions (Islām)

As Ibn Samhān said.

* And the Prophet, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س conquered Khaybar year 7H, and its people ,وwere all Jews, so he established them there and made a treaty with them over their agriculture, so with its domination by Muslims and the prevailing of their laws over it, [Khaybar] became Dār Islām, and inhabiting it and living in it and settling down it became permissible, and he, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س ...had governors in it ,و

* And on the opposite end, Al-Aswad Al-'Ansī claimed prophethood in Yemen and some from the people of Yemen apostated and followed him until he overpowered some of San'ā', and this was during the Prophet's, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س last days in ,وthis Dunyā. So Al-Aswad killed Shahr Ibn Bādhān, who the Prophet, لى ص هللا يه ل علم س established in it [as a ruler], and some of the governors of the Prophet fled to ,وAl-Madīnah when Al-'Ansī's matter became exacerbated, and some people apostated with him, and the Muslims there dealt with him through Tuqiyah [10], so they were not deemed to be Kuffār due to their presence in Dār Ar-Riddah (land of apostasy) and their not fleeing. Rather, from them was Fayrūz Ad-Daylamī and his companions who remained steadfast and resorted to trickery until they killed Al-Aswad Al-'Ansī and the domination in Yemen returned to the Muslims. So San'ā' became Dār Kufr due to the domination of the Kuffār and the apostates over it after it had been Dār Islām, meaning it became Dār Riddah, and it stayed under the domination of Al-Aswad who claimed prophethood for four months or close to that, and this did not interfere with the presence of righteous Muslims in it, adopting Tuqiyah, and working for the return of the domination of the Muslims, until they succeeded at the end of their matter in killing Al-Aswad and returning Yemen to the rule of the Muslims. And the Prophet, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س did not object to this [11] ,وnor did he say that they became Kuffār due to their remaining in San'ā' and their not fleeing when it became Dār Kufr due to the Kuffār's domination over it. And this was with the presence [at the time] of Dār Al-Islām and a Jamā'ah of the Muslims. * And also, after this, when Egypt fell at the hands of the disbelieving 'Ubaydiyīn from Banī 'Ubayd Al-Qaddāh, and overpowered it and dominated the government, it became Dār Kufr and Riddah, after it had been Dār Islām, and the majority of its people were Muslims. So it stayed under the rule of the Ubaydiyīn for around 200 years, and they manifested their Rāfidism and Kufr and their heresy, to the point that Ibn Al-Jawzī wrote his book An-Nasr 'Alā Misr. And despite this, none of the truthful scholars said that the ruling of Kufr that was given to the Dār and to those who overpowered it included its oppressed [Muslim] people. Rather amongst them were many scholars and Fuqahā' and righteous men. Some of them were concealing themselves, unable to manifest their 'Aqīdah amongst Banī 'Ubayd, to the point of even speaking of the Ahādīth of the Messenger of Allāh, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س ,out of fear that they would be killed (as Ibrāhīm Ibn Sa'īd Al-Habbāl ,وthe companion of 'Abdul-Ghanīyy Ibn Sa'īd, narrated that he prevented himself from narrating the Ahādīth out of fear that they would kill him) [12]. And with this, the masses of the Muslims would conceal their hatred for Banī 'Ubayd, and their disavowal from them, and perhaps some of them manifested this in a way that would not incur their punishment, as As-Suyūtī mentioned in the introduction to Tārīkh Al-Khulafā' from Ibn Khalakān, that he said about the 'Ubaydiyīn, "And they would claim to have knowledge of the unseen things, and the information about them in this is well-known, to the point that Al-'Azīz ascended the Minbar one day so he saw a paper in which it was written

With oppression and tyranny we are satisfied *** and not with disbelief and imbecility

If you were given knowledge of the unseen *** show us the author of this document And a woman sent him a tuft of hair in which she wrote, "By the one who honored the Jews with Mīshā, and the Christians with Ibn Nastūr, and humiliated the Muslims with you, unless you look into my affair" End quote [13]. So who from the truthful scholars - not from the hotheads - pronounced Takfīr of those ones due just to their living in Dār Al-Kufr so long as they did not manifest a cause from the causes of Kufr? This, though there existed Dār Islām that could be migrated to at that time, so how about when it does not exist in our time???

to be continued, In Shā' Allāh

-----

[9] The Hadīth, "Pronounce the Salām to the one you know and the one you don't know" - Agreed

upon.

[10] See Al-Bidāyah Wan-Nihāyah 6/308.

[11] Rather, it was narrated that they did this at the command of the Prophet, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س and ,و

that he sent to them commanding them to remain upon their religion and advancing towards war and

taking action against Al-Aswad. See Tārīkh At-Tabarī and others, and it was also narrated that the

Messenger of Allāh, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س -praised Fayrūz when he got the news of his killing of Al ,و

Aswad while he was in his death-illness.

[12] See Majmū' Al-Fatāwā 35/85.

[13] Tārīkh Al-Khulafā' p.13. And Mīshā was the Jew ruling over Ash-Shām, And Ibn Nastūr the

Christian in Egypt.

continued.. And the 'Ubaydiyīn were more harmful to the Religion of Islām than the Tattār, as Adh-Dhahabī mentioned. From them were those who openly cursed the Prophets. As for cursing the Sahābah, it was without limit. As-Suyūtī mentioned from Abī Al-Hasan Al-Qābisī, "Those who 'Ubaydullāh [14] and his sons killed from amongst the scholars and worshippers were four thousand men, [in an attempt to] turn them away from their pleasure with of the Sahābah, so they chose death [instead]. He said, "If only [Ubaydullāh] was only a Rāfidī only. But he was a Zindīq.'" (Tārīkh Al-Khulafā' p.13). So you see that in Egypt there existed, at the time, Fuqahā, as we mentioned previously, and also in the words of Abī Muhammad Al-Qayrawānī Al-Kīzānī, his statement, "The Fuqahā who lived there did so for the purpose of opposing [the

'Ubaydiyīn] so that the Muslims would not be without them [thus enabling the 'Ubaydiyīn] to try them in their religion" End quote. So from them were those who hid their Religion, and from them were those who manifested it and were killed... As Al-Qādī Abū Bakr Al-Bāqilānī said, "Al-Mahdī 'Ubaydullāh was was a filthy Bātinī keen on the elimination of the Religion of Islām. He hung the scholars and the Fuqahā' so that he would be able to misguide the creation" End quote (Tārikh Al-Khulafā' p.12). And from the scholars who confronted them over their Kufr was the martyr - we consider him as such - Abū Bakr An-Nāblusī, who was brought by Al-Mu'izz [15], "So he said to him, 'It reached me that you said 'If I had 10 spears, I would have thrown nine at Rome and thrown one at the Egyptians.' So he said, 'I did not say this.' So [Al-Mu'izz] thought he went back on his statement, so he asked him, 'So what did you say?' He said, 'I said, 'We must throw nine at you then throw at them with the tenth.' [Al-Mu'izz said], 'And why?' He said, 'Because you changed the Religion of the Ummah and killed the righteous and extinguished the light of Al-Ilāhiyyah, and claimed what was not yours [to claim - i.e. like knowledge of the unseen].' So he cursed him then whipped him. Then a Jew came, so he ordered him to strip the skin off him, so he began to strip the skin off of him while he was reciting the Qur'ān. The Jew said, 'Mercy for him betook me, so when I reached to his heart, I stabbed him with a knife, so he died.'" Summarized from Al-Bidāyah Wan-Nihāyah 11/284, and see Siyar A'lām An-Nubalā' 16/148. And what can be seen from all this is that the state of the Muslims under the rule of the Kuffār in power in every era where they overpowered some of the lands of Islām differed - between [those who were] oppressed and hidden, or those employed Tuqiyah, or a Mujāhid who established the Religion of Allāh Tabāraka Wa Ta'ālā. And the scholars did not cast any of them with Kufr so long as they were not drawn into any one of the negators of Islām and the causes of clear Kufr. But rather, they declared Takfīr on the ones who gave victory to the Kuffār or the apostates or manifested alliance to them or became from the people of their state and their Kufrī government, as Ibn Kathīr mentioned in Al-Bidāyah Wan-Nihāyah (11/284) from Al-Qādī Al-Bāqilānī, his statement about the 'Ubaydiyīn, "Verily their Madhhab is pure Kufr and their 'Aqīdah is [that of the] Rāfidah, and likewise the people of their state who obeyed them and assisted them and allied with them, may Allāh uglify them" End quote. And the examples of this nature in history are many. And what can be seen from this is that the Asl in every one who affiliates to Islām or manifests the particulars of Islām, as long as he does not manifest a cause from the causes of Kufr, the Asl in relation to him is that his blood and wealth and honor are inviolable where he is. And Allāh Tabāraka Wa Ta'ālā said,

ال و نون رجال ول ساء مؤم نات ون م مؤم لموهم ل ع تHad there not been believing men and believing women whom you did not know

[16] So He called them believers though they were in Makkah when it was Dār Kufr, and despite that they were hidden and the [other] believers did not know them. He said in Rawdat At-Tālibīn 10/282, "If the Muslim is weak in Dār Al-Kufr and is unable to manifest his Religion, then staying there is forbidden for him, and Hijrah to Dār Al-Islām is obligatory upon him. So if he is unable to make Hijrah, then he is excused until he is able. And if the land is conquered before he migrates, then the [obligation of] Hijrah falls from him. And if he is able to manifest his Religion due to his status as one who is obeyed amongst his people, or because he has kinfolk there who protect him, and he does not fear a trial in his Religion, then Hijrah is not obligatory but its is preferred so that he does not add to their majority or incline towards them or so they do not plot against him. And it was also said, Hijrah [remains] obligatory. Narrated by Al-Imām, and As-Sahīh Al-Awwal" End quote. And Al-Māwardī said, "So if he has in it - in Dār Al-Kufr - family and a tribe and he is able to manifest his Religion, it is not permissible for him to migrate because the place that he is in has become Dār Islām." Rashīd Ridā said commenting on this, "This is an invalid statement because a man's manifestation of his Religion on its own does not make a Dār, Dār Islām when the laws in it are not Islāmic. So all of the countries of Europe do not oppose a person in it if he manifests his Religion or calls to it, even in their state of waging war against the Muslims. And Because Hijrah from [one] Dār Islām to another is permissible by consensus. And if [Al-Māwardī had] said Hijrah is not obligatory on him in this situation (i.e. the situation mentioned in his quote) then it would have been close [to the truth] And perhaps this is the Asl and there occurred an error in transmission [of Al-Māwardī's words]" End quote from Sharh Al-Arba'īn An-Nawawiyyah p.14 within Majmū'at Al-Hadīth An-Najdiyyah. * And Allāh Subhānahu Wa Ta'ālā said in the details about killing a Muslim by mistake:

ان وإن وم من ك كم عدو ق ر مؤمن وهو ل تحري بة ف نة رق مؤمIf the deceased belonged to a people at war with you and he was a believer; the

freeing of a believing slave (is prescribed) [17] So He, Tabāraka Wa Ta'ālā, called him a believer, and made an expiation in the case of his wrongful killing, though he was living with our enemies in Dār Al-Harb, according to the statement of a group of the Salaf and the Fuqahā' and the scholars of Tafsīr, as came in Tafsīr Ibn Jarīr and others. And see Rawdat At-Tālibīn 9/381. And Ash-Shawkānī said in Fat'h Al-Qadīr 1/498, "And this matter of a believer who

the Muslims kill in the countries of the Kuffār, who was amongst them then converted and did not migrate, and they think he did not convert and that he remained on the Religion of his people - there is no blood money over his killing, rather upon [the killer] is the freeing of a believing slave. And they differed over the reason for there being no blood-money. Some said that the reason [the killed's] guardians are disbelievers and they have no right to the blood money. And others said the reason is that this one who believed, his inviolability is little, due to the Statement of Allāh Tabāraka Wa Ta'ālā,

ن ذي نوا وال م آم هاجروا ول كم ما ي تهم من ل شيء من والي تى هاجروا ح ست وإن ي ما صروك ي ن ن ف دي الكم ي ل ع صر ف ن ال ال لى إ وم ع كم ق ن ي نهم ب ي ثاق وب ي هللا م ما و لون ب عم ير ت ص ب

And as to those who believed but did not emigrate (to you O Muhammad), you owe no duty of protection to them until they emigrate, but if they seek your help in religion, it is your duty to help them except against a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance, and Allah is the All-Seer of what you do [18]

End quote. And ponder over Allāh's description of them as "those who believed" though they did not make Hijrah from Dār Al-Kufr when there was the shade of the presence of Dār Islām to which it was obligatory to migrate. And Ash-Shawkānī mentioned after that that some of the people of knowledge mandated his blood money, but that it be paid to the Muslim treasury, and this statement will come. And we can mention here what Abū Dāwūd (#2632) and At-Tirmidhī narrated, from the Hadīth of Jarīr Ibn 'Abdillāh, who said, "The Messenger of Allāh, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س sent an expedition to Khath'am. Some people sought ,وprotection by having recourse to prostration, and were hastily killed. When the Prophet heard that, he ordered half the blood-money to be paid for them, saying, 'I am free from any Muslim who resides amongst the polytheists.' They asked, 'Why, O Messenger of Allah?' He said, 'Their fires should not be visible to one another.'" And the Hadīth was said be defective in that it is Mursal, due to Jarīr not being mentioned in the narration of a group, but some of the scholars authenticated it by way of its many narrations. And Al-Khātibī and some of the people of knowledge mentioned that he ordered half the blood-money to be paid for them after his knowledge that they became Muslim, because they harmed themselves by staying amongst the Kuffār, so they were like the ones destroyed by his own wrongdoing and another's wrongdoing, so his share of wrongdoing fell, so there remained only half of the blood money." See 'Awn Al-Ma'būd 7/218. And all of this is from the evidence that Takfīr is not pronounced over a person like this, despite his deficiency in not migrating, and his disobedience by remaining amongst the polythiests. And there is no clearer evidence of this than the Messenger of Allāh's naming of such a person a Muslim and him not removing this description

from him. And this is not muddied by the Prophet's disavowal from such a person, as total disavowal is only from the Kāfir, because what is meant here by disavowal is liability for the full blood-money [19] as was explained in the Hadīth itself. And also from this is the deficiency in his right to be heped due to his negligence in migration. So this is a straight evidence about the disavowal that causes expulsion from Islām. [And there is] a second type of disavowal explained by the Sunnah and Allāh Ta'ālā mentioned in His Statement:

ن ذي نوا وال م آم هاجروا ول كم ما ي تهم من ل شيء من والي تى هاجروا ح م وإن ي صروك ن ت س ي ا ن ف دي الكم ي ل ع صر ف ن ال ال لى إ وم ع كم ق ن ي نهم ب ي ثاق وب ي هللا م ما و لون ب عم ير ت ص ب

And as to those who believed but did not emigrate (to you O Muhammad), you owe no duty of protection to them until they emigrate, but if they seek your help in religion, it is your duty to help them except against a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance, and Allah is the All-Seer of what you do [20]

So Allāh did not join their living in Dār Al-Kufr and negligence towards the obligatory Hijrah to Dār Al-Islām, with assisting the polythiests and waging war against the Muslims. So in [the latter's] case, the disavowal from him would be a total disavowal signaling expulsion from Islām. Ibn Hazm said after he mentioned the Hadīth above, "And he, may the Peace of Allāh be upon him, did not disavow from anyone except the Kāfir. Allāh Tabāraka Wa Ta'ālā said,

نون مؤم نات ال مؤم ضهم وال ع ياء ب عض أول بThe believers, men and women, are Auliya' (helpers, supporters, friends,

protectors) of one another [21] Then he said, "So what is correct from this is that whoever reaches Dār Al-Kufr and [Dār] Al-Harb, out of choice, intending to wage war against those who ally with him from the Muslims, then by this action he is an apostate, and for him are all the rulings of the apostate, from the obligation of being killed when he is overpowered, to the making of his wealth violable, and the invalidity of his marriage, and other things, because the Messenger of Allāh, لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س did not disavow from a ,وMuslim, but rather the one who flees to the land of war due to oppression he feared, and did not fight the Muslims, or helped [the enemies] against them, and did not find from the Muslims anyone who would protect him, then nothing is upon him because he is compelled and coerced" End quote (Al-Muhallā 13/138-139).

to be continued, In Shā' Allāh

---

[14] Translator's Note: He is ‘Ubaydullāh Al-Mahdī, the one who established the Fatimid state, and

took the Tunisian city of Al-Mahdiyyah, after which he is named, as its capital.

[15] Translator's Note:He is Abū Tamīm Ibn Ismā’īl, who conquered Egypt and brought it under the

rule of the 'Ubaydiyīn.

[16] Translator's Note: Al-Fath: 25

[17] Translator's Note: An-Nisā': 92

[18] Translator's Note: Al-Anfāl: 72

[19]And in a narration in Al-Bayhaqī (9/12-13) and others, and in it is Al-Hajjāj Ibn Atra'ah, "Whoever

lives with the polytheists, then the liability falls from him."

[20]Translator's Note: Al-Anfāl: 72

[21] Translator's Note: At-Tawbah:71

continued..

And he is clear that entering Dār Al-Kufr does not have to be Kufr, if it is not coupled with waging war against the Muslims and assisting the Kuffār and helping them over [the Muslims]. So he concedes [that] the helpers of Shirk who wage war against the Religion or helps the polytheists against the Muwahhidīn [are Kuffār], not the generality of people living in Dār Al-Kufr. Then Ibn Hazm said, "So we mentioned that Az-Zuhrī, Muhammad Ibn Muslim Ibn Shihāb was intent on that if Hishām Ibn Abdil-Malik died, he would go the land of the Romans because Al-Walīd Ibn Yazīd had vowed [to spill] his blood if he was able to, and he was the ruler after Hishām. So whoever is like this is excused. And likewise, the Muslims who live in the lands of India and China and Turkey and Sudan and Rome, if he is unable to leave from there due to burdens on his back or lack of money or weakness in his body or a prevention in the path, then he is excused. And if there was there a person waging war against the Muslims, helping the Kuffār by giving them a service or writing something down for them, then he is a Kāfir" End quote. And beware of understanding his statement "helping the Kuffār by giving them a service or writing something down for them, then he is a Kāfir" - as Takfīr due just to helping the Kuffār with a general service or writing, as some of the extremists say, for you see how Ibn Hazm tied this assistance to waging war against the Muslims. So such a person is a Kāfir - meaning [one who] wages war against the Muslims and assists and helps the Kuffār in their war against the Muslims, even if it was just by writing for them and things like that [is a Kāfir], not [one who is] doing a service for them and writing for them in general (i.e. in what does not assist them in their war against the Muslims). So there are details about this that will come when detailing working for the Kuffār.

Then he said, may Allāh have Mercy upon him, "And if he lives there for a Dunyā matter and he is like a Dhimmī to them, and he is able to join the majority of the Muslims and their land, but is not distanced from Kufr, then we do not see an excuse for him, and we ask Allāh for protection. And this is unlike one who lives in the obedience of the extreme people Shirk and acts in the same manner as them (he means the 'Ubaydiyīn) because in the land of Egypt and Al-Qayrawān and others, Islām is what is apparent and despite all this, their leaders do not openly announce their disavowal from Islām, rather they affiliate to Islām, though in reality they are Kuffār. As for the one who lives in the land of Al-Qarāmitah by choice (or migrates there after knowing their state) [22] then he is a Kāfir without a doubt because they openly announce their Kufr and their abandonment of Islām, and we seek refuge in Allāh from this. And as for one who lives in a land where some of the desires that expel one into Kufr are manifested, then he is not a Kāfir, because the name of Islām is what is apparent there, whatever the case may be... like Tawhīd and belief in the Message of Muhammad لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س ,and disavowal from every religion besides Islām ,وand establishing the prayer and fasting Ramadān, and all of the legislated actions that encompass Islām and īmān, and all praise is due to Allāh, Lord of the Worlds" End quote. And it is known that all of this was [said] in the shade of the presence of Dār Islām. And ponder Ibn Hazm's consideration of the manifestation of the legislated acts of Islām and its great particulars, like the Tawhīd of Allāh and belief in the Prophethood of the Messenger of Allāh لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س and manifesting prayer and fasting وRamadān and affiliating your loyalty to Islām and not disavowing from it - despite [the rulers'] Kufr. Ponder his consideration of this in permitting the residence of a Muslim [there] - or, at the very least - not pronouncing Takfīr on him - due to his living in a Dār with such Kufr, and where the state of its rulers is such. And no one would wrangle with comparing this to the situation of the Muslim countries today, except one who is stubborn. And the previously mentioned Hadīth about the Prophet's لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س وdisavowal from everyone who lives amongst the polytheists - it was said in the shade of the presence of Dār Islām, and it was said in at time where Hijrah to the Prophet لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س was obligatory, before Makkah was conquered. And وdespite this, he did not make Takfīr of them due only to their living amongst the polytheists, though they sinned and were punished by a decrease in their inviolability, and a weakening and deficiency in the [Muslims'] duty to protect them. So if there was no Dār Islām that a Muslim can migrate to, then he is excused for

living in Dār Al-Kufr so long as he fears Allāh and stays away from Shirk, and from assisting the people of Dār Al-Kufr over the Muslims, as there is no Dār Islām for him to migrate to for him to be sinful for neglecting it, not to mention for him to be a Kāfir. So what about if the purpose of his residence in Dār Al-Kufr when the situation is like this, is to give victory to the Religion of Allāh, and to manifest Tawhīd, and to fight polytheism and association? There is no doubt that a Muslim like this is a good-doer who is rewarded and is established upon the Religion of Allāh Tabāraka Wa Ta'ālā. And in the Mutawātir Hadīth narrated from over 10 Companions, with different phrasings, that the Prophet لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س said "There will never cease to exist a وParty from my Ummah, manifest upon the Command of Allāh. They will not be harmed by those who oppose them or those who abandon them, until the Command of Allāh comes." And similar to it is the other Hadīth, "Good will be tied to the forelocks of horses until the Day of Resurrection - [for the bring] reward and booty." And it is in Sahīh Bukhārī. So these two Ahādīth point to the presence of Truthful, Mujāhid Muslims until the Day of Resurrection, and the continuation of their presence in all circumstances, in the shade of the presence of Dār Al-Islām and in its absence. And the scholars have acknowledged the obligation of a Muslim to live in Dār Al-Kufr if he is able to strive towards turning it into Dār Islām, as it was said in Mughnī Al-Muhtāj by Ash-Sharbīnī (4/239), "And if he is able to eliminate and disassociate from Dār Al-Harb, it is obligatory for him to stay there, because location is Dār Islām. So if he migrates, it becomes Dār Harb, so this is forbidden. Yes, if he seeks the assistance of the Muslims through his migration, then it is better that he migrates. Al-Māwardī said this - and it was mentioned previously - then, when staying [in Dār Al-Harb] he should fight them for Islām, and call them to it if he is able... otherwise, then no (i.e. otherwise, it is not obligatory for him to stay there)" End quote. And it was transmitted in Rawdat At-Tālibīn (10/282) from the author of Al-Hāwī, his statement, "So if he desires the manifestation of Islām there by his remaining there, then what is better is that he stays. And if he is able to disassociate and abstain from Dār Al-Harb, then it is obligatory for him to stay there, because his location is Dār Islām. So if he migrates, it would become Dār Harb, so this is impermissible. Then if he is able to fight the Kuffār and call them to Islām, he must, otherwise, then no, and Allāh knows best " End quote. So ponder over their allowing residence in Dār Al-Kufr in such a situation... So who is the extreme [Takfīrī] compared to [them]?

Al-Hāfidh Ibn Hajar said in Al-Fat'h, "And in it - i.e. in the Hadīth on the horses - is a glad tiding of the longevity of Islām and its people until the Day of Resurrection, because from the necessities of the permanence of Jihād is the permanence off the Mujāhidīn, and they are the Muslims. And it is like another Hadīth, "There will not cease to exist a party from my Ummah, fighting upon the Truth"" End quote. From Kitāb Al-Jihād Was-Siyar, Section: Jihād is obligatory under every righteous and corrupt [ruler]. And close to this meaning is the agreed upon Hadīth of Hudhayfah, "And if there was no Jamā'ah or Imām?" The Prophet لى ص هللا يه ل لم ع س said, "Then isolate وyourself from all those sects, even if you have to bite the root of a tree, until you meet death and you are upon this." [23]

So in it is that the absence of the Jamā'ah of the Muslims and their Imām - and these are traits of Dār Al-Islām - they have no relation to a person's Islām or his Kufr. Rather, the condition which that depends on is his manifestation of a cause from the causes of Kufr. So all of this is evidence that if the Muslim was in Dār Al-Kufr and did not migrate from it to Dār Al-Islām due to inability or something preventing him, or due to his ability to manifest his Religion in it, or due to his establishment of Jihād and giving victory to the Religion - then he is a Muslim whose blood and wealth are inviolable.

to be continued, In Shā' Allāh

-----

[22] Translator's Note: This excludes those who live there and want to leave but are unable to leave.

[23] Translator's Note: The full Hadīth nrrated by Hudhayfah is: "The people used to ask the

Messenger of Allāh about good, but I used to ask him about evil for fear that it might overtake me.

Once I said, "O Messenger of Allāh! We were in ignorance and in evil and Allāh has bestowed upon

us the present good; will there by any evil after this good?" He said, "Yes." I asked, "Will there be

good after that evil?" He said, "Yes, but it would be tainted with Dakhan (i.e. little evil)." I asked,

"What will its Dakhan be?" He said, "There will be some people who will lead according to principles

other than my Sunnah. You will see their actions and disapprove of them." I said, "Will there by any

evil after that good?" He said, "Yes, there will be some people who will invite others to the doors of

Hell, and whoever accepts their invitation to it will be thrown in it (by them)." I said, "O Messenger of

Allāh! Describe those people to us." He said, "They will belong to us and speak our language." I

asked, "What do you order me to do if such a thing should take place in my life?" He said, "Adhere to

the Jamā'ah of Muslims and their Imām." I asked, "And if there was no Jamā'ah or Imām?" The Prophet

said, "Then isolate yourself from all those sects, even if you have to bite the root of a tree, until you

meet death and you are upon this." 4/803