Click here to download:
Do you advise for women to travel to the lands of fighting, especially since there exists a Khilafah state towards which Hijrah is allowed even without a Mahram (any close relative who cannot be married to her)? And if a woman does reach there, then is it allowed for her to get married herself on her own? Or is it necessary that her father who is in her country should agree to whichever man who comes to her?
Personally, from experience I do not advise women to go to the land of battle, especially those lands which are not stable and their control goes around between you and your enemy. And now all the battlefronts are following the tactic of ‘attack and retreat’, and there is no land of Jihad that is stable today (like how it was under the Taliban during the 1990’s) for us to consider it possible or permissible for the women and children to come to such stable lands.
And some of the scholars and leaders have seen and warned about its danger.
From amongst them is Aasim al Mu’ammar, an Arab leader who was present in Afghanistan after the American invasion, and who wrote an article entitled “The danger of women travelling for Jihad in our present time and stories from the ground”. He mentioned in it some tragic and painful scenes which happened to some of the families of the Muhajireen after the fall of the government of the Taliban, scenes which he had himself witnessed, and how some of the apostates distributed these women amongst themselves and so on, and other such stories, which if a person were to read them, he would cry in anguish and in pain.
Shaykh Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi had mentioned in his letter ‘Advise to the brothers who are asking their wives and children to join them in Syria’, that “The ferocity of the battle in Syria has not yet begun”. He then said:
“If the brother who is asking his family and the women to join with him in the field of Jihad in Syria is unaware of these realities, then he is one of the most negligent of people about what is being plotted and planned against him. And such negligence is unbecoming to the Mujahideen. And if he is not negligent of it, and this is what I consider as being more likely and what I think the people of Jihad to be, then how can it be permissible for him to drag his family into such turmoil while our Syrian brothers are themselves fleeing with their women and daughters away from it. And those of them who would wish to wage Jihad would then return back after they have secured their families in a place far away from the battlefield. And they only do this because they are aware of the criminality of this regime and how great is its enmity towards the people of Islam and how they do not hesitate to rape their free women”. (Page 4)
And when Shaykh Eesa al Awshan (who is a judge of Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia) spoke in the magazine (Sawt al Jihad, issue no. 15, page 26) regarding the story of Khalid al-Sebeit, he said “Khalid went to Azerbaijan and then from there to Turkey where his wife was with the women of the Arab Mujahideen, who went out at the beginning of the war”.
So the Mujahideen did not keep their women with them in the land of battle, rather they moved them to a safe place which is away from the area of conflict and fighting due to the fear of the occurrence of the worst.
All what has been mentioned, warned the women from accompanying their husbands to the lands of Jihad!! So how about doing so without even a Mahram in the first place?!
Some of the Shaykhs of Jihad have exempted the one who is being pursued or is wanted by the security.
Secondly: Who is the Khalifah?
It is reported in the two Saheehs (Bukhari and Muslim) that “The Imaam (leader) is no more than a shield behind whom the enemies are fought and the people are protected”.
Shaykh Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi says in Risaala Ath-Thalaatheeniya (page 148) that “What it means is that shelter is sought under the Imaam and under him there is safety and protection for the subjects as he is like a shield and armour for them”.
That is, the actual leader is the one who has the ability to protect the Muslims who are under him. But if we look at the case of al-Baghdadi, he cannot pray in a mosque publicly like how the previous Khalifas used to do, due to his fear of being targeted. So he is not able to protect himself, let alone protect the others.
So when Allah said: “O you who believe! When believing women come to you as emigrants, examine them, Allah knows best as to their Faith. And if you ascertain that they are believers, then do not send them back to the disbelievers”, (Surah Mujaadila) this was after the treaty of Hudaybiyah and after the pillars of the Prophetic authority had become stable in Medina.
Despite the fact that the Kuffar tried to kill the Prophet who was the leader, he did not hide but he kept mingling with the people and prayed with them and associated with them, and the location of the Prophet and the Khalifas after him were well known. And this is an evidence for having gained the actual stability, and not the false stability.
So we cannot compare this situation with the situation of Medina and apply the same evidences in a situation which is completely different.
Thirdly: If we assume that there is someone who did not pay attention to this and she went to the land of Jihad and it became a reality, and she wanted to marry, then the leader or the judge of the group will have the status of the Wali (her guardian) in this case.
Shaykh Abu Qatada said in his third meeting with Ghurfath Al Fajr al Islamiyyah “As for her staying there, if she married one of the youth of Islam who is a match for her, then it is allowed for her”. (Page 13)
That is, it is allowed for her to marry him without the permission of her real Wali through the judge or the leader of the group.
But there is one final point: Sometimes the women go to the land of Jihad, not for the sake of marrying, but for living under the authority of the Jihadi groups, while she does not want to marry. Then a young man comes and proposes for marriage to her, and the judge gets her married to him against her will or without her desiring it – is this permissible?
One of the Shaykhs, Dr. Aamir al-Busalamah wrote a treatise that he named as “The ruling on forcing women to marry” in which he made a comparative study on the four Islamic Mazhabs (Maliki, Hanafi, Hanbali, Shafi’i) and their opinions regarding conducting the woman’s marriage against her will, and he then concluded with the opinion which is the most correct, and he said:
“And that which is apparent from the sayings of the scholars is that it is not allowed to conduct the marriage of a sane adult woman against her will, regardless of whether she is a virgin or not a virgin. Rather it is necessary to have her consent”.
Then he quoted the saying of Imaam ibn al Qayyim which states:
“And the ruling for this is that an adult woman is not to be forced for marriage, and she should not be married without her consent ….. And this is the statement which we believe in. And we do not believe in any other than this. And this is in accordance with the ruling of the Messenger of Allah, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and his commands and prohibitions, and the fundamentals of his Shariah, and the benefit of the Ummah” (Zaad al Ma’ad Fee Hadyi Khayr al Ibaad, 5/96)
Then he stated the evidences from the two Saheehs and the analogy and benefits and harms that support this saying of the impermissibility of marrying a woman against her will and that her consent is a condition for the marriage as Ibn Hazm has stated.
And this is what I have to say about this subject, may Allah reward you with good.
And our final supplications are that all praise belongs to Allah the Lord of all that exists.
JUSTPASTE VERSION: https://justpaste.it/nafeerwomen
The Shaykh, the Allamah, the Muhaddith, Sulaiman bin Naasir al Ulwaan – may Allah free him and kill the one who imprisoned him – said:
“And there is in it another issue and a matter which is very important which we are in need of in our contemporary world and in an age in which the ruling chair is in the hands of the undeserving, and in the shade of this vicious campaign against the Muslim countries – and that is the ruling regarding fighting under the banner of the Kaafir ruler. And that states that, if there does not exist a Shariah banner which is capable of subduing the enemy, then there is no harm in fighting under the banner of that Kaafir ruler, especially if there is in that common public interest and if the major harm will be averted. And this is what the clear Shariah evidences indicate along with the Usooli (juristic) principles and the rules of Fiqh. And it is not correct as per the Shareeah to prevent it based on the Hadeeth “Whoever fights under a banner of ignorance….” (narrated by Muslim in his Saheeh (1848) on the authority of Abu Hurayrah, may Allah be pleased with him). The banner that is of ignorance is the one in which the truth does not stand out clearly from falsehood or it is for ignorant partisanship and corrupted factors and over colour and race and dubious matters.
And how many destructive wars, furious battles and storms of trials have these ill fated banners caused..! And it is this banner that is haram to join and fight under. It is a banner that is not concerned about the religion and does not give any value to its ties. And the meaning may be clear from the Hadeeth when the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “One who fights under a banner of ignorance, having anger for the sake of his group, making calls for his group or supporting his group, and gets killed, then his death is that of one belonging to (the days of) Jahiliyya” . And An Nawawi- may Allah have mercy on him – said in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim: “(Ignorance i.e. Amiyyah) means the blind matter whose purpose is not clear and this is what Ahmad bin Hanbal and the majority of the scholars)”. So whoever fights under the banner of a leader and his fighting is done in support of the leader or to enforce his authority and increase his wealth, then this fighting is haram, haram and this is the dispraised ignorance (Jaahiliya). Continue reading
1. Not differentiating between the general Takfeer (Takfeer al Muthlaq)(1) and the Takfeer of the individual (Takfeer ul Muayyan) (2) or Kufr of the type (Kufr an Naw’) (3) and Kufr of the individual (Kufr al Ayn).
2. Takfeer based on a rule which says that “The people are basically originally upon Kufr” because the land is Dar ul Kufr (land of Kufr.)(4)
Note: As for the rule that “The original ruling on the soldiers of the Taghut and their helpers is Kufr) then there is no mistake in this.
3. Not permitting prayer behind a Muslim whose condition is hidden, until his Aqeedah(5) becomes known.
4. Takfeer solely based on someone merely praising the Kuffar or making dua for some of them without considering the details.
All praise is for Allah, the Lord of All that exists. The best of prayers and peace be on our Prophet Muhammad and his family and his companions.
We have previously discussed with Sheikh Abu Baseer regarding the reasons over which he had based his fatwa that does not allow joining Jabhatun Nusrah. And today inshallah we are presenting a discussion with the Sheikh regarding some of the thoughts in his letter entitled “A discussion over the doubts and responses over my article regarding joining Jabhatun Nusra”. As for the rest of the other issues, we may discuss them in the future separately from this subject, if Allah facilitates it, as distinct topics as they have come from more than one side. And so it would not be good to bring them in this discussion here as they need to be presented as a general response and not specifically addressed towards the Sheikh so that some may not think that the only purpose of this is to give a response to the Sheikh. And it is not for this reason that we write this but rather it is to clarify our point of view to the one who does not know it.
And some examples of the topics which we see it fit to postpone their discussion in a separate article:
1. The bay’ah (pledge) of Jabhat an Nusrah to Al Qaeda: its history, the reasons for its announcement and everything which is pertaining to this topic.
2.Does Jabhat an Nusrah or Qaidathul Jihad bear the responsibility for what was done and is still being done by Jamaat Dawlah (the Khawarij) based on the claim that these Khawarij came from beneath the cloak of Al Qaida, and other such topics.
Returning to the Sheikh’s article, we will carry out the discussion over the following points:
The First Point: What Sheikh Abu Baseer sees as a harm that will come as a result of what he named as “the AlQaidanisation of the Syrian revolution”, is not seen as such by us. This point has been given some refutation which is enough without any need for its repetition. And consequently, the hadiths which the Sheikh has mentioned as evidence are authentic hadiths but using them in our context here is incorrect. Continue reading
My Mujāhid Brother:
The Muslim feels much happiness with the blessings that Allāh causes to transpire to him and motivate him and remind him of the greatness of Allāh’s bounty upon him. And although not every blessing is a blessing in reality – for it might be a trial for the slave and an enticement for him, or other than that – there remains the blessing of the honors that are indisputably nothing but the Grace which our Lord, عزّ وجل, bestows upon the best of His creation, and the most beloved of them to Him was our Prophet Muhammad, صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Indeed it is the blessing of “maintaining steadfastness” and not being affected by the misguidance and deception of those who are astray, as Allāh Ta’ālā says,
And in the Chapter that follows it, Allāh عزّ وجل says, warning His Prophet about these misguided pursuers of Fitnah:
And despite the fact that the believer of all time periods understands the greatness of this virtue, it is the believer during the period of estrangement (Ghurbah) that [reaches] the highest degree of absorption and understanding of the greatness of this Divine blessing, especially when he sees the plenitude of those around him who lapsed without attaining what [they] sought after – and there is no Might or Power except with Allāh. So these situations increase the believer in faith and in deference, and they increase him in his turning to and his need of Allāh, and they increase him in contempt and scorn for himself.
Exactly as the Companions, may Allāh be pleased with them, used to act.
So you see, for example, the guided and directed Imām, the legal expert, [the one] who was given the glad tidings of Paradise and Deliverance – ‘Umar Bin Al-Khattāb, may Allāh be pleased with him, was copious in his weeping over himself and his fear over himself from the sources of hypocrisy, so he would say to Hudhayfah, may Allāh be pleased with him, “I ask you by Allāh, did the Messenger of Allāh count me as one of the hypocrites?”
And Ibn Abī Mulaykah said, “I met thirty of the Prophet’s companions, صلى الله عليه وسلم, and all of them feared for himself from hypocrisy.”
So because of this, they were, may Allāh be pleased with them, the best of the people in action, and the most copious of them in fear, and the most severe of them in accounting themselves due to the glorification of Allāh that was established in their hearts, and their knowledge of His being entitled to a hundred times the worship and submission that the slaves perform.
And due to this Divine consciousness in their hearts, may Allāh be pleased with them, the Messenger of Allāh, صلى الله عليه وسلم, made their methodology the standard next to which no other is acknowledged. So in the Hadīth, “‘And this Ummah will divide into 73 sects, all of them in the Hellfire except one.’ So they [the Companions] said, ‘Which one is it, O Messenger of Allāh?’ He said, ‘Those who were upon what I and my companions are upon today'” . And because of this, the one who seeks to take an example should take them as an example, may Allāh be pleased with them, especially if the strangeness of the Religion heightens and the helpers and the supporters are few in number.
The Strangeness of the Religion:
Yes. “Islām began [as something] strange and it will return to being [something] strange as it began, so Tūbā for the strangers.”
Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allāh have mercy upon him, said, “Its [i.e. Islām’s] Ghurbah (estrangement) is greatest when those who once entered into it forsake it…” until he said, “So indeed no party forsakes Islām except that Allāh brings a people He loves who will fight on His behalf, and they are the Victorious Party until the Hour is established. And this demonstrates that He mentioned this in the context of prohibiting alliance with the disbelievers. So He, Ta’ālā, said,