CONTENTS

 

A Note from the Editor                                                                               6

A Note from the Author                                                                              7

          Introduction                                                                                               10

 

Chapter 1

 

HISTORY OF THE KHAWAARIJ

a.     General History of the Khawaarij                                                       16

b.      Al Muhakkim al `Uwla (the people who ask for judgement)

and their categories                                                                              48

 

Chapter 2

 

WHO AND WHAT ARE THE KHAWAARIJ?

c.     Features of the Khawaarij mentality                                                    58

d.     Misunderstandings of the Khawaarij regarding the issue

 of Takfir                                                                                                64

e.     Proper understanding of Takfir                                                             73

f.       Types of Takfir                                                                                      76

g.     Manners of Ahl us-Sunna                                                                     80

h.     Misunderstandings of the Khawaarij regarding                                  85

i.       Answering the words of Ibn `Abbas’s: ‘KUFR DUNA KUFR’             89

j.       Conclusion                                                                                            99

 

Chapter 3

 

MODERN KHAWAARIJ MOVEMENTS IN THE WORLD TODAY

k.     The Modern Khawaarij                                                                        101

l.       Appearance of the Khawaarij in Egypt                                                102

m.   The Trial of Shukri Ahmad Mustafa `Abdul `Al                                    108

n.     The Formation of Other Khawaarij Groups                                        130

o.     The Khawaarij in the West                                                                   134

 

p.     How Should We Deal with the Khawaarij?                                          137

q.     The Rise in Khawaarij Thinking in the Subcontinent and Algeria      138

o.  What of the Khawaarij in Algeria?                                                      139

p.  History of the GIA formation                                                               148

q.     Personal Experience with the GIA                                                       162

r.      The GIA Reveal the Truth of Their `Aqida                                            169

s.      Last Statement Regarding the Khawaarij of Algeria                           174

 

Chapter 4

 

THE RULING KHAWAARIJ

t.       What Legitimacy                                                                                   178

u.     Torture inside Saudi Prisons                                                                183

v.      A Sister’s Story                                                                                    200

 

CONCLUSION                                                                                                    204

 

QUESTION AND ANSWER                                                                               208

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                                                                 233

 

APPENDIX 1:

Last Statement of the GIA Showing Them as Khawaarij

 

APPENDIX 2:

Usraat ulAnsaar Responds to Their statement. They then denounce the group and call them extreme Khawaarij:

قل اللهم فاطر السماوات والأرض عالم الغيب و الشهادة أنت تحكم بين عبادك في ما كانوا فيه يختلفون

 

Say, “O Allah, Originator of the Heavens and the Earth. Knower of the Unseen and the Witness. You make judgement between your slaves in what they differed therein about.”[1]

 

 

 

 

                                                             بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الحمد لله و الصلاة والسلام على رسول الله

 

A NOTE FROM THE EDITOR

 

This book will be of great benefit to those that are curious about the events taking place in the world today. This book is both timely and filled with historical facts. It has been my personal pleasure to outline and to help to put together all of the historical narratives and `aqidah points that needed elaboration. I am sure that you will enjoy this great effort as much as I have.

 

May Allah I accept this modest effort from us.

 

 

ابن عمر

Ibn `Umar

 

 

A NOTE FROM THE AUTHOR

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الحمد لله و الصلاة والسلام على رسول الله

وأشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له. الملك الحق المبين.

 

Dear brothers and sisters in Islam السلام عليكم ورحمة الله

 

I hope that my words reach you in good health and peace.  There are quite a few points we could bring forward for reasons to write this particular book. One of the reasons is due to the unfairness that has been done to the Ummah and to the Mujaahidin, which some of the scholars of the tyrants have labeled as Khawaarij. Likewise, of equal injustice are the words of the ignorant, who are sometimes calling the Khawaarij Mujaahidin.

 

The specific reason for writing this book is that I myself have been called Khawaarij. A quick glance into the pages of Islamic history will show that I was not the only one labeled with this title due to my insistence on reviving the call to Jihaad. Great scholars of the past, such as Ibn Qayyim, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal رحمهم الله were also called Khawaarij as well as other names and singled out for public scrutiny for standing for the truth. Besides all this, we must still continue to propagate the movement. Most importantly, in order to understand who the true Khawaarij are from those who are being accused of being Khawaarij, we must keep some vital points and differences in mind,

 

1-     Many people confuse the Khawaarij with the Mujaahidin.

 

2-     We must know the difference between the fact that the Mujaahidin sometimes become Khawaarij, as well as the Khawaarij go to the Mujaahidin at times.

 

3-      It is difficult to judge who is who when there is no implementation of Shari`a. When people fight the tyrants, some are Mujaahidin but others may be Khawaarij disguised as Mujaahidin.

 

4-     We shouldn’t stop the struggle because we are labeled with bad names.

 

5-     Khawaarij are the enemies of Islam and the present rulers are the enemies of Allah U

 

6-     We should know the distinction between a. those who are Takfiri who don’t fight and b. Khawaarij that kill for belief. The first have the problem in the mind and the second have the problem that is in the sword.

 

7-      The Khawaarij did not want to intentionally do evil. The rulers do evil and insist on doing evil.

 

8-     We must study other groups to understand the Khawaarij aren’t the worst but the first of the bid`ii groups.

 

9-     Finally, we should urge all sincere brothers and sisters to understand the problems of deviant groups, show them how to deal with them and to save our belief and action from the danger they pose to us in our reality. The Ummah can’t just simply avoid the struggle. Some must stand up as mentioned in the hadith of Sahih Muslim. In this hadith, the Prophet r says, “There will always be a group fighting for the truth.”

 

 One of the best things to do in matters such as these is to then make appeal for people to open their hearts for the cause of Allah U and to work hard to remove the evil no matter the title given to the person who removes it. We must remove every Haraam and not leave the Kuffar to establish their kufr on earth. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the brother, Ibn Umar, for transcribing and organising the topic from the tapes. I give him ijaaza (permission) to teach, reform and integrate this work for related and other unrelated topics. May Allah U select us to be among his elite soldiers.

 

Your brother, 

 Abu Hamza

 

Written: Winter 1999

Finalised: Spring 2000    

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله و أن محمداً رسول الله

 

This treatise is an attempt to try to help remedy some of the ills of the Ummah with the medicine being the Qur'an and the Sunna. Allah I has spoken of the usefulness of the Qur’an for those who will use it as their guide. Allah U has said:

فَذَكِّر إن نَّفَعَتِ الذِكرَى

“Therefore remind if the reminder profits them”[2]

 

Thus Allah I has given us the clear criterion and has shown us that the Qur’an is a reminder and is of use only if it will profit us. And the only way it will profit us is if we are guided by Allah I to be the ones who will benefit from the message and its remembrance. One cannot be guided unless purely by the mercy of Allah I, as He, Ta`ala (Exalted be He), has said,

 

كَذَلِكَ يُضِلُّ اللهُ مَن يَّشَاءُ وَ يَهدِي مَن يَّشَاءُ

“Likewise, Allah leads astray who He wills, and He guides who He wills."[3]

But who are those who are astray and those who are rightly guided? Allah U gives us the answer in the following verse,

 

فريقا هدى و فريقا حق عليهم الضلالة أنهم اتخذوا الشيطان أولياء من دون الله و يحسبون أنهم مهتدون

 

“A party he gave guidance to and a party that deserved to be lead astray, because they took the protectors of Shaitan instead of Allah and they reckon that they are guided.”[4]

 

From this ayah, it is made clear to us that the guidance that we are given from Allah I is a great mercy, as He guides whom He wills and others He leads astray. This guidance however is also conditional. Once we have been guided by the Lord of the Worlds to the truth of the heavenly revealed religion of Islam, the prerequisite to stay on guidance is with the Qur’an and the Sunna of the Prophet r. Allah U has said of His Book, Al Qur’an,

 

كَّلا إنّها َتذِكرَ فَمَن شَاءَ ذَكَرَه ِفي ُصُحٍف ُّمكرَّمَةٍ َّمرُفوعَةٍ ٌّمَطهَّرَةٍ ِبأيدِي َسَفَرةٍ ِكَرامٍ َبَرَرة ٌقِتَل إنسَانُ َما َأكفَرَه

 

“By no means! It is an admonition, in noble, exalted and pure pages written by the hands of pious scribes. Curse man for what he disbelieves!”[5]

 

Surely it has become clear to man that the guidance of the Qur’an is paramount for the preservation of the Islamic message. The Sunna also has an equal place in Islam. Allah r has said,

 

َو َما َينطِقُ َعنِ الهَوى إن هُوَ إلا َوحيٌ ُّيوحَي عَلَّمَهُ شَدِيدُ القَوَّى ذُو ِمَّرة…

 

“And he (Muhammad r) does not speak of his own desire. It is only revealed to him by revelation and taught to him by one mighty in power and stern.”[6]

 

Let it be known that both the Qur’an and the Sunna are revelation that the Prophet r received from Jibril u by the permission of Allah I and that both constitute the criterion of making lawful things lawful and making unlawful things forbidden. Allah I has told us that the authority of the Sunna equals precisely that of the Qur’an, so obedience to what the Prophet r said is obedience to Allah U and disobedience to the Prophet r is counted as disobedience to Allah I. 

 

يَا أيُّهَا الَّذِينَ أمَنُوا أطِيعُوا اللهُ وَ أطِيعُوا الرَّسُولُ وَ أولِي الأمر مِنكُم

 

“O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from you.”[7]

 

As Allah I has given us this ayah, He has said that obedience is due to Him first, then to His Messenger r, and finally to those in authority from among us. We have spoken at length already about the necessity of the Qur’an as guidance for those who He has seen fit to bring to the straight path. The next is the necessity of implementing the words of the Prophet r and finally obedience to those ruling over us with the two previous lights as criterion. This last category is the subject of this treatise.

 

Today, the subject of important discussion is that, are we to give our obedience to those ruling over us in the Muslim lands, or is it lawful to resist them when they go out from some of the boundaries of Islamic law? There has occurred a dispute in recent years regarding this crucial issue. Those that believe they are keeping the unity of the Muslims find it necessary not to resist the present rulers in whatever sins they are doing as fitnah would arise from attempts to topple them, creating more harm than good.

 

However, there is another group that believes that enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong includes resisting disobedient leaders from among us and going out from them when their sins are more of a harm to the Ummah than good. The former sees the fikra (the idea put into practice) of the latter as Khawaarij, because they are believed to be going out from legitimate rulers and disrupting the unity of the Muslims. But is this the case? Are we to count all the rulers of today as legitimate and those resisting them as Khawaarij? Or is there another aspect that we have not considered? This is the investigation that we are conducting and Insha’Allah, it will prove fruitful to the readers, whether they be resident in England, or in other countries.

 

This investigation is manifold sided and will be considered from all angles and the conclusion reached is from none other than the Book of Allah I, the Sunna of His Messenger r, the ijmaa` and ruling of the Sahaaba and past pious scholars. Allah I is the guide and we ask Him to guide you and us in the pursuit of the truth and the reward of the Hereafter. Amin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

HISTORY OF THE KHAWAARIJ
GENERAL HISTORY OF THE KHAWAARIJ

 

Out of every subversive group, its genesis lies in a flash point, some act or belief that triggered its movement. Something caused its adherents to react in such a way that they went out of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah. But what led to the Khawaarij to form such beliefs? This dangerous group began in the early days of Islam and was in fact, the first deviant group to emerge in the Ummah of the Prophet r. The prominent sahaabi, `Abdullah ibn `Umar t, described them in these words, “They are the worst of Allah’s creatures and these people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the kuffar (unbelievers) and interpreted them as describing the mu’minun (believers)”[8].

 

The Khawaarij did an enormous evil and the fitnah they produced was great indeed, but they are not the worst of the bid`ii groups. They are merely the first group to begin the bid`a of this type. Another example in this case is when Qaabil (Cain) murdered his brother Haabil (Abel). The Prophet r made the following statement in regards to Qaabil, “No human being is killed unjustly, but a part of responsibility for the crimes is laid on the first son of Adam (Qaabil) who invented the tradition of killing on the earth.”[9] Even though Qaabil began the Sunna of murder, that does not make him the worst perpetrator, because the Pharaoh of Egypt did more murder than him, not to mention Hamaan as well as the Jews in their murder of the Prophets. The identity of this dangerous faction is best explained by the words of the Prophet r,

 

عن أبي سعيد قال بينا النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم يقسم جاء عبد الله بن ذي الخويصرة التميمي فقال: اعدل يا رسول الله  فقال r ويلك من يعدل إذا لم اعدل؟ قال عمر بن الخطاب: دعني اضرب عنقه. قال دعه فإن له أصحاباً يحقر أحدكم صلاته مع صلاته و صيامه مع صيامه يمرقون من الدين كما يمرق السهم من الرمية، ينظر في قذذه فلا يوجد فيه شئ، ثم ينظر في نصله فلا يوجد فيه شئ. ثم ينظر في رصافه فلا يوجد فيه شئ؛ ثم ينظر في نضيه فلا يوجد فيه شئ . قد سبق الفرث و الدام، آيتهم رجل إحدى يديه أو قال ثديه مثل ثدي المرأة، أو قال مثل البضعة تدردر يخرجون على حين فرقة من الناس. قال أبو سعيد: اشهد سمعت من النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم، و أشهد أن علياً قتلهم و أنا معه وجئ بالرجل على النعت الذي نعته النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم، قال: فنزلت فيه-و منهم من يلمزك في الصدقات-

 

In a hadith narrated by Abu Sa`id, the Prophet r was distributing some gold that had been sent back by `Ali Ibn Abi Taalib t. One man, after receiving his share, was displeased with his portion. This man, by the name of `Abdullah ibn Dhil Khawaisara At-Tamimi stepped forward and said, “Be just O Messenger of Allah!” The Prophet r answered him thusly, “Woe be to you! Who would be just if I were not to be?” `Umar ibn AlKhattab said, “O Messenger of Allah! Allow me to cut off his neck!” The Prophet r said, “Leave him, for he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with their fasting, you will look down upon your prayer and fasting, in comparison to theirs. Yet they will go out of the religion as an arrow goes through the body of the game in which case, if the one part of the arrow is examined, nothing will be found on it. And when its other part is examined, nothing will be found on it; and then its other part is examined, nothing will be found on it.

 

“The arrow has been too fast to be smeared by dung and blood. The sign by which these people will be recognised will be a man whose one hand will be like the small breast of a woman. These people will appear when there will be differences among the people.”

 

Abu Sa`id further noted, ‘I testify that I heard this from the Prophet r and also testify that `Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet r was brought to `Ali and the following verses were revealed in connection with that very person’[10] (i.e. `Abdullah ibn Dhil Khawaisara At-Tamimi):

 

وَ مِنهُم مَن يُّلمِزُكَ فِي الصَّدَقَات

“And from them are men who accuse in regards to charity.”[11]

 

In another hadith about the same man, it states the following:

 

عن أبي سعيد الخدري قال: بعث علي و هو باليمن إلى النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم بذهيبة في تربتها فقسمها بين الأقرع بن حابس الحنظلي ثم أحد بني مجاشع، و بين عيينة بن بدر الفزارى و بين علمقة ابن علاثة العامري، ثم أحد بني كلاب و بين زيد الخيل الطائي،ثم احد بني نبهان. فتظيثت قريش و الأنصار فقالوا يعطيه صناديد أهل نجد و يدعنا؟ قال: إنما أتألفهم. فأقبل رجل غائرالعينين. ناتى الجبين، كث اللحية، مشرف الوجنتين، مخلوق الرأس فقال: يا محمد، اتق الله: فقال النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم : فمن يطيع الله إذا عصيته؟ فيأمنني على أهل الأرض و لا تأمنوني؟ فسئل رجل من القوم فتله، أراه خالد بن الوليد، فمنعه النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم. فلما و لي قال النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم: إن من ضئضئ هذا قوما يقرءون القرآن، لا يجاوز حناجرهم، يمرقون من الإسلام مروق السهم من الرمية، يقتلون أهل الإسلام، و يدعون أهل الاوثان، لئن أدركتهم لأقتلنهم قتل عاد.

 

It was narrated by Abu Sa`id al Khudri t, “When `Ali was in Yemen, he sent some gold in its ore to the Prophet r. The Prophet r then distributed it among Al-Aqra bin Habis alHanzali who belonged to Bani Mujashi, Uyaina bin Badr al-Fazari, Alqama bin Ulatha Al-Amiri, who belonged to the Bani Kilab tribe and Zaid al Khalik At-Ta’i who belonged to Bani Nabhan. Then the Quraish and the Ansar became angry and said; ‘He gives to the chiefs of Najd and leaves us!’ The Prophet r said, ‘I just wanted to attract and unite their hearts.’ Then there came a man with sunken eyes, bulging forehead, thick beard, fat raised cheeks and clean shaven head and said, ‘O Muhammad, fear Allah!’ The Prophet r said, ‘Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? He trusts me over the people of the earth, but you do not trust me?’ A man from the people, who, I think, was Khalid ibn alWalid, asked for permission to kill him, but the Prophet r prevented him. When the man went away, the Prophet r said, ‘Out of the offspring of this man there will be people who will recite the Qur’an but it will not go past their throats, and they will go out of Islam as an arrow goes our through the game. They will kill the Muslims and leave the pagans. If I were to be present when they appear, I would kill them as the killing of the nation of Ad.’[12]

 

And in yet another hadith, we are able to learn even more crucial information about this evil faction,

 

سعيد الخدري يقول: بعث علي بن ابي طالب رصي الله عنه إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم من اليمن بذهبيبة في أديم مقروظ لم تحصل من ترابها، قال: فقسمها بين أربعة نفر: بين عييبة بن بدر و أقرع من حابس، و زيد الخيل، و الرابع إما علقمة و إما عامر بن الطفيل. فقال رجل من أصحابه: كنا نحن أحق بهذا من هؤلاء، قال: فبلغ ذلك النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فقال: ألا تأمنوني و أنا أمين من في السماء يأتني خبر السماء صباحا و مساء؟ قال: فقام رجل غائر العينين، مشروق الوجنتنين، ناشز الجبهة، كث اللحية، محلوق الرأس، مشمر الإزار فقال: يا رسول الله اتق الله، قال: ويلك، أو لست أحق أهل الأرض أن يتق الله؟ قال: ثم ولي الرجل، فقال خالد بن الوليد يا رسول الله، الا أضرب عنقه؟ قال لا، لعله أن يكون يصلى، فقال خالد: و كم من مصل يقول بلسانه ما ليس في قلبه. قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم: إني لم أومر أن أنقب قلوب الناس ولا أشق بطونهم. قال: ثم نظر إليه و هو مقف و قال: إنه يخرج من ضئضئ هذا قوم يتلون كتاب الله رطبا، لا يجوز حناجرهم، يمرقون من الدين كما يمرق السهم من الرمية. و أظنه قال: لئن أدركتهم لأقتلنهم قتل ثمود.

 

Narrated Abu Sa`id al Khudri: “`Ali ibn Abi Taalib sent a piece of gold not yet taken out of its ore, in a tanned leather container to Allah’s Messenger r. Allah’s Messenger r distributed that amongst four persons: `Uyaina bin Badr, Aqra bin Habis, Zaid alKhail and the fourth was either `Alqama or `Amir bin at-Tufail. On that, one of his companions said, ‘We are more deserving of this gold than these people are.’ When that news reached the Prophet r, he said, ‘Don’t you trust me though I am the trustworthy man of the One in the heaven, and I receive the news of Heaven both in the morning and in the evening?’

 

Then there rose up a man with sunken eyes, raised cheek bones, raised forehead, a thick beard, a shaven head and an izaar (a waist sheet) that was tucked up, and he said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Fear Allah!’ The Messenger of Allah r said, ‘Woe be to you! Am I not of all the people of the earth the most entitled to fear Allah? Then that man went away. Khaalid ibn alWalid said, “O Messenger of Allah! Allow me to chop off his neck!’ The Prophet r said, ‘No, for he may offer prayers.’ Khaalid said, ‘There are many of those who offer prayers and say by their tongues what is not in their hearts.’

 

The Messenger of Allah r said, ‘I have not been ordered by Allah to search the hearts of the people or to cut open their bellies.’ Then the Prophet looked at him while the latter (the man) was going away and said, ‘From the offspring of this (man) there will come out a people who will recite the Qur’an continuously and elegantly but it will not exceed their throats. They will then go out of the religion as an arrow goes through the game’s body.’ I think he also said, ‘If I should be present at their time, I would kill them as the nations of Thamud were killed.’”[13]

 

قال ابي هريرة: سمعت الصادق المصدوق يقول: هلكة أمتي على يدي غلمة من قريش

 

Abu Huraira narrated: “I heard the truthful and trusted by Allah [the Prophet r] saying, ‘The destruction of my followers will be through the hands of young men from Quraish.’”[14]

 

Thus from the very beginning we are able to see that this group was so rebellious, they even defied the Prophet r.

 

حدثنا يسير بن عمرو قال: قلت لسهل بن حنيف: هل سمعت النبي r

يقول في الخوارج شيء؟ قال سمعته يقول، و أهوى بيده قبل العراق. يخرج منه قوم يقرئون القرآن لا يجاوز تراقيهم يمرقون من الإسلام مروق السهم من الرمية.

In another hadith narrated by Yusair bin Amr that he asked Sahl bin Hunaif,

 

“Did you hear the Prophet r saying anything about the Khawaarij?” He said, “I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq, ‘There will appear in it (Iraq) some people who will recite the Qur’an but it will not go beyond their throats and they will go out from Islam as an arrow darts through the game’s body.’”[15]

 

As a point of reference, the Prophet r was pointing towards Iraq, which gives us some understanding of the next hadith,

 

عن ابن عمر قال: ذكر النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم: اللهم بارك لنا في شأمنا، اللهم بارك لنا في يمننا. قالوا: يا رسول الله، و في نجدنا؟ فأظنه قال في ثالثة: هناك الزلازل و الفتن، و منها يطلع قرن الشيطان.

 

In a hadith narrated from `Abdullah ibn `Umar, the Prophet r said,

 

“O Allah, put barakah (blessing) on our Sham! O Allah put barakah on our Yemen.” The people said, ‘And on our Najd as well?’ I think the third time he r said, “There (Najd) is a place of earthquakes and afflictions and from it the horn of Shaitan will come out.”[16]

 

Ibn Hajar al `Asqalani quotes a sahaabi by the name of alKhaatibi about this hadith, who had this to say,

 

و قال الخاطبي: نجد من جهة المشرق و من كان بالمدينة كلن نجده بادية العراق و نواحيها و هي مشرق أهل المدينة، و أصل النجد ما ارتفع من الأرض. و هاء ما قاله الداودى أن نجداً من ناحية العراق

 

“Najd is in the direction of the east and is in the city of the highlands of the Iraqi steppe. Its direction is east of the people of Madinah, and the root of the word “najd” means what is risen up from the earth.” Ad-Dawudi has also said, “Najd is with regard to the land of Iraq.”[17]

 

As was said by the Prophet r, the people of the land of `Iraq have a history of fitnah and groups that cause strife. They are so infamous for it that `Amr ibn al `As said of them,

 

أهل الشقاق و النفاق

“People of division and hypocrisy.”

 

The Khawaarij were then able to find fertile ground for their misguided concepts. Due to danger that they pose to the safety and well being of the Ummah, it is also necessary to fight them. The Prophet r ordered us to do so in many hadiths.

 

إنه يخرج من ضئضئ هذا قوم؛ يتلون كتاب الله رطباً، لا يجاوز حناجرهم، يمرقون من الدين كما يمرق السهم من الرمية، لئن أدركتهم لأقتلنهم قتل ثمود.

 

“Truly, there will come out from the offspring of this man a people, they will recite the book of Allah greatly and it will not go past their throats and they will leave out of the religion just as the arrow leaves out of the game. If I was able to, I would kill them like the killing of Thamud.”

 

 

ألا أحدثكم بأشقى الناس رجلين؟ احمير ثمود الذي عقر الناقة، و الذي يضربك يا عليّ على هذه، حتى يبل منها هذه.

 

“Shall I not tell you of the two most wretched of mankind? It is Ahmir of Thamud, who hamstrung the camel and who struck you, O `Ali on this (his head) until from it (his head) poured forth this (the blood).”

 

سيخرج في آخر الزمان قوم أحداث الأسنان، سفهاء الأحلام، يقولون من خير قول البرية، يقرؤون القرآن، لا يجاوز حناجرهم، يمرقون من الدين كما يمرق السهم من الرمية، فإذا لقيمتموهم فاقتلوهم ، فإن في قتلهم أجراً لمن قتلهم عند الله يوم القيامة.

 

“There shall come in another time foolish and simple minded youth. They will say the best words of creation. They will recite the Qur’an and it will not go past their throats. They will go out of the religion, just as the arrow goes out of the game. Then, when you establish the proof on them, then kill them. Then if you kill them, in killing them is a reward in the sight of Allah on the Day of Resurrection.”

 

سيقرأ القرآن رجال لا يجاوز حناجرهم، يمرقون من الدين كما يمرق السهم من الرمية.

 

“Men will recite the Qur’an and it will not go past their throats. They will leave out of the religion just as the arrow goes out of the game.”

 

سيكون بعدي من أمتي قوم يقرؤون القرآن لا يجاوز حلا قيمهم--، يخرجون من الدين كما يخرج السهم من الرمية، ثم لا يعودون فيه، هم شر الخلق و الخليقة، سيما هم التحليق.

 

“After me, there will be from my Ummah people who will recite the Qur’an, and it will not go past their throats. They will leave from the religion just as an arrow goes out of the prey. Then, they will not return to it. They are the worst of creation and the creatures.”

 

سيكون في آخر الزمان ناس من أمتي يحدثونكم بما لم تسمعوا به أنتم و لا آباؤكم، فإياكم و إياهم.

 

“There shall come in another time a people from my Ummah in which they shall speak to you what you and your fathers have not heard of so you should beware, beware of them!”

 

سيكون في أمتي اختلف و فرقة، قوم يحسنون القيل، و يسيئون الفعل، يقرؤون القرآن لا يجاوز تراقيهم، يمرقون من الدين مروق السهم من الرمية، لا يرجعون حتى يرتد على فوقه، هم شرار الخلق و الخليقة، طوبي لمن قتلهم و قتلوه، يدعون إلى كتاب الله و ليسوا منه في شيء، من قاتلهم كان أولى بالله منهم سيما هم  التحليق.

 

“There will be in my Ummah differences and division. A people will speak goodly and they will do sinful acts. They will recite the Qur’an and it will not go past their throats. They will leave out of the religion as an arrow leaves out of the game. They will not return until a part of it apostates. They are the worst of creation and creatures. So blessings and good tidings be to the one who kills them and they kill him.”[18]

 

The Khawaarij as a movement actually began in the time of `Uthmaan t. The one that put that process into place was a man by the name of `Abdullah ibn Saba`.[19] When Ibn Saba` began, his main mission was to destroy Islam from the inside. He had tried every other way and failed. The first attempt was to rally support for himself in the urban centers of the Islamic World. This however, proved to be of little success. When he went to Basra, he was turned away; Baghdad likewise.

 

But he eventually came to realise his mission in Egypt. Here, he found people with revolutionary concepts, and through his followers he managed to turn them angry at the ruling of `Uthmaan t and the alleged oppression of some of his relatives, who were governors in places such as Syria, for example. His whole motivation was to speak to Ahl ulBait [the closest family of the Prophet r] and to cause them to revolt against the rule of `Uthmaan ibn `Affan t. This inflammatory rhetoric that was going around actually affected and provoked another type of people instead. These people were sincere and honest worshippers of Allah r, but they had revolutionary concepts and ideas floating about in their heads. They started seeing what the rulers were doing in the course of their ruling and they consequently shared in the killing of `Uthmaan t. There was a plot against `Uthmaan t with forged paperwork, in which many people became involved in this and a great evil took place. Even Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr t, the son of Abu Bakr t was drawn into these ugly scenes.

 

A`isha t, who was striving to defend `Uthmaan t, was also inadvertently involved in this tumultuous time and even fought with `Ali ibn Abi Taalib t in a battle known as the Battle of the Camel. What caused this battle to occur is that some the Sahaaba were trying to avenge the death of `Uthmaan t, while others were saying that the Islamic state should be returned to normality before taking revenge against the murderers of `Uthmaan t.  In this battle, 5,000 sahaaba died on each side in combat against each other. However, in this battle, `Ali t proved victorious and A`isha t was sent back to Madinah with her family after this disastrous incident. These, as well as many other disturbances that took place between the people of the Prophet r, were carefully orchestrated by `Abdullah ibn Saba`, to destabilize the Islamic state and pour confusion in the hearts of the believers.

 

After this situation, another set of problems came forward, in which `Ali t was to fight Mu`awiya t. `Ali t after the death of `Uthmaan t, removed all of `Uthmaan’s cousins from power due to the complaints of people regarding their harshness. This was against the advice of the other sahaaba, such as Ibn `Abbas t as well as many others.[20]. However, Mu`awiya t refused to step down and became `Ali’s t most vocal and vicious opponent. This was due to the fact that `Uthmaan t was a relative of his and upon his murder, his wife was injured. In an attempt to keep him from being injured in the course of the assassination, her finger was cut. After this incident, the widow of `Uthmaan t fled to Syria with her cut finger and the bloody shirt of `Uthmaan t. Upon seeing this, Mu`awiya t demanded justice for the death of his fallen kinsman. The other reason for Mu`awiya’s t bitterness towards `Ali t was that he had asked `Ali t many times, “Why is it you want bai`a from me and you have the murderers of `Uthmaan in your army? You did not avenge the blood of `Uthmaan yet! Avenge the blood of `Uthmaan and I will give you bai`a, no other way!” Among the army of `Ali were some of the Khawaarij who said to `Ali, “Judge by Allah or we will do to you the same that we did to `Uthmaan.” Imaam `Ali t then drew up an army and went to fight Mu`awiya t when he refused to give him bai`a [pledge of allegiance due to a legitimate ruler (haakim) by those who are going to be ruled over (mahkum)]. When `Ali t and Mu`awiya t each drew up armies in preparing to fight each other, some of `Ali’s t troops and supporters were angry that `Ali t did not take immediate action against his opponents as transgressors.

 

Why did he not do this, they thought to themselves. When the battle began, Mu`awiya t began to curse `Ali t in congregational prayers in the masjid and to have others do so as well. However, `Ali t did not do so and refused to do such an action, even though he was in the right in regards to the situation. `Ali t could have cursed Mu`awiya t just the same, but he refrained. `Ali’s t army came to him during this incident and asked, ‘If the other side is cursing us and calling us names, then what are they?’ The Khalifa (Islamic ruler) replied, ‘They are our brothers, and they are doing wrong (baghy).’ `Ali t sent a message to Mu`awiya t saying that he is to repent to Allah I and to give him the bai`a, but the opposing side refused. On the side of Mu`awiya t was `Amr ibn al`As t. In the beginning stages of the resistance of the rule of `Ali t, Mu`awiya’s t Syrian troops were being severely routed. But `Amr ibn al’As t came to Mu`awiya t with an ingenious plan. He said to him, “Shall I not suggest for you a thing, which shall cause the party to divide more than ever.” Mu`awiya t replied, “What is that?” Ibn al `As t told him, “You’re going to lose the war anyway. You should raise the Qur’an on the top of the spears. Then you should say, ‘Why do we not let the Qur’an judge amongst ourselves in our dispute? Why do we kill each other? Here is the book of Allah, why not let it judge between us?’”

 

When this suggestion was made, they did just that. When `Ali’s t troops saw the other army raise the Qur’an on spears, they began to say, “Look, they have raised the Qur’an up. Why should we kill each other when we may judge between ourselves with the Book of Allah? Why should we fight amongst ourselves?” `Ali t replied, “Why do you think we came here in the first place. We are the most eager to have the Qur’an be our judge. We called them to judge with it in the first place but they refused. But it is because they are losing now that they want the Qur’an to be their judge, so that maybe they will regroup and get stronger. Carry on and let us finish this fitnah until it is really over once and for all.” 

 

 But the disobedient troops of `Ali t were adamant and demanded that the fighting end. They decided that they wanted `Ali t, their ruler, to do as they say. This was the first idea to be introduced with the statement, ‘that if you do not do what we say, you’re a kaafir.’ These ideas were starting to build up in the heat of the battle, when tensions were high. Many of those who were refusing to fight Mu`awiya’s t troops were from the murderers of `Uthmaan t, unbeknownst to `Ali t. These people were not few in numbers and were about 20,000. Anytime `Ali t tried to retaliate for the murder of `Uthmaan t, 10,000 people would stand out and say, “We all killed him, we all killed him.” Due to all of this fitnah and the insistence on stopping the fight by the army of `Ali t, the fight was stopped and the arbitration was to begin.

 

When the fight was stopped, Mu`awiya t and Ibn al`As t were very happy because of the time it gave them to regroup. The strategy they used had worked perfectly. Even though their camp had more solidarity than `Ali’s t, militarily `Ali t was stronger than they were. A formal agreement was drawn up, with certain clauses that were to be acted upon. It was to explain how they were going to judge between both camps. `Ali t was to produce one person from his camp, and Mu`awiya t to produce one from his own as well. Mu`awiya t chose `Amr ibn al `As t due to his military cunning and his success with avoiding their impending defeat against

 

`Ali t. `Ali’s t first choice was to send Ibn `Abbas t as his arbitrator, due to the fact that he was very intelligent and he knew the understanding of the Qur’an very well. But due to the disunity in the camp of `Ali t, an argument took place because of this choice. It was said to `Ali t that sending Ibn `Abbas t was the same as sending himself[21], and that he should send someone else, as `Amr ibn al `As t was very clever and able to outsmart his adversaries. They demanded that the choice should be Abu Musa al Ash`ari t, as he is a very pious man and an early companion of the Prophet r.

 

Even though some of them tried to advise against this because they thought Abu Musa t might be tricked, they still persisted in their choice. Abu Musa t agreed to their choice as an arbitrator. But another problem soon came as Shaitan began to whisper in the ears of whoever would listen. Some of the Khawaarij on both sides began to think that it was good that the war was stopped so they could go to the judgement of Allah U and His Messenger r. But why, they thought, should we listen to the judgement came to by two men and not by Allah I?[22]

 

As the arbitration continued, one of the rules stipulated by Mu`awiya’s t camp was that they would make their judgements over a month’s time, and when a decision was reached, they would each read what their ruling was on this matter. As the messenger reading the stipulations was continuing to read over the conditions spelled out by Mu`awiya’s t side, the Khawaarij killed his camel. They said to him, “We told you to judge with the Qur’an, not to judge with people like myself and you.” `Ali tsaid, “This is the decision that was arrived at and we must follow through.”

 

The Khawaarij wanted to go and to fight again, but `Ali t told them that that time was over now that the conditions for the arbitration had already been read and agreed to. When these people were to go from Siffin to Kufa, they spent the whole journey abusing one another, spitting at each other, etc, with each side disagreeing and abusing the other continuously. One part of the group said, “You have gone against the Qur’an by using human judgment and you have sinned.” The other side replied with, “You have gone against our imaam, when allegiance is due to him. You have disobeyed our imaam.”

 

When they arrived in Kufa, the arbitration between the two representatives of each side, Abu Musa al Ash`ari t and `Amr ibn al `As t had already begun. But the Khawaarij were not listening to this at all. They began to make takfir[23] on Mu`awiya t and to call for `Ali t to make takfir on Mu`awiya t as well. These people refused to come into the city and camped outside of it. They called for Mu`awiya t to be declared a kaafir for refusing to judge by Allah I. When `Ali t arrived, he said that he would not fight them, prevent them from the masjids or do anything to them unless they began to spill the blood of Muslims. But the trouble continued. At the masjid, whenever `Ali t gave a khutba, the Khawaarij made a great commotion and would yell out, “Judgement belongs only to Allah!”[24] `Ali t said, “This verse is true but your interpretation is wrong. The book of Allah U can not take rule by itself. It is people who must carry out the judgement.” As the circumstances grew worse, `Ali t sent Ibn `Abbas t to speak to them about whatever grievances they had.

 

Their beginning statement to Ibn `Abbas t was that `Ali t was not a believer anyway. They began to ask questions, for instance, why at that battle of the Camel against `A’isha t were they not able to take the spoils of war, including the war captives. `Ali t was present and offered up his answer to the question, “Which of you here would like to take the Mother of the Believers as his captive?”[25] The spoils of war were not distributed among the people because the Muslims who were fighting were not kuffar, but Muslims that were sinning. The only people whom it is lawful to take their wealth in battle are the kuffar (unbelievers) and Mushrikun (pagans), but to do this to Muslims is a major sin.

 

Their next grievance was that they believed that both parties had left the fold of Islam because of the verse, “Judgement belongs only to Allah.” If judgement is only for Him (Allah), then how is it that you went to human arbitration, they reasoned. They used their minds and reasoned that this had to be major kufr, no doubt about it. Both `Ali t and Ibn `Abbas y however, were able to find the faults of this type of argument. Under careful scrutiny, this argument falls to pieces in front of the Qur’anic evidences that call for human judgement in certain matters. Allah I has said,

 

و إن خفتم شقاق بينهما فابعثوا حكماً من أهله و حكماً من أهلها إن يريدا إصلاحاً يوفق الله بينهما إن الله كان عليماً خبيراً

 

“And if you fear a breach between the two of them, then appoint a judge (hakam) from his family and a judge (hakam) from her family. If the two seek reconciliation, Allah will cause the reconciliation. Truly, Allah is knowledgeable and acquainted with all affairs.”[26]

 

And Allah U says further,

 

و من قتله منكم متعمداً فجزأ مثل ما قتل من النعم يحكم به ذوا عدل منكم هديا بالغ الكعبة أو كفارة طعام مساكين أو عدل ذلك صياماً ليذوق و بال أمره.

“Whoever among you kills it (the game) unintentionally, then the recompense is an offering brought to the Ka`ba of an animal in like of what was killed, as judged by to just judges among you. Or he could feed the poor or fast the expiation to taste the punishment for what he did.”[27]

 

The Khawaarij had been defeated yet again. And to support this verse `Ali t had said, “Is not appointing the judge from each side preserving the blood of the Muslims and their unity.” This caused a group of some 3,000 of the Khawaarij to come back to Ahl us-Sunna, while the rest stayed and continued to rebel against the other Muslims.

 

While all of this was going on, the arbitration between Abu Musa al Ash`ari t and `Amr ibn al `As t continued, in which Ibn al `As t said to his opponent, “Listen, let both of us deny both of these rulers as much blood has been spilt because of them. Let these two be done away with and let the Muslims have a fresh start. Then, let us have my son `Amr ibn `Amr to lead.” Abu Musa t replied, “No, your son ruling means you.” `Amr ibn al `As t accepted this and continued on, “Very well, let’s agree that we denounce them both. You will go and denounce `Ali, then I will do the same to Mu`awiya, and we will leave it to the Muslims to then choose a proper leader from among themselves and then the problem will be solved.”

 

Abu Musa t agreed to the proposition mainly to save Muslim blood, but there is something that must be understood. Abu Musa t was not actively conspiring against the Muslims. Being a pious and humble man, he was not aware that any Sahaaba t would ever do any sort of intrigue against him. So while he thought that they were both working to keep the unity of the Muslims, Abu Musa t had actually been tricked.

 

The fateful day came for the two arbitrators to tell the people the conclusion that they had come to regarding the Muslim State. `Amr ibn al `As t said to Abu Musa t, “You are before me in Islam, a companion of the Prophet r and you have related many hadith on his r behalf. Begin and tell them what we have agreed upon.” Thus Abu Musa t was pushed to read his decision first. Abu Musa t began with, “O you people! We have been fighting against each other and we have not been fighting the outside enemies. We are supposed to be doing jihaad against our enemies as they have been attacking us from the outside. I am now denouncing Imaam `Ali as he gave me the authority to make any decision that I came to. I have made the decision that `Ali is not the Khalifa anymore and that the Khalifa should be someone else.” Imaam `Ali t was trying to comprehend as to what was happening.

 

But the worst had not befallen the Muslims yet. Abu Musa t promptly stepped down after his declaration and `Amr ibn al `As t came next and began his judgement, “And I am endorsing Mu`awiya ibn Abi Sufyan as the Khalifa, because Muslims can not stay without a Khalifa. He is capable of doing so, his blood is clean and he did not interfere in the killing of `Uthmaan.” The group of Mu`awiya t became very happy as they realised that they were now the soldiers of the Khalifa and that their plan had worked down to the last letter. Imaam `Ali’s t camp was in complete disarray at the events that had just taken place.

 

 Upon seeing that he had been deceived, Abu Musa t escaped the people, went to Makkah and went into hiding as he was filled with shame for himself. The next step was that the Khawaarij called `Ali t a kaafir, then labeled Mu`awiya t a kaafir and both were seen to be criminals in the sight of Allah I. `Ali t had to try to keep the calm in this storm. He simply replied to his camp, “Listen, these two have not ruled by Allah! Where does it say in Allah’s Shari`a that you denounce the Khalifa. These two were chosen to arbitrate and they didn’t do this at all. They had no authority to denounce a Khalifa as this is not from Islam. We must come together again and fight against them.”

 

 `Ali t went back to Kufa and prepared his troops. He sent his letter to the Khawaarij telling him that it was now time to fight again against those who had not judged correctly, as they had committed a sin in not judging by what Allah U had sent down. The letter sent back by the Khawaarij was scathing and went as follows, “No. We asked you to be angry and fight for the sake of Allah in the first place. We asked you to do this in the beginning. These two judged without evidence. Now you want us to fight not for the sake of Allah I, but for your position. You want us to fight for your power. We will not fight for you unless you say that Mu`awiya was a kaafir and that you had become a kaafir. If you witness that, we will look if we can help you or not.”

 

`Ali t shot back, “Myself bear witness that I am a kaafir? After the Hijra with the Messenger r and the battles with him and all of these things, I will bear witness to no such thing!”

 

The Khawaarij then became angry and said not to send them anymore correspondence. At this time, they then began to spill the blood of the Muslims. `Ali t ordered that the Khawaarij be left alone, and after he and his army were finished fighting Mu`awiya, they would come back and see if they came to their senses.

 

While `Ali t went off to wrest the victory from Mu`awiya t, the Khawaarij began to do terrorist activities. They would stop people on the road and ask them their opinions in regards to certain issues.[28] When the people answered against them and refused to curse `Ali t or Mu`awiya t, the Khawaarij killed them. One such martyr was `Abdullah ibn Khabbab ibn al Aratt y, the son of one of the companions of the Prophet r. The companion Khabbab ibn al Aratt t had a lot of knowledge and many ayaat in the Qur’an were revealed because of this noble individual.

 

 `Abdullah ibn Khabbab y was travelling with his wife at that time, who was pregnant. The Khawaarij stopped him and questioned him. “What did you think of the time of the khilafa system of Abu Bakr?” `Abdullah ibn Khabbab t answered, “Masha’llah (What good Allah willed), it was good.” They questioned again, “And `Umar.” He replied, Masha’llah, it was good.” They replied again, “And `Uthmaan?” He answered again, “Masha’llah, it was good, but people did not like him, but he was good.” The Khawaarij said, “You are one of THEM. You know that they shared in the killing of `Uthmaan.” They asked him furiously, “And what about `Ali?” He said, “He is good. And if you help him, he will be even better. But if you are not willing to help him, stand aside and be quiet.” They said, “Now we see. You are trying to get us to believe in people who don’t believe in the truth. But we will show you the truth!”

 

They then took the married couple and tied them up and as they were doing so, a date fell from the tree of a non-Muslim and one of the Khawaarij ate it. He was asked by another Khawaarij, “Did you pay for it? For if you didn’t, you must, for it is not yours.” The man then went and paid for what he had eaten. The Khawaarij had also killed a pig, and they began to squabble about who should pay for what they did to the non-Muslim’s pig. The owner came, the Khawaarij apologised, and paid what was due for the pig.

 

As `Abdullah ibn Khabbab t witnessed all of this happening in front of his very eyes, he said to them, “I should be worried for myself. You people kill Muslims and spare the pagans.” After this was said, the Khawaarij killed him as well as his pregnant wife. But they hadn’t finished there. They went, cut open the belly of the dead wife and killed the baby inside as well.

 

Once word of this reached `Ali t, he sent word back to them, “Now you have started killing Muslims. If you don’t repent and pay the blood money for what you did to the man, his wife, the child and all the other Muslims you have killed, I will fight you before I fight Mu`awiya.” Abu Ayyub al Ansari t was sent to speak to them and to tell them the demands of `Ali t. One of `Ali’s t statements to them as well as to his army was that, “If you fight them (the Khawaarij) there will not be even ten of you killed and not even ten of them left.” The battle was prepared. The Khawaarij sent no further correspondence after that and began to make takfir on other Muslims yet again and prepare for battle.[29]

The battle between the two sides was fast and fierce, but in the end, as truth ultimately must prevail over the dark oppression of falsehood, the Khawaarij were defeated. As `Ali t was surveying the bodies of the dead, he was looking for some sign that he had killed the very Khawaarij that the Prophet r had made mention of in the hadith. `Ali t was looking for the man that the Messenger of Allah r had said that his hand would look likes a small breast. When he was found, `Ali t exclaimed, “Allahu Akbar. I have been utilised to fulfill the prophecy and you all know the hadith.” This was the first generation of the Khawaarij and their story ends here.

However, these were not the only Khawaarij. The Khawaarij didn’t just stop with that one man and some followers after him. It continued on. There was a second generation of Khawaarij in Dimashq (Damascus), and Abu Amaamah t explains their story in the following hadith,

 

حدثنا أبو كريب، حدثنا وكيع بن ربيع بن صبيح و حماد بن سلمة، عن أبي غالب، قال: رأى أبو أمامة رؤؤسا منصوبة على درج مسجد دمشق، فقال Uأبو أمامة، كلاب النار شر قتلى تحت أديم السماء، خير القتلى من قتلوه.

 

In a hadith chain from Abu Kuraib t in a chain from Waki`a bin Rabi`a bin Sabih t and Hammad bin Salamah t from Abu Ghaalib t, who said that, “Abu Amaamah t saw severed heads on the steps of the masjid in Dimashq (Damascus) and he was weeping. Abu Amaamah t then said, ‘The dogs of the hellfire (the Khawaarij) are the worst to be killed under the heaven and the one they killed is the best of people to be killed.’[30] Then he recited,

 

يوم تبيض وجوه و تسود وجوه فأما الذين اسودت وجوههم اكفرتم بعد إيمانكم فذوقوا العذاب بما كنتم تكفرون. و أما الذين ابيضت وجوههم ففي رحمة الله هم فيها خالدون.

 

“On the day when faces will be whitened and faces will be blackened. Then to those whose faces are blacked, did you become kuffar after your Imaan? Then taste the punishment of what you disbelieved in. And as far as those whose faces were whitened, then they shall be forever in the mercy of Allah.”[31]

 

“Then I said to Abu Amaamah t, ‘You heard it from the Messenger of Allah r?’ He said, ‘If I did not hear it except once, twice, three, four or ever seven times, I would not have spoken it.

                

The Khawaarij were to continue to resurface in each time, appearing and bringing terror and pandemonium wherever they placed their feet. One generation of the Khawaarij was to make an appearance in the time of Abul `Abbas `Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn `Ali ibn `Abdullah ibn `Abbas (d. 136) t. This Khalifa was well known for his fierceness in battle and was nicknamed as-Saffah (‘the Blood Shedder’). In the time of the `Abbasiyyah khilaafa (Islamic governance) however, the Khawaarij were very weak and scattered because the Khilaafa of `Abbas t was harsh against anyone who opposed it, right or wrong. It is also because they were being separated and some went to Tunis and Khurasaan.

                

The Khawaarij, however, were not to be counted out, as a snake is most dangerous when it is injured. Under the leadership of alJulandi ibn Mas`ud, the Khawaarij movement of that time, known as the Ibaadiyyah, began to create havoc.[32] But nothing could have prepared them for the ‘Blood Shedder’ t, a man whom even the fanatical and extreme Shi`a feared. Once they had been singled out as enemies, the ‘Blood Shedder’ t killed Ibn Mas`ud and ten thousand of his men. Although originally coming from three main groups, the Khawaarij later began to become more fragmented, and as time went on, became a complex jumble of many different splinter groups, some combining bid`ii concepts from other groups into their own and incorporating them.

 

Their ideas that were then to become bid`a stacked on top of bid`a, in addition to some of the other deviant ideas that were already part of their thinking.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SOME TYPES OF ANCIENT KHAWAARIJ

 

 The following presented below are some of the types of ancient Khawaarij that existed,

 

1.      THE MUHAKKIM AL’UWLA (the people who ask for judgement and their categories). The story of this particular type was from above. The first of them was a man by the name of Dhul Khuwaisira, who asked the Prophet r for judgement. Their end came in the time of `Ali ibn Abi Taalib t when `Ali t found the man with the forearm like the small breast of a woman. Only ten of them were left, but they escaped and started their own group. These are the same ones who labelled `Ali t, Mu`awiya t, `Amr ibn al `As and Abu Musa alAsh`ari t, who were involved with the tahkim (judgement), to be kuffar.

 

2.      al Azaariqa. These are the companions of Abu Raashid Naafi` ibn al Azraq. These people left with Naafi` from Basra (in `Iraq) to al Ahwaaz. And there was with Naafi` leaders of the Khawaarij such as `Atiyah ibn al Aswad alHanafi, `Abdullah ibn alMahuuz, and his brothers, `Uthmaan and Zubair, `Amr ibn `Umair al`Anbari, Qatari ibn alFaja’a alMazini, `Ubaida ibn Hilaal ash-Shukri, and his brother, Mahraz ibn Hilaal, Sakhr ibn Habib at-Tamimi, Saalih ibn Mikhraaq al`Abdi, `Abdu Rabbil Kabir, `Abdu Rabbis Saghir.

 

Others decided to fight the Khawaarij outwardly. With roughly some 30,000 horses drawn up from, the resistence to the Khawaarij in Basra became organised and people joined them. Then there came and joined with them `Abdullah ibn alHaarith ibn Nufail an-Nufali, with the friend of his army, Muslim ibn`Abis ibn Kuraiz ibn Habib. The Khawaarij then fought him (Muslim ibn `Abis) and defeated his companions. Then there came to them (the Khawaarij) `Uthmaan ibn `Abdullah ibn Mu`ammir at-Tamimi and they (the Khawaarij) defeated him.

 

There then went out to them Haaritha ibn Badr al `Itaabi in a dense and thick army, and they (the Khawaarij) defeated him. The people of Basra were afraid for themselves and their land from the Khawaarij. There then came alMahlub ibn Abi Safara, who stayed at war with the Azaariqa for 19 years until he brought an end to them in the days of alHajjaaj. Naafi` died before the battles of alMahlub with the Azaariqa. And after him (Naafi`), they (the Khawaarij) gave bai`a to Qatari ibn alFaja’a alMizaani and named him the ‘leader of the believers.’

 

3.      an-Najdaat, who were the people of Najda ibn `Aamir alHanafi, and he was called guardian. And it was in this matter that he left from alYamaamah with his military he sought to gain admission to the Azaariqa.

 

He then received Abu Fadaik and `Atiyyah ibn alAswad alHanafi in the group which left Naafi` ibn al Azraq. They informed him of what Naafi` had brought about most recently from the disagreement by making takfir on the dissenters from service to him and the generally well known happenings and bid`a. They then commenced to give Najda bai`a and named him the ‘leader of the believers.’ They then disagreed with Najda, with some of the people making takfir on him for matters that they held against him.

 

Out of them then rose up his sons with an army to the people of alQatif. They then fought the men and took the women as war captives and their people for themselves. They said, “Their allotment led to their establishment of our share and we only returned the surplus, and they had intercourse with them (the female captives) before the shares were divided up. They ate from the ghanima (the war booty) before it could be divided up.” They then returned to Najda and informed him of that. He said, “Did he not slander you regarding this thing that you did.” They said, “We did not know of that. He did not slander us.” They then began to make excuses for their ignorance.

 

His (Najda’s) companions then differed with that. Then some of them agreed with his decision and the excuse of ignorance and judgement in ijtihaad. They said, “The religion has two matters, the first being awareness of Allah, awareness of His messengers. And further is the prohibition of spilling Muslim blood, yield in their favour and establishment of what came from the sight of Allah as a whole. This, it is waajib (compulsory) on all and ignorance of it is no excuse.

 

“The second is what is equal to that. Thus people have the excuse of ignorance until the hujjah (clear proof) is established on them regarding halaal and haraam. And whoever makes it permissible, the punishment on a sinful mujtahid (one making ijtihaad) [33] in judgements before the hujjah is established on him, then he is a kaafir.”

 

Najda ibn `Aamir also declared halaal and blood of the people of the covenant [34], and their wealth as in a condition of taqiyyah [35]. He made the judgement that one must disassociate and hate anyone who says that it (the blood and the wealth of the above mentioned) is haraam.

 

4.      al `Ajaaridah. These are the companions of a man named `Abdul Karim ibn `Ajaarid. He assisted the an-Najdaat in their bid`a and someone said that he was from the companions of Abu Baihas. He then disagreed with him and single himself out with the following words,

 

“It is compulsory to make baraa’a (complete disassociation and bearing hate towards someone or something for the sake of Allah I, who told you to hate that thing) from the infant, until they call and bear witness to Islam.

 

“And it is also compulsory that they testify to it (the Muslims testimony) when they reach puberty. The infants of the Mushrikun (pagans) are in the fire with their fathers.” He also did not believe the wealth became war booty until its’ owner was killed.

 

They also turned away from those who leave off military service from the Khawaarij when they know them by confession of their sect. They also believe that hijrah is a bounty and not incumbant, they disbelieve in the Kabaa’ir (major sins such as smoking, drinking alcohol, etc.), and he related from them that they deny Surah Yusuf from the Qur’an by claiming that it is from a collection of old fictional stories. They say, “It is not permissible that a love story be from the Qur’an.”

 

5.      Tha`aaliba, these are the people of Th`alaba ibn `Aamir, who was with `Abdul Karim ibn `Ajarid. He (Th`alaba) disagreed in the matter of the children (whether or not they are kuffar). Tha`alaba said,

“Truly, we are under their authority and charge, big or small, until we see from them a denial of the right (of Allah I) and being pleased with tyranny.”

 

 

The `Ajaaridah then made baraa’a from Th`alaba and we say regarding him (Th`alaba) moreover that he said, “The child does not have the judgement in the state of childhood, regarding allegiance or enmity until they know it and they make testimony to it. Thus, if they accept that (the allegiance with them) then they are as that, but if they deny it, then they have become kuffar.”

 

6.      al Ibaadiyyah, they are the companions of `Abdullah ibn Ibaad, who rebelled against Marwaan ibn Muhammad. One of their famous opinions is that the people who differ with them from those who say the shahaada are kuffar, but not Mushrikun (pagans) and that they can marry from them and inherit from them as well.

 

Also, they believe the country of the sultaan (the one ruling) is a place of wrong doing (baghii) and the person who commits major sins is a muwahhid (believer in tawhid), but not a believer.

 

7.      as-Suffriyyah, the companions and followers of Ziyaad ibn al Asfar. Their beliefs are no less bizarre and twisted than their predecessors above are. The difference is that they differed with the Azaariqah, the Najdaat and the Ibaadiyyah in the matters of that the Suffriyyah do not make takfir on those who refuse to fight with military service (against a legitimate ruler).

 

They also don’t judge the children of the pagans as pagans, making takfir on them and confining them to the fire forever. They claim that they are ‘believers in and of themselves and that they don’t know, maybe we have gone out of imaan in the sight of Allah.’

 

To sum up these people, we can say that anyone who goes out of a legitimate Imaam which Ahl us-Sunna agreed upon, that person is from the Khawaarij. The Khawaarij are the first people to go against Imaam `Ali t in the war of Siffin, they distanced themselves from `Uthmaan t and `Ali t. They called people with major sins kuffar and they said that it is legitimate and compulsory to rebel against an Imaam if he differs or opposes a Sunna (according to their opinion). [36]

 

 

 

 

WHO AND WHAT ARE THE KHAWAARIJ?

 

The Khawaarij is a term used by the scholars of Islam for people who have a certain belief or behaviour that deviates from Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah. The Prophet r, as was shown previously, prophesied this group, before they even arose in the Ummah. However, the scholars of Islam have gathered the Khawaarij into three main groups, as not all of the Khawaarij are one single entity. The first group are those who deny Surah Yusuf and label it a love story, in addition to the denial of some other verses in the Qur’an. These Khawaarij are out of the fold of Islam and classified as complete kuffar (non-Muslims), as they deny verses from the Book of Allah I. The other two Khawaarij groups are classified as people of bid`a, but their bid`a does not cause them to go out of the religion.

 

Of these three Khawaarij groups, there is also another hidden group within these three groups. This faction is known as the Khawaarij Murji’a, which may sound contradictory in title, but is actually a disease well known in the Ummah. Although we may consider it to be something new, it is actually quite old. The Khawaarij Murji’a are a group of people that declare those they disagree with to be kaafir or bid`ii. They curse their opposition in addition to denying the Haakimiyyah (Law giving and Legislative right) of Allah U. Those having the ideas and characteristics of the Khawaarij Murji’a are in the majority among the modern movement, which has given itself the name ‘Salafiyya.’ These so-called salafis label their opponents as bid`ii, kuffar or innovators but continue to strip Allah U of His attribute, Al Haakim (Law giving Judge), which is mentioned twice in the Qur’an.

 

أليس الله بأحكم الحاكمين

“Is not Allah the most wise and judicious of the Law giving Judges?”[37]

 

 

و هو خير الحاكمين

“And He is the best of the Law giving Judges.”[38]

 

In both of these verses, Allah U called Himself al Haakim, which means He alone is the Law giving Judge. But the trait of the Khawaarij Murji’a is to categorically deny this and in order to take attention off of themselves, they focus it somewhere else. This is done by their labeling other people as bid`ii, deviant, etc.[39] The Khawaarij Murji’a are also very keen to not make takfir on those who do not pray and those who replace the Shari`a with man-made laws. However, when someone disagrees with them, they immediately turn and label him a dalaal (deviant), bid`ii or kaafir!

 

FEATURES OF THE KHAWAARIJ MENTALITY

 

There are also certain features that the Khawaarij have that can be easily recognised. These features are seven in number:

 

            1. Muslims are pronounced kuffar for sins that do not eject from the religion (i.e. drinking alcohol, fornication, etc). The evidence is the prominent sahaabi, `Abdullah ibn `Umar t, described them in these words, “They are the worst of Allah’s creatures and these people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the kuffar (unbelievers) and interpreted them as describing the mu’minun (believers)”[40].

 

2. They are willing to slay Muslims because of their beliefs, yet they are not willing to fight Jews and Christians but they will fight the Ummah. The evidence is the statement of the Prophet r, ‘They will kill the Muslims and leave the pagans. If I were to be present when they appear, I would kill them as the killing of the nation of `Ad.’[41]

 

            3. They resist and go out against the legitimate rulers without cause and try to remove them. The evidence is their ancestor, `Abdullah ibn Dhil Khawaisara’s statement to the Prophet ,  ‘O Messenger of Allah! Fear Allah!’

 

            4. When they differ with someone, they call him a kaafir. 

            5. They are rude, arrogant and their knowledge is only surface knowledge.

 

6.      They fight Muslims who differ with them the same way as Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah fight the Kuffar. The Khawaarij confiscate the belongings, ambush them, and kill them if they flee the battlefield and take their women and children as booty if they are able.

 

7.      They usually give their groups a name to distinguish themselves from other Muslims in their times. Evidences for this are the Khawaarij groups such as alMukaffira, Jama`at ut-Takfir walHijrah, Jama`at alMuslimin as well as Ahl ut-Tawhid.

 

 

These names mean to them that they are the guardians or the only legitimate group upholding the Sunna. This is also a subtle way that they use to accuse other people of not having faith. These people also are the first to say, ‘We, of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah,’ which excludes anyone else and makes them the only members. Thus they have made Islam into a country club, throwing those out who they don’t want, and making themselves safe from harm.

 

The evidence for features four and five is the most compelling. The story of their debate with the great tabi`ii [one who is a student of the companions of the Prophet r] Abu Majlizرحمه الله  in which they were defeated promptly is a strong testament for our proofs. The story is as follows,

 

Whenever the Khawaarij al Ibaadiyyah (a branch of the Khawaarij) came to the trustworthy Abu Majliz رحمه الله, they said to him, “Have you not seen the words of Allah, ‘ and whoever does not judge by what Allah has sent down, then they are Kaafirun (unbelievers).’[42] It is true, is it not?” Abu Majliz answered, “Yes.” They said, “ ‘and whoever does not judge by what Allah sent down, then they are Zaalimun (oppressors).’[43] It is true, is it not?”’ Abu Majliz answered, “Yes.” They said, “ ‘and whoever does not judge by what Allah sent down, then they are Faasiqun (rebellious sinners).’[44] It is true, is it not.” Abu Majliz answered, “Yes.”

 

They said, “O Abu Majliz, is it then those ones are judging by what Allah sent down (they were making reference to the rulers of that time).” He answered them, “It is their religion which they are judging with and with it they speak and they call to it. Thus, if they leave something off from it, they know that they already committed a sin.” They said, “No, by Allah, but you know!” Abu Majliz رحمه الله said, “You have more right to this than I.” And in another relation from Ibn Jarir at-Tabari رحمه الله, he (Abu Majliz رحمه الله) says, “You have more of a right to that than us. As far as we are concerned, We do not know what you know, but you know it. On the contrary, you prohibit full support of your authority (the rulers) out of fear of them.”[45]

 

Al `Allamah Shaikh Mahmud Shaakir رحمه الله made a commentary on this narration in the following statement, “It is made clear that those who were asking the question of Abu Majliz from the Ibaadiyyah were only seeking to make compulsory the proof in takfir of the rulers. This is because they were in the army of the ruler and were probably disobedient or they were pursuing a part of what Allah made haraam for them regarding the pursuit of that sin. And for this he (Abu Majliz) said to them (the Khawaarij al Ibadiyyah) in the first narration that if they (the rulers) left something from it, they (the Khawaarij) know that they (the rulers) committed a sin. And he said to them in the second narration that if they (the rulers) committed what they committed, and they (the Khawaarij) knew it, then it is a sin for them (the Khawaarij, because they saw it (the sin) and didn’t correct the rulers when they saw them ruling wrongly).”[46]

 

So we are able to understand from this hadith and its explanation that the Khawaarij al Ibaadiyya weren’t asking these questions because the ruler was doing clear kufr. NO! This is not the case. They were seeking permission to disobey because they themselves were going after haraam. This is the proof on the third point, because they want to go out of the rule of a legitimate ruler without sound reason. They had no evidence for this behaviour. This can even be used as evidence for number four of the Khawaarij features due to the fact that they disagreed with some manner that the rulers were doing. They were then eager to declare the rulers kuffar the moment they disagreed with something, thus the want was to make takfir out of what they THOUGHT was kufr, not what was actual kufr. This is completely irrational and without base.

 

This is finally an evidence for the fifth feature of the Khawaarij for many reasons. Their quoting of verses was correct, but let’s look at their application. They wanted to take verses describing major kufr and apply them to someone who either was doing no kufr at all regarding the situation, or were at most committing minor kufr. They provided no tafsir (interpretation), sharh (explanation) or any type of proof for the stance they were taking.

 

This shows that those who were speaking were of little knowledge, and what knowledge they did possess was being abused in a most fatal manner. And in yet another proof is the manner in which they spoke to Abu Majliz رحمه الله. Their attitude towards him was one of contempt, malice and hatred. And when he refused to immediately adopt their line of reasoning, they began to become hostile and swear by Allah r to solidify their position. From just these examples, we can see how unruly and uncouth the Khawaarij really are as a group. Fortunately for Abu Majliz رحمه الله, there were people around to protect him, but `Abdullah ibn Khabbab رحمه الله wasn’t as fortunate.

 

This also provides our evidence for the sixth point as well. When the Khawaarij deal with someone they don’t agree with, they treat that person as if they are dealing with a kaafir, pagan or dangerous deviant. Over an exchange of words, here we have the Khawaarij, as told above, murdering `Abdullah ibn Khabbab رحمه الله, his wife, not to mention the couple’s unborn son being torn from her belly and murdered. In another disagreement with Abu Majliz رحمه الله, they were ready to try to fight him and attempt to subject him to violence, but there were too many people to protect the Shaikh رحمه الله from their outlandish behaviour.

 

 

 

 

MISUNDERSTANDINGS OF THE KHAWAARIJ REGARDING THE ISSUE OF TAKFIR

 

Some of the rules misused by the Khawaarij led to their misguidance, as well as the others. What was their most fatal mistake is when they mistook Takfir alMu`ayyin (takfir on a particular person), Takfir alIjtihaad (takfir based upon independent judgement) and Takfir un-Nass (takfir based on the text) and blended them into one thing. The rule of Takfir un-Nass (Takfir in which a clear text is mentioned) is a very great principle of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah and is in all of the books of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah, in addition to Shaikh ulIslam Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab’s رحمه الله “Nawaaqid ulIslam” (What violates Islam). This rule states, “Anyone who doesn’t declare the disbelief of the Mushrikun (pagans) or he doubts of their kufr or the truth of their thinking, it is Kufr.”

 

These people abused this rule blatantly and with malice. This was taken to mean that anyone who refused to declare kaafir who they THOUGHT was a kaafir is a kaafir. This case was born out when the Khawaarij declared `Ali t and Mu`awiya t kaafir and declared `Amr ibn al `As t a kaafir for not declaring those two to be kuffar. This thinking is an extreme view and does not reflect the core belief of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah.

 

The authentic understanding of this rule is that anyone who knows those who the Qur’an and Sunna has referred to as kuffar (i.e. Jews, Christians and Mushrikun) and refuses to label them as kuffar; or maybe even declares them Muslims, then that person is a kaafir. This same rule applies with those who declare to be Islamic such people as the Pharaoh, Abu Lahab, Jews, Christians as well as other religions after the Prophet r. 

 

This is not the same as the one whose kufr is unknown to you, and a charge of kufr is made against him. No one may come to another Muslim and force him to label others as kuffar if he either has no proof or he does not know the proof of the kufr of those mentioned. Even Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله and the scholars previous to him, when they called the act kufr, every person that did the act was not declared kaafir. To apply kufr to a specific person, which is called Takfir alMu`ayyin that has to go through specific rules and regulations according to Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah. For example, when the sahaaba t asked the Prophet r to make the Dhat Anwaat, he did not call them kuffar, but he said this is equivalent to asking for a god other than Allah U.[47] Although it was an act of kufr and blasphemy, they were not declared kuffar. This is because they only asked about it, they did not do the act. And yet another example is when Mu`aadh ibn Jabal t came from Shaam, 

حَدَّثَنَا أَزْهَرُ بْنُ مَرْوَانَ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ زَيْدٍ عَنْ أَيُّوبَ عَنْ الْقَاسِمِ الشَّيْبَانِيِّ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي أَوْفَى قَالَ لَمَّا قَدِمَ مُعَاذٌ مِنْ الشَّامِ سَجَدَ لِلنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ مَا هَذَا يَا مُعَاذُ قَالَ أَتَيْتُ الشَّامَ فَوَافَقْتُهُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ لِأَسَاقِفَتِهِمْ وَبَطَارِقَتِهِمْ فَوَدِدْتُ فِي نَفْسِي أَنْ نَفْعَلَ ذَلِكَ بِكَ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَلَا تَفْعَلُوا فَإِنِّي لَوْ كُنْتُ آمِرًا أَحَدًا أَنْ يَسْجُدَ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ لَأَمَرْتُ الْمَرْأَةَ أَنْ تَسْجُدَ لِزَوْجِهَا وَالَّذِي نَفْسُ مُحَمَّدٍ بِيَدِهِ لَا تُؤَدِّي الْمَرْأَةُ حَقَّ رَبِّهَا حَتَّى تُؤَدِّيَ حَقَّ زَوْجِهَا وَلَوْ سَأَلَهَا نَفْسَهَا وَهِيَ عَلَى قَتَبٍ لَمْ تَمْنَعْهُ

 

It is narrated that when Mu`aadh ibn Jabal t came from Shaam (the area comprising Syria, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon today), he prostrated to the Prophet r. The Prophet r said, “What is this, O Mu`aadh?” He said, “I came from Shaam and I observed them doing so, so I loved for myself that we should do so to you.” Then the Messenger of Allah r said, “Do not do that. Truly, if I were to order anyone that he should to other than Allah, I would have ordered that the wife prostrate to her husband. By the one in whose hand is the life of Muhammad, the woman does not love the right of her Lord, until she loves the right of her husband, even if he asks for her and she is at the oven cooking.”[48] [49]

To distinguish in this area is paramount to understanding this great principle of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah. If there is someone who is making du`a (supplication) to Allah I at a graveyard because he believes it is a holy place, this is haraam and bid`a (innovation), but he does not leave out of the religion. But if this same person is making du`aa to the people inside of the graves, then this is major kufr with no excuse for it whatsoever. Prostrating at an area or making du`a at an area because he believes it is a holy area, again this is haraam and bid`a. But if the one mentioned is prostrating or supplicating to those at that locale, again this is major kufr.

 

The same is true when someone says a blasphemy because he is ignorant or has made a mistake. This one is not classed as a kaafir and out of the religion. We can see this from the following hadith qudsi,

 

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الصَّبَّاحِ وَزُهَيْرُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ قَالَا حَدَّثَنَا عُمَرُ بْنُ يُونُسَ حَدَّثَنَا عِكْرِمَةُ بْنُ عَمَّارٍ حَدَّثَنَا إِسْحَقُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي طَلْحَةَ حَدَّثَنَا أَنَسُ بْنُ مَالِكٍ وَهُوَ عَمُّهُ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَلَّهُ أَشَدُّ فَرَحًا بِتَوْبَةِ عَبْدِهِ حِينَ يَتُوبُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ أَحَدِكُمْ كَانَ عَلَى رَاحِلَتِهِ بِأَرْضِ فَلَاةٍ فَانْفَلَتَتْ مِنْهُ وَعَلَيْهَا طَعَامُهُ وَشَرَابُهُ فَأَيِسَ مِنْهَا فَأَتَى شَجَرَةً فَاضْطَجَعَ فِي ظِلِّهَا قَدْ أَيِسَ مِنْ رَاحِلَتِهِ فَبَيْنَا هُوَ كَذَلِكَ إِذَا هُوَ بِهَا قَائِمَةً عِنْدَهُ فَأَخَذَ بِخِطَامِهَا ثُمَّ قَالَ مِنْ شِدَّةِ الْفَرَحِ اللَّهُمَّ أَنْتَ عَبْدِي وَأَنَا رَبُّكَ أَخْطَأَ مِنْ شِدَّةِ الْفَرَحِ

 

Anas ibn Maalik t relates that he heard the Prophet r say, “Allah is more pleased with the repentance of his slave whenever he repents to Him than anyone of you who lost his riding animal in the desert. On the riding animal is his food, drink, so then he said from extreme pleasure, ‘O Allah, you are my slave and I am your Lord!’ out of a mistake from the severity of his joy.”[50]

 

To say that Allah I is your slave and that you are His Lord is a statement of kufr, yet the man did not leave out of the religion. Why? It is because he had a slip of the tongue. This is what is known in Islam as kufr al Akhtaa’ (the kufr of mistake). Someone can say this in times of extreme grief, in times of extreme joy and in times of extreme anger. At these times, for saying such a thing, the individual should not be precluded from the religion and counted as a kaafir.

 

From these and many other evidences, the scholars of Islam have distinguished between labelling the act as an act of kufr and labeling the one who does it as a kaafir. Another evidence is the hadith of the Prophet r about a person who was flogged after the third or the fourth time because of his alcoholism. Then one sahaabi cursed him. The Prophet r prohibited him from doing so, and said to him t, “Don’t call him that. He does love Allah and His Messenger.”[51] Although the Prophet I cursed ten activities with regard to intoxicants in general, he did not allow a person who does this activity to be cursed specifically. From these and many other evidences from the Prophet I, verses from the Qur’an and the way that the Sahaaba w understood these verses and hadith, Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah have isolated the impediments of takfir.

 

These impediments are reasons from the above-mentioned sources that prevent a Muslim from being labelled as a kaafir, until the hujjah (proof) has been established on him. This is because Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah does the opposite of the Khawaarij, who consider everyone kaafir (even a Muslim) until they (the people being called kuffar) prove otherwise. We consider everyone who says they are Muslim as such until we have reason to believe otherwise. This is in accordance with what Allah I and His Messenger r has said. Therefore the scholars of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah are agreed upon the following impediments:

 

 

1. The action for calling him a kaafir must be undoubtedly kufr; not what people think is kufr.

 

2.  The person must be sane.

 

3. The person must have knowledge or access to knowledge about the action that he does.

 

4.  The person must have done this action deliberately

 

5.  The person is not to be sleeping

 

6. The person chose to do the act with free will, without compulsion, and also he should not be the opposite of all the above.

 

7. Also, the person should not have a different interpretation which would cause him to do the action thinking that he is pleasing Allah I. It is particularly important to make this point, due to the fact that the people doing it are interpreting. Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah does not make takfir on them, even though the act is kufr. The reason for this is that many of them are ignorant or misled by evil scholars away from the correct interpretation. Some of their leaders/scholars even lie about the Prophet r in giving these people their interpretation.

 

This is precisely why Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله, who reestablished this rule in our time, did not label the people who used to make supplication to Allah at a place called Qublat alKawwaaz as kuffar. He was keen to this situation and he changed it, because many of the evil scholars of his time invented hadith to convince people that such a bid`a is halaal.

 

Then the exact opposite of the above numbered impediments of takfir are:

 

1.      The action is without any doubt kufr.

 

2.      The person has their sanity and is well within his senses.

 

3.      He knows the action he did and is completely aware of it.

 

4. He does the action purposefully, not on accident.

 

5.      The person is awake and not sleeping.

 

6. The person does so, not under any coercion whatsoever.

 

7. The person does not have any acceptable Ta’wil[52] to justify the kufr action.[53]

           

Once these conditions have been fulfilled, then and only then may we level the charge of Takfir alMu`ayyin (charge of kufr against the individual). In English, this can be said that,

 

There is a clear difference between the clear kufr and the clear kaafir. In a way, you can say, not every clear kufr is done by a kaafir. But every clear kaafir has most certainly done kufr!

 

In short, that is the rule.

 

Anything going outside of these bounds is simply not from Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah. We should take heed from the lesson that we have just learned from the disastrous behaviour of the Khawaarij.

 

PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF TAKFIR

 

In this current era, there has been a great deal of heated debate over the claims to Islam that certain groups and certain people have been making. These arguments, as well as many of the circumstances that have surrounded the Ummah today have led to some people classing others as kuffar, without giving the proper explanation of the kufr of the people. Others, confused by these actions, have included everyone inside of the fold of Islam and refused to label these people in question with any charge whatsoever. Much of this confusion and bewilderment is in regards to the issue of takfir.

 

Takfir means to label someone with the charge of doing major kufr (a type of kufr that renders one a kaafir). Takfir can be towards a Muslim individual, a non-Muslim individual or a group of people. Takfir towards a non-Muslim is what Allah I said of the Jews and Christians,

 

إن الذين كفروا من أهل الكتاب و المشركين في نار خالدين فيها أولئك هم شر البرية

 

‘Those that are kuffar from the People of the Book and the Mushrikun (pagans) are in the fire forever. They are the worst of creation.’[54]

Here we have a verse where Allah I has labelled the Jews, Christians and pagans as kuffar.[55] The takfir towards a Muslim is different however. This case is where someone that is a Muslim has apostated and left Islam due to a certain act of kufr. An example of this is where Allah I says,

 

قل أ بالله و آياته و رسوله كنتم تستهزئون لا تعتذروا قد كفرتم بعد إيمانكم إن نعف عن طائفة منكم نعذب طائفة بأنهم كانوا مجرمين

 

“Say, ‘Was it in Allah, His signs and His Messenger that you were mocking? Make no excuse, you have become kuffar after your imaan (belief). If we pardon a group of you, we will certainly punish a group of you, because you were criminals.’ ”[56]

 

Allah I also said,

 

يا أيها الذين أمنوا من يرتد منكم عن دينه فسوف يأتي الله بقوم يحبهم و يحبونه

“O you who believe, those who would apostate from their religion, Allah will bring people whom he will love and whom they will love.”[57]

 

But it doesn’t just have to be an individual Muslim that apostates. A group of people who disbelieved after their Islam can apostate as well, as the hadith shows us below,

 

حَدَّثَنَا مُعَاوِيَةُ بْنُ عَمْرٍو حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو إِسْحَاقَ عَنِ الْأَوْزَاعِيِّ حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو عَمَّارٍ حَدَّثَنِي جَارٌ لِجَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ قَالَ قَدِمْتُ مِنْ سَفَرٍ فَجَاءَنِي جَابِرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يُسَلِّمُ عَلَيَّ فَجَعَلْتُ أُحَدِّثُهُ عَنْ افْتِرَاقِ النَّاسِ وَمَا أَحْدَثُوا فَجَعَلَ جَابِرٌ يَبْكِي ثُمَّ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ إِنَّ النَّاسَ دَخَلُوا فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ أَفْوَاجًا وَسَيَخْرُجُونَ مِنْهُ أَفْوَاجًا

 

Jaabir ibn `Abdullah t was weeping and he said, “I heard the Messenger r saying, ‘Truly, people will enter the religion of Allah in great crowds and they will leave from it in great crowds.’ ”[58]

 

TYPES OF TAKFIR AND UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE

 

The main reason for the Khawaarij going astray and exaggerating in the matters of takfir was a direct result of their blending the rules of takfir together, thus it was all seen as one and the same. This major mistake must be answered and put straight, so the Ummah might not fall into confusion when we see these matters. In this section, we will lay out the different types of takfir related to our topic[59], starting with the first one,

 

1.      TAKFIR UN-NASS (charge of kufr based on a decisive text). This is when there is a decisive text and after applying the rules of takfir, one levels the charge of takfir. An example would be where Allah I has said,

 

تبت يدا أبي لهب و تب

“The hands of Abu Lahab are destroyed and may he be destroyed.”[60]

 

It is clear from this text that Allah I has thus labeled Abu Lahab, one of the uncles of the Prophet r who hated Islam, without doubt to be a kaafir. If someone should come and say that Abu Lahab is not a kaafir, but a Muslim, then the charge of kufr can be leveled against this person. However, the impediments and rules surrounding takfir should be examined before coming to a ruling on the individual. It may be that he is a new Muslim and he doesn’t know this information. It may be he is insane or something else of this nature. But the takfir should be given if the person can not be excused from the rules of takfir and no one can deny that. This is not a takfir between two people, but it is between the person and Allah I since Allah I called Abu Lahab by name.

 

2.      TAKFIR ALIJTIHAAD (charge of kufr based on individual judgement). This is when a particular verse or set of verses taken from the Qur’an state an action to be kufr. An example of this would be when Allah I said in his book,

و من لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافرون

 

“Whoever doesn’t rule by what Allah sent down, then they are kaafirun (unbelievers).”[61]

 

This kufr is studied and understood. It is after all the verses related to the subject are studied carefully that one could come to a judgement and say, ‘Any ruler today who is not judging by what Allah sent down is a kaafir.’  This type of takfir people could differ on because of some rules and regulations in regard to it. It could also have to do with the fact that there are different grades of kufr with regard to the topic. One grade of kufr is that one who occasionally does not judge by what Allah I sent down has not become a kaafir, but he has indeed done a major sin, a kufr duna kufr (a kufr less than kufr) as reported in an authentic narration by Ibn `Abbas t. However, the one who makes a practice of it all the time has most certainly done kufr and is a kaafir according to another relation of Ibn `Abbas t and that of ibn Mas`ud t.

 

3.      TAKFIR ALMU`AYYIN (charge of kufr where the individual is actually named). The manifestation of this charge of kufr is where an actual person is named with the title of kufr. However, before this can happen, the takfir of ijtihaad must be exercised. If we relate this to the same topic mentioned above regarding ruling by what Allah I sent down, namely being, “Whoever does not judge by what Allah sent down, then he is a kaafir,” the judgement in ijtihaad will of course remain the same. If the ijtihaad has been made, and it is found that major kufr is involved, the next thing is that it must be double- checked to make sure that the verses from the Qur’an and the charge of kufr fits the person.

 

He (the one making the charge of takfir) then next applies it to a person, for example by saying, “President Q or King Y is a kaafir because of this verse or these verses, due to the fact that he is ruling by other than what Allah sent down.” Due to the fact that mu`ayyin in takfir is arrived at by ijtihaad, there could be some difference in it between one scholar and another. An example would be ta’wil (interpretation), where one scholar might pardon the individual under examination from takfir due to lack of knowledge and understanding of the evidence on the part of the one under suspicion. Some will not pardon him, like in the case of the debate between Imaam Shaafi`ii رحمه الله and Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله, where Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله labeled the one who leaves prayer in totality to be a kaafir. With this kind of takfir, others may act on it and us it, but sometimes others might not exercise it and pardon the one in question.

THE MANNERS OF AHL US-SUNNA WALJAMA`AH WHEN DIFFERING IN TAKFIR

 

In recent years, we have observed that there have been debates in which one side, who would not allow any disagreement, labeled the other side to be kuffar. Thus every time there was any talk of the subject, debate either ended in takfir or in great fitnah. This same chronic disease is exactly what the Khawaarij suffered from. If any time of difference arose regarding a principle, rather than observing the proper manners, they immediately class that person as a kaafir. We would like to present the proper way of debate and disagreement according to the principles of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah. The disagreement that we have chosen shall be the debate that occurred between Imaam al`Allamah Muhammad ibn Idris ash-Shaafi`ii رحمه الله  and  the Imaam of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمه الله

 

The debate centered around the judgement pending on the person that has left the prayer in totality. This is one of history’s great debates. In the debate, Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله took the hadith narrated in his Musnad from the Prophet r that, “Whoever leaves the prayer is a kaafir.” Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله also quoted a similar hadith in which The Prophet r stated, “Whoever leaves the prayer, he is a mushrik (pagan).” This is what led him to the conclusion that the person who leaves the prayer in totality is a kaafir. In answer to Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمه الله, Imaam Muhammad ibn Idris ash-Shaafi`ii رحمه الله said that if he is a kaafir, how does he come back to Islam? Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله said that he should retake his shahaadah (testimony of faith for a Muslim). Imaam Shaafi`ii رحمه الله pointed out that the person already is pronouncing the shahaada and he never denied, which means that he is therefore still a Muslim. Once the debate ended, Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله stayed convinced and steadfast on his opinion and Shaafi`ii رحمه الله on his. [62] This debate has essential things that we can learn from it, such as

 

1.      The presentation of the strongest evidence is what takes precedence when it comes to matching the reality of the truth. The strongest evidence should always be followed, irrespective of the personality in question. Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله had the strongest evidence in this regard; therefore his ruling is the closest to the truth of the matter.

 

2.    Even though they disagreed and their disagreement was in such a serious matter, never once did Ahmad رحمه الله say that because Shaafi`ii رحمه الله disagreed with his evidence that he was kaafir. Neither did Shaafi`ii رحمه الله say that Ahmad رحمه الله was a kaafir for disagreeing with the evidences that he put forward. Why is this so important? This is precisely the issue that we are faced with by some today, that when you disagree with them in a matter, they go to misusing verses from the Qur’an. It may be that they have some evidence, even though it is general. If you then disagree with the evidence that the person is quoting, they class you as kaafir.

 

3.    Imaam Shaafi`ii رحمه الله didn’t call Imaam ibn Hanbal رحمه الله Khawaarij because he insisted on his takfir. Neither did Ahmad رحمه الله label Shaafi`ii رحمه الله  Murji’a[63], or say that because you didn’t call a kaafir a kaafir, then you’re a kaafir. We can learn a great lesson from the wisdom exercised in this debate. This is because the takfir that was being applied was the takfir of ijtihaad of a person. The hukm is general but the conclusion and ijtihaad could vary from person to person due to the conditions and the evidence in front of the one applying the judgement.

 

4.    The takfir of ijtihaad had been looked at by both of them. However, Imaam Shaafi`ii رحمه اللهdid not feel that the verdict listed in the Qur’an fit the person who left the prayer, where Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله felt that it most certainly did. This here shows that two people may disagree in the takfir of ijtihaad, but that does not mean that some one must be Murji’a, Khawaarij, deviant or kaafir due to the disagreement. It simply means that someone either doesn’t have enough evidence to come to the same ruling as the other. Or it may be the case that one person has more knowledge than the other in a particular matter, which causes him to insist on a particular ruling. This was the case with Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله, who had the most evidence and understood the reality more than Imaam Shaafi`ii رحمه الله, even though Imaam Shaafi`ii رحمه الله is the teacher of Imaam ibn Hanbal رحمه الله.

 

5.      Disagreement in an area under debate should not cause people to accuse others of being Murji’a, Khawaarij or kuffar, for the principles being executed are the way of Ahl us-Sunna when it comes to derivation of evidence. Thus someone who is using a general ayah has no right to exclude someone who disputes with him from the religion of Islam just because of what he THINKS is kufr. No! This is the way of the Khawaarij. Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah, when it comes to the ways of takfir alMu`ayyin and the takfir of ijtihaad, looks at all evidence, and if there is a difference, then it is examined. That which is the most correct is implemented. However, in the takfir of an-Nass, they will never disagree, as the text is clear on that Jews and Christians are kuffar, Abu Lahab is a kaafir and so on. There is no ijtihaad in this area and difference of opinion is not allowed when Allah I has stated someone by name and explicitly in the Qur’an to be a kaafir. Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah would never differ in this area.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MISUNDERSTANDINGS OF THE KHAWAARIJ REGARDING THE CHARACTERISTICS OF IMAAN

 

Equally important is the Khawaarij understanding of the characteristics of Imaan, since this is how they reach many of their erroneous and far fetched conclusions about Islamic concepts. The Khawaarij have committed an innovation in regards to some of the essential aspects concerning Imaan that simply must be answered.

 

Furthermore, an explanation is required as to where the Khawaarij and their followers made a mistake and were excessive in takfir and exaggerated in it greatly. They didn’t just make takfir on the ruler alone, for from the starting point they understood the words of Allah I, ‘And whoever does not judge by what Allah sent down, then they are Kaafirun.’ On the contrary, they made takfir on Muslims and those who are Muslim established by the ijmaa` of the Muslims for their partisanship to those rulers. And it was taken to mean to them that this partisanship is without the rejection of the evil (munkar) with two of the three outward signs of imaan, the hand and the tongue.

 

This is not true. The outward absence of rejection of the evil (munkar) with the hand and tongue, being two of the three dimensions of imaan, does not mean someone is aligned to those who have replaced the Shari`a of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. The reason why is because truly, not every one is able to stop the evil (munkar) with his tongue and hand. On the contrary, the Prophet r has made it waajib (compulsory) that rejecting the munkar is in accordance with the ability, just as in the hadith of Abu Sa`id where the Prophet r said,

 

“Whoever of you sees a munkar (evil), let him change it with his hand. And if he can not, let him change it with his tongue. And if he can not, let him hate it in his heart, and that is the weakest form of Imaan.”[64]

 

 The Prophet r named the heart’s denial of that which is judged to be unpleasing and following kufr and disobedience, he r named it jihaad, just as in the hadith of `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud w. The Prophet r said,

 

“There was not from any prophet risen up in an Ummah before me, except that he from his Ummah Hawaariyun (disciples) and Ashaab (companions) that took by his Sunnah and obeyed by his order. Then there appeared after them those who said what they did not do and those who did what they were not ordered. Thus the one who makes jihaad against them with his hand, he is a mu’min (believer). And the one who makes jihaad against them with his tongue, he is a mu’min (believer) and the one who makes jihaad against them with his heart, then he is a mu’min (believer). And there is nothing beyond that from the Imaan of a mustard seed.”[65]

 

Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله, in explanation of Surat ut-Tawba, ayah 31, narrated a hadith of `Adi ibn Abi Haatim and said,

 

 “Those who took their priests and rabbis as lords whenever they obeyed them in making halaal what Allah has made haraam and making haraam what Allah has made halaal. As for this matter, it has two matters,

 

ONE:  That they know that they are replacing the din of Allah, then they follow them (the rulers) in their replacement and they have firm conviction of making halaal what Allah has made haraam and making haraam what Allah has made halaal in obedience to their rulers with their knowledge that they are leaving off the din of the Messenger, then this is kufr.

 

And Allah and His Messenger made it shirk, even if  they did not pray to them (the rulers) or prostrate to them (the rulers). So whoever follows other than it with opposition to the din with his knowledge, then he has opposed the din (comprehensive religion of Islam) and has firm conviction of what he said of that besides what Allah and His Messenger said, he is a mushrik (pagan) like them.

TWO: That they have firm conviction and belief of that the haraam was made halaal and the halaal was made haraam. But they obeyed them in disobedience to Allah, just as the Muslim does what he does from disobedience which he has firm conviction that it is disobedience. Then these, they have the judgement like them from the people of sins. [66]

 

From this example we are able to see that the Khawaarij have made a dangerous mistake. Their mistake is that they have blended the rulings on the ruler (haakim) and the ruled (mahkum) into one entity. This is precisely the reason why you have groups like the alMukaffira and the Jama`at ut-Takfir who not only declare the rulers to be kuffar, but the whole population of the country, and in some bizarre cases, children as well are declared kuffar. All of these things stem from a people who are not able to classify exactly what imaan is because they do not have its proper understanding.

 

So it should be important in this place to classify exactly what is Imaan. The correct position on what Imaan is can be taken from the statement of Ibn `Abbas w, the cousin of the Prophet r. Ibn `Abbas w has said that Imaan is composed of three dimensions, those being heart, tongue and limbs.[67] This is opposed to the thinking that Imaan can have some characteristics subtracted from it or added to it. For more information on this topic, please see the tape set, What is Imaan.

ANSWERING THE WORDS OF IBN ABBAS: ‘KUFR DUNA KUFR’[68]

 

 

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HUKM SHAR`II, FATWA AND JUDGEMENT

الفارق بين الحكم الشرعي والفتوى والقضاء

 

In delicate situations such as these, we must be sure about what we are talking about. To clarify any situation, we must know what is Hukm Shar`ii, Fatwa and judgement. Only after comprehending these can we put the matter in front of us in perspective.

                                   

                              Our first matter to be explained is Hukm Shar`ii.  Hukm Shar`ii is what Allah I said about a certain situation that was given judgement on in His Shari`a (i.e. ‘and whoever does not judge by what Allah sent down…’). With regard to the Fatwa, it is applying the rule of Allah I about a certain situation for a particular incident that matches the context of that rule (i.e. a scholar would say, ‘I hereby rule that judging by other than the Shari`a is forbidden’).

 

For instance, we cannot use the rule that fluids, which are toxic, are Haraam (forbidden) when we talk about water, vinegar or things like this because these are Halaal (lawful) substances. In other words, we cannot forbid people from drinking water because wine is haraam and alcohol is forbidden to drink, for these two matters are not related. It is not enough to know what Allah said about the matter to issue the fatwa. Thus the fatwa is relating the correct verses to the reality of the situation. It is of equal importance to know the reality of the situation at hand. The Fatwa is only correct if the Hukm Shar`ii is correct and the reality is correct. So when Ibn `Abbas t said to the people of his time, ‘it is not the kufr that you are thinking of,’ that statement could not be used in another time, unless the same conditions and similarities took place and were preserved.

 

The judgement goes a bit further than this. The judgement is making sure the Hukm Shar`ii is correct, the reality that surrounds it is sound and correct and that the judgement actually happened and took place. The judgement is in purity acting on behalf of the authority and making sure that the fatwa is executed in its entirety (an example would be to punish those judging by other than the Shari`a with the death penalty or whatever penalty was found to be the fitting judgement).

                             

It then becomes compulsory to act it (the judgement) out. This is what the work of a Qaadi (judge) is. Once he is sure that the Hukm Shar`ii is correct and the reality around it is correct, he endorses the reality and makes sure the judgement takes place. The Fatwa goes one step ahead of Hukm Shar`ii and the judgement goes one step ahead of the Fatwa, which is application.

The reason for the introduction to the words of the sahaabi Ibn `Abbas t, is that Ibn `Abbas t had the words of the Qur’an memorised. He then had the reality around him, and he used his senses to issue his famous words ‘a kufr of a lesser kufr,’ which is unfortunately used and abused out of its context in a totally different environment, situation and a different purpose as well. To focus more on the word ‘kufr of a lesser kufr,’ we have to understand the actual word that was said and narrated by different scholars of tafsir (interpretation) and ahaadith.

 

 It was actually said, “It is actually not the kufr that you think it is.” And from this it shows that this word was said in the context of a conversation. That conversation took place between him and the Khawaarij of his time. So his verdict was given according to what they had in mind. This is specifically for them and their time. We can understand from this verse that he still called it a kufr and he did not change the word, make it allowable, or say that it was permissible, but he still called it a kufr. He also took in mind the reality of the time, and what was happening with regard to the leaders of his time. So he was answering the doubts of these people according to their situation, i.e. he used the Hukm Shar`ii, who ever does not rule by Allah I, indeed they are the kuffar, but the reality did not match that kind of kufr.

 

Now focusing more on the reality of his time, we can easily find the following:

 

1. That the first leader the Khawaarij called a kaafir was granted paradise by the Prophet r i.e. `Ali t.

 

2. Mu`awiya t, the second one who was labeled kaafir, was given important jobs by the khulafaa' (the Muslim rulers who succeeded the Prophet r) and used to write down the revelation of the Qur’an from the Prophet r.. 

 

3. Both parties of Sahaaba t that disagreed had enmity amongst themselves and at the same time they had more knowledge than the ignorant people of their time, the Khawaarij, but they did not call one another kuffar (unbelievers). 

 

4. Abu Musa alAsh`ari t, one of the earlier Sahaaba t of the Prophet r showed no signs of wilful disobedience when acting as a representative for `Ali t. He was actually deceived. So how is it that one deceived could be classified as a kaafir for things that are out of his control?!!

 

5. `Amr ibn al`As t was a great helper of the Prophet r in the campaigns against the kuffar and was also spoken of with high regard by the Prophet r. It can be said of him as well that he was not willing trying to deceive or lead anyone astray. He was seeking the best for the Muslims, as all the other members in this situation were.

 

6. That the Shari`a was 100% intact and applied.

 

SO if any rule by other than Allah U took place, it is down to the individual that did it, out of his ignorance or corruption, which is what matters most. So these are the realities that are behind the words of Ibn `Abbas t, that it was a fatwa for his time. Now, Ibn `Abbas t himself made another statement in a general situation with regard to those not ruling by Allah’s I law, where he w did say, ‘It is enough kufr.’[69] When Ibn `Abbas w made the statement that ‘it is enough kufr,’ this cannot be taken to mean a minor kufr. When he says enough, it can only be taken as a major kufr.

 

That means exactly what Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah has said in regards to those ruling by other than what Allah U sent down, changing the Shari`a or legislating something, this is the major kufr (kufr alAkbar). If they fail to apply it SOME instances, that could be taken as a kufr of a lesser kufr (kufr al Asghar). This methodology is because the way of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah is to use all the verses available before judgement, while the bid`ii people only use the verses that suit them. Supporting this fact, no one will ever find a statement from Ibn `Abbas w or anybody with regard to legislation (tashrii`) saying it is a ‘shirk of a lesser shirk,’ as Allah said in the Qur’an,

 

أم لهم شركآءا شرعوا لهم من الدين ما لم يأذن به الله و لو لا كلمة الفصل لقضى  بينهم  و إن الظالمين لهم عذاب اليم

“Or do they have partners for them legislating a religion that Allah did not give permission for. Had it not been for the word of decision and decree, the matter between them would have been judged. And truly for the oppressors is a torturous punishment.”[70]

 

We are very surprised that those calling themselves salafis who use the word ‘kufr duna kufr’ from Ibn `Abbas w and they don’t use the other saying condemning ruling by other than what Allah U sent down. In addition to what Ibn `Abbas w has said in this regard, Ibn Mas`ud w was asked regarding this same issue. When he was asked by some people, “What is reshwa (a bribe)?” He replied, “It is suht (ill-gotten wealth).” They then said, “No, we mean in judgement and ruling.” He said, “This is the very kufr.”[71]

 

AlHaafiz ibn Kathir رحمه الله, known for his decisive manner in regards to tafsir, did not give a ruling in the beginning of his tafsir on these verses. Why didn’t Ibn Kathirرحمه الله comment about this ayah and he only left the comments of the Sahaaba and those other than himself? The reality which people don’t focus on is that Ibn Kathir رحمه الله was a knowledgeable faqih[72] and most important about these scholars is that they look comprehensively at the reality of their existing time, then they put their conclusion. This is exactly what Imaam Ibn Kathir رحمه الله did. The Imaam doesn’t just start from Surat ul Ma’ida, ayaat 44, 45 and 47, but he begins the subject of ruling and judgements starting from ayah number 40 and finishing on ayah number 50.

 

 After all of the relevant evidences have been narrated, then Shaikh Ibn Kathir رحمه الله inserts his opinion, adding to it in the reality of his time, which was the time period of the Mongols, who were ruling by the book of Genghis Khan. These circumstances are occurring in our time now. Usually the faqih, before he reaches his verdict and gives his ruling on a matter, he puts all the relevant ayaat and hadith regarding the matter in question. Next come the statements and rulings of the Sahaaba, then the opinion of other scholars as well. Finally, at the end of the subject he gives his verdict after all the evidence has been presented.

 

Ibn Kathir’s رحمه الله ruling is most serious indeed. We are able to appreciate its importance as we can read,

 

“And as for the royal policies, which the Tartars were ruled by, they were taken from their king, Genghis Khan, who laid down for them Al Yaasiq, which is a book made up of laws which he took from different shari`as. It is from Judaism, Christianity, the Islamic religion and others. Also it contains many laws which he took from his sheer thinking and desire. Thus, it became within his sons a followed law to which they have been giving precedence over ruling by the Book of Allah and the Sunna of His Messenger r. Whoever does this is a kaafir that must be fought until he returns to the rule of Allah and His Messenger. So no one other than He (Allah) should rule in few nor many matters.”[73]

 

Also add what Ibn Kathir رحمه الله said in his book alBidaaya wan-Nihaaya,

 

“Thus whoever left the wise Shari`a sent upon Muhammad ibn `Abdullah, the Seal of the Prophets and makes judgements to other than it from the abrogated shari`as has become a kaafir. So how is it for the one who makes judgment to al Yaasiq and makes it superiour over it (the Islamic Shari`a)? Whoever did that, then he has already become a kaafir by consensus (ijma`) of the Muslims.”[74]

 

 Shaikh ul Islam, Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله, said of this matter,

 

“The second form of the Taghut[75] is the tyrannical judge who makes changes to the judgements of Allah. The evidence for that is the statement of Allah, Ta`ala,

 

ألم تر إلى الذين يزعمون أنهم آمنوا بما أنزل إليك و ما أنزل من قبلك يريدون أن يتحكموا إلى الطاغوت و قد أمروا أن يكفروا به و يريد الشيطان أن يضلهم ضلالاً بعداً

 

“Have you not seen those who claim that they believe in what came down to you and what came down before you. They seek that they make judgement to the Taghut (false legislators) and they were already ordered to disbelieve in it. And Shaitan seeks to lead them far, far astray.”[76]

 

“The third form of the Taghut[77] is the one who makes judgement to other than what Allah sent down. And the evidence for this is the words of the Exalted One,

‘And whoever does not judge by what Allah sent down, they are Kaafirun.’[78]”[79]

 

CONCLUSION

 

So it is proven that those who fail to rule by Allah’s I Shari`a are kuffar, not only those who replace the Shari`a. It is actually a major kufr just to fail to rule by it.  But those who actually introduce their own shari`a, they are doing a kufr above a kufr (major kufr stacked on top of major kufr). And those who impose their own shari`a upon people by the sword, they are doing a kufr above a kufr above a kufr.

 

And those who are making all of these kufr allowable, they are doing the most kufr of all and they have distorted the religion of Allah I completely, for they called to what is kufr and labeled it allowable. It is then very clear that these people who are killing Muslims because of their own Shari`a, they are a kind of Khawaarij.

 

 

 

 

MODERN KHAWAARIJ IN THE WORLD TODAY

 

THE MODERN KHAWAARIJ

 

            Now the question that must be asked now is “Who are the modern Khawaarij today?” “Where are they and how can we know of them so that we may beware of their dangerous activities and ideas?” For the safety of the Ummah, these groups and peoples must be identified. This is for all the Muslims to know to keep away from them, whether it be the books of their scholars, or be it the places where they make their da`awa and the organisations that they associate with to spread their message.

 

THE APPEARANCE OF THE KHAWAARIJ IN EGYPT

 

The first appearance of the modern Khawaarij occurred in Egypt in a place called Asyut.

 

That group was called at-Takfir walHijrah[80], formed by a man by the name of Shukri Ahmad Mustafa Abdul `Al. He was born in Upper Egypt in Asyut, first of June in the year 1942. He was arrested and jailed in one of the militant cells of Ikhwan alMuslimin in 1965. When he was in prison, he was inspired by one of Shaikh Sayyid Qutb’s رحمه الله books, entitled Ma`arif at-Tariq  (Milestones). However, he went overboard with his ideas and he exaggerated some of the meanings of what was in that good book. At the end he was separated from the movement of Sayyid Qutb رحمه الله as well as the followers of Sayyid Qutb رحمه الله.

 

He singled himself out with a new idea, which was to emigrate and reside in an area in Yemen called the ‘Mountains and Valleys of Yemen’. His idea was to establish the Islamic state there and form a Muslim army which would start conquering and putting the Muslim countries in control again. It was also his aim to unify all the Islamic countries. He managed somehow to convince his two nephews and recruited them into his movement. Having been recruited and affected by him, they started to hit their mother, and then she prevented them from seeing him.

 

He then began to start taking his da`awa out of Asyut to other places in Egypt like Bani Swaif, Kafr Shaikh and Al Mina. He started by asking people to boycott the government and the society. He issued a fatwa that the imaams of all the masaajid in Egypt are kuffar and that no good Muslim can pray behind them. He also issued in his fataawa that all masajid in cooperation with the government are masaajid of harm and may not be used for worship. Meanwhile he was asking for some just reasons and demands, such as the necessity to apply the Shari`a. He laid the responsibility of the application of the Shari`a not only on the ruler, but those being ruled as well. He claimed that they could change the situation whenever they wanted to change it. He then categorised the people into three categories,

 

a-     A kaafir and/or a mushrik (pagan).

 

b- A crude, or a rogue person who does not know much about   religion and is happy to stay in his group.

 

c- The one who is Muslim just by name.

 

To him the last category is the person who is not able to know about the religion due to his ignorance. Then, he made a programme for each one of these categories and he denounced anyone who left his group for any other group as one who had committed kufr of apostasy and betrayal. And he himself was to decide that verdict as the amir. His methodology was to work in four axes,

 

1. The idea, which is to establish the Shari`a of Allah I on the earth according to the Qur’an and the Sunna.

 

2. To have soldiers for this methodology which are members of his group or whoever joins them.

 

3.      The manners of executing this methodology are based on taking a side from the society, and making in between them an Islamic society within the society. Then, as said before, immigrate to non-urban areas in the mountains of Yemen and to use it as a base for unifying the Islamic Ummah.

 

4. To use whatever utility and means that Allah I allows them, and to put their trust in Allah I and His words.[81]

 

What is more amazing, is that he and his group used to think that a big war would happen between the Soviet Union and the United States which would result in the end of technology. Afterwards, there would be plenty of iron and steel around to make swords, shields, arrows and stabbing weapons as fighting goes back into prehistoric times.

 

They then sent pupils to Saudi Arabia and other areas to spread the new school of thought and to be sponsored. There was a private incident that happened to Shukri, and three of his followers that was to make the gap between him and mainstream Islam permanent. He had ordered three of his followers to leave the university so he could give them a mission. When they refused, he classified them as kuffar and apostates. As a result, he sent the father of one of the wives of these men to take his daughter from her husband, as the man he made takfir on had become a kaafir in his estimation.

 

As the gap between them and the Muslim community was increasing by the hour, they also made another rule, which was to stop judging a person as a Muslim initially until he goes through a test Thus until tested, every one claiming Islam was judged to be kaafir first. Then, upon passing the test, they (the new members) also have to give him bai`a (oath of allegiance due to a Muslim ruler by his subject). He classed those who are not willing to emigrate or step aside from the society as Mushrikun (pagans), using the two sound hadiths that whoever resides with the Mushrikun, then he is like them. The government then arrested some of these members because they were attacking members of the public and some government forces.

 

The major reason for their destruction happened when they kidnapped and killed Shaikh Muhammad Hassan Adh-Dhahabi [82]رحمه الله They came dressed as police officers and arrested him, and shot at his police guards as well.[83]

 

It was at this time that the government arrested most of the group, including Shukri Mustafa, who was sent to a military court, which decided to execute him and three of his followers. When the government sent for his followers inside the prison to change their thinking, the result of this long debate had six consequences,

 

1.                             Some of them repented from the idea of the Khawaarij and decided to lead their lives without any struggle at all.

 

2.                              Others left that kind of ideology and decided to join other militant groups who are from Ahl us-Sunna walJama’ah, such as Jihaad groups.

 

3.                              Government agents unfortunately recruited some followers.

 

4.                              And those who decided to stick with the same idea worked very hard in the da`awa. They worked against the government by recruiting members into their group from the general society.

 

5.                              They even succeeded in sending many of them to join the sincere brothers in Afghanistan. Thus began a new and serious chapter of the idea of takfir and Khawaarij from the land of Jihaad in Afghanistan as it became, from the eighties till early nineties, the capital of jihaad and the major sign of Muslim struggle in our time.

 

6.                              But there is still an even greater sign of the Khawaarij movement in our time. That sign is the Sa`udi monarchy, which is completely Khawaarij. We ask that you read the two stories later presented in this article and ask yourself who is the real Khawaarij.

 

THE TRIAL OF SHUKRI MUSTAFA `ABDUL `AL

 

The following are extracts taken from the leader of the Jama`at ulMuslimin (Takfir walHijrah) in a trial in Egypt in 1977. As he is the founder of the Khawaarij group of our new time, his statements will give us the words of the Khawaarij, as they speak on their own behalf. This candid look is both unprecedented and chilling.[84] 

 

On the 6^th of January 1977, the court asked,

 

 “Could you clarify or elaborate on your ideology, doctrine, your group as well as with regard to isolating yourselves from the population?”

 

Shukri Ahmad Mustafa spoke up, 

 

“I object that I am here without my group and Jama`ah attending the hearing. I ask to be given enough time to explain without interruption, and I will summarise without distorting the message. I will introduce my defenses with the following,

 

 “I have written the doctrine or manhaj of the jama`ah in 4,000 pages, which the military courts and the informants captured. I would like to have them back. They include,

 

1.      A big book entitled alIsraar (‘the Secret Meaning’), which includes detailed answers for those who claim that they are from Ahl us-Sunna. This book was taken from me by the intelligence agency in 1973.

 

2.      Also another book which talks about the manners of judging people and societies. The book is called at-Tabayyun (to be evident; to distinguish)[85] It is 200 pages and was seized by the intelligence agency in 1973.

 

3.      It is a book about the introduction to Usul ulfiqh (Principles of Jurisprudence), which also answers the doubts and slander with regard to our ideas. It is 500 pages and is not completed yet.

 

4.      A short, concise introduction to make ijtihaad[86] compulsory and taqlid (blind following) haraam. This is not complete yet.

 

5.      A book, which speaks about the positive side of Islam, contradictions of Islam, which is 150 pages. There are other books that I did not write myself, but we do believe in them. For example, a work by Mr. Maher `Abdul `Aziz and a book called alHukm, which includes a subject regarding ruling by what Allah has revealed.

 

This is from `Ala ud-Din `Ali Rida. It explains our political and Shari`a stand for our Jama`ah and our stance for international affairs. He has another book as well entitled alHijrah, and his most important of his books is alKhilaafa (Islamic system of governance), which is for me.[87] This book talks about the ultimate goal of our Muslim jama`ah from the Shari`a point of view. It also explains the methodology to reach such an aim. This is the first point of the introduction that I wanted to make in order to explain my jama`ah from the Islamic point of view.

 

 “The second point in my introduction to explain our doctrine is that I am in my speech talking about Islam and my speech could reach other authorities. I want to declare that no authority could possibly have the capability to denounce our doctrine. This is because we have put conditions on ourselves that our evidence should always be decisive in meaning and not have any other meaning that could be over ruled or superseded.[88]

 

“More often, when we give a lot of evidence, we ask our opponents to give us only one evidence with a sound, correct chain to Allah I that is decisive in its meaning to over rule our evidence. And it is just not possible that they could do that. I still declare now that it is beyond the capacity of all of our opponents to bring one, single, sound evidence to answer or denounce our doctrine. And that challenge from us is sound and trustworthy until the Day of Judgement.[89]

 

“With regards to al`itizaal[90], I consider it just a fruit produced from the whole Islamic doctrine and the heavenly patterned order from the entire heavenly pattern of orders. Therefore, I can not start answering the points of al`itizaal or its similar practical ideas until I explain thoroughly my own Islamic doctrine from its roots with the relevant evidence.”

 

The court interfered and said,

 

“You may say what you want, but try to be brief.”

 

Shukri continued and said,

 

“I will start now by giving the idea about the topics I will talk about and to be specific, I will speak of three important topics,

 

1.      I will talk about the compulsory aspect to gain knowledge and guidance from Allah alone and to disregard, ignore and denounce anything called knowledge and it is not knowledge that is related to Allah I in its chain.

2.      Whatever I am going to talk about after it is made clear that the knowledge and guidance is from Allah himself, then we will talk about its content and implication of its meaning.

3.      Then we shall talk about the ultimate Islamic objectives and the means to reach it according to Shari`a. And we will have to answer some doubts once we talk about these three things….[91]

 

The court asks him,

 

“Do you believe that the Qur’an is with absolute certainty with narration from Allah?”

 

Shukri answered,

 

“I believe that the Qur’an is with absolute certainty from the practical point of view which implies glorifying it and worshipping Allah according to its orders and it becomes forbidden to change any letter in it. It is incumbent to use it as the source of judgement. And this is what we have been ordered.”

 

The court asks another question,

 

“Do you mean then that the Qur’an is not with absolute certainty from the theoretical point of view?”

 

Shukri said,

“Yes, and without any conservation. I want to say that Allah did not send down the Qur’an so it would become an idol or a shape, but it has been revealed so people could work according to it. And here I have said that we should work with it and it is haraam to disobey its orders. I have also declared that it is in the highest degree of absolute certainty that mankind has known from a practical viewpoint…”[92]

Shukri carried on speaking and then said,

 

“The people who have stopped and made it unlawful for Muslims to do ijtihaad and to gather evidence from the three sources, even if it differs from the rulings of the four great imaams, it looks like they wanted to protect the madhaahib (schools of thought) by closing the doors of ijtihaad. But did they really want that? In fact no, they have closed the door to ijtihaad for the whole of the Ummah and opened it for themselves alone. For the scholars of their regime in any time do their own fataawa (Islamic ruling done by a scholar based on the Qur’an and the Sunna) according to the madhhab (school of thought) of the ruler, no matter what the madhhab.

 

They propagate sins and for haraam to become halaal in the name of Islam. If I wanted to, I would have given many examples from the past and present where no one could disagree with us in regard to it. This is because it became a physical fact in our life, such as making usury, adultery, ruling by other than the Shari`a of Allah, obscenities and even toxic drink halaal in the name of Islam.

 

The court asked,

 

“How did zina (unlawful sexual intercourse outside the union of marriage), riba (interest collected on money or commodities), khamr (all types of intoxicants and things that cover the senses i.e. marijuana, cigarettes, alcohol, speed, etc.) and all else become halaal in the name of Islam?”

Shukri said,

 

“The profits given by banks has been made halaal by Shaikh alAzhar Muhammad Shaltut. There is no doubt that Shaikh Shaltut, when he gave this fatwa knew that people would think that it was Islamic. Also, what Shaikh Muhammad Matuwaali Sha`raawi said in the masjid of alAzhar with regard to this point specifically, which makes usury halaal in the name of Islam, he said, ‘Profits which the government banks are using now is allowable.’

 

Shukri carries on,

 

“With regards to the khamr, we have seen Shaikh Sa`d Jalaal allowing the people to drink beer and the Messenger r said, ‘Some people from my Ummah will make khamr halaal by calling it by another name.’[93]

 

“With regard to zina, the government has made it halaal through its man made laws. Many of the people who are even talking on behalf of Islam allow free mixing, and I consider this the first essential introduction to zina. And the Messenger r said, ‘The eye makes zina, the ear makes zina, the hand makes zina.’[94] We are still seeing nowadays that the imams of masaajid are chanting in the name of Islam of what Allah has made haraam. This includes things, such as equalising women and men, the people of the book with Muslims, contraception and other things which have proven to be absolutely haraam in the Islamic Shari`a. All of this is being used by Shaikhs in the name of Islam.”[95]

 

He continued similarly on this subject until the court asked him the following,

 
“After this introduction, it is required from you now to answer the first question with regard to your isolating and segregating yourself and your jama`ah from the community.”

 

Shukri answered,

“I want to speak about three important points which presents our ideology,

 

1.      I have finished the first one already in regards to rejecting any evidence that is not related to Allah, alhamdulillah

 

2.      To explain the rule of Islam and its Shari`a discipline.

 

The court finished on this day and reconvened the next day, on the seventh of November 1977.

 

The court, upon reconvening the next day, said to him,

 

“Continue what we started yesterday.”

 

Shukri Ahmad Mustafa spoke the following,

 

“As the topic that I am speaking about is directly related to Islam and its discipline, I need to talk a little bit about some topics with regard to Usul ulfiqh. Firstly, the issue of Names. I believe that calling a thing any name is the basics of any dealing or conception. When we say, ‘Someone has come’ or, ‘We took the car,’ this implies something that exists in people.

 

If the word ‘car’ does not mean the normal known car, then it doesn’t really represent my expression or what I meant. You can not understand or deal with this concept with practical usage. We therefore start by saying that Allah U has made Adam and his progeny as khala’if (rulers) of earth, and he taught him all the names. And he was the only qualified creature to control earth, from other creatures, including angels. And the names that Adam learned, which was his obligation as the highest creation were without any excuses were the true and authentic names of things.

 

“That obligation was to become the Khalifa (the Islamic ruler accepted by Allah) on earth. It means He (Allah I) taught him about worship, Islam, obedience, belief, kufr, revelation and he taught him all the names relevant to his khilaafa. And obviously without a doubt, these names were in agreement with its reality. This means, if He I said, ‘a Muslim,’ that should present a proper, true Muslim that has the attributes of a real Muslim, which Allah taught to Adam u. When He I said, ‘this is good, bad, ugly or pretty’, these names should represent the actual goodness, badness, evilness, prettiness or ugliness.

 

It is therefore clear that calling a thing by its Shari`a name is the Manaat (evidence and sign) for guidance. Once these names are put for different realities, then the balance will be interrupted completely and therefore you will call the evil good, the ugly as pretty and so on. Allah I also taught the angels this wisdom when he taught them about the names of things, that they said, quotes ayah. However, in order to go directly to the point of this introduction, I would like then to point out that there have been a lot of changes that have occurred in the pages of Islamic fiqh. It is now including strange expressions which collide with the Shari`a names and expressions…

 

“We gave an example yesterday with the word ‘faasiq.’  Let’s look at when they say in the books of fiqh ‘a faasiq Muslim.’ The word ‘faasiq’ and ‘fisq’ mean rebellious and rebellion, but in the Shari`a, it means ‘kaafir and kufr.’ Also, regarding the word ‘zaalim’, they say ‘zaalim Muslim.’ Although, it has been proven differently in the Shari`a, when Allah I says, in 

 

والكافرون هم الظالمون

 

‘The kaafirun (unbelievers) are zaalimun (oppressors).’[96] [97]

He then added,

 

“We have mentioned also yesterday about the word ta’wil (interpretation). It was used in fiqh as it is to take the apparent meaning to something other than the apparent meaning. But in the Shari`a, it means whatever the matter will come to in the end eventually.[98] [99] This issue is huge because of its danger, therefore if someone brought a name other than what was brought in the Shari`a, we can only tell him,

 

إن هي إلا أسماء سميتموها أنتم و آباؤكم ما أنزل الله بها من سلطان

 

‘They are but names that you and your fathers used to call on without authority from what Allah sent down.’[100]

 

“This is what I am saying as of now. There is no authority against me, except with the Shari`a discipline. For example, we want to put the right and correct meaning of the word masaajid of Allah. This is from what Allah taught Adam from the names. Even with the previous evidence, you might find a sign on the masjid that does not comply with the description of a masjid that is described by Allah. Yet, it is called a masjid. If someone says to me, ‘Why don’t you pray in such a masjid,’ he has to prove to me that the masjid belongs to Allah according to the Shari`a Allah explained. Allah I said,

 

و إن المساجد لله فلا تدعوا مع الله أحداً

 

‘And truly, the Masaajid are for Allah, so do not call on anything with Allah at all.’[101]

 

“That proves that the masaajid have to be purely for Allah. Only the name of Allah should be mentioned and glorified in such a place. Not His name and the name of His enemies, nor to grace His religion as well as other religions. It should be only His religion. Allah I said,

 

في بيوت أذن الله أن ترفع و يذكر فيها أسماء يسبح له فيها بالغدو والآصال رجال

 

‘In houses that Allah permits, these houses be elevated and Allah’s name be mentioned inside for His glory’.[102]

 

“And that also means that masaajid should be particularly for Allah, as He says that He should be glorified therein. Allah also said,

 

لمسجد أسس على التقوى من أول يوم أحق أن تقوى فيه

 

‘The Masjid which is built according to taqwa (piety and fear for Allah), from the first day, has more right upon you to worship in it.’[103]

 

“We therefore knew that the masjid, which is clear, that is being built for other than taqwa (fear and piety for Allah) and worship alone, it does not have the right to have worship conducted in it. Allah tells us,

 

أجعلتم سقاية الحاج و عمارة المسجد الحرام كمن آمن بالله و اليوم الآخر و جهاد في سبيل الله لا يستوي عند الله و الله لا يهدي القوم الظالمين

 

‘Do you consider equal those who give drink to the thirsty and those residing at the Sacred Masjid to those who believe in Allah and the Hereafter and perform jihaad. They are not equal in the sight of Allah. And Allah does not guide the oppressive ones.’[104]

 

“In this ayah, it explains that it is a great thing to give drink to the thirsty pilgrims and to stay in the best masjid on earth. However, it is not enough reason to be used for wasting the correct belief in Allah, the Hereafter and for jihaad to take place and for Allah’s word to be higher. Therefore, there is no great deal in building masaajid, even if it is the Sacred Masjid itself. Allah as said,

 

إنما يعمر مساجد الله من آمن بالله و اليوم الآخر و أقام الصلاة و آتى الزكاة

 

‘Only those should reside in the masaajid of Allah that are the believers in Allah, the Hereafter and performers of prayer’[105]

 

“These are the conditions for residing and being in charge in the masjid of Allah I. Allah has mentioned,

ما كان للمشركين أن يعمر مساجد الله شاهدين إلى أنفسهم بالكفر

 

‘It is not for the Mushrikun (pagans) to reside and control the masjid of Allah, when they witness on themselves that they are kuffar (unbelievers).’[106]

 

Next Shukri said, 

 

“This verse indicates that anybody doing an action that exposes himself, it is called proof for a clear kufr. He has witnessed kufr on himself with a practical witness. It is not lawful for him to guard or reside in the masaajid of Allah, even if he respects them. The Mushrikun (pagans) in the time of the Messenger r used to honour the Sacred Masjid as the residual of the religion of Ibrahim. But Allah said about them, 

 

و ما لهم ألا يعذبهم الله و هم يصدون عن المسجد الحرام و ما كانوا أولياءه إن أولياءه إلا المتقون

 

‘What about them that Allah does not torture them and they are hindering the Sacred Masjid and are not its protectors and allies. Only those who are pious and have fear are the protectors and supporters of it.’[107]

 

Shukri then said,

 

“I use and explain this verse with regard to the definition of the masaajid of Allah to prove with Shari`a meaning with regard to the masaajid of Allah that people are not applying the criterion of the masaajid mentioned in the Qur’an. And when these masaajid are not in agreement with the criterion of a masjid, then it is not allowed to call it a masjid of Allah.

 

“Therefore, according to what has been explained, no one has authority on me or a sound proof to question me due to my abandoning of these masaajid. In fact, my evidence against you is compelling and too apparent, because the Messenger r said,

 

جعلت لي الأرض مسجداً  و طهوراً

 

‘The whole of the earth has been made for me as a masjid, in a state of purification’.[108]

 

Allah has also said,

 

و لله الشرق والمغرب فأينما تولوا فثم وجه الله إن الله واسع عليم

 

‘And to Allah belong the east and the west. Then wherever you turn your face, there is the face of Allah. Truly, Allah is all encompassing in knowledge.’[109]

 

The court put forward another inquiry,

“And what is your opinion regarding the late Shaikh Adh-Dhahabi?[110] Was he a Muslim or a kaafir?”

Shukri answered,

 

“He was a kaafir.”

 

The court asked him for his evidence and Shukri Mustafa spoke up,

 

“My evidence is that he worked in the religious endowments department and was a minister and a director for the nobility of the masaajid of daraar (harm). He also made an oath in swearing by other than the judgement of Allah in taking an oath upon entering the office of ministry. Thus it is not possible that it could be a case of ignorance of the incumbency of judgement by what Allah sent down for after the state and the community regarding Islam.”[111]

 

        

THE FORMATION OF OTHER KHAWAARIJ GROUPS

 

The formation of other Khawaarij groups across the Muslim world had four types of consequences,

 

1-     Some of the takfir groups immigrated to Yemen.

 

2-     Whilst other members went from Egypt and Yemen to Pakistan and Afghanistan, some of these people were actually repenting after long discussions in prison.

 

3-     Some, however became government agents.

 

4-     Others were not takfir extremist minded before, but took their ideology from working with the governments. They inserted this ideology through casual circles and in collective homes, like Afghanistan and so on. They also had to speak to the Mujaahidin to train to go to war.

 

Through these long discussions whilst waiting to go into Afghanistan, they managed to convert many people to these ideas. This is how the takfir and Khawaarij started in Pakistan by ideas that went undisputed. It is noticeable that they were non-structured as a group or jama`ah but the ideology was structured. Then there were certain books they were recommended to  read and understand in a certain way.

 

It was then that those who came to these ideas were convinced to leave the fighting in Afghanistan as it was not from their point of view Islamically sound. They had to survive financially, so they needed to search for grants and funding which was meant to be for the people who fought on the front line, not themselves, so they had to lie about the reality in order to get the money. That meant that the Ummah had now found a new type of Khawaarij, different from the ancient Khawaarij in the way that they lie without fear and need to and they don’t have any manners or even worship like the ancient Khawaarij used to have manners and worship.

 

Khawaarij narrated some of the trustworthy books of hadith because they were not known to lie. The reason why these new Khawaarij did not go to fight in Afghanistan is that they used to see the governments ruling by other than the Shari`a as original kuffar, but not as kaafir murtadd. They asserted that these rulers never had any relation with Islam in the first place. [112]

Meanwhile, they used to see the Mujaahidin as apostates because they didn’t call the rulers original kuffar and because of this sickness in the Khawaarij thinking, it became compulsory to fight the Mujaahidin before they fought the government as original kuffar. Obviously that makes them eligible for the hadith of the Prophet r that they fight the believers and leave alone the people of shirk.

 

Furthermore, they went one step further and called Shaikh `Abdullah `Azzaam رحمه الله a kaafir and an apostate as well as Usaamah bin Laadin and many other leaders of the jihaad movements. It is important to note that every bid`a needs ignorance and arrogance to survive, but the Khawaarij bid`a especially needs in addition to that qaswa (hard hearts and brutality) and ill feeling and hatred (ghill). It is certainly possible that believers sometimes can have ghill, but not qaswa. This attribute of qaswa is for the kuffar and bid`ii people alone.

 

Unfortunately, some Mujaahidin were injured on the battlefield by indulging in these discussions while healing their wounded. It shows that these bid`aat can do nothing but poison your mind.  For those saying that the Khawaarij were just in the time of the Prophet r and `Ali t fought them and finished them, we narrate the saying of `Ali ibn Abi Taalib t, when he overcame the Khawaarij. The people came to congratulate him that Allah I had finished them with his hands. He said,

 

“No, by Allah, they are still in the backs and spines of men and the wombs of women. And when are alive, they hardly leave anyone alone.”[113]

 

Shaikh ulIslam Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله, when he was commenting about the Khawaarij he said,

 

“And this sign which the Messenger of Allah mentioned would be the sign for the first people of the Khawaarij. But they are not the only people that are spoken of in these verses because He r mentioned in other hadith that they would still keep coming until the age of the Dajjal.

 

“It is concluded by the Muslims that the Khawaarij are not the only Khawaarij mentioned in the battles with `Ali in the battle of Nahraawaan.”[114]

 

The question that remains now is how are we to deal with the Khawaarij according to the rulings of the scholars of Islam and the Ummah?

 

THE KHAWAARIJ IN THE WEST

 

As of yet, there has been no appearance of the Khawaarij in the West. There has been however, an alarming rise in the takfiri thinking in recent years. These people who are takfiri in idea have not graduated to full Khawaarij yet, because they have not begun to kill for their idea as of yet. All that is happening now is just talk. This is what separates those who are takfiri from the authentic Khawaarij. We should also note that every Khawaarij is takfiri but not every takfiri is Khawaarij.

 

We should bear in mind the statement of the Prophet r in which he said, “They will kill Muslims and leave alone the pagans.” He never said “they will just make takfir on the Muslims and leave the pagans.”  The  pseudo-Khawaarij in the West are just takfiris as of yet and have not yet begun to spill Muslim blood for their beliefs.

 

Thus the Khawaarij and their takfiri counterparts can be filed into four categories, 

 

1.      The Khawaarij that are in power, who must be fought and never be allowed to take any part in authority over Muslims in matters of honour, blood or wealth. These will be explained further in the book in the chapter entitled, The Ruling Khawaarij.

 

2.      The Khawaarij fighting apostate and bid`ii regimes like the Shi`ii and so on. These Khawaarij we leave to fight these regimes and hopes that they will destroy each other. But the moment they go for Muslim blood, they should be fought without doubt. The Muslims should also be warned of the Khawaarij activities and prepare themselves in the event that they have to battle with them. These people will be covered in more detail in the chapter, What about the Khawaarij of Algeria?

 

3.       The Khawaarij who are actually fighting the Muslims, who should be fought relentlessly until they come to the truth or they are eliminated.

 

4.      Next are the takfiris, who haven’t graduated fully to the class of Khawaarij. They are just referring to others as kuffar, with incorrect ideas and understandings of Qur’anic ayaat and in some cases giving out secret teachings.

 

Unfortunately, we have people of category four above today, who are using this same ideology today, with regard to takfir to build their own empire. Those that become part of the empire initially are greeted with good cheer and welcome. But as time goes on, their absolute loyalty is demanded, and any attempt to leave the group is seen as going into apostasy or at the very least hypocrisy.

 

Sometimes the takfiris start dirty wars against dissenters or deserters of their group by asking their wife/husband to leave their spouse because they refuse to listen to the new holy shaikh. In some cases the takfiri leadership does the separation without even the consent of the person whom they classed as a dissident. The major sign of the leaders of such groups is that they are not people of action. So while they declare rulers by other than Allah U kuffar, or grave worshippers kuffar, they are not willing to change that evil with their hand.

 

Those among them that speak of Tawhid alHaakimiyyah will not do what it takes to atleast try to implement the Haakimiyyah, i.e. training, going for jihaad, giving the benefit of doubt to those that do jihaad, etc. Most often, they accuse the people doing jihaad of deviancy so people don’t follow their action, as well as fostering jealousy towards the people of jihaad. They defame the character of the Mujaahidin, so that people will not follow them or ask them for advice. It is very clear for a Muslim with a clear conscience that if you believe in something, you should do something about it, not just says something about it. Instead of becoming the Islamic armed group they become the Islamic-slandering group.

 

These takfiri leaders have become machine guns of takfir. The followers of these groups like the social aspect more than learning the religion of Allah U.   

 

HOW SHOULD WE DEAL WITH THE KHAWAARIJ?

 

Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله, with regard to a helpless or weak individual of the Khawaarij and the Rawaafidah (Twelver Shi`a), said,

 

“It is narrated on the authority of `Ali and `Umar as well as the consensus of the scholars of Islam that these two individuals should also be killed.

 

“Some scholars argue about the individual that is not fighting. However, they all agree that to kill them in a group as a group protecting themselves with the sword is allowed. This is because fighting is more general than killing.” [115]

 

 

THE RISE OF KHAWAARIJ THINKING IN THE SUBCONTINENT AND ALGERIA

 

Originally from Pakistan, some of these Khawaarij are still living there and continuing their practice. The Khawaarij in Pakistan can be divided into three categories.

 

1 those who came back to their origins which is the Muslim lands to continue their mission in larger populations.

 

2        A large group that packed up and went to Algeria to introduce this distorted ideology for the first time after centuries.

3        Those still living in Pakistan and continuing the practice of their ideology. These also fell into the hands of government agents and are being used as pawns in a conspiracy to put people off from jihaad and Islam altogether.

 

WHAT OF THE KHAWAARIJ IN ALGERIA?

 

A research was put together with regards to the Khawaarij of Algeria. Strangely enough the same Jama`ah that conducted the research was called Khawaarij by many of the Ummah. In an attempt to defend its aims and to defend itself, it reduced its ideology to booklet form.

 

It was later to become that this Jama`ah, which started as a Jama`ah of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah fighting the Khawaarij, as well as warning the Ummah from the evil of this group, that they were to renege on their own principles to become one of the most dangerous Khawaarij in this century.

 

The research conducted suggested that this most recent Khawaarij movement came from Pakistan from a group that had direct links with the infamous Jam`aat at-Takfir walHijrah of Egypt. This group went under the name of  alMuwahhidin (The Unitarians for the One God) and received their guidance and the main corpus of their teachings from a shadowy figure known as Dr. Ahmad.

 

Al Muwahhidin started at different Masaajid, pressing the ideology of raising the banner of jihaad against the existing governments from 1989-1990 in a place called Wahraan and bil Abbas in Algeria. Their main ideas centred around constructing and then leading an armed jama`ah to fight the apostate rulership of Algeria.

 

Then soon after, when they were exposed by many of the salafi Mujaahidin and some of the non-Mujaahidin ‘salafis’ they decided to isolate themselves from the masaajid and to call all other masaajid to be masaajid of harm because all the people who were praying inside were Mushrikun (pagans) and kuffar.

 

This harsh and exaggerated verdict was taken from the misunderstood rule that,

 

“Whoever refuses to label a kaafir as a kaafir, then the one who refused is a kaafir.”[116]

 

The Khawaarij in the preliminary stages meant the one who would not label the ruler a kaafir.

 

However, in addition to this they went a step further and they called the leaders of the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) kuffar without calling the followers of the movement kuffar. They then split amongst themselves over the issue, with some of them advocating that they could fight the apostate rulers without calling the FIS leaders or their follower’s kuffar.

 

This proved insufficient to settle the difference between the two-takfir groups, so the next step was to schedule a debate. This debate was held in a masjid called Masjid At-Taqwa in a place called Baab alWaad.

 

After the debate was concluded, the main takfir group that insisted on calling the leaders of the FIS kuffar issued a verdict that those who would not label the FIS kuffar were themselves kuffar and Mushrikun (pagans). They refined themselves and changed their name to the Mothergroup, while the people who split from them called themselves the Supporters of Tawhid.

 

The Mothergroup had most of its members in Afghanistan before these events took place. The leader of the group was a man by the name of Saif alMaghrabi. He then added to his group another Jama`ah from a place called Bal Kur from  Masjid Lakhal. The amir of the later group was Ahmad Hussain and he was in Zirkaji prison while the research regarding the Khawaarij groups in modern times was written.

 

It was said that he repented from the bid`a in takfir and he wrote a paper to answer the Mothergroup Jama`ah while in prison.

 

Another group sprung up from Masjid Salih-uddin alAyyubi under the leadership of Nur-uddin Saddiqi while Abu Aminah headed Baab alWaad. Abu Aminah came from Peshawar and spent more than five years in Afghanistan and when the research was being written he was in prison and he was still upon the `aqidah of the Khawaarij. 

 

All the above Takfir groups in Algeria labeled the Salafi Mujaahidin Mushrikun and kuffar even though these Mujaahidin called the rulers apostates and said democracy was kufr. This was not enough to satiate the appetites of the Takfir groups, as they labeled anyone who refrained from calling the leaders of FIS kuffar to be kuffar as well.

 

In 1991, the mysterious Dr. Ahmad came from Peshawar with a large group and they made major changes in their belief and `aqidah. They abrogated Udhr bilJahl[117] and interpretation (ta`wil, which is unanimously accepted and agreed upon by the Ummah) as impediments of takfir.[118] As a consequence, everyone in Algeria was labeled a kaafir, including those who called democracy kufr and labeled the leaders to be kuffar.

 

In spite of the waves of protest made by members of the Ummah, the general populations were still labeled non-Muslims (kuffar). They next issued a book, written by Dr. Ahmad, called al Hijr ul Jalliya, (‘The clear proofs in the kufr of those that follow the FIS and follow the religion and system of Democracy’). Next another book was issued, written by Nur ud-Din Saddiqi, entitled Kashf uzh-Zhunun `an `aqeedat khairun qarun (‘Revealing the doubts regarding the `aqidah of the first generation’). This last book became the main doctrine of those who spread from the GIA (Armed Islamic Group).

 

 Once things had reached the boiling point, the salafi Mujaahidin did a purge and liberated the masaajid from both these groups and the nationalist groups and called for real jihaad in 1992. After they had been driven from the Masaajid, the takfir groups reunited and met in the same year in Bani Murad Imblada to appoint an amir and decide how they should fight and work.

 

There was then a great struggle between them and the GIA and many debates issued forth from this disturbance. From all of this, we are able to distinguish ten points of the beliefs of the takfir groups in Algeria

 

1.                             They unanimously believe there is no excuse for ignorance or interpretation.

 

2.                             They agreed that anybody doing the slightest shirk is a kaafir, even if he is ignorant or he works according to ta’wil in hadith or he is doing shirk of a lesser shirk. This person is still labeled a kaafir.

 

3.                             They concluded that those who have the slightest shirk, even if born Muslims, their kufr is Asli, not Ridda[119], because they were never classed as Muslim.

 

4.                             The consequence was that they labelled all Muslims as kuffar without any differentiation or reservation.

 

5.                             They classed the believing Mujaahidin doing proper Islam as apostates. This was because they did not label every single person as a kaafir. The Takfir jama`aat then agreed that they have to fight them (the Mujaahidin) first before the Jews and Christians.[120]

 

6.                             What follows from this is that they agreed the blood, money and honour of Muslims is halaal, thus they have taken Muslim women as war booty, had intercourse with them and they leave them[121]

 

7.                             They have decided not to deal with any group who differs with them except on the manner of tuqya.[122]

 

8.                             Anyone who differs with them, they call him a kaafir

 

9.                             They interpret the Qur’an according to their own Madhhab (school of thought), not the actual tafsir on the ayah. Ayaat about kuffar are applied to the letter on Muslims.

 

10. One major difference between the ancient and modern Khawaarij is that the ancient Khawaarij, although they called sinners kuffar, they never put forward the principle that those who differ with them were absolutely kuffar and were never Muslim before.

 

One major similarity between the ancient and the Modern Khawaarij is that the people who used to say that people are originally kuffar unless they prove otherwise were called the Bayhasi Khawaarij.[123]

 

The second similarity is that those who the Khawaarij are ordering to stop without giving a verdict about a person being a Muslim or kaafir, their similarity is to the likeness of the Khawaarij Aqdasi.[124] But what led the GIA to get to this point? What caused them to go from fighting for Islam to fighting for their own desires. The answer to this lies in their very own history, which follows shortly.

 

In regard to the GIA, when they started their struggle, the salafis and the salafi Mujaahidin were supporting them, especially in 1992. However, the roots of the militant Islamic groups in Algeria in general started sometime before. Perhaps the most famous of all of these is the Struggle of Buyali Mustafa, who was a militant man with salafi tendencies and his struggle had been going on since the early 80s. He took his struggle to the mountains and he was avoiding the population to the best of his ability. He was little known to the media but his struggle was known of by the Islamic militant groups, some of whom still feel proud if they find a way to relate themselves to him in some way.

               

After he died, most of his group redistributed themselves among other groups in the general population. The GIA also relates itself to the Buyali movement and it based its movement upon the doctrine of Buyali for quite some time. Things then started to change when more civilians were targeted, more Mujaahidin were executed and the chance for any reform became more and more remote. Rumours abounded until finally, the GIA came forward, showing and telling the world that it had adopted the doctrine of the Khawaarij (through their deeds and their literature in which their deeds were justified). It was proven that they accepted and practiced the doctrine of the Khawaarij, even though they had many battles against the Khawaarij of Algeria in the past. In the end however, they became what they had been combating for so long. Now we shall see how the structure and form of the GIA came into being.

THE HISTORY OF THE GIA FORMATION

 

The GIA formed from a collection of militant groups that all at one time had struggled against the military government of Algeria. Some senior Mujaahidin formed from Buyali’s group and others later followed suit with them. There then appeared scattered groups which were not well known, nor did they have swelling memberships, such as

 

1.     Brother Nasr ud-Din Kuhail رحمه الله and his group, who led a large operation against the court of Bilada. This occurred in 1989.

2.     Brother Qari Abdur-Rahim Garzul رحمه الله, brother Tawfiq Ben Tabish رحمه الله and brother Furtas Ali رحمه الله, who were part of a group that did a series of explosions in 1990. All three of these brothers were later killed رحمهم الله .

3.    A group lead by Muhammad Khair رحمه الله, that was enjoining the right and forbidding the evil, in a place called Kasaba, which was the original capital of Algeria years ago.

4.    Another group enjoining the good and forbidding the evil under the leadership of Brother Ali Zuwabri   رحمه الله[125] in a place called Bufarik in 1991.

5.      Many other very small groups like those mentioned above who joined them, lived in a city called Baraaki

 

All of the above groups united in August of 1991 under the leadership of brother Nur ad-Din Salaamina رحمه الله. When he was killed, in February 1992, Brother Muhammad Aalaal رحمه الله took over. When Brother Muhammad was killed, he was replaced by Abu Adlan Abdul Haqq La`ayaayda.[126] When Abu Adlan took over control of the group, this caused the formation of the core of the GIA, although it didn’t have the name yet. This group then did quite a few difficult operations that annoyed the government and gave them a big say in the jihaad movement in the country. This also forced other groups to reunite and others to join them or to try to unite the other groups into one mass in other areas.

 

Parallel to these groups were others that came together and unified to join the GIA later, such as

 

1.The group of brother `Abdur-Rahmaan Dahhan, known as Abu Sehaan and brother at-Tayyib al Afghani رحمهما الله.

 

2. Brother Mansur Malyaani رحمه الله, who led a group that, did a major campaign against the navel forces in February of 1992.

 

However, after the arrest of brother Malyaani, Brother Ahmad alWud took over operations. In October of 1992, there was a great meeting for most of the militant groups and in this meeting, brother alWud decided to join the group of Abdul Haqq La`ayaayda. From this day, it was called the GIA (Armed Islamic Group). Mr. La`ayaayda became the leader for the GIA and issued a statement which claimed responsibility for large operations all over the country. He then issued the main rule of conduct for the Jama`ah of GIA. From then onwards, the world started to know about the GIA, as the faction began to expand very rapidly and strengthen itself politically.

 

After the arrest of the Amir of the GIA in Morocco, the new amir became Brother `Isa Ibn `Ammar.[127] After the killing of Brother `Isa bin `Ammar in August of 1993, the new amir became brother Ja`far Saif Allah. Brother Saif Allah was killed in 1994 in Ramadan and the leadership was given to Abu Abdullah Ahmad رحمه الله[128]

 

Shaikh Abu `Abdullah Ahmad رحمه الله was famous due to his good manners and character. This subsequently helped to orchestrate the merging of other major groups in Algeria to the GIA, such as the FIS and the Movement for the Islamic State. These new members, upon joining, gave him bai`a, which took place in May of 1994. The agreement was to work under the banner of the GIA and its Salafi belief and action.[129] The Shaikh accepted their bai`a, on the condition that those who went into the democratic way before, such as the FIS, will repent and disbelieve in democracy, and they will carry on according to the Salafi `aqidah from therein. The Shaikh next issued a book that was to become famous in its setting of another regulation for the group to follow. This work was titled, alQawaa’id al Asasiyya Mufliha fi al Jama`ah al Islamiyyah al Musallaha (‘The Successful Rules for the Basis of the GIA’).

 

With the influx of all of these newcomers, different doctrines and ideas were being joined into this group. Subsequently, the group became enormous. The environmental side effects also resulted later in the infiltration of the GIA by government agents and other groups, which also resulted in mass killings within the ranks of the group, separation and a general bad image before it was known that the group was approaching the Khawaarij doctrine.

 

When Shaikh Abu `Abdullah Ahmad  رحمه الله was killed on September 26, 1994, Abu `Abdur-Rahmaan Amin, who became the amir of the GIA, replaced him. But his leadership did not start easy, because previously the FIS had attempted to infiltrate the group in order to later take control of it. One of the ways that they attempted to put this plan into action was by appointing one of their previous leaders, Mahfuz  Abu Khalil, who was brought to power with the help of many newcomers, including Shaikh Muhammad Sa`id.[130] But other senior members of the GIA led a counter offensive against these tactics. One tactic was that they did not let him (Mahfuz) stay in power for even three days before they started to make Islamic courts for him.  On one hand, the previous FIS members were excluded, along with their leadership being shunned, while on the other hand appointing Abu `Abdur-Rahmaan Amin رحمه الله and the Shura being selected from senior GIA members. They also made a video tape about the court trial of one of the senior members of the FIS who joined the GIA (his name was Ibrahim Lamara). This man confessed to a conspiracy of trying to take over the GIA and further added that he joined the GIA only to take control of the Islamic militants. He explained that once this was done, they would help the government move for democracy again. He repented for the second time at the end of the tape and he said that he believes he should be killed according to Islamic law because he tricked the Mujaahidin. He was then executed by the GIA after the case was adjourned, but they prayed over him and they said that they killed him after he repented as a punishment for his work, not as an apostate.[131]

 

The GIA went through long internal wars between its members and the members of the FIS who did not join the movement. This is because there were still some members of the FIS insisting on the democratic path. GIA was also fighting the hardcore Khawaarij, known as Ahl ut-Tawhid, in addition to the other groups that had split from them for different reasons, not to mention their constant struggle against the government.

 

It seems at this time, due to Abu `Abdur-Rahmsan Amin رحمه الله ’s iron policy of the GIA, that many people were put off from joining or carrying on giving their support to this movement. Many Mujaahidin have claimed that they left the GIA due to fear for their own lives and the harsh punishment applied on them. There was also the work of the government agents spreading rumours that the GIA was a branch of the government.

 

The government armed many of the civilians in the villages to resist the work of the GIA and to intimidate and harass anyone that used to support them before. Such an action fueled the situation even further and put the armed civilians at war with the Islamic groups, particularly the GIA. The intended end result was that step by step, this government trap managed to create a war between the GIA and the general population of Algeria. For the first time the civilians were carrying weapons and doing the work for the government. Many members of the GIA families were tortured, kidnapped and even killed.

 

They were held in prison until the GIA members turned themselves in or agreed to work for the government. In an act of retaliation, the GIA started to do retaliatory measures on the spies, government supporters, informants, etc. It seems, unfortunately, that they at one point began to include some family members in their retaliation as well as the families of the perpetrators. But it had not yet been proven clearly through their literature or statements, which came out into the world with ambiguous meanings, and words that could be interpreted many different ways.

 

In the time of the leadership of Abu `Abdur-Rahmaan Amin رحمه الله, he issued his famous book, Hidaayat ur-Rabb il Alamin (“The guidance of the Lord of Creation”), which contained a lot of ambiguous and general terms which needed some serious explanation to clarify where it was leading. It also gave the enemies of the GIA and jihaad a lot of material to distort jihaad and the image of the GIA.

 

Due to the hard work of Abu `Abdur-Rahmaan رحمه الله in conducting a full scale war against the government of Algeria and against France, this was a motive for the Algerian people to overlook many of the shortcomings of the GIA. He was the first Islamic military leader to take the war to the streets of France with a bombing campaign inside France, which included the hijacking of an airplane from Algeria to France.[132]

 

Furthermore, he issued a statement banning the buying of any vehicles from France, to become effective immediately. He made a solemn pledge that he would burn any vehicle coming from France. He even interrupted the French machinery programme in Algeria by hijacking and killing their priests who were involved in taking and changing Muslims to Christians.[133] [134] One of his famous major operations against the Algerian government was their freeing of 900 prisoners from high security prison in a town called Batna, from a prison called Lambase. Because of this heroic move, a lot of people joined the GIA soon afterwards.

 

But after the killing of Muhammad Sa`id رحمه الله, and some conflict, rumours began to circulate from the GIA to the members and supporters outside Algeria. They tried to intensify or initiate a war against the West in their own land. Many of their supporters justified to themselves to pull out and use the rumours as an excuse to denounce the GIA and to distance themselves from it. Some had done so even in the newspapers and used the media to distance themselves further.

 

However, there was no valid Islamic reason given at the time and those who were at one time serious supporters of the GIA promised to give the evidence of their conclusion in a short time after giving their statements renouncing the GIA. Such a promise was never carried out. It wasn’t until the GIA themselves announced their belief and claimed responsibility for terrible un-Islamic actions that it was proven that they had become full-blown Khawaarij. But this took place after the death of Abu `Abdur-Rahmaan Amin رحمه الله in an ambush by some of those who had separated from him.

 

After Abu `Abdur-Rahmaan Amin رحمه الله was killed, the amir for the GIA became Antar Zuwabri. He was one of those on Amin’s  Shura panel in addition to being one of the youngest members. His brother, `Ali, was an early leader of a militant Islamic group before the GIA. They have managed to hold onto power until now (September 1999) and he (Antar) is still in control of what is left of the GIA. Perhaps the most devastating problem that happened to the GIA was after Antar issued a statement[135] on the 8^th of September 1997 in which they stated that the Algerian people were kuffar, apostates and hypocrites because they did not support the GIA against the government. Furthermore, they accepted and claimed responsibility for killing, slaughtering, massacring, burning and even kidnapping and raping women of their opponents and doing sabi[136] to the women of their opponents. They classed all of that as sacrificing for the cause of Allah and a sign of sincere worship.

 

The statement also smelled of bad language not usually used by Muslims, in addition to the use of obscenities. It did not mention the killing of the children or the heavy massacre that was taking place at the time. Hundreds of people were massacred and maimed, most of them civilians, a great many being women and children as well. No one at the time believed that this could be the work of any Islamic group, even the anti-Muslims themselves, they have all agreed that this is the work of the Algerian government, trying to put people off from Islam and Islamic ideas. That statement also raised the question about why on earth this group would claim such a horrible thing while everyone was pointing their fingers at the government, as most of these massacres were occurring not far from military barracks. The massacres also befell those people who used to give the biggest help and support to the GIA Mujaahidin and many of the masses were recruited from these areas. Such a scenario gave credence to the rumours that people were circulating. Those rumours were that Abu `Abdullah Ahmad and the government infiltrated the GIA in Sept 1994.

Since then, a major rift developed between members of the GIA inside and outside Algeria, both waving a stick of anger not just at the GIA, but the Mujaahidin in general, giving the secular government a lot of excuses to carry on in their policy against any Islamic movements. It was unfortunately a stab in the back from the GIA to the Muslim Ummah in general and the Mujaahidin in Algeria and worldwide in particular. That was the last of the GIA statements, and no one even wanted to distribute that last statement[137]

 

Ironically, this statement came shortly after two booklets issued, one issued by the GIA entitled as-Saif ulBattar (‘The Sharp Edged Sword’), the other being issued by supporters outside of Algeria called the Ansar group, entitled Talmi` ulAnsar. These booklets both explained and cleared every single ambiguity and rumour about the belief and action of the GIA, which resulted in many of the people that had split from them again came back to the GIA. There was no `aqidah or belief mistake in these two booklets and there was nothing that could be criticised at all. What happened in reality away from the academic studies was a different matter that the Muslim Ummah did not experience before, that being that people would write down a manhaj and then work against it. However, although the GIA are still the strongest militant group in Algeria against the government, many of its previous supporters inside and out have turned against it and are even willing to fight it. The reason for this eagerness and readiness to fight the GIA is because it has become as dangerous as the government against the religion, safety and honour of the general and common Muslims. May Allah guide them back to the straight path or finish them up on the hands of good and sincere believers.

 

It should be duly noted and taken into account that these dangerous groups now in existence will continue to be strong and get stronger. And as they are targeting people and their properties, getting richer and richer, they are also fulfilling the desires of their members by taking women as treasure, as they are making the mountains more and more inhabited, they can survive even longer than the government.

 

The only way they can be defeated is when the proper Sunni Mujaahidin are able to be self-sufficient and financed and also look after their members and brace themselves for long battles against the government as well as these groups. The true Mujaahidin have to find equivalent resources to fill atleast the minimum requirement of a proper mujaahid to make him last longer, by targeting the proper enemies of Islam[138], taking the booty from them and satisfying the financial, sexual and social need for a mujaahid to survive long-term battle. May Allah I help the true Mujaahidin.   

PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH THE GIA

 

The experience of the distributors of the Ansaar magazine (known as Usraat ulAnsar) in general and others in particular with the GIA is very important indeed to shed light on the controversy of this group. `Usraat ulAnsar carefully monitored the groups progress and development from Ahl us-Sunna to what looks to be a very serious, dangerous bid`ii group.

 

The support of the Ansar group started prior to Abu `Abdullah Ahmad’s leadership in 1993 in Europe in general and England in particular, mainly sponsored by Algerian brothers, some of who came from Afghanistan. Prior to al Ansaar magazine, there was another magazine in Pakistan called ash-Shahaadah to support the Jihaad in Algeria, which was helped by the Egyptian jihaad group. After many of the supporters in Europe took over the moral and media support by issuing magazines from France, they were able to give the world the news about jihaad and the reasons for it. At once the French government cracked down on them heavily to block news from being heard. They were then forced to move to other countries, which allowed more freedom of speech, such as England, Sweden and others.  It was then when al Ansaar magazine was issued, mainly to support the GIA, on a weekly basis.

 

Al Ansaar group was fought viciously by other Algerian groups in Europe who were secularist or pro Democracy, such as FIS, with all of its factions. The Ansaar continued to support the GIA until the killing of Shaikh Muhammad Sa`id. Some of the writers of al Ansaar demanded more explanation from the GIA regarding these events while others continued their support. Then, after a while, some of the supporters decided to pull out and to stop giving support to the GIA by issuing statements in the media distancing themselves from the GIA. The dissenters said that they would give Islamic reasons in due course, a promise that never materialised.

 

Such an unjustified action added to the split that took place between the supporters of the GIA in Europe and elsewhere. It was seen as giving in to the rumours regarding the `aqidah of the GIA without evidence. Ironically, in the past, those who had supported the GIA with all their might asked others in doubt to give the GIA the benefit of the doubt. They further advised leaving the rumours and allegations made against them to be set aside and to support the group unless other evidence was to be presented that would warrant otherwise. It was a scandal, Islamically, when they went against their own methodology of giving the benefit of the doubt by pulling away and distancing themselves from the GIA. This had far-reaching consequences that sent an earthquake of instability among the adherents to the GIA and the group’s aims.

 

This worked beautifully for the enemies of Islam who were searching for a doorway or any angle to help them. It is well known that it is a sunnah of the enemies of Islam in general to spread rumours against the Mujaahidin. This is in hopes that many people will leave the jihaad principles and the path of jihaad, only to seek reform through other means that are un-Islamic, like Democracy, Socialism, etc. Immediately following the killing of Shaikh Muhammad Sa`id and other members in the group, rumours about what was taking place in the ranks of the Mujaahidin were rampant. The Islamic analogy for such an incident had two possible outcomes.

 

1.      The rumours circulated against the GIA were correct and the people who they executed were killed wrongly in oppression. Under these circumstances, it would mean that the leadership were oppressors and even faasiqun (rebellious sinners), killing some of their members (to consolidate power) without any proper Islamic justification.

 

2.      These are only rumours, and the GIA did have some Islamic justifications, such as what was given to protect the unity of the group and the main principles of jihaad away from nationalism and other infiltration.[139]

If the first scenario is correct, then they have killed in oppression to seize power. But even if this was the case, it was still wrong Islamically to pull from the bai`a and to cease supporting them and this is the unanimous verdict of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah. Even if an Imaam of jihaad is a faasiq, who does major sins like adultery, drinking, etc, he should be advised to stop his bad action, but never to go against him if he is doing jihaad. The nearest example of this is Hajjaaj Ibn Yusuf ath-Thaqafi, who killed tens of thousands for his throne. He was still supported for his jihaad against India and other kuffar by the sahaaba and the tabi`iin. Now, using Hajjaaj’s case with the scenario in front of us, it is concluded that it was then haraam, and near to bid`a to denounce the GIA group or the amir at the time for such given reasons.[140]

Obviously, if the other scenario was proven, then the rumours against them were wrong and they came to their conclusions through correct ijtihaad[141]. That means that pulling out from the GIA at that time was even more unlawful as it was not proven that they were Khawaarij yet. In fact, the books that they wrote after these incidents, which were previously mentioned, were in complete harmony with the way of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah to the letter.

 

After understanding this, it then became compulsory for any just person or group to preserve the way of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah with alWala walBara (Loving and Hating for the sake of Allah) and continue to support the GIA. In addition to this, those responsible were to throw back and crush the hopes for kuffar to split jihaad by spreading doubts. The problem was however, that the aftermath of this incident was not followed by support of the jihaad in Algeria.  Usraat ulAnsaar waited nearly eight months for a reply from those who had withdrew support from the jihaad movement in Algeria. After all this time, there was still no answer or evidence given for withdrawal from the movement. When after repeated attempts to iron out differences with the dissenters, `Usraat ulAnsar continued to issue the Ansaar paper. This also involved ignoring some of the authors who disregarded our request to prove their position Islamically regarding their dissent. Meanwhile, the staff of `Usraat ulAnsar contacted and asked the GIA to correct the ambiguities which were published in their book Hidaayat ur-Rabb ulAlamin (‘The Guidance of the Lord of Creation’) and other literature. That way there would be no gray area that anyone could exploit in their `aqidah and methodology.

 

Once a clearer picture was presented, they would then be able to defend themselves against any rumours about their belief or their attitude. They responded by sending us as-Saif ulBattaar (‘The Gleaming, Sharp Sword’) to revise it. After it was revised, its mistakes corrected and some ambiguous points within its pages were cleared as well, it was published and there were no critical comments to it.

 

In this small work, they expressed their sympathy to the Algerian population and promised sincerely to be their guardians and to protect their religion, honour and properties. They even announced that they do not class every member of the army and the police as a kaafir, but they class them as a group of kufr who need to be removed from power for Islam to shine. They also apologised for any person or child who had been killed in the process of defending Islam and they made it clear that these innocent people had never been a target and will never be targeted.

THE GIA REVEAL THE TRUTH OF THEIR `AQIDAH

 

Three months after the release of the book, as-Saif ulBattaar, the military wing of the FIS joined the national Algerian army. The leader of the FIS military wing started negotiating with the government about peace treaties between the FIS and the government, which coincided with mass killing and massacring in many villages and lightly populated areas. Some of this included the killing of some children, which appeared to be the work of the government. It was then necessary to ask the GIA to issue statements explaining to the world who was behind the massacres and invite the old Mujaahidin to join them. Soon the only alternative after the FIS was for one to join the GIA.

 

`Usraat ulAnsaar Group again tried to make contact with the GIA to ask them regarding dates for the operations they claimed to have done against this military government. Strangely enough, these so-called operations were dateless and it looked as if some of these mythical operations were claimed previously. It appeared they were fed up with their own supporters, even those outside Algeria. They then were to issue a final statement so chilling, `Usraat ulAnsaar were unsure if this had been the same group that they had known before. Dated August 9, 1997, issue number 52 (the issue actually reached `Usraat ulAnsaar three weeks after its release), the GIA boldly came forward and exposed their real `aqidah and claimed responsibility for the massacring, kidnapping and taking sabaya in general without any specifics. They maintained complete silence regarding the killing of children, which took place in many villages and other urban areas. But the worst of all was yet to come. For the first time, since the genesis of the GIA, they accused the Algerian people of being kuffar, apostates and hypocrites for not supporting them in their struggle against the government. Their vulgarity and abusive language in the letter was a delight for everyone opposed to jihaad. For `Usraat ulAnsaar, there was a mixture grief and sadness among the ranks that this could be the Islamic end of one of the most terrifying group to the kuffar this century, but now to end up being Genghis Khan versus the Muslims. On the other hand, there was some relief that Allah I exposed them through their arrogance and ignorance in a way that there could be no uncertainty after it. To the Ummah in general and to Usraat ulAnsar in particular, it was an evil stab in the back.

 

However, Usraat ulAnsaar felt a pressing need to issue the statement, which was classed at that time as shooting ourselves in the head. This also gave the enemies of jihaad a gun that they had never dreamed of having, ready pointed at us and loaded.  But the group published the GIA statement anyway, as they felt duty bound to protect the truth and the principles of jihaad. It was decided also to contact them, to clear some points, such as who was responsible for the killing of the children. Another question that needed answering was if what they issued was their statements and words, as the possibility that it might be propaganda from only a segment of people in the jama`ah. Or it could have easily been that the government sent such a statement on behalf of the Mujaahidin to trick the Muslims and split up the jihaad movements

 

Unfortunately, after establishing contact with them through a mutual acquaintance, they confirmed that the statement was indeed from them and that they meant every word contained therein. The GIA contact over the phone was next asked why the jama`ah didn’t issue the news of the massacre at the same time the news about all the fighting was being issued. The answer was that he himself did not know and that the person responsible for their media did not know.

 

The second question Usraat ulAnsaar asked him was who is responsible for the killing of the children, as it was not mentioned in the statement they issued. The contact answered in sadness that he did not know but will try to clarify. The final question posed to them was why is it this statement suddenly goes against every book they issued since their existence with regard to their belief, action and attitude towards the Muslim populations. The contact requested Usraat ulAnsaar to have good faith on them and that all of this would be explained soon.

 

All over Algeria and outside of Algeria, things were boiling. People split amongst themselves in a very hot atmosphere. Death threats were given to the supporters of the GIA as well as from the supporters. There were many meetings and battles in Finsbury Park Masjid, understandably against people who thought that we were part of the conspiracy. Others blamed us for publishing such an evil statement, which caused all this chaos. It was hard for those present in Finsbury Park Masjid to justify to any shortsighted person that the truth has to be published, even if it is against personal interests. The most important thing to remember is that the principle of jihaad is to defend the truth.

 

In the beginning of the rumours circulating against the GIA, some demanded that Usraat ulAnsaar renounce the GIA straight away and not wait for an explanation. But the question was, would the GIA stop the massacring and the killing until they were able to give the explanation for their actions, or would they continue? Such a question was horrific and the Ansaar group had to contact them immediately to ask them such a question. Upon contact being established, the representative’s answer came polite but poisonous. The representative told `Usraat ulAnsaar that he could not guarantee anything, as he is only as spokesman and he still does not have the answers. After this conversation, it became clear that the speaker on the phone became a spokesman for those who do not want to speak. Usraat ulAnsaar realised that there was now nothing left but to fulfill the obligation of the Messenger r, that once it is proven that any group of people are doing the Khawaarij action, the fighting is compulsory for those who can to stop them. The hadith we add in the research are those who kill or get killed by them.

 

A statement from Usraat ulAnsaar was then issued immediately after the conversation with the GIA, denouncing them.  This refutation was published in Arabic and English newspapers, in which the GIA were exposed as Khawaarij, who changed from their own doctrine. After this statement, death threats were made against Usraat ulAnsaar, not to mention the attendants at Finsbury Park Masjid. An ‘I told you so’ attitude was given from those who had dissented from the GIA in the earlier period. However, even those who blamed the Ansar group for not denouncing the GIA in the first place can be divided into two categories,

 

1.      People who don’t know the manners of Islam in joining or leaving a group. This causes them to do things emotionally.

 

2.    Those who know the manner of leaving and joining a group but they yield to media pressure and personal benefit.

 

In addition to this, knowledgeable people have challenged anyone who could prove that the GIA was Khawaarij before their infamous statement 52 was published.[142]

 

LAST STATEMENT REGARDING THE KHAWAARIJ OF ALGERIA

 

Although this is bad news, we had to keep the manhaj of Ahl us-Sunnah so that when we supported the group, it was crystal clear it deserved to be supported. And likewise, when it had to be clear we had to denounce them and fight them, it had to be crystal clear that that was the case.

 

Unfortunately, there were many groups and individuals supporting them in the beginning because of the advice of their Shaikhs or other than purely Islamic matters. When they denounced them, it was before the evidence was produced and was made clear the GIA were Khawaarij. Again they denounced them because of their Shaikhs and/or the media. We hope that we learn a lesson not to put the verses of the Qur’an second to the words of the media and the Shaikhs.

 

It was recommended by them then and still today that the Mujaahidin fight the GIA as well as the secular government of Algeria until the whole of the religion and the Shari`a is for Allah. The only experience the Ummah learned from this sad turn of events is that there is a new kind of Khawaarij, different from the previous ones, who can lie and believe their lies. It is not clear when exactly the GIA leaders changed from Sunni to Khawaarij. One thing is certain, and it’s that it didn’t happen in the time of Abu `Abdullah رحمه الله or the leaders before him. Without statement 52, which grieved Usraat to publish, that matter would perhaps have stayed a mystery until now. 

 

We then also have to strengthen the point that joining the group, which is claiming to fight in the cause of Allah I, must follow the manners of Islam. Also, denouncing or leaving a group that is claiming to fight in the cause of Allah U must also follow certain manners. We can not leave what is clear only to go to and stick to what is doubtful.[143] Whatever it is they owe their own people, the greatest debt is a deep apology and reasonable explanation for their actions. It very well may take a long time for the people to ever trust them again. You can see with the number of youths leaving Algeria and going to the West after participating in jihaad, you can see the damage done and the mistrust between the simple hearted mujaahid and the arrogant leaders of some groups. This is especially serious in the wake of the FIS recently dissolving its army and handing over the weapons to the military. We see them now, hugging the abusers of the Shari`a. It was as if all along the FIS was in the wrong and had not pledged to defend the Shari`a until the last drop of blood. The tyrants are now rejoicing and gloating as they won this part of the battle and have the luxury of forcing people to compromise their beliefs, but fortunately this is not the whole story nor the end of jihaad.   

 May Allah I guide the GIA back to the straight path or finish them on the hands of the pious believers. And O Allah I, help and strengthen with honour our Mujaahidin.

 

 

 

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE RULING KHAWAARIJ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHAT LEGITIMACY DO TODAY’S RULERS POSSESS?

 

It is understood in the Shari`a law that the ruler and the people ruled are under contract. In Islam, the contract must have parties to witness it and act in it, and in this case, the three parties are the ruler, the ruled and Allah Himself. The contract must also have a subject, meaning the terms that have been agreed upon. The subject of this contract is the Shari`a. Allah I in His regal majesty is the ultimate witness and One that gives sanctity to the regime in as much as it is spelled out under His holy and sacrosanct guidelines. Allah I is also the link between the people, the ruler and the Shari`a since He designed it, sent it and made it the subject of oath for His creation to be obedient and render their will unto Him.

 

He I allows people to appoint a ruler to govern them by the Shari`a and ordered the ruler to only rule by His laws. In this, the Divine Legislator has conferred to the ruler the Divine authority to punish people if they are disobedient to Him I while the ruler is doing the work of Allah I on Earth. He I warns people not to follow the ruler if he orders other than the Shari`a and he called disobedience to His I law by blind following the leader an act of major shirk (polytheism). The contract between the people and the ruler is called bai`a.

 

Relating this to our matter now, we can easily focus that there is no legitimate bai`a for any ruler tampering with the Shari`a, as he has nullified the contract by his own doing. In Islamic law, the people should replace him for the system of justice to carry on. If the people refuse to do so, and the army supported him, the whole country becomes Daar ulHarb, and there is enmity between the Supreme Monarch and His creation due to their disobedience. Trustworthy scholars should then pronounce him an apostate and his groups as a group of kufr in the sight of Allah I[144], but not all of them are enemies, as surely some are only sinners. Jihaad then becomes compulsory for every Muslim until the state is restored with a proper ruler and the state is brought to order.

 

Today’s example is the case related directly to the abovementioned ruling. All of the rulers today are ruling without the divine oath of allegiance. These circumstances first came about when the `Uthmaani Khilaafa was ruling the earth. Even though these rulers had their shortcomings, it was not the case that they were replacing the Shari`a and implementing other than what Allah I sent down. But as the fire of nationalism was fueled in the hearts of the Egyptians, and then not long after the nation that would later call itself Saudi. These nations would actually rise up and go out of the divinely sanctioned rule of the `Uthmaani rulers. These rulers were and are the true Khawaarij, for how do they have any excuse against the `Uthmaaniyyah?! In the time of the `Uthmaaniyyah, the Jews were kept from polluting Palestine with their presence, kept the borders open to all the Muslims who hoped for immigration to Dar ulIslam, provided people with sadaqa and zakat from the Islamic treasury and established Islam through jihaad. These same disobedient and tyrannical nations (Egypt, Saudi, etc.) would help foreign powers to overthrow the khilaafa and bring to an end 1300 years of justice to the Earth and usher in a swift 75 years of pure barbarity that cannot even be attributed to the Tatars.

 

Not only did these people conspire against the rightful Islamic rulers, but they also overwhelmed people who refused to give their bai`a to an illegitimate government. Not more than a century after the death of the Messenger of Allah r, a forceful personality by the name of Mansur took the khilaafa position without right. He then went on to take bai`a by force form the people. Although the people acquiesced, the general populous wanted to give bai`a to an-Nafs uz-Zakiyyah رحمه الله, the one who had the most right to rule the Islamic state.[145]

 

However, the people reasoned, how could they do this when they had already given their bai`a to Mansur. This caused the people to come questioning Imaam Maalik رحمه الله, and they stated the hadith of the Prophet r that if there are two khalifas to kill the second one who rose up. Imaam Maalik’s رحمه الله issued a fatwa that their bai`a to Mansur was the same as that of a man that was forced to divorce his wife. Due to the fact that it was done under coercion, it is thus invalid. Even though this fatwa was delivered over 1000 years ago, it can still apply today. There is no contract between our current rulers, no matter how many elections they have and irrespective of what we say or do. As long as Allah I has not recognised their authority, then it is not for us to do so either, as Allah I has said,

 

قاتلوهم حتى لا تكون فتنة و يكون الدين كله لله

 

“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (shirk) and the religion in totality is for Allah.”[146]

 

Dear brothers and sisters,

 

By now, we hope that you understand who the true Khawaarij are. But we would still like to elaborate on this most serious type of Khawaarij, as they are in full power. Let us see their actions and words presented in a short matter, and you can decide the rest. As soon as we point in that direction, everyone will know the history and will understand. Their internal and external policies, main enemies and allies and where their utilities and loyalties go will tell everyone the identity of these type of people and the regimes that they hold sway over.

 

You can see from this that they are non-religious Khawaarij. They may be speaking with our tongues, with the same colour skin, or even issuing verses from the Qur’an and Sunnah, when under pressure and it suits them. The reality is that their knives are always dripping from the blood of Muslims and their free hand is filling the mouths of kuffar with sweets and benefits, be they the natural resources being pumped from the lands of the Muslims, or the commodity of our women, who have fallen into their hands as booty. The war machine against Islam also includes many of the regime Shaikhs who eagerly cast their ballot for the election of their tyrants for an indefinite term of ruling the world, who will never go out of their way, even if they wear crosses, say and do naked kufr.

TORTURE IN SAUDI PRISONS EXCLUSIVE REPORT[147]

This is an exclusive interview with one brother who spent some time in a Saudi prison within the last few months. He was arrested when he returned from a land of Jihaad, but Alhamdulillah, he was released and fled the country before the latest crackdown.

We would like to say that what you are about to read is not a fabricated or second-hand account. This account was taken DIRECTLY from the mouth of the brother who underwent this torture. Defenders of the Saudi regime will nonetheless try to say that this is a made-up story or that it is lies.

 
In the Name of ALLAH, the Most Merciful, the Most Kind

“I don't know what to say in the beginning and how to start the story, but I find myself forced to speak the truth and to let the world know about the biggest hypocrite regime on the face of the Earth. Words are not sufficient for me to describe what happened. I returned from the Jihaad in Afghanistan, where I had gone to help the oppressed Muslims and fulfil my duty to Allah U. One night I was sleeping with my family at my home in Al-Khubar[148], in the Eastern Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. My family heard a loud knocking on the front door, which frightened them. My brother went to open the door, and as soon as he tried to open the door, the visitors forced their way into the house and put him up against the wall. They also got my other family members up against the wall. They forcefully woke me up from my sleep, dragged me by my clothes and put me against the wall as well. They started to swear at me:

‘You son of an adulteress! You dog! Where are the weapons in your house?’

“I told them that I did not have any weapons in my house. Then they started to beat me, in front of my family. They began searching my house and went through my things. Then they handcuffed me and took me in a car to the headquarters of the intelligence services.

“When we reached the headquarters, they forced me out of the car and took me to one of the rooms. In that room, they removed all of my clothes and started to laugh whilst commenting on my 'awrah (private parts). When I asked them why they were doing that, they said that it was part of the search procedures. They gave me back my clothes, took me to another room and told me to wait there The room was very cold and I waited for eleven hours before anyone came. I had gone to sleep in a chair, and was woken up by a slap across my face. Then someone said to me:

‘How dare you sleep, you dog!’

“Then he started to swear at me, calling me a homosexual, a fornicator with my mother and a fornicator with my sister. I said to him:

‘Don't say that. It is not Islamically permissible.’

“He gestured to two guards to hit me. They hit me a number of times. Then he
said:

‘Don't teach us our Deen. We know it better than you.’

“Then three officers entered. Their names are as follows:

Ahmad Muhammad Al-Ba'aadee
Nida Al-Oteibi,
Samir Rashid Al-Qahtani

“They had all been educated in the USA. They sat down and, when they saw me, they said:

‘His face does not suit interrogation, as there is not enough blood on it.’

“Then a large soldier came and slapped me across my face a number of times until blood appeared. After that they asked me:

‘Where did you learn to be a mujaahid?’

 

“I told them, ‘From the Book of ALLAHU and the Sunnah of the Messenger of ALLAH (Peace and Blessings of ALLAH be upon him).’

 

“Then they said:

‘Liar! Liar! The Book and the Sunnah did not tell you to disobey the wali ulamr ( ruler of the Muslims) and to fight the Islamic State.’

 

“I told them that I had not fought the Islamic State. They said:

‘You don't speak, only we speak!’

 

“Then they asked me hundreds of questions over nine hours. During the questioning, the subject of Shaikh 'Abdullah `Azzaam- the shahid (martyr) scholar of the Mujaahidin in Afghanistan, came up. I told them that the Saudi government portrayed a good image of him in the media. Then one of the officers, Ahmad Muhammad Al-Ba'aadee said:

‘We know the truth about 'Abdullah `Azzaam. He called all the young beardless boys to Afghanistan in order to carry out homosexual acts with them under the guise of Jihaad.’

Eventually I asked them:

‘Why am I here? I want to know!’

 

I wished I hadn't asked. They said:

‘It seems as if you didn't have a good tarbiyyah (upbringing).’

 

They then ordered the guards: ‘Teach him some manners!’ And the guards beat me until the officers said:

 

‘Enough!’

 

“I was then taken and thrown in the cells. The next day they returned and asked me:

‘Why did you go for Jihaad?’ I told them that I went for Jihaad to help the Muslims and gain victory over the kuffar (unbelievers).

 

They said:

 

‘Liar! You want to overthrow the Saudi regime.’ I said that that wasn't true.

“Then they questioned me for six hours. They asked me where I had hidden the weapons and the explosives. I told them that I did not have any of these things. They asked me more questions and I told them that I didn't know.

“They ordered the guards to take me to a room and make me stand until further notice. I thought I would be made to stand only for one day, being provided with food. In actual fact, they made me stand for eight days giving me only water but neither food nor a moment's sleep.

“When I used to make Salah (prayer), I used to make long prostration in order to rest. One of the officers used to come and kick me, lifting my neck with his foot. He would say:

 

‘Don't make long prostration! Get up!’ and he would swear at me. He used to do this whilst I was in Salah!

“After the eighth day, I felt I was near to my death, since I had had neither food nor sleep for eight days. Then one of the officers came and called me.

“They gave me food and drink and said:

‘Now that we have saved you from death, you will speak and tell us where the weapons and the explosives are.’

 

“I told them that I did not know because I did not have anything. They said:

 

‘It seems that you have still not learnt any manners.’

“They took me to a room, sat me on a chair and attached electrodes to my hands and legs. The officer turned the switch on to 30V. He asked me where the weapons and the explosives were. I said to myself that I would not reply except with 'La ilaha ill ALLAH'. He started to increase the voltage to 60V, 90V then 120V. When he reached 150V, I fell unconscious. I awoke after one day. They took me to the same room, and poured cold water over me in preparation of more electric shocks.

 

At that point I said:

 

‘OK! I'll tell you where the weapons and the explosives are.’

 

"They asked me where, to which I replied:

 

‘I left them in Afghanistan’

 

They then started to beat me and swear at me again.

For two days I was not given any food. Then one of the officers asked me whether I wanted to eat. I replied in the affirmative. He asked me which restaurant would I prefer to eat from. I replied:

 

‘Masha-ALLAH, you have five star service here!’

 

“He said: ‘In fact, you'll see that we have ten star service here.’

“Then he began to laugh and I wondered why he laughed. He took me to a room and asked me what I wanted to eat. I thought he was serious.

“I said: ‘A cheeseburger from Hardees’. He said:

 

‘What else?’

“I said: ‘French Fries.’

“He asked: ‘And what else?’

 
“I said: ‘A Pepsi.’

“He asked me if I wanted anything else, and I replied that that was sufficient. Then he said:

‘What do you think if we also get you an Apple Pie?’

“I said: ‘Yes, yes, bring that too!’

 

“He told me to wait there and he left the room. After a while, he returned with four well-built men. He pointed to the men and said:

‘This is Cheeseburger, French-Fries, Pepsi and Apple Pie. They will serve you your meal Insha’allah.’

“I was sat in a chair, with my hands laid out flat on a table. The man he named 'Cheeseburger' came and with a long cane, he struck the backs of both of my hands until they became blue. The officer asked whether I had eaten my fill with the 'Cheeseburger'. I wanted to say yes, but I was in so much pain that I couldn't reply.

“Next came 'French-Fries’. He brought with him three canes and said:

 

‘These must be broken today!’

 

“He started to beat me across my back. By the Mercy of ALLAH I, all three canes broke very soon. I don't know how many times he had struck me, since after the third strike, I stopped feeling any pain.”

“Then came 'Pepsi' and 'Apple Pie'. They laid me on my back on a table, and brought something known as a 'falakah'. This is like a short, thick, wooden log with a short rope stretching from one end to another. They inserted my feet through the rope, and rotated the log against my shins, winding the rope and tightening my feet together. Each person held an end of the log and raised it, so that my feet were up in the air.

 

“Then a third person came and with a long, thin cane, beat the soles of my feet until they were covered in blood (as a result I wasn't able to stand for about six days, since the soles of my feet had become torn).I pleaded with them to stop but they did not listen and continued to beat me. After four hours of torture, they stopped and left the room.
“The officer returned and asked me if I wanted any other food. I said:

 

‘No I am full.’

 

“He asked if I would like some cake as a dessert after my meal. I was extremely angry and replied:

‘Get lost you kaafir! You dog! You dajjaal! You American agent! You Israeli agent! You cross worshipper.’

 

“He clapped his hands twice and three men entered with three glass tanks. In each tank there was a snake. He teased me:

‘Shall we release these, leave you and go? Shall we? I'm a kaafir am I? I'm a dog am I? We will release these and also bring some scorpions.’

 

“One of the snakes was as thick as my arm and one was a cobra.

 

‘They will entertain you!’ he said and he gave the order for the glass cases to be opened. I became very frightened and I called him. I started to cry and said:

"I'll tell you everything, and I won't hide anything from you. Just take these snakes away."

 

“The officer became very happy. He stroked my beard and my head, saying,

 

‘Masha'ALLAH. You are a good boy now. You have become well-mannered.’

 

“He started to wipe my tears, saying:

 

‘Don't cry little boy. I'm like your father.’ I marvelled at Allah’s patience with this man.

 

“They unshackled me and I told them I couldn't walk. The officer said:

 

‘Don't worry. We are at your service,’ and he ordered the others to carry me to the interrogation room.

“By now I was psychologically destroyed. I gave them information about the brothers, but I didn't tell them everything. And ALLAH I knows that I didn't tell them anything, until after I had reached a state of psychological destruction. For the one who is reading this account of mine is not like the one who has been through it. I ask ALLAH U to excuse me on the Day of Judgement.

“I was then taken to the prison's clinic where they treated an injury to my eye, my back, my feet and my heart, which had been affected by the electric shocks. I stayed in the clinic for six days and I didn't receive any physical torture after that- only mental torture. For instance, they would play loud music in my presence and swear at me with the worst swear words imaginable. Then they took me to a normal cell to join three other Mujaahidin brothers.

“After meeting with my brothers in the cell, I knew that what had happened to me was light compared to what they had been put through. One of them was locked in a corpse freezer and left for two days. He knocked and knocked and pleaded with them to let him out. By the time they had taken him out, he had become psychologically destroyed and he even confessed to things he had not done. During this period he also acquired a continuous chest infection.

“Another brother was placed in a hot room and fed some very salty food. For three days he was not given any water to drink. Then they came and asked him if he wanted any water. He was so thirsty and his mouth was so dry that he could not even speak, and he merely gestured that he needed water. They brought him the best mineral water and allowed him to drink to his heart's content. When he wanted to go to the toilet to relieve himself, they tied his hands behind his back, removed his lower garment and sealed his private part with black tape. Then they laughed and said:

 

‘Go on, urinate!’

After a number of hours he cried and screamed and said:

 

‘Bring a blank sheet of paper and I will sign it. And you can write a confession to every crime above my signature. I killed Sadat (President of Egypt), I killed King Faisal (Saudi Arabia), I killed John F. Kennedy (US President).’

 

“It was as if he had become mad. Then he started to give them information regarding every possible thing. Even things they did not ask him about. Then finally, they allowed him to urinate.

“Once one of the brothers returned from a torture session with a big smile on is face. Upon being asked the reason of his smile, he joyfully told us that he was happy because he had now seen open proof of the Saudi regime's collaboration with the US government. He said that during his interrogation, American officers whose identity cards read had also questioned him: 'FBI Saudi Arabia Branch.' Afterwards I was to find out that the FBI even has an office in Al-Khubar.

“I stayed in the prison for a further two months and ten days. One morning, one of the officers - 'Abdul Ghani Ash-Shareef' - came to the cell and called one of the brothers, addressing him as,

 

‘You son of an adulteress! You fornicator with your mother!’

 

“The brother cautioned him to fear ALLAH. The officer replied:

‘Are you trying to teach me about my Lord? I know my Lord better than you! Cursed be your Lord! Cursed be your Deen!’

“Once I said to this same officer:

 

‘Why do you torture me, when we are both from the tribe of Quraysh?’ He replied:

 

‘Yes, but you are from the lineage of Muhammad, and I am from the lineage of Abu Jahl.’

“Dear reader, you might not believe me if I told you that these were the most beautiful days of my life. We all used to pray during the night and fast everyday following the words of Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله:

 

‘What can my enemies do to me? My Paradise is in my breast; wherever I go, it is with me. My murder is Shahaadah (martyrdom). My imprisonment is solitude with ALLAH U. And my exile is tourism.’

 

“Some of the brothers even wrote this famous statement on the cell walls with their own blood.

“And whilst in prison, we used to constantly repeat a slogan of which we were proud and felt we were acting by:

 

" لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله عليها نحيا وعليها نموت وفي سبيلها نجاهد وعليها نلقى الله
La ilaha ill ALLAH Muhammad Ar-Rasulullah! Upon it we live, and upon it we die. And in its path we make Jihaad, and upon it we will meet ALLAH.’

“All the brothers in all the cells used to chant this together in one voice over and over again. The guards used to come and kick the doors, telling us to shut up. They would say:

 

‘May ALLAH either cut your tongues, or we will put our boots in your mouths.’

 

“But this would only increase the volume of our voices. And we would frequently utter cries of ALLAHU AKBAR (ALLAH is the Greatest), since we felt that this prison was a test from ALLAH to purify us from our sins and to strengthen our Iman (faith), just as had happened to Bilal bin Rabah, the family of Yasir, 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud, Khabbab bin 'Arrat, Abu Dharr Al-Ghifari, and before all of them, the Messenger of ALLAH (Peace and blessings of ALLAH I be upon him).

“We used to feel that when this punishment was combined with Iman in ALLAH, it became a blessing from ALLAH and not a misfortune. The voices of the brothers were constantly engaged in the remembrance of ALLAH and recitation of Qur'an. We felt that these voices in the future would become war and weapons against the oppressors. Every time we saw a tyrant increasing the torture, we became more certain that their end was becoming nearer - because ALLAH gives respite, but does not disregard.
“Then after many intercessions, ALLAH favoured me to leave that prison and that country. And here I am writing this actuality to all the Muslims in the Islamic world, so that they know the reality of this apostate regime; that they know that it is a regime of lies, pretending to represent Islam, whereas Islam is innocent of it.

“And to let those know who defend this regime and describe it as 'Salafi' (upon the example of the first three generations of Muslims), saying that it is established on the 'Aqidah of Tawhid (the creed of the Oneness of ALLAH) whilst its soldiers punish the Muslims for raising the word of Tawhid.

 

A Mujaahid Brother

 

 
 

 

 

A SISTER’S STORY

 “The women and children of the household rushed frantically upstairs.  At the top, there were two small rooms and a narrow landing, where the spare room, of a similar size, was empty.  It was in this room that all 24 of us, together with the 8 children, hid.

 

“Steps were heard outside the door and then there were two or three male voices.  For the seconds before the door was flung open, we tried to pray while standing… but then we saw scowling faces staring at us.

 

“The children were torn away from us, screaming.  What were we to do? Stay calm! Hope! Pray! Oh Allah, please protect the children.

 

“I watched silently, as havoc was wrought.  The destruction was just a normal part of their intimidation tactics.  At some point, we were dragged and pushed down the stairs and some of us were taken outside.  It must have been around 3pm and the sun was scorching hot.  Al Anba’een was “simmering”

 

“Nadia’s clothes had been ripped off and she had no shoes on her feet – her hair was all over the place!  She was still clutching her baby tightly, and tears were streaking her now soiled face.  Large horrible hands were reaching for her and she was begging for the life of her baby! I suddenly felt cold.  I began to edge carefully towards Nadia, with my hands out-stretched.  Somewhere in the depths of my tormented mind, I had the idea that I could perhaps at least take the child.  In the time it took me to glance at Nadia’s face, they had impaled the child on one of their fixed bayonets.  Its mother let out the most haunting yell, before she was thrown to the ground! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!  Blood trickled from her many wounds.  Her eyes were black and she ceased to be.  Her soul was free.

 

“It was my turn now!  They were suddenly distracted by something that I couldn’t yet see.  I shuffled to the right quietly and realized that Najla was on one of the balconies on the 6^th floor.  She had nothing on, but her qamis.  She climbed up, on to the edge and perched there, as if in a trance, her naked legs trembling and bruised.  As she stepped off, she asked Allah to forgive her.

 

“I began to run, towards the main road, but it was futile.  I was bundled into the back of a military vehicle, where there were already 11 other women, Muslim sisters.  All of us had been separated from our outer garments which were our modesty!!!

 

“The under-ground ‘Holding Camps’ in the desert, are possibly one of the closest things to hell on earth.  They are dark, always grossly over-crowded and the stench is vile.  They watch us 24 hours a day, taking perverse enjoyment from our varied predicaments and attempted privacy.  Our food was usually one small plate of  “bubbling” lentils, and a piece of stale bread, daily.  The lentils were bubbling because they had been cooked 3 or 4 days previously and left in the sun to ferment.

“Rape and beatings are a normal part of the daily routine of these ‘holes of hell’.  But the worse scenario was when we were frog-marched to ground level, stripped and manacled to the bars of what looked like more cells and our brothers brought in to witness the ‘daily sport’!!!

 

“What crime did we commit, you may ask! Were we terrorists? Were we guilty of treason? Had we murdered others?” No we had done none of these things! Our only crime, if it could even be classified as such, was the fact that we were (and still are) practicing Muslimaat (Muslim sisters), al hamdu lillah.  Some of us also happened to be the women of practicing Muslimin (Muslim brothers).

 

“We were not out-spoken in public, but we did meet each evening for communal prayer and to read a little Qur’an, we did ask our children not to miss their salat while at school; and our girls, like us, wore the hijab.

 

“Our men just disappear without trace, our children are bullied and ridiculed and sometimes banned from school.  We are subject to any and all of the afore-mentioned barbarity, and this today is Egypt.

 

“As tired but faithful practicing Muslimaat (Muslim sisters), On behalf of all the other sisters I demand the protection of our brothers, which after all, Allah says, is our right.  We plead for you all.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

In the end result, we are able to see that the obstacle in front of us is large. Our task to remove it is formidable. By facing the truth of the situation that we are looking at and being willing to soil our hands in the process of changing it, we bring all the rewards that Allah I promises to those who strive in His cause.

 

During this small effort, all those involved in this research hope that the reader will understand that although the force we are fighting is monolithic, it is made up various moving parts, some of which have friction with eachother, thus there are some Khawaarij who would never pay any mind to their ideological counterparts due to differing opinions in certain matters.

 

But if we look carefully at the general characteristics, we are able to notice a pattern that occurs with all groups like this one. In the beginning, those involved mean well, but in the process the objective becomes blurred, and as disillusionment sets in, incongruent ideas with Islam become commonplace, as the evidence is left and opinions take precedence. Thus, it is of great use of the reader to know that some of the Khawaarij will rebel against the ruler as well as the Shari`a. Other Khawaarij, if the ruler of their time is not legitimate, they will rebel against the Shari`a.

There are also some Khawaarij who have worship like prayer, but there are others who have no worship but are pure enemies of Islam and Muslims.

 

Other Khawaarij are Khawaarij Murji’a, who can call some people kuffar and they don’t follow their own rules with regard to others,

 

It is also noticeable that the Khawaarij divide among themselves and they always branch out from one another, as well as differing amongst themselves, not to mention others.

 

The Khawaarij could mix with other bid`a as well, which suits some of their thinking, like the Mu`tazila Khawaarij, Shi`a Khawaarij, the Murji’a Khawaarij, all branches of the original Khawaarij who differed in judgement. The only way to impede their advance is to fight them and to remove them from the area.

 

Some times the Khawaarij are less of a danger than the apostates or outside intruders. It is then up to the Sunni Muslim Imaams to treat them as a second enemy and delay to fight them, or deal with them and the other groups simultaneously, like the situation in Algeria, in which the Mujaahidin are fighting the government and the Khawaarij at the same time.

 

Some extremist people do not kill for their belief, but argue and call people kuffar, without actually killing Muslims due to what they believe. These are the Takfiriyyah. It is then advisable to then expose them without fighting them. And if they are the only people who are fighting an enemy to Islam more dangerous than them, then fighting under their leadership is permissible. It is known in history that some of the tabi`iin fought some Shi`a under the leadership of the Khawaarij. When they were asked to justify their action, they answered, “We fight the enemies of Allah under the leadership of the enemies of Islam.”

 

The danger of the Khawaarij is less than the Murji’ a of our time, as the Khawaarij exaggerate matters in the religion and obligations, whereas the Murj’a let go of the principles of Islam, one by one, without safeguarding Islam whatsoever. Following the Murji’a scenario, Muslims could follow the scenario of the Muslims in Kosova, Albania and so forth. This is when the people are far removed from Islam and only turn back to Islam after a major catastrophe.

 

We pray and rely on Allah I that after the disasters of the loss of our Khilaafah system, our Shari`a, our honour, our dignity and our courage in the face of oppression that we turn back to His religion for no one’s sake but His alone, establish the proof on the arrogant ones and take the appropriate steps to restore our strength and dignity in the sight of Allah U.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

QUESTION AND ANSWER SECTION

 

 

 

Question: How was it that Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله was tricked into making a fatwa calling himself the religious head of the Peninsula area and he gave the authority to the As-Sa`ud family?

 

Answer: Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله had many obstacles in his time, such as the Khalifa of that period, the `Uthmaani Khilaafa (Islamic governing system) which were Sufis, and we don’t mean the Sufis such as those today. These Sufis were adherents of the Hanafi madhhab and did jihaad in the path of Allah I. However, in that time there was a great amount of grave worshipping and Ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله knew that it was necessary to enjoin the right and to forbid the wrong against things such as these. The Shaikh knew that if he enjoined the right and forbade the wrong that he would not be termed a Khawaarij as enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong is compulsory, even if the evil is not being done by the Khalifa, but the people of the local area. He was not like the evil scholars of today, when they see you enjoining the right and forbidding the right, they call you a Khawaarij. There were scholars and sahaaba t before him, alHasan t and alHussain t, and many Sahaaba t other than them who were doing the same thing regardless of whether of the Khalifa liked it or not.[149]

When he gave authority to the As-Sa`ud family, he did not tell them, “We are the Khulafa’a (Islamic rulers).” He did not say this to them. He told them, “You are in charge of this kingdom, to help me change the evil of this kingdom.” He never tried to establish another khilaafa system. This is the same thing that would happen in the times of the Crusades. The Crusaders would come and the Khalifa would not want to fight them, but the scholars would go and fight the Crusaders in disobedience to the Khalifa. Yet they would still make du`aa for him on the minbar, send him the money to sustain the state as well as continuing to use the Khalifa’s currency.

 

The As-Sa`ud were not doing so, and did not plan to do so at all. In their time they were losing all their money for the jihaad, but the As-Sa`ud family weren’t using it for jihaad. The Sa`ud family were using him to establish their kingdom, but Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله was using that family to unify the people against the fire and grave worshipping and other things. He رحمه الله was working in the cause of Allah and they were working in the cause of Shaitan, and Allah U speaks of this in the Qur’an in Surat un-Nisaa, ayah 76,

 

الذين أمنوا يقاتلون في سبيل الله و الذين كفروا يقاتلون في سبيل الطاغوت فقاتلوا أولياء الشيطان إن كيد الشيطان كان ضعيفاً

 

“Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of the Taghut. So fight the helpers of Shaitan. Truly the plan of Shaitan is weak.”

 

Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab’s رحمه الله ijtihaad was to unify the tribes and people. He knew that he could not have come to them and told them to obey the Khalifa, for if he had, they would have killed him. Then they would have had the grave worshipping and the British in the Arabian Peninsula, so he had to tell them that they were in charge of the kingdom to help him change the evil in that place. He never once told them that they were the khulafa’a. There is only one khalifa in the Ummah of the Prophet r and the second one is to be killed according to the hadith of the Prophet r. They were given allegiance by Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله because they were helping him to establish the Shari`a in the Peninsula.

 

But now where is the Shari`a in the Peninsula? Where is the Shari`a? In which law does it say that when the women go to Makkah and Madinah that they are to be veiled, but when they go to Riyadh they wear a hot shirt, or no shirt at all. As soon as any of the eminent Saudis go to Riyadh, they’re wearing mini skirts. There are also a lot of homosexuals in that land and when you go to the airport in Jeddah, it appears as a circus. Are they establishing Shari`a there?

 

The mission of the Shaikh was to clear the area, and to purify it from worship to any other than Allah U. He knew his duty. But the Saudis were more clever than him, so the moment after he died, they began aligning themselves with the biggest enemy of the Khalifa, the British. They began helping the allies to bombard the Khalifa in every way and to demean the power of his rule in any nation, such as Egypt.

 

It is obvious that the practices that the Shaikh رحمه الله fought to abolish have now appeared again in the Peninsula. One of the biggest pillars after proclaiming La ilaha illallah is to fight in jihaad, particularly against the Jews and Christians. When you go to fight these people in Palestine or in the Peninsula, this is important. How can we leave these filthy people in the land of the Prophet? It has been proven time and time again that many Christians have tried to steal the body of the Prophet r!

 

Salah ud-Din al Ayyubi رحمه الله saw the Prophet r in a dream in which he r said, “Protect me from these two blondes!!” Salah ud-Din رحمه الله asked, “Who are these two blondes?” When he awoke and went outside, he found two blonde haired foreigners digging up the grave of the Prophet r, to attempt to steal his body!

 

Afterwards, he went and had a metal barrier built around the grave of the Prophet r, so no one would be able to do this anymore. We must also consider the last advice of the Prophet r, “Throw the Jews and Christians out from the Arabian Peninsula.” What did Ibn Baz say, though? He said that they should stay there! Even though the Prophet r said they are not to be allowed in there! So he (Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab رحمه الله) has been tricked, and we have been tricked. But for how long! This is the time! If we decide now to correct what the illegitimate people have done, those who have stolen the khilaafa, destroyed the khilaafa, they should be killed just for that alone! Let alone changing the Shari`a, taking the women’s clothes off, using money from the kuffar against Muslims or dropping jihaad and doing their jihaad against the Muslims. Who is killing the Muslims and making friends with the Kuffar? This is the definition of the Khawaarij. Who is doing this? It is these rulers, not us.

 

Question: There is a leaflet regarding an argument over shaving the beard to be able to go for jihaad without being monitored by the kuffar. Some are arguing for and others against. What should be the correct position on this issue? There are the ones supporting this like the jihaadi brothers and those against it are denouncing it. What should be done?

 

Answer: The shaving of the beard has nothing to do with the jihaadis. We should not be using terms such as salafis, jihaadis or others when we are just Muslims. These titles are not lawful in Islam as I made mention of on the tapes, Is it Salafism or Shaikhism? In fact, using these titles in such instances as, “O the jihaadis have said this…” or things like that could actually take you out of the religion for it is as if you are mocking or denying jihaad with these slurs and terms.

As far as the issue of the beard is concerned, we must understand something. There are different categories of matters such as these. There are some differences that do not fall under the same heading, for example, if you meet someone saying something other than the view of Ahl us-Sunna about `Isa u, that he is dead or something like this. Another example is if someone is denying verses from the Qur’an, saying that the Jews and Christians of this time are going to the Paradise or any statements such as these, this has to do with part of our belief. These things, just like belief in Allah I, His Books, His Messengers, the Angels, Qadr and the Day of Resurrection are all things that are haraam to have difference in, because it is a part of Imaan and the faith of the believer.

 

However, there are other areas where ijtihaad takes precedence, such as in matters of doing jihaad and being able to get to the place of jihaad. There are some who say, “I want to go for jihaad, but if they see me with my beard before I get there, they are going to kill me.” Then they shave it so that they may arrive safely.

 

 These areas are a matter of ijtihaad in cases such as these, so we ask Allah I to guide them and us for He knows their true intention. But if one with a shaved beard should try to lead salah, he may not, for the imaam for prayer must have a beard, as well as implementing the sunna in his clothes. If there is ijtihaad based on this issue, then the ijtihad is for you, not for the whole Ummah.

 

Some people actually begin to differ in these issues to the point where there is argument over whether or not to raise the hands in salat after the first takbir or not and this starts to take priority over the major issues. Then there begins to be arguments in matters where ijtihaad is not permissible, like whether or not to fight the Jews and Christians! Or there is haraam argument over whether or not to implement the Shari`a in this time. These areas are not to be argued over, for there is no issue of ijtihaad in them since this Ummah already agrees upon these principles. But starting arguments over whether or not to say “amin” aloud in prayer or how the hands should be is not priorities now in this day and age. Bothering with things like these and whether or not the jalabiyya or the qamis is closer to the sunna is just plain foolishness. The misinformed spend time arguing about these types of things. In the time of the sahaaba t, they were concentrating on the core of belief, as this was the most important aspect.

 

So we should know that differences from other than the core of Imaan are from the Shaitan and we should stay aloof from them. There is today, alhamdulillah, and a whole generation of youth that don’t come from the background of madhhabism but want the strongest evidence. Years ago, the kuffar used to invest great time in madhhabism, as this kept the Muslims divided and squabbling among each other. Today this behaviour has been diminished.

 

And with regard to the issue, my ijtihaad is that it is permissible in this case, as the hadith of the Prophet r that there was a man by the name of Muhammad ibn Maslama t. This man, who was put in charge of the group that went to kill K`ab ibn alAshraf, was allowed to say bad things about the Prophet r in order to get close enough to kill K`ab ibn AlAshraf.[150] Another evidence is that in the time of Hajjaaj ibn Yusuf, some of the Tabi`iin and the Sahaaba used to pay a bribe to the soldiers of Hajjaaj to stay hidden from him and his fitnah. When they were asked, they said, “We purchase the most important part of our religion with another part of our religion.”

 

Similarly, if the police or a tyrannical regime seeks a Muslim woman, she might be allowed in certain instances to work without the hijab or the face veil. This would enable her to get out of the country to escape from their tyranny, rape or things that might cause her to lose her religion. In general, if there is a conflict between the most important matters, such as pillars of Islam or imaan and the apparent or the branches of these pillars, one should keep the roots even if he has to trim the branches. Now, this can also be explained in the case of Abu Bakr As-Saddiq t who had said, “If you see an apostate making the adhaan, you go and kill him first, as he is trying to use one part of the religion against another part.”

 

Question: You have said that in certain instances, it is allowed to go outside of the ruler. Assuredly, if we go outside of these rulers today, we are going to have to face the military. And when we face the military, there are most likely some people in it who claim to be Muslims. If we fight them, aren’t we fighting and killing innocent Muslims? Is it even halaal for Muslims to fight these armies, as there are those in it who are saying La ilaha illallah?

 

Answer:  Allah U did not leave this to our ijtihaad and this is a matter of imaan and Kufr. Similar situations as these happened in the time of the Messenger of Allah r. When people opposed the Islam and the Muslims, although they were saying La ilaha Illallah, they were killed in front of the Messenger r, and their killing was blessed by the Qur’an and endorsed by the Prophet r. Now before we go into all of the evidences, we would like to explain some principles in regard to this topic.

  

It should be known that Allah I has judged a human being not just by himself, but by his group. We would like the brothers and sisters to understand that Allah I has made for each person two rules with regard to his belief. One rule is the judgement concerning him as an individual. Another rule is concerning his group or the group who he or she is loyal to, moving about with, putting his energy into and consuming his time with. 

 

 These four categories of people mentioned are,

 

1.      A Muslim by himself and by his group as well. These are the people who do the five pillars and they believe in Islam. They obey Islam according to their ability. They also work and are loyal to a guided group. Examples are the Sahaaba w from the immigrants and the helpers, the Muslims as individuals under the khilaafa (the Islamic governing body) who were ruling by the Shari`a, even though the Khalifa (Muslim ruler) might be doing some oppression. The Shari`a was still intact and the rights of Muslims were preserved. Since 1924, after the destruction of the khilaafa, the reality of this example has disappeared. All that is left now is the people that are doing Islam individually and those struggling and fighting to bring back the Shari`a. There are also those that help them, support them and help them, even if they can’t be with them as Allah I has said,

 

لا يكلف الله نفساً إلا وسعها

 

“Allah does not make a soul responsible except for what is according to its capacity.”[151]

 

 

2.      A kaafir by himself and a kaafir by his group. The likes of these are the people who don’t do the apparent of the religion, either because they are the original kuffar or they are apostates. Another example also is a person that belongs to and defends a kaafir or apostate group. An example is the Christians, Jews, fireworshippers, deists, dualists, pantheists, atheists, agnostics and Masons in the armies of Muslim countries. This is because we class these armies as defenders of other than the Islamic Shari`a.

 

3.      A kaafir by himself and a Muslim by his group. The like of whom would be a person who is showing Islam, but his heart has the kufr of hypocrisy. He is part of a guided group that is supporting Allah I, His Messenger and the believers. However, he deceives that group and is looking for chances to destroy it form the inside, all the while he has the apparent `ibaadah (worship). This is just to be saved and to continue on, like `Abdullah ibn Ubai ibn Sulul in the time of the Messenger r and those like him. The examples of this in our time are the spies who work for apostate governments and go to the front line to spy on the Mujaahidin. They also join study circles and meetings. They are to be left to Allah I until He exposes what they are doing then they can be dealt with Islamically according to the evidence.

 

 

4.      A Muslim by himself and a kaafir by his group. This needs to be explained further, and if not handled appropriately, it can be abused. This abuse is a usual occurrence with the Khawaarij and the Murji’a. This situation is not new to the Ummah, as it existed in the time of the Messenger r and in the time of the Sahaaba w when incidents of apostasy occurred. It occurred as well in the times of the Tatars, when they entered the Muslim lands, and the Muslims were mixing with kuffar and vice versa.

In fact, this is the situation of our Ummah right now. These kinds of Muslims might be good Muslims, as an individual with regard to worship and obligations. It could even be the case that he is doing tahajjud at night, hajj and so forth. However, he supports whoever fights the Shari`a or those who are killing the believers and preventing them from enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. He then gives his effort until a banner of apostasy or original kufr is made manifest. Such was the time of the Messenger r, when he took the believers to fight the people of Ta’if, who used to trade with Riba (usury) after their Islam. Once the Messenger r prohibited them, they resorted to the sword and they insisted on dealing in riba, in addition to their Islam. So the Messenger r fought them for 21 days, surrounded them and used the catapult to throw stones, fire and snakes at them, including their women, children, elderly and disabled as he could not see who was who and the war must go on. They were all dealt with as a group of kufr, although they used to pray, fast, and do the rest of the apparent signs of Islam.

 

This is also what the Qur’an has revealed concerning the Muslims who used to live among the kuffar of the Quraish. When the Quraish were preparing for the battle of Badr, they forced the Muslims that did not make hijrah to come amongst them, just to swell their numbers to scare the Sahaaba w and the other believers away from the battle. These people who were coerced included al`Abbas t, the uncle of the Prophet r. Adding to that, the Messenger r told the sahaaba as mentioned in Sahih Muslim, that there are some members of Bani Haashim that will be joining the kaafir forces and they are being forced to do so. He urged the Sahaaba t if they see any of the Bani Haashim that they don’t kill them because they were forced.

 

Then one sahaabi from the Ansaar said, “O, We are going to kill our families and leave our enemies and not kill them.” The Messenger r replied, “Would you like the face of my uncle al `Abbas to be slapped?” Then `Umar t asked for the Messenger’s r permission to punish the sahaabi who made such a comment. All of this would change during the war. When the battle began, some arrows from the Prophet’s r side tore into the necks and hearts of Muslims who came amongst the people of the Quraish. The Muhaajirun w (Emigrants) and the Ansaar (Helpers) w at that point were terrified and shouted, “We have killed our brothers.” Allah I then sent down these verses,

 

إن الذين توففاهم الملائكة ظالمي أنفسهم قالوا فيم كنتم  قالوا كنا مستضعفين في الأرض قالوا ألم تكن أرض الله واسعة فتهاجروا فيها فأولئك مأواهم جهنم و ساءت مصيراً إلا المستضعفين من الرجال و النساء و الولدان لا يستطيعون حيلة و لا يهتدون سبيلاً

 

“Those whom the angels take in death while they were oppressing themselves, they will say, ‘What state were you in?’ They will say, ‘We were weak and oppressed in the earth.’ They will say, ‘Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to make emigration in?’ Their destination is the Hell fire and what an evil end. Except the truly weak and oppressed from the men and women and the one not able to devise a plan or find a way.”[152][153]

 

Allah I then exempted the weak and disabled and their like from going into the fire if they don’t emigrate. But in this story, there is something else to endorse the importance of judging the group of kufr and dealing with them. That is the strong words of the Messenger r to his uncle al `Abbas t, when he was insisting to the Messenger r [P1] that he was Muslim to exempt him from paying the ransom for himself and his nephew. The Messenger r said,

 

“Leave that argument aside. You came with a group fighting and you are going to be dealt with as a group that fought. You must pay for yourself and your nephew.”

 

In another hadith, he r said,

 

“Your apparent is what we judge you about, and your internal is to Allah.”[154]

 

 He then ordered al `Abbas t to pay the ransom for him and his nephew. Then Allah U revealed with regard to that,

 

يا ايها النبي قل لمن في ايديكم من الاسرى إن يعلم الله في قلوبهم خيراً يؤتكم خيراً مما أخذ منكم و يغفر لكم و الله غفور رحيم

 

“O Prophet! Say to whoever is in your hands, ‘If Allah  knows any good in your hearts, He will give you something better than what was taken from you and He will forgive you. And Allah is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.’”[155]

 

 He paid twenty ounces of gold to him to free himself and his nephew.[156]

 

In relation to judging a group of kufr and a group of imaan, Allah I has spoken

 

الذين أمنوا يقاتلون في سبيل الله و الذين كفروا يقاتلون في سبيل الطاغوت فقاتلوا أولياء الشيطان إن كيد الشيطان كان ضعيفاً

 

“Those who are believers fight in the cause of Allah, and those who are kuffar fight in the cause of the Taghut. So fight the friends and allies of the Shaitan. Truly the plan of Shaitan is weak.”[157]

 

This ayah has three main rules with regard to the group,

 

1.      Those who fight in the cause of Allah I, they are in general believers, even though there may be hypocrites among them, they are still believers.

 

2.      Those who are fighting for the benefit of an opponent to Allah I, or other than the ideology of Islam. They are a group of kufr, even if they have amongst them people who are not kuffar. As a group, they are still all a group of kufr, according to the apparent.

 

3.      What position we should we take with regard to these groups. Allah I shows which group we should be linked with and which group we should fight. Allah I also orders us to fight the group according to the apparent and the fight must go on.

 

It is then clear that Allah I makes the reason to call a group as kufr or imaan is the motive of what the group is fighting for in the end. If there is a group fighting to keep the law and order of Allah I intact, this is the group of imaan. The other group is the group of kufr, in which its motive is to fight in the cause of taghut. Taghut is whatever and whoever people are using to judge amongst themselves other than Allah I and are known as a group of kufr without doubt. And yet another example of Allah I labeling one group as kufr and another imaan is mentioned in the following hadith,

 

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الصَّبَّاحِ حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ زَكَرِيَّاءَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سُوقَةَ عَنْ نَافِعِ بْنِ جُبَيْرِ بْنِ مُطْعِمٍ قَالَ حَدَّثَتْنِي عَائِشَةُ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا قَالَتْ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَغْزُو جَيْشٌ الْكَعْبَةَ فَإِذَا كَانُوا بِبَيْدَاءَ مِنْ الْأَرْضِ يُخْسَفُ بِأَوَّلِهِمْ وَآخِرِهِمْ قَالَتْ قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ كَيْفَ يُخْسَفُ بِأَوَّلِهِمْ وَآخِرِهِمْ وَفِيهِمْ أَسْوَاقُهُمْ وَمَنْ لَيْسَ مِنْهُمْ قَالَ يُخْسَفُ بِأَوَّلِهِمْ وَآخِرِهِمْ ثُمَّ يُبْعَثُونَ عَلَى نِيَّاتِهِمْ

 

It is related by `A’isha w who said, “The Messenger of Allah r said, ‘An army will come to make war on the Ka`aba, then when they are in Baida, the Earth will swallow them up, from the first of them to the last of them.’ I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, how is it the first of them to the last of them will be swallowed up and they have those among them who are form the market and those that are not from them.’ He said, ‘The first of them to the last of them will be swallowed up, then they will be resurrected according to their intention.’ ”[158]

 

In the version of Ahmad, Tirmidhi and Ibn Maajah رحمهم الله, it states ‘there will be forced people inside of them’, and the Messenger r said that, “They will be resurrected according to what is inside of them.” In the version of Nisaa’ii, it is asked, ‘What if there shall be believers among them?’ Therefore we know that the army is a group of kufr, even if believers are inside of it.

 

Although this army is a group of kufr, each and every individual in that group cannot be called a kaafir. It may be that there are those who are coerced; others are fussaaq (rebellious sinning Muslims), who want to make benefit. There could even be good believers, but believers hiding inside to help Muslims from the inside, such as Khaalid alIslaambuli رحمه الله in the Egyptian military[159] or the one from the family of the Pharaoh mentioned below,

 

و قال رجل مؤمن من آل فرعون يكتم إيمانه أتقتلون رجلاً أن يقول ربي الله و قد جاء كم بالبينات من ربكم

 

“And a believing man from the family of the Pharaoh, who hid his imaan (faith) said, ‘Would you kill a man because he says, My Lord is Allah, and he has come to you with clear signs from his Lord.’ ”[160]

 

These rare elements don’t change the judgement of this group as a group of kufr. Allah I did not change the judgement for the family of Pharaoh because some of them were defending Musa u. So we can understand that it is a group of kufr fighting the Muslims and Mujaahidin in the cause of the taghut. These enemies must be fought harshly and sternly until they come back to the fold of Islam and the Shari`a of Islam. It must not rule in any matters with other than Islam, small or great. Although we don’t call every individual in this group a kaafir or an apostate, we can call the high leaders of this group that make decisions Tawaaghit (false legislators). However, in reference to our population in the Muslim countries, they are weak and helpless Muslims and most of them love Allah I, the Messenger r and the Shari`a.[161]

 

From all that is above, we can understand that this is what happened for all those who were not carrying weapons and fighting Muslims. Now the situation which people are confused about now is this one. There are those people who are employed full time in the military, carrying the most sophisticated weapons against their weak and helpless brothers, most often capturing their wives and relatives to force them to hand over themselves to the Mushrikun. These Mushrikun (pagans) of course are legislating other than the Shari`a of Allah U. Let us also understand the nature of our army, which is purely secular and anti-Islamic. It also consists of:

 

1.      Some Muslims

 

2.      Jews and Christians

 

3.      Reverts from Islam or any other religion

 

4.      Freemasons as well as freemasonry

 

5.      Ruthless hired militia and most of the time they have no war with the Jews and Christians and have entered into indefinite treaties with them. Now their enemies are genuine Islamic movements, which makes them the real Khawaarij described in the hadith of Muslim and Bukhaari regarding those who kill the Muslims and spare the Mushrikun (pagans).

 

As was mentioned in the main text of the book, they have nullified their contract with Allah I just by ruling with with other than the Shari`a. So they have no bai`a to be obeyed in the first place. It is important to also quote from the classical scholars on issues that require a decisive judgement from the preservers of our religion. We should read an important fatwa by Shaikh ul Islam, Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله that advises regarding our strategy in matters such as these,

 

AL-FATAWA ALMISRIYYAH, VOLUME 4, CHAPTER OF AL-JIHAAD

 

“We say that any group who departs from any of the apparent indisputable laws of Islam that have been handed down from generations to generations of Muslims without any interruption, then it is incumbent to fight against such a group according to the consensus of Muslim imaams (leaders of Islamic schools of law). Even though they recite the two testimonies. 

 

“So if they recite the shahaadatain (two testimonies) but abstain from observing five daily prayers they must be fought against until they offer prayers. And if they abstain from paying zakah, it is incumbent upon Muslims to fight them until they start paying zakah.  Similarly, if they abstain from the fasting of Ramadhan or pilgrimage to the ancient House of Allah or refuse to prohibit the abominations or adultery or gambling or drinking and other things forbidden by the Islamic Shari`a; or if they refuse to enforce the laws of the Qur’an and Sunnah pertaining to life, property, honour, management of affairs and other such things; or if they refrain from enjoining good, forbidding evil, and fighting the disbelievers until they embrace Islam or pay jizyah (poll tax) in submission. 

 

“Likewise, if they introduce innovations in religion contrary to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and the practice of the righteous ancestors and imaams of the community by, for instance, blaspheming the names, signs, or attributes of Allah, or rejecting divine preordainment or decree, or rejecting the manner in which the Muslim community behaved in the days of the rightly guided Khalifas, or slandering the foremost from among the emigrants (al Muhaajirin) and the helpers (al Ansaar) and those who followed in their footsteps faithfully;  or if they fight the Muslims in order to force them to submit to them, abandoning the Islamic Shari`a, and all other similar cases. Concerning which Allah says,

 

وقاتلوهم حتى لا تكو ن فتنة ويكو ن الدين كله لله

 

“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (shirk) and the religion in totality is for Allah only”[162]

 

“Thus in all such cases when religion is partly for Allah and partly for others, it is incumbent upon Muslims to fight until all religion is for Allah alone.  Allah says,

 

 

 

يا أيها الذين أمنوا  اتقوا الله و ذروا ما بقي من الربا إن كنتم مؤمنين

فإن لم تفعلوا فأذنوا بحرب من الله ورسوله

 

“O you who believe, fear Allah and leave the remainder of the usury if you are truly believers.  But if you do not, then take notice of war from Allah and His Messenger.”[163]

“This verse was revealed about the people of Ta’if, who had embraced Islam, observed the obligatory prayers and fasted, but they dealt in usury.  The verse commanded the believers to leave the rest of the usury amount owing to them, and was told that if they failed to do so, then they would be enemies of Allah and His Messenger. 

 

“Usury was the last sin to be prohibited in the Qur’an even though the money involved is obtained through mutual consent of the parties concerned.  If a person refusing to desist from it is deemed to be at war with Allah and His messenger, what about those who persist in committing other sins which were prohibited well before usury?!”[164].

 

We ask now which of countries now are prohibiting usury and are not the enemies of Allah. In the future, more important questions could be added to the second edition if sent by us through our e-mail.

 

Question:  As we all know, the situation that occurred in Bosnia as well as Kosovo involved Muslims. But there is a lot of confusion on this point. Are the people in Kosovo and Bosnia to be classified as kuffar or Muslims. Most of the inhabitants of these lands do not pray, fast, give zakah, and much less know about the basic principles of Islam. Some of them know nothing of the religion but La ilaha Illallah. But if they don’t know what it means or its implications, how can they be classified as Muslims? Do the peoples inhabiting these areas Muslims or kuffar?

 

Answer: The situations in Bosnia and Kosovo were great indeed. We watched first hand as people who were only nominal in Islam were singled out for slaughter. Even though their knowledge of Islam was miniscule, they were still earmarked like cattle for death. However, we spoke at length above regarding the issue of takfir and the impediments that surround it. One of those impediments is knowledge.

 

The people of Kosovo as well as Bosnia more that fit the classification of Udhr bilJahl, ‘excuse due to ignorance.’ There is perhaps no Muslim person on the planet more in need of knowledge of Islam that these poor, punished and humble people. Due to this, the words La ilaha illallah is all that they remember. Because of this, we hold them to be Muslim, but we also must teach them about their religion. Now in the course of teaching them the religion, when they accumulate some knowledge, if they reject Islam, then we may gather a judgement against them.

 

Until then, we should show remorse and pity to these people and ask Allah I to increase them in knowledge and make them good Muslims, like their European ancestors, Imaam Bukhaari, Imaam Tirmidhi, Imaam an-Nisaa’ii, Imaam Abu Dawud, Imaam at-Tabaraani, Imaam Ibn Hibaan رحمهم الله and others. Amin 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

 

`Abdul Wahhab, Muhammad ibn, Nawaaqid ulIslam, Kashf ash-Shubuhaat fit-Tawhid

 

Ad-Dimashqi, `Imaad ud-Din AbulFidaa’ Isma`il ibn Kathir AlQurshii (701-774 AH), Tafsir al Qur’an al `Azim, al Bidaaya wan-Nihaaya, Mashruu` Maktaba Taalib alIlm, Kuwait, 1414 AH.

 

Aali Shaikh, Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn `Abdul Latif (1311-1389 AH), Tahkim al Qawanin (1380 AH), Majmu`a Fatawa, al Madinah al Munawwara, 1411 AH.

 

Al Ash`ari, Abul Hasan, Maqallat ulIslamiin

 

Al Waki`a, Akhbar ulQadaa’

 

An-Naisaburi, Abul Hussain Muslim ibn Hajjaj al Qushairi (206-261 AH), Sahih Muslim, Dar Ihya’ut-Turaab al `Arabi, (1416)

 

Ash-Shahrastaani, AbulFath Muhammad ibn Abdul Karim (479-548 AH), al Milal wan-Nahal, Mu’sasat ulkutub uth-Tharaafiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon, (1415 AH).

 

Al `Asqalani, Ahmad ibn `Ali ibn Hajar (773-852 AH), Fath ulBari, al Maktabat us-Salafiyya, al Qaahira, Egypt, 1380 AH.

 

Al Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Isma`il al Mughira (191-256 AH), Sahih al Bukhari, Dar al Arabiyya, Beirut (1405 AH).

Al Jawziyya, Abu `Abdullah Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr ibn Ayyub ibn Qayyim (691-751 AH), Madaarij us-Saalikin, Dar ulKutub ul`Ilmiyyah, Beirut (1415 AH).

 

Hanbal, Abu `Abdullah Ahmad, Musnad

 

Hassaan, Muhammad bin, Haqiqat ut-Tawhid,   Dar ulIslam lin-Nushr, Mansura, Egypt (1414 AH).

 

Ibn Hazm, Abu Muhammad `Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Sa`id az-Zaahiri (384-456 AH), al Mahalla.

 

Ibn Taymiyyah, Taqi ud-Din Ahmad ibn Abdul Halim (661-728 AH), Majmu`a Fatawa, Kitab ulIman,

 

Shaakir, Ahmad ibn Muhammad (1309-1377 AH), Umdat ut-Tafsir, Hukm ulJaahiliyyah, Maktabat us-Sunnah, al Qaahira, (1412 AH).

 

Ibn Ibrahim, Muhammad, `Abdul Wahhab, Muhammad ibn, ibn `Atiq al`Anqaari, S`ad, ibn `Abdur-Rahman, Muhammad ibn `Abdul Latif, et al, Ad-Darar us-Sunniyyah fil Ajwabiyyat in-Najdiyya, Kitab ul`Aqa’id, (1417 AH)

 

 

 

 

 

 

About this book

 

“You are from the Khawaarij (Deviants who revolt against legitimate rulers).” Does this sound familiar? Many a Muslim, who has an argument with an opponent about the issues of today, one of them eventually comes to that conclusion about the other.

 

But is every one who is given this title deserving of it? In our research on the topic of the Khawaarij, these accusations are investigated. Every aspect of the Khawaarij is looked at candidly and examined with the utmost of care. How do the Khawaarij think? How do they view others? And are they kuffar or Muslims?

 

Other questions tackled include, Who are the modern Khawaarij? What is the difference between Takfiri and Khawaarij? How do we know them when we see them?

 

Chapters inside include an interview with the reviver of the Khawaarij movement in our time and a history of the rise of the Khawaarij in the subcontinent and Algeria. Included is a rebuttal of their ideas in the Conclusion of this work. Distinctions are drawn between the general Khawaarij and the Khawaarij Murji’a, with exclusive stories that tell how it is that the Khawaarij Murji’a have actually come to rule over nearly the whole of the Muslim world. Get your copy today and know the truth!!