A Comment On The Khilafa Debate

A Comment On The Khilafa Debate
————————

The following discussion took place between me and a brother who watched the Khilafa debate between Ustadh Abdul Rahman and Abu Baraa. The brother then contacted me and had a discussion with me in which he expressed his doubts after watching that debate.
_______________

The brother: Watch “The Khilafah Debate | Ustadh Abdur Rahman Hassan …” on YouTube… Have you watched it?

Me: Yes.

The brother: Fine….. And Ustadh Abdurrahman doesn’t make any sense for me.

Me: The Ustadh made mistakes with regards to Haakimiyyah. But that guy Abu Baraa was speaking non sense in the debate about the Khilafa. He mentioned some of the most absurd claims.

The brother: Like..?

Me: Like for example he was saying that since the Prophet (sallallhu alayhi wasallam) only spoke to a few leaders of Medina while taking Ba’yah from them, then that proves that you don’t need the support of the majority to be the ruler. This shows Abu Baraa’s ignorance because those leaders of the tribes in Medina with whom the Prophet spoke and took Ba’yah from were all accepted by their people and all the people knew them and they would accept their decisions but in the case of Abu Bakr al baghdadi, nobody accepts their decision or their leadership, and in fact nobody even knows who they really are and the majority of the Ummah are opposed to them and hate them and stand against them. So this shows that what happened during the time of the Prophet was completely different and opposed to that of abu bakr al baghdadi. And the followers of Baghdadi are not the Ummah exclusively rather they are those who have turned against the Ummah and are fighting the Ummah.
And moreover, Abu Baraa’s statement is one of the most foolish statements I ever heard on this subject… Because the authority of the Prophet comes from Allah. So Allah is the one who appointed him as the Prophet and the authority over the entire mankind. And the Prophet speaking to the leaders of Medina was only to defend and protect him. It does not affect his authority. (In fact the one who says that the authority of the Prophet comes from the people is actually following democracy, because by that he is saying that the authority for the Prophet and for Allah for ruling comes from the people and not the other way round…! So it is in fact a greater Kufr than even just democracy…! But this ignorant Abu Baraa did not realize this fact and that he was actually speaking words which would make one fall into the Kufr of democracy…What an ignorance from Abu Baraa…!)

Secondly, this incident is a proof AGAINST Abu Baraa… Because according to Abu baraa HIMSELF in that video, he mentioned that the Prophet at first spoke to several different tribes asking for protection. Many were willing to accept him but did not have the ability to protect him. So the Prophet then went to others who could protect him. So this shows that when a leader takes pledge from the people, protection should be given. So is that the case with Abu bakr baghdadi…? Can he protect the Ummah…? So how can he claim to be their leader and ask for Ba’yah?

The brother: Fine… But I felt his whole point was, how did we make a ‘condition’ that the majority is required. He was continuously asking for daleel and abdurrahman wasn’t having it.

Me: No…It is not like what you said…

The brother: Yes he can protect those within his boundaries. Where did we get that he need to have the ability to protect the whole Ummah in wherever they are?

Me: One of the proofs for the majority is the statement of Ibn Taymiyyah in which he said that if Umar and those with him gave pledge to Abu Bakr but the rest of the majority of the companions did not give him Ba’yah then Abu Bakr would not have become a Khalifa unless the majority of the companions gave him the Ba’yah.

The brother: But that’s what he responded as ‘majority of’ ahl halli wal aqd and not the majority of ummah. And he defined that.

Me: First of all he cannot protect those under him. When America came and made air strikes they could not protect anybody and they themselves went in hiding. So if the NATO force arrived they could easily destroy entire towns of theirs like they did in Afghanistan… So he can’t even protect his own people. But even if we agree for the sake of argument…then every Mujahid group in the world protect their own people. Tell me who protects the people in Afghanistan. Mullah Umar or baghdadi…? So who is their rightful leader…? And his statement regarding ahlul hal wal aqd is another weird argument.

The brother: That argument is valid.

Me: Which one?

The brother: Regarding the other groups holding the same potential… which you said… But not what you said about them being unable to defend themselves in the war… Coz it is a war and it has ups and downs.

Me: No… If it has ups and downs, then that proves that they are not in a state of Tamkeen but rather in a state of war. Because if the Kuffars are able to strike them anywhere in their territories and kill their people, then that means their land is Darul Harb (land of warfare) and not a land with Tamkeen, because you have Tamkeen only when you have security in your land. So them having ups and downs while they are in this defensive war shows that they are not in a stable condition which is one of the requirements for Tamkeen.

Moreover, according to baghdadi, all other groups in the world are invalid and cancelled by them… Did you know that?

The brother: Yes I know that.

Me: That is important. It is not about ups and downs in a war… There are two things to be noted…One is the definition of the Khalifa and does baghdadi fit that…? The second is the Ba’yah. Is it valid or not?

The brother: Go ahead.

Me: Do you know that the Ba’yah is a contract between the leader and the Ummah…? And every contract has it pillars without which it will be invalid… So do you know what this contract of Ba’yah is all about?

The brother: Okay, go ahead with the pillars of Ba’yah.

Me: One is that the Ba’yah is a contract between two parties. So no contract is valid until both the parties agree to it…

The brother: Okay

Me: So to be a leader for the Ummah means it is a contract between the leader and the Ummah.. So if the Ummah does not approve of it, this contract is invalid. Secondly…

The brother: Wait…. Before going to second…. Can u explain what Ummah means in our real world? Every Muslim, or notable Muslims or…?

Me: The entire Ummah or most importantly, its majority.

The brother: This is exactly which I’m trying to understand… From where we took that as a ‘sharth’ (condition), and its daleel for that? The statement of Ibn taymiyya does not prove that. Any more significant daleel?

Me: Akhi, I told you that the Ba’yah is a contract between two parties. The leader and the ummah. So how can this contract exist in reality if the ummah is not there…? If you say minority is sufficient, then where did you find in Fiqh that someone can make a contract on behalf of others without their permission…? Remember, if a few people gave Ba’yah to baghdadi, then it is a contract between him and those few… So he is a leader only for them alone just like every other group. But how does he become a leader for the Ummah because there is no contract made by them or their representatives..?

The brother: Yes. This is a point that I need to think upon.

(The discussion continued after that and more explanation was given to the brother which I hope to summarize at some point soon inshallah)

 

Justpaste Link: https://justpaste.it/khilafadebate1

 

Khilafa – Is it a thing that is declared or decided by the situation?

Khilafa – Is it a thing that is declared or decided by the situation?

(From Dr. Eyad Qunaibi’s page/ Ahmed Sameer)

– Translated by Aamir Wali

From what is obviously self evident is that there is no governorship (Imarah) without a Jamaah (community) and also, from what is self evident is that is that the supreme leadership i.e the Khilafa is at the end ultimately a governorship in a Jamaah (community). That is why the Imam or the Khalifa is described as Ameerul Mumineen (The leader of the believers).

But the supreme leadership (Khilafa) even though is ultimately a governorship, it is unlike any other governorship and it has what it distinguishes itself with and has specific rules and laws.

So while talking about the supreme leadership (Imamat ul Uzma), then what is intended would also be that of the bigger community (Jamaath ul Uzma) which is “THE Muslim Community” and NOT “a community FROM amongst the Muslims”. And “THE Muslim community” refers to the majority of the ummah and its greater populace. So the Imam is only the one whose authority and power extends over to the majority of the ummah.

And that is because the existence of the Grand Imam cannot at all be assumed of without the gathering of the Muslim community and its majority in a union in which it would be appropriate for them to have one single leader. And the evidences associated with this are:

The advice of the Prophet (saw) given to Hudhayfa (ra) when he said to him, “Stick to THE Muslim community and their leader”. So the Prophet (saw) combined these two together putting them in one category and did not differentiate between the two.

And the Prophet (saw) said, “Whoever sees a disliked thing from his leader, let him be patient over it since the one who separates himself from THE COMMUNITY for a handspan and died as such, it is then a death of jaahiliya”.

And he said, “Whoever left obedience and separated from THE COMMUNITY and died, then he has died the death of jaahilia”.

And he said, “Whoever comes to you while you are united under a single leader, while desiring to break your unity and divide YOUR COMMUNITY, then kill him”.

All these hadeeths make the supreme leadership/Grand Imamat and the Muslim community as one single thing and categorizes the one who goes out of the Imam as one who has gone out of the community. This is because the former cannot be assumed without the latter as we mentioned.

And there is no difference amongst those with intellect that the authority of any ameer whose existence is known, its extent is specified and has limits in accordance with his power and ability that he actually has in the circumstance. So if we suppose that a man from amongst the people in the east stood up and declared that he considered himself as the leader of the people in the west whom he does not know nor do they know him and also he does not have any command over them nor any ability or power, he would with that have opposed logic before he opposed the Shareeah, since of what value is a declaration like this that has no reality or truth?!

Hence, governorship is not a declaration but a description that reflects the ongoing reality. It is not gained by intentions or hopes or claims. Similarly is the case with the Grand Imamat. It is absolutely impossible for a man to be considered a Khalifa or an Imam with the supreme leadership unless he has fulfilled the prerequisites of this leadership as to his power and authority over the Muslim community ie. its masses and its great majority. So this is the prerequisite of the Grand Imamat which is different from the rest of the Emirates. And every leader who does not have this authority and such a power, then his authority is not that of the supreme leader or a Khilafa even if he claimed it a thousand times. So names and terminologies are decided by the scenario and not the opposite. Infact any authority can turn into the supreme leadership and Khilafat if it fulfills its conditions and its scenario even if those in authority do not call it an Imamat or Khilafat…!!

Similarly, the opposite may happen. Any of those having any authority can call their leadership as Khilafat and describe their leader with the Grand Imamate but that does not become so. And history is filled with it.

So names do not change the reality of the objects, but the actual authority and its capacity is what decides.

So declaration for an Imam or a Khalifa does not mean that he has become an Imam or a Khalifa, rather this announcement can in the best case be considered to be no more than a request for this man’s authority and an invitation for his appointment. As for him actually being an Imam or a Khalifa or not, then this is completely beyond the announcement and is decided by looking into the actual scenario. Similarly, Umar (ra) gave bayah to Abu Bakr (ra) and declared him to be a leader, but the Imamat or the actual leadership of Abu Bakr was not established until after the majority of the people of shawka (strength) approved of him. Ibn Taymiyyah says,

“As for the governorship and authority, then it is a term for the ability that is held. It could be gained by means that is pleasing to Allah and His messenger like the authority of the Khulafa u Rashideen, and it could also be gained in ways that are in disobedience (to Allah) like the authority of the oppressors. And if it is assumed that Umar and those with him pledged allegiance (bayah) to him (Abu Bakr) but the rest of the companions refused the bayah, then he would not have become an Imam by that. Indeed he became an Imam only by the pledging of allegiance by the majority of the companions who are the people of authority and strength. That is why the abstinence of Sad bin Ubadah did not harm (the leadership), and that is because it would not break the purpose of the governorship whose intent is to get power and authority by which the benefits of the Imamat can be attained. And that occurred by the agreement of the majority over it”.

He also says, “So indeed there is no condition for the khilafat except the agreement of the people of shawkah (strength) and the majority through whom the matter may be set up for gaining the objectives of the leadership. This is why the Prophet (sa) said, “Stick to the jamaah (community) for indeed the hand of Allah is with the community” and “Indeed the devil is with the lone one and is further away from two”.

And none can be found from amongst mankind who separated the Grand Imamah from its conditions for its fulfillment except the Raafidhah! So they caused the people to laugh at their intellects where they named some of the noble ones from Ahlul Bayt as Khulafa and as Imams merely due to them being more entitled for it. Whereas the truth is that even if they were more entitled to it, they did not become Khulafa or Imams as per this meaning. In fact, it would be correct to call them as Imams in the religion but not the Imams of the dunya. And this is not degrading them, may Allah be pleased with them, but a statement regarding the actual reality.

So if a questioner asks, that if the Khilafat and its existence are decided by the scenario and it has conditions to be fulfilled and we are not to claim it or announce it to begin with, then how would you carry the statements of the scholars who stated the obligation to set up a Khalifa/Imam through whom the worldly and religious benefits would be fulfilled? Does this not mean that an announcement for a khalifa should be made today so as to take away the sin from us?

Our reply is that the sayings of the scholars regarding the obligation of setting up an Imam are when the prerequisites of it have been achieved, then it would be an obligation on the ummah to set up an Imam. And when the prerequisites have not been achieved/fulfilled then the talk about the Grand Imamat would be incomprehensible to begin with. And setting up the Imam is an obligation over the jama’ah (community). And when the Muslims do not have the jamaah, then the Muslims are addressed to bring their jama’ah into existence first, and not to bring the khaleefa whose leadership will have no meaning without such a jamaah.

And in our times, if we talk about the obligation of setting up the jamaah (community), then it is a talk about the obligation of repelling every obstacle which prevents such a jamaah from existing i.e. Jihad against the transgressing enemy and its agents who plundered away from the Muslims their authority and who are dividing the Muslim community by laying down borders which they drew by pens so that the allegiance would be for them and not for Islam, those who prevent the law of Allah from ruling and from the return of the unity of their word. So repelling the authority of this kufr is the obligation of our times absolutely by all means and with all certainty. When those obstacles have been removed and such hurdles have been set aside and the authority of Muslims have been returned back to them from those who snatched it from them and their community, from those who divided them, and the authority of the kufr from its chiefs has been removed from them, then it would be easiest for them at that time to chose a man from amongst them who would then be their Imam and Khalifa in reality and not just by claims or announcements!

And here, there is an issue: If the unity of community and authority has been achieved within a jamaah or group from amongst the Muslims and they exist in one of the regions or a unity of community and authority has been achieved in a number of different regions which are away from each other, then I do not know of any difference of opinion regarding their permissibility to have a number of leaders so that each region will have a leader over it. And the meaning of “dispute” and “breaking of ranks” would be non existing because the ummah has not yet united as one community while each of those regions would be in need of a leader who governs it. And it would not be permissible then for any of those leaders to claim an authority that he does not have and to claim himself a position that does not exist and say that he has become the Khalifa and the Imam over the entire Muslim community who may not have even heard about him at all, and then after that claim to have invalidated and cancelled all those Emirates even those over whom his authority has not reached nor is it even anywhere near them. This then would be an act that not just trespasses against the Shareeah but goes against the intellect. We have mentioned previously that those with intellect from every nation have agreed that the rule of every leader is in accordance with his authority and he does not have any command over those he does not have authority. So what meaning will a leadership have without such authority!

And this is not the prohibited plurality of leaders, for indeed what has been prohibited is for there to exist two Imams who are disputing over the same status and authority but not the plurality of leaders in the manner that we have explained and the existing conditions.

As for the Imam having no command outside his authority both in terms of logic and Shareeah, then there can be no clearer evidence than the incident of Abu Basir and his group. When they were not under the authority of the Prophet (sa), it was permitted for them to not abide by the treaty that the Prophet (sa) made with the polytheists (ie Hudaybiya). And infact Abu Basir would receive those who came to him from Mecca and shelter them and they would attack the caravans of the Quraysh and the Quraysh did not accuse the Prophet (sa) of having violated the treaty as they knew well that the command of any leader does not go outside his authority. And Abu Basir was not under this authority and this was permissible for him inspite of there existing the Imam and the leadership with an absolute reality and by fulfilling its conditions in a manner that will never occur in history again. So what then would be the case of the one who does not possess even one tenth of that and compels the people to accept an authority when it has not even reached them?

And with that you will understand that there is no meaning for something known as “announcement for the establishment of the khilafa” just as there no meaning for something known as “announcement for the fall of the khilafa”… since the Khilafa had in actual sense fallen even before 1924 and the announcement of the fallen Ataturk for that did not change any of the rules of reality or legitimacy. So Imamah is not obtained by announcement as we have mentioned and similarly does not fall by announcement. In fact it is only a matter that either occurs in reality or does not occur!

And I am here speaking only about the prerequisites and the current scenario which specifies as to whether a leadership is to be described as the Grand Imamat (Imamat ul Uzma) or no, far from it. Whether the means by which capability and power has been achieved is approved or not is not the subject of my talk since the leader can gain this authority either by consultation (shura) and approval or he may gain it by force, and the sword and overpowering. But whereas if were to speak about the Khilafa that is praised by the sharia and that which has been promised about and which is a specific picture of the supreme leadership, then it is altogether a different talk.

And Allah knows best.

Justpaste Link: https://justpaste.it/gqnj

 

Tandheem ad-Dawlah and their claim they received Ba’yah from Ahl Hal Wal ‘Aqd

The Ahul Hal Wal ‘Aqd are the those of power, authority and influence over the people. The scholars have stated that they may be the likes of the leaders, scholars, tribal leaders and so on. The purpose of Ahl Hal Wal ‘Aqd is to gain approval of the people. So the Ahul Hal Wal ‘Aqd should have sufficient number of people to have acceptance of the Ummah or at least its majority. They are the representatives who represent the Ummah. As we see today, the Ummah has different people across the globe as their different representatives all of whom are obeyed by different sections of the Ummah in different regions. In this case, all of these should be consulted with and made a part of Ahul Hal Wal ‘Aqd. What really matters is the one who can represent the Ummah and be obeyed by them willingly.

It is necessary that the Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd should be representatives of the Ummah, and not that they are to be those chosen by so and so council for himself and then named as the people of Shurah. This is the actions of the tyrants and not the way of Khilafah. In the case of ISIS, not a single one of their so called Ahlul Hal Wal Aqd is accepted by the Ummah. In fact the Ummah does not even know them let alone accept them! This is why their claim of fulfilling the condition of Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd is rejected. So how can you say they represent you or the Ummah when neither you nor the Ummah knows them. Who are these Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd?, What is the proof they fulfilled the conditions of being Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd?, Who are they representing and who chose them to chose (the “Khalifah”)?

It is known in the books that none of the Khulafaa Rashidoon became the Imam except with the agreement with Ahl Hal Wal ‘Aqd, or at least its majority. The establishment of the Imam of the Muslims only occurs when the people of strength and authority agree upon this. Receiving the Ba’yah from Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd is the very essence of Minhaj Nubuwaa (i.e Methodology of Prophethood), and let none come to claim that they are the Khilafah today (as the Prophet peace be upon him told us would be established again), except that they fulfill this crucial element.

Shaykhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said:

“As for the Rafidhah, they say that the Imam (leader) after the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) Abu Bakr was pledged by ‘Umar with the consent of (only) four. So it’s said to them, this is not the view of the Imams of Ahl Sunnah , even if some of Ahlul Kalaam [philosophers] say that Imamah (leadership) is conducted by the pledging of four (people), like some of them said: “It’s conducted by the pledge of two (people)”, and some of them said it’s conducted with the pledge of one (person), these are not the statements of the Imams of the Sunnah.

Rather the leadership in their (Imams of Sunnah) view is established with the agreement of the people of strength on it, and the person does not become a leader until the people of strength, through whose obedience to him the objective leadership is reached, agree upon him. For the objective of the leadership is only attained by capability and authority, so if he’s given a pledge whereby capability and authority are reached then he has become an Imam.

The Imamah (leadership) is dominance and authority, and a person doesn’t become dominant by the agreement of one, two or four (people), except that if the agreement of those entails the agreement of those besides them, thus becoming dominant thereby.”
“And similarly with ‘Umar, when Abu Bakr appointed him, he only became the Imam when they pledged to him and obeyed him, and if it so happened that they didn’t fulfill the appointment of Abu Bakr and didn’t pledge to him he wouldn’t have been an Imam, regardless of whether that permissible or not”

“And if it happened that ‘Umar and a party with him pledged to him (Abu Bakr) and the rest of the Companions withheld from pledging he wouldn’t become an Imam by that, rather he only became an Imam through the pledging of the majority of the Companions who are the people of capability and strength. And due to this the lingering of Sa’d ibn ‘Ubadah brought no harm, because that had no impact in the objective leadership, for the objective is the attainment of capability and authority whereby the benefits of Imamah (leadership) are gained, which were gained by the agreement of the majority”

“So whoever says that he becomes an Imam by the agreement of one, two or four (people) and they aren’t the people of capability and strength then he is mistaken, just like the one who thinks the absence of one, two or ten people is also mistaken”

[Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah, Vol 1, pg. 526-531]

And there are those who claim that it is sufficent that only one, two or three men give Ba’yah for the Khilafah, Abu Nu’aym al-Asbahaani states in his Tadhbeetul Imaamah wa Tarteebul Khilafah, pg. 256

“If he says: “As-Siddeeq (Abu Bakr) was only given the pledge by one man, which is that ‘Umar said to him: “Stretch forth your hand I’ll pledge to you”. Then it’s said (to him): ‘Umar didn’t do that except with knowing of the consent of the Muslims and their uniting upon him (Abu Bakr), and (with the knowledge of) their yielding to his opinion and actions.  And because of their awareness of his trustworthiness, sincerity & following of the truth.  And because tranquility is uttered on the tongue of ‘Umar and his heart, along with what the Prophet (peace be upon hm) taught them, that: “If they obey Abu Bakr and ‘Umar they’ll be guided” and “That they should follow the two after him, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar”.

And it has also been stated, “So whomsoever from the Fuqaha’ said that it (Bay’ah) is concluded by one person from Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd, then they require that this person or small number (of people) is expressive of the will of Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd and is representative of their majority
[al-Wajeez fee Fiqh al-Khilafah pg. 55 by Salah as-Sawi]

So we find that the reality of the matter comes down to the people uniting and coming to agreement of the one who gives Ba’yah on their behalf (i.e the Ahul Hal Wal ‘Aqd even if it is a few people). The important matter to understand is that the Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd should have the sufficient number of people to have acceptance of the whole Ummah or at least its majority, as mentioned earlier. The regions, or numbers are not relevant. It may be possible that one single man alone can be the Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd if the Ummah all accepts and obeys this single person of authority or influence. Clearly, they are the representatives who represent the Ummah. If one man alone is widely accepted by the Ummah, and his decisions will be accepted, then he is sufficient to be from the Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd. But on the other hand, if the Ummah has different people across the globe as their different representatives all of whom are obeyed through out different regions of the Ummah, then all of these must be consulted and made a part of Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd. So if there are 20 or 50 scholars and leaders who are obeyed and accepted willingly in different regions of the earth, then all of these 20 or 50 or whatever the number may be, must be consulted.

And Imam al-Ghazzali further addresses this issue when he said, “And that which we choose is that it’s sufficed with one person who concludes the Bay’ah to the Imam as long as that person is obeyed and of might that’s not overstepped and as long as the masses are inclined towards him and he’s not opposed except by whom no heed is paid to his opposition, then if that one person who’s followed and obeyed described with this description gives Bay’ah than it’s sufficient since the masses are in his agreement”. [Fadha’ih al-Batiniyyah, pg. 176-177]

Shaykh Abdullah al-Mohaisny stated in his piece regarding the claim of the Khilafah of ISIS, “However despite all of that we say that the Khilafah we strive for and our necks are struck for, is that which the Prophet (peace be upon him) promised of, which is “Upon the methodology of Prophethood..Anything besides that is forceful rule which the Ummah has grown tired of and has suffered the anguish of it for decades. Claiming the label of Khilafah without meeting its requirements is teasing the feelings of the Muslims, exploiting their emotions and harming the religion of Allah. The announcement of Khilafah by Jama’at al-Baghdadi isn’t the first case, it was announced before them in Algeria, they fought the Ummah, and the West & its agents rejoiced over this hastening before establishment. Two years ago the Khilafah was announced by Abul Banat and those with him in Syria, they demanded the Bay’ah, they isolated themselves from the Shura of the Ummah and ended! A youth in Afghanistan (also) declared the Khilafah, they came out against the Mujahideen, they imposed on the Ummah to pledge to them. They fought, killed and were killed. What has to be taken into consideration isn’t raising the slogan of Khilafah, but meeting it’s requirements, what has to be in consideration is that it should be on the methodology of Prophethood, or else what did we accomplish?

Dr. Iyaad Qunaaibi mentions,

“Governorship is not a declaration but a description that reflects the ongoing reality. It is not gained by intentions or hopes or claims. Similiarly, is the case with the Grand Imaamah (i.e the Khilafah). It is absolutely impossible for a man to be considered a Khalifah or an Imaam with the supreme leadership unless he has fulfilled the prerequisites of this leadership as to his power and authority over the Muslim community, i.e its masses and great majority. So this is the pre-requisite of the grand Imaamah which is different from the rest of the emirates. And every leader who does not have this authority and such power, then his authority is not that of the supreme leader or a Khilafah even if he claimed it a thousand times. So names and terminologies are decided by the scenario and not the opposite. In fact any authority can turn into supreme leadership and Khilafah if if it fulfills its conditions and scenarios even if those in authority do not call it an Imaamah or Khilafah. Similarly, the opposite may happen. Any of those having any authority can call their leadership as Khilafah and describe their leader with the grand Imaamah but that does not become so. And history is filled with it. So names do not change the reality of objects, but the actual authority and its capacity is what decides.”

To conclude and review this matter, we will raise a few points.

• The Purpose of Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd is to gain acceptance of the Ummah and its obedience. So has the Ummah obeyed the leadership of ISIS or are the majority against them? How can we say ISIS Shurah represent the Ummah when majority of the Ummah are against them?

The purpose of Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd is to get the Ummah united under one leadership. So has the Ummah united under them? In fact, not only has the Ummah turned against them, ISIS has brought in such a huge split in the Ummah that didn’t exist before. They have split even the ranks of the Mujahideen through out the earth and killed their leaders and soldiers. So how can we call it Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd when instead of unity, they have split the ranks of the Ummah and the Mujahideen?

• Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd is for the leader to gain strength and power in his leadership. So that is why they need acceptance and support of the people since it is the people who are his strength and power. So has ISIS leadership gained support and strength from the Ummah or have they created more enemies than they even had just before their declaration?

If one says that they are obeyed in Iraq, that does mean that they are the Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd because even tyrants are obeyed by the people due to fear like the case of Hajjaj, who was obeyed and just like our rulers of today who are obeyed in fear. So such obedience does not mean that they are Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd. Instead they must be those who are obeyed willingly by the masses.

The leader of ISIS even before declaring a Khilafah, was already a leader and a position of authority in Iraq before this declaration of Khilafah. And he was not made a leader by the people but his own group. Once his followers chose him as a leader, they forced his authority on all the others who have never even heard of him. In Fiqh, such a ruler is known as Imam Mutaghaalib or the one who asserts power by force. The difference between Imam Mutaghaalib and the one who is chosen by Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd is that in the former he is obeyed under compulsion and fear but in the later the obedience is willingly. So in the case of ISIS, obedience under them is forced in the people if they are under their authority. Otherwise they are not obeyed in the bulk majority of the Ummah. All that is against the very definition and purpose of Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd. All this proves beyond doubt that no Ahlul Hal Wal ‘Aqd has chosen them nor are they the ones representing the Ummah.

And Allah knows best.

Justpaste: https://justpaste.it/AhlulHalWalAqdDawlah

The increasing extremism within the Islamic State

Interview with Ahmed Al-Hamdan

by Tore Hamming

Part 5

(The increasing extremism within the Islamic State)

Translated by Al Muwahideen Media

 

 

Interviewer: A recent interesting development is the dismissal of Turki al-Binali from the IS Sharia Council allegedly due to his ‘moderate’ view on the ‘excuse of ignorance’ and Takfir al-Adhir. This could be interpreted as a defeat of the Bin’ali trend within IS and a victory for the so-called Hazimis (followers of Ahmed al-Hazimi). How do you interpret this development?

Ahmed Al Hamdan: Extremism in Takfeer is the filthy germ which is found in every Jihadi group because of ignorance and impulsiveness and due to feeling oppressed and other such reasons. However each group deals with this disease in different ways. There are those who take a gradual approach in dealing with it in which those who have extremism are made to undergo Shariah courses like what happened with a group of youth in Waziristan. The officials of Al Qaeda put them under a Shariah course to correct their thinking. (1) Or it would be by expulsion from the group like what happened when Shaykh Abu Mus’ab az-Zarqawi expelled a coordinator who made it a condition that a person should make Takfeer on the Saudi scholars like Bin Baz and Ibn Uthaymeen in order to be sent to Iraq for Jihad (2). But there are also groups who do not immediately deal with this disease or even try to treat it, and so it takes root and spreads inside the group, and then suddenly you see its leaders coming under pressure from a lobby of the extremists, and they get compelled to adopt their ideology, or they revolt against it as had happened with the GIA in Algeria when the group with Zaytouni carried out a coup against the leadership and took control of the group and then imposed their ideology on the group as a whole (3).

ISIS is amongst those groups that did not deal with this extremism from the beginning, and so it gradually spread within its ranks. I guess without me being absolutely sure, that the leadership felt confused in front of its soldiers who used to exaggerate in Takfeer, and they were afraid to appear weak in front of them, and so they tried to get along with them so that they may prevent them from going further to the point of making Takfeer upon themselves, so that the issue will not aggravate soon to a situation of internal fighting.

  1. What prompts me to say this are several things amongst which are: They espoused certain matters relating to Takfeer and then suddenly they began to say that those who espoused this are deviated!
  2. What was stated by Abu Yazin Ash Shami – a member of the Shura council of Ahrar ash Sham- in the debate which took place between him and Abu Muhammad Al Adnani and a group of Shariah officials in ISIS after announcing their state in Sham, when one of those who were present there mentioned that we have become forced to be defensive and are under pressure from our soldiers after Sheikh Al-Zawahiri began to address Morsi with the title “Doctor” Morsi! So they are attacking and we are defending (4).

So it is clear that this group ISIS is trying to silence all of its soldiers who oppose them who are accusing them of being weak. Thus their policies stemmed from reactions due to the behavior of these soldiers, and they confronted extremism with a counter extremism.

However before we speak about the issue of Takfeer on the ‘Aadhir’ we must clarify the concept which states ‘There is no excuse for ignorance in the issue of major Shirk’.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab explained the writings of some of the scholars before him saying that a Muslim who falls into major Shirk is not excused due to ignorance or misinterpretation. In fact he is only excused in one case only and that is when he is compelled or really forced by the enemies. For example:

If I prostrate to a grave and supplicate to the dead person that is in the grave and I say to the dead person “oh Ali, make my matters easy for me and help me.”

From amongst the acts of worship which should be for Allah alone is prostration and supplication for needs which no one except Allah is capable of fulfilling. So when you stand and prostrate to other than Allah, this means that you have made someone else a partner with Allah in a matter that should not be made for anyone except for Allah alone.

So then now you have fallen into Shirk (by associating partners with Allah).

And if I am ignorant that this action is Shirk (associating partners to Allah), will Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab excuse me for this ignorance? The answer is no. And if I did this due to a misinterpretation thinking that this person is an intermediary between me and Allah, will Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab excuse me for this misinterpretation?  The answer is no.

But he will excuse me if a group of people came and threatened me with weapons and they were serious in their threats and I was unable to escape from them, and they said to me “prostrate to this grave or else we will kill you”. So here it is allowed to prostrate as long as you hate to do this action. And this is the only case in which I will be excused by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab.

But why will I not be excused in the first two cases? It is because Allah has warned from Shirk in a very clear manner in the Quran in verses which are easily understandable. So whichever person the Quran has reached, he has received the Hujjah (clear message) and it is not necessary to further clarify it for him. So based upon this, whoever the Quran has reached, he has received the Hujjah (the clear message).

So the matter of making Takfeer on a Muslim if he commits major Shirk is a matter which was agreed upon by the Salafi school (or as known in the west as the Wahhabis) generation after generation. It was only after the establishment of the third Saudi state (the current one) that this matter got reviewed again, and now we find different points of view (5). Despite that, some Saudi official religious figures still support this juristic view. For example:

  • the member of the committee of the senior scholars (Kibaar ul Ulama), Dr. Saalih al Fawzan, who has written an introduction to two books ‘Daabit Takfeer al Mu’ayyan’ and ‘Aarid al Jahl’ by Shaykh Rashid Abul Alaa, which are amongst the books which are being circulated in the Saudi prisons.
  • And also the member of the ‘presidency of scientific research, Fatwas, propagation and guidance’ (Riaasath al Buhooth al Ilmiyya wal Iftaa wa Da’wah wal Irshad), Shaykh Ibn Jibreen when he wrote an introduction to the book “Al Udhr Bil Jahl Tahta al Mihjar Ash Shari’e” by Shaykh Mad’hat al Farraj which is also one of the books circulated in the Saudi prisons.

So the Salafi schools and trends even if they conflict in some matters, they however are in agreement in the others.

But if every group and lobby within ISIS adopts this position of not excusing the ignorant person in the matters of major Shirk, then what is the problem?

The disagreement is in one issue only, and it has a relation to the legitimacy of ISIS and its leader.

It is the issue of Takfeer ul Aadhir (making Takfeer on the one who excuses the ignorant) and a series of chain Takfeer based on this.

Let us give an example: “Sulayman” does an act of Shirk and so he is a Mushrik Kaafir according to all these groups with no disagreement. However “Ahmed” does not make Takfeer on this “Sulayman” because of some doubt he has in this matter. Here they get divided into two groups – The group with Turki Bin’ali says that Ahmed does not become a Kaafir except after clarifying the matter to him regarding Sulayman’s action of Shirk and the doubts have been removed and the matter has been explained to him. (This act of clarifying is known as providing the Hujjah).

So Turki Bin’ali says about the person who does not make Takfeer on a Mushrik or a Kaafir: “As for the one to whom it has become clear through evidences from the Sharia about the Kufr (disbelief) of a person and then he still did not make Takfeer on him, he is a Kaafir” (6). So it also becomes understood from this statement that the one to whom it has not become clear, it is not allowed to make Takfeer on him.

The Hazmi group would immediately make Takfeer on Ahmed without any need to clarify the matter to him and remove the doubts. In fact they even make Takfeer on the one who does not make Takfeer on him!!

The Shariah official of ‘the Islamic state’ in Yemen, Abu Bilal al Harbi who was one of those who had previously been close to al Hazmi said “We are free from his latest Fitna (ordeal) which is to make Takfeer on the Aadhir (the excuser) and we believe that the one who excuses is not to be made Takfeer upon except after the matter has been made clear to him and the doubts have been removed. I asked al Hazmi about chain Takfeer and he said it goes up to the third person (i.e. Takfeer is made till the third person in the series of the one who excuses the one who excuses the one who excuses the one who commits Shirk – i.e three people in the chain of excusers) and I asked him for the evidence that it is made till the third person only and he gave me no evidence for that” (7).

How does this disagreement affect the legitimacy of ISIS and its leader?

-The Shiah are Mushrikeen and Kuffar by the agreement of these people.

-Shaykh Ayman al Zawahiri does not make Takfeer on all the Shiah. He excuses their general masses and because of this he himself is a Kaafir Mushrik according to the Hazmi wing.

-Baghdad addressed al Zawahiri previously saying “May Allah protect him” and as “the Shaykh the Mujahid”, and this means that he does not make Takfeer on him.

-So then he (Baghdadi) himself is a Kaafir..!

And if the leader is a Kaafir then it is not an Islamic state..!!

The second problem is that amongst many who do not speak the Arabic language and who speak in Russian and English, there is a matter that is spreading amongst them gradually, and appears to be taking root in them. And that is the issue of the Takfeer on the Aadhir (on the excuser). ISIS has been spreading their propaganda strongly in these two languages and also amongst many who come to them especially those who speak Russian who have engrossed themselves deeply into this innovation of making Takfeer on the Aadhir. And the ranks of these people are gradually growing stronger inside ISIS due to many people who have this belief entering ISIS. And they are divided into three groups:

  1. The first group is of those who have fought against ISIS (8).
  2. The second are those who have disassociated from ISIS and are trying to split from it (9).
  3. And a (third) group that is still within its ranks and spreading these thoughts.

Previously ISIS used a technique of eliminating the leaders of these people (10), but now it has gone out of control and these people who make Takfeer on the Aadhir have increased in large numbers, and it is difficult to deal with them all using the same method which was previously used when they were only a few.

Now we will deal with the final point, which is the statement attributed to ISIS regarding the issue of the Aadhir “the excuser” (11).

The reality is that this statement does not agree with the bases of those who make Takfeer on the Aadhir, rather there are radical differences, such as:

  • In the first page it demonstrated the mistake in the arguments of those who make Takfeer on the Aadhir since those who make Takfeer on the Aadhir say that the Aadhir becomes a Mushrik by not making Takfeer on the one who does an act of Shirk, whereas the statement says that this argument is wrong because we don’t say that the one who does Shirk and the one who does not do it are equal, and this argument will necessarily lead to chain Takfeer.
  • In the second page ISIS forbade the use of certain terms such as “the foundation” and “necessary implications” in the meaning of “there is no God but Allah” and “Kufr bi Taghut” and the term “Takfeer on the Aadhir” whereas these terms are the central themes of those who propagate Takfeer on the Aadhir..!
  • And in the third page it says that the issue of Takfeer on the Aadhir is an issue which changes depending on the circumstances and it is not always the same. Sometimes the person who doesn’t make Takfeer on the Mushrik does not become a Kaafir because the matter is unclear and ignorance is widespread and propagation is weak and doubts are widespread. So here it is necessary to clarify the matter (i.e. provide the Hujjah), and if he still abstains from making Takfeer after the matter has been clarified then he will become a Kaafir. This is contrary to the beliefs of those who make Takfeer on the Aadhir who do not accept these kinds of excuses which can prevent Takfeer. Rather, they make Takfeer even on the one who abstains from Takfeer even at a time when ignorance is widespread, propagation is weak and doubts are common.
  • Also, in the third page, they said that there is an exception which is during a situation in which there is an Islamic state which preaches Tawheed and renounces Shirk “like our state now” (as per their claim). So here there does not exist anything that can prevent Takfeer on the one who does not make Takfeer on the Mushrikeen, because the matter has become clear (in an Islamic state). Even though both the groups would reach the same conclusion here, the arguments taken from the Shariah by both the groups to view the matter, are different. ISIS applies this ruling inside their borders only, which would mean that this is not applicable to those outside ISIS, because there the voice of Islam is not loud enough or there does not exist an Islamic state which calls towards renouncing Shirk and towards Tawheed, as per their claim. So based upon this, this ruling applies only in areas under their control and does not extend to the rest of the lands. And this is contrary to the arguments of those who make Takfeer on the Aadhir, who as we have stated in the previous point do not give any consideration to such differences in circumstances.
  • However in the fourth page they used flexible terms which can take many meanings. They say in it that it is necessary for the preacher in the Islamic State to remove the doubts in abstaining from Takfeer on the Mushrikeen, but in the previous page they say that this is a clear and evident matter! So I do not know how this matter can be clarified to the people when it is already a clear matter! As if they are still dealing with it as if it is an unclear matter!!!

So ISIS has two solutions, and each one is equally difficult.

To formally adopt the belief of making Takfeer on the Aadhir in the form put forward by those who make Takfeer on the Aadhir. And by that they will have given to their opponents in the other Islamic groups such as Al Qaida the proof that they are extremists who have no connection to the Jihadi methodology and its previous Shaykhs, in a clearer manner than before. This will weaken their propaganda amongst their supporters abroad.

Be silent or oppose this thinking, which will increase the numbers within its ranks by new members joining them or by being convinced of it, who will then become an obstacle for them, destroying them from the inside, whether they refrain from fighting or they fight against ISIS themselves for not adopting their view.

==========================

Footnotes:

(1) – In fact Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin used to prohibit speaking about making Takfeer on the common soldiers. He said, “In an authentic Hadeeth from our Prophet, may prayers and peace be upon him, he said “If a person makes Takfeer on his brother, then one of them would definitely become a Kaafir”. If the one who has been called a Kaafir is indeed a Kaafir then it is over, and he is a Kaafir. But if he was not a Kaafir then it returns to the one who said it (on the one who made Takfeer). So this is a very, very, very severe warning against getting involved in this issue, especially in regards to Takfeer on a specific individual. So fear Allah, glory be to Him, and beware, and again beware…! Making Takfeer on the people is a very great sin, and from amongst the very major sins. So safeguard your tongues. And when we speak, if the speaker is from the people of knowledge and knows the rules of Takfeer, there is no problem if he speaks about this and clarifies it to his brothers, like when sometimes some people commit nullifiers of Islam. So it is detailed and sensitive issue. Sometimes a person may do an act of Kufr but he will still not be a Kaafir due to his ignorance or due to some compulsion. These are detailed issues and it is not easy for the brothers in general to learn it or specialize in it. But we normally speak on matters in general. So fear Allah and stay away from this matter, and busy yourselves by remembering Allah a lot and supplicating to Him and by acknowledging the blessings of Allah and being grateful for these blessings, until we meet Allah while He is pleased with us. So before you speak, think about what will be the consequences of this statement, and strive hard in obeying Allah and in Jihad for the sake of Allah. And fear Allah in those matters in which you do not have a deep knowledge. And to fear Allah means you should not boldly issue Fatwas. [“Faith defeats arrogance” at 58:00 minutes, by As Sahaab Media foundation]

The former Mujahid in Afghanistan and the ex-detainee in Guantanamo, Waleed Muhammad Al Haajj, said on his Twitter page: “The commander Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin, may Allah have mercy upon him, gathered all the Mujahideen at the Farooq military camp leaving only the guards at the gate when he had heard that some of the Mujahideen at the camp had made their main concern to say that such and such a person is a Kaafir and such and such a person is an apostate. So he gathered them together and said “Oh my sons, you came here to train and prepare, so do not concern yourselves with Takfeer, and leave it to the scholars”.

Links to the tweets:- (12)

(2) – A member of the Shariah committee of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Maysarah al Ghareeb said: “I met a brother from Sham who had recently entered Iraq. He told me about an incident that occurred to him, which in brief was that prior to his entry into Iraq he had met a brother who came from the Arabian Peninsula, at one of the guest houses. And while they were eating, the coordinator asked the brothers about their beliefs regarding Bin Baz and Ibn Uthaymeen, and it became clear to him that the brother from the Peninsula did not make Takfeer on them. So this host was surprised at that and he rebuked the brother, telling him that Shaykh Abu Mus’ab makes Takfeer on them both and that the one who does not make Takfeer on them will not enter the land of Jihad. At that, the brother asked in amazement “So you are stopping me from entering Iraq?” and the host said “Yes”, and he did what he threatened him of doing and he sent him back to where he had come from. But the brother who spoke to me was afraid and he did not say his opinion regarding the matter due to his fear that he also will be prevented from entering the land of Jihad and Ribat. I immediately raised the case to our Shaykh (Zarqawi), may Allah have mercy on him, especially since he had entrusted me to tell him everything that was happening in the field due to his fear that his followers may not be able to reach him because of him remaining hidden for the sake of security. So he became very much angry and threatened the one who attributed an opinion to him which he did not believe in, and ordered his deputy to investigate this matter and if it was found to be true, then to expel the host from the group. Then the Shaykh told me “It is true that I consider them as having misled the Ummah by their Fatwas, but I do not make Takfeer on them. By Allah, even if the brother from the Peninsula does not make Takfeer on (King) Fahad, I would still not prevent him from Jihad. Many have entered Iraq who do not make Takfeer on the Saudi government.” [Al Zarqawi as I knew him” –3/6 released by Al Furqan Foundation]”

(3) – Shaykh Atiyatullah who was at that time in Algeria spoke on the details of a coup led by Jamaal Zaytouni (Abu Abdur Rahmaan Ameen) against the leadership of the group by putting pressure on the media official to issue a statement under the name of the Shura council stating that the previous leader had been removed and Zaytouni has been appointed in his place and he spread it quickly to the battalions and to the brigades for the matter to become firmly established. Then he met with the actual leader and the Shura council and refused to step down saying “what will decide between me and you is killing”. So they stepped down and left their leadership to him to prevent bloodshed. (Refer to the book: “The Algerian experience”, by Atiyatullah, P.16)

(4) – Refer to “The details of the debate with the group ISIS” by Shaykh Abu Yazen ash Shami, with comments by the previous head of the Shariah office in Ahrar ash Sham, Shaykh Abu Muhammad as Saadiq P.6

(5) – From those major scholars during the period of the third Saudi State who adopted a somewhat different view are: Ibn As-Sa’adi who wrote on that in (Fataawa as-Sa’adi, P.447) and Ibn Uthaymeen in (Sharh Kashf Shubuhaat, P.37)

(6)– “Al Kawkab Ad-Durrie Al Muneer”, p.11, Sharh Nawaaqid Al Islam Al Ashrah, lesson 2 (50:00), Tawheed broadcast in the city of Sirte, 3rd August 2013

(7) – The letter: “Al Hazmi from a close look”, p.5, 5th August, 2014

(8) – For example Abu Mu’az al Aasmi, one of the former soldiers of ISIS who were imprisoned previously in the prison of Raqqa and fled after the US bombed it, wrote an article on 3rd October 2016 entitled “The reality of the clash at Aleppo and the cowardice of the soldiers of Al Baghdadi, the Taghut of Shaam”, and in it he mentioned about a fight that took place between this group and Baghdadi’s group in the city of Al Baab and then at a farm between Al Raii and Jarablus.

(9) – Al Aasmi also stated in the above mentioned article that “After Allah guided a group of Muhajireen brothers towards Tawheed in the city of Al Baab, in Aleppo, the security apparatus of the ‘Idols’ State’ began to plot against them after they saw that the call towards Tawheed had reached everyone and the one who has not been guided towards it would leave fighting until he gets clarification and searches for the truth”.

(10) – On 16th August 2014 a statement was published entitled “Aiding the imprisoned brothers in the Kaafirs’ Jahmiyyah State” in which it was stated that these:- “(Abu Ja’far al Hattaab, Abu Mus’ab At-Tunisi, Abu Usayd al Maghribi, Abul Hawraa al Jazaairi, Abu Khalid Ash-Sharqi, Abu Abdullah al Maghribi and Abu Umar al Kuwaiti) have been arrested by ISIS for making Takfeer on the Aadhir, and since the past two years their fate has been unknown, and it is likely they have been executed.”

(11) – It is the statement number 155, issued by Al Maktab al Maqreezi Li Mutaaba’ah Ad-Dawaween Ash-Shariea”, on 25th May 2016.

Muw image 1

https://justpaste.it/ahmedinterview5

http://www.jihadica.com/the-increasing-extremism-within-the-islamic-state/

Advice from Sheikh Abu Muhammad Al Maqdisi to the Mujahideen in Shaam

Advice from Sheikh Abu Muhammad Al Maqdisi to the Mujahideen in Shaam

May peace, mercy and blessings of Allah be upon you.

May Allah bless you beloved brother.

By Allah my brother, I do not know of any better advice to give you and to your brothers and to your loved ones, than to have fear of Allah.

And I have another advice for you about a matter that is giving me sleepless nights, and I say it summarizing it as:

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah.

I remind you of the Hadith of the Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, “There will always be a group from my Ummah following the commands of Allah, they will not be harmed by those who oppose them and those who abandon them, until the decision of Allah comes”.

From amongst the most important advice I have for the Mujahideen in this age is to increase the number of the supporters of Sharia and those who are seeking it, and those who are striving for its establishment, because Allah will ask them about their lives as to how they gave it up, and about their blood as to how they let it spill. The Mujahid did not migrate from his land and carry his weapon except for striving for martyrdom and for the pleasure of Allah and for the loftiest Firdaws (in paradise).

And this matter will not be correct or complete or fulfilled except through sincerity in his intention, speech, action, and his fighting and his striving like how Allah has said “And they have been commanded to do no more than: To worship Allah, offering Him sincere devotion, and inclining only to the truth” (Surah 98:5). So it is not sincerity that the Mujahid desires to raise a banner of nationalism or establish a nationalistic, democratic or secular rule.

Sincerity and Tawheed require that he fight to spread the soleness of Allah everywhere and under this comes the subject of Allah as being the sole ruler and the sole law maker. And one of the matters which no one can dispute about it today is that there are in the fields of Jihad that which the Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, has informed us of regarding the existence of various forms of fighting every time.  So amongst them are those who fight to be called as a Mujahid, and those who fight for war booty, and those who fight for the sake of a banner whose aim is not clear, or in ignorance or for nationalism. And amongst them are those who fight by taking instructions from foreign countries (whether America or Arab countries), and those who fight for the victory of a group or organization without looking at how close that group is to Allah’s religion, and without looking at its objectives and its banner.

The Muwahhid (the one who believes that Allah alone has the right to be worshipped) does not fight for any of these aims or under any of these banners. But he is as the Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, has described “Whoever fights for the Word of Allah to be on top of all, then he is fighting in the path of Allah”. And ‘the word of Allah’ is Tawheed (i.e. the statement “None deserves to be obeyed and worshipped except Allah”).

This contains in it the word “none” which necessitates disassociation from all the false deities regardless of whether they are people, stone, laws, constitutions, or the path of Shirk and secularism. And all those who know the fields of Jihad know that there are groups there that are fighting for the sake of these false deities without any ambiguity in their stances and they openly declare their polytheistic aims. And amongst them are those who are climbing over the skulls of the martyrs and riding over the body parts of the heroes to achieve their nationalistic aims. They do not find any problem in betraying them for that by falsely claiming that they are striving to establish the Shariah, but their statements when they are with the enemies of Allah and their words which they broadcast in the media expose them and show their stances and their real aims without they attempting to hide it…!

And you them signing on documents striving to establish the polytheistic democratic state, or collaborating with and supporting the one who openly declares that the type of government that they seek will be based on the choice of the majority…!

It is a very common basic knowledge that the field is not lacking in truthful ones who openly state and declare that their aim is to establish the Shariah truthfully and seriously, and they do not say or do things which contradict this aim. So wherever you find these truthful ones, then hold on to their group very firmly, and increase their numbers and do not let your men separate from their men until your soul leaves your body or Allah grants you victory.

And do not be tempted by those who mislead and who want you to spill your blood for their projects which will result in the ballot boxes of the Shirk of democracy, by them quoting the statement of some of the scholars who said “Defensive Jihad does not require prerequisites or conditions”. In fact it is Allah’s words that deserve to be given preference and it is His book that has more right to be used as evidence. He, glory be to Him, says “And they have been commanded to do no more than: To worship Allah, offering Him sincere devotion, and inclining only to the truth”. So He has ordered us that our worship, our Jihad and our actions are to be solely and sincerely for Allah, and this how Tawheed is fulfilled, which is Allah’s right over His slaves.

Allah has says “Whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, while being a believer, they will enter Paradise and will not be wronged, [even as much as] the speck on a date seed.” (4:124)

So He has made Imaan (belief in Him) a condition for righteous actions and for Jihad and for others likewise, just as He has made it a condition to receive His promise. And the saying of the scholars that “There are no conditions for defensive Jihad”, if it is without restrictions like how some ignorant ones understand, and by which some of those who deceive their followers got misled, it would still be incorrect to use that as evidence since there exists Mujahid groups that fight in the path of Allah and that raise the banner of Tawheed clearly, and they openly announce their aim of implementing the Shareeah. So as long as these types of groups exist, it will be obligatory on everyone who long for Allah and for the afterlife to increase their numbers, and it will be obligatory on him to fight alongside them, and he must remind them that he only joined them because of their aim to implement the Shariah, and that if they abandon this aim then he will abandon fighting alongside them, not by abandoning fighting altogether but that he will join the ones who have this aim, and are under this banner and have this goal of implementing the Shariah.

Every fighter should give his pledge to the leader of his group upon this condition in all clarity, so that the fruits of Jihad are not hijacked again just like how it had happened in the other lands of Jihad when the thieves who steal the sacrifices of others climbed over the skulls of the martyrs to reach the positions of power to rule people by their polytheistic democracy.

So I emphasise on this matter which should be self evident and clear for every Muwahhid because we see today in Syria that there is an increase in the traders of Jihad and the thieves who steal the sacrifices of others by deceiving the youth and misleading them and who have ties to foreign countries and who conspire against the Jihad. So it is the duty of every fighter to purify their ranks from these, and it is the duty of every preacher and student to expose these traders of Jihad with clarification. And it is the duty of every leader and official to not betray those upon whom Allah has given them leadership by them hiding this matter from them and their blood being wasted for the victory of such kind of traders who exploit other’s Jihad.

And in the Hadith narrated by Ma’qil Bin Yasar, may Allah be pleased with him, he says “I heard the Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, say “If Allah makes His servant a leader over a people and he dies by having betrayed those under him, then Allah will prohibit him from entering paradise”. (Bukhari & Muslim)

And I have come to know unfortunately that some of the Muhajireen conceal some of these details from their followers and even prevent them from reading the news to know the differences existing among the groups and what is being said by the Sheiks and scholars on these critical and important topics, by them claiming that they are afraid of them falling into Fitna (trials). I say to them “Surely they have already fallen into Fitna” (Surah 9:49). It is because their brothers are fighting sincerely and fiercely, and they have migrated from their lands to give victory to the religion of Allah and to establish His laws, whereas their leaders know that some of these groups that have signed on the documents for democratic state are using them and bringing them close to them to benefit from their fierceness in fighting and to exploit their sacrifices to widen the area that is under their control which will at the end be governed according to what these people have signed on the documents and agreements under the supervision of the Tawaghit who are funding them. So there is no doubt that hiding this matter without advising their brothers, there is no doubt that this is a betrayal towards Allah, to the believers, to Jihad, and to their sacrifices. Allah says “O you who have believe, do not betray Allah and the Messenger or betray your trusts while you know [the consequence]” (Surah 8:27).

And all praise is to Allah, by His grace, I constantly comment on these dangerous issues, and I advise on this topic, since they are very grave issues that are related to the blood of the Mujahideen and their sacrifices, and so I always advise them about it, and I warn against stealing the fruits of Jihad and trading on the sacrifices of the martyrs. And because of that, we became enemies of the thieves of Jihad, and to its tradesmen and to those with distorted projects and who are financed by the Taghut regimes.

And whatever be the case, I will not stop warning against that and cautioning and advising about that, even if all of them become our enemies. And we will not allow them to tamper with the sacrifices of our martyred brothers or to steal the blood of the Mujahideen to waste them on their dirty projects to carry out the conspiracies of those who finance them.

And we will not give up advising our brothers and warning them about this very serious matter even if the whole world turns against us.

Our comfort comes in the saying of the Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, which we have mentioned in the beginning of this talk which is ” There will always be a group from my Ummah following the commands of Allah, they will not be harmed by those who oppose them and those who abandon them, until the decision of Allah comes”. We ask Allah the most high, to make us from among them.

“And Allah is predominant of His affair, but most of the people do not know”. (Surah 12:21)

We ask Allah to protect you and to grant you steadfastness, and to use you to make His religion victorious, and to join together the hearts of the truthful ones to implement His Shariah and to establish His religion.

And may peace and blessings of Allah be upon the messenger of Allah.

JustPaste link: https://justpaste.it/maqdisiadviceshaam

Muw image 1

The Role of Ideologues

Interview with Ahmed Al-Hamdan

by Tore Hamming

Part 4

(The Role of Ideologues)

Translated by Al Muwahideen Media

Interviewer: Part of the struggle between IS and AQ happens through ideologues either part of or sympathetic to one of the two movements. AQ has consistently been supported by major ideologues like Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, Abu Qatada al-Filastini and Hani Siba’i, while IS has relied on younger people, most famously Turki al-Bin’ali. How do you see the role of these ideologues for the broader struggle within Salafi-Jihadism?

Ahmed Al Hamdan: In fact, this question has been phrased wrongly.

We must realize that the problems of ISIS are no longer confined to a conflict with Al Qaeda in just the Arab region only making the Arabs to be the only influential speakers for Jihad. Rather ISIS has come to every language and nationalities! And they have come into conflict with groups that are not Arabs. These nationalities and groups have speakers that speak in their languages and influence them more than the Arab speakers.  I will give you an example:

Amongst the English speakers, Shaykh Anwar al Awlaki is considered to be one of the main leaders and ideologues of Jihad, while amongst the Arabic speakers he is considered to be a Jihadi commander only. Why? It is because all the Shariah treatises of Shaykh Anwar have been released in the English language. They were not released in the Arabic language with the exception of 4 statements, which were all exhortative statements.

So if we compare for example the influence of Shaykh Anwar al Awlaki amongst the English speakers with that of the influence of the Shaykhs such as Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi and Abu Qatada al Filastini, there is no doubt that Shaykh Anwar al Awlaki would be much more influential. And this can also be seen with the American Shaykh Ahmad Jibril. I myself and some of those occupied with the Arab Jihadi issues had never heard of him at all until recently when communicating with the English Jihadi media. And we came to know that this person has a lot of influence and is widely known, despite us having not heard about him at all before.

And this is a general principle: The more material exists for a person in a specific language, the more will be his influence upon the speakers of that language. How many materials of the ideologues of Jihadi groups in Arabic have been translated into Turkistani language for example? Maybe 2 or 3. So is this sufficient to influence the Turkistanis in the battle against ISIS? The answer is no. However when a person like Mufti Abu Dhar Azzam break away and release a statement criticizing ISIS, this will have a greater effect than translating some articles of al Maqdisi and al Filistini about ISIS into the Turkestan language, even if he is less knowledgeable than them. Why is this so?  Because Abu Dhar is known amongst the Turkistanis and he speaks in their language and he has held lectures and lessons among them. And so, being previously known as well as a common language is what becomes effective for having influence in battles, and not just Shariah knowledge.

Who is the foremost ideologue for Jihad and the Jihadi groups in Europe? We don’t know. Perhaps a Shaykh who is young in age and who speaks French will have a greater influence than Shaykh Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi or Abu Qatada al Filistini upon the Jihadis who speak in French.

So the person who speaks directly to you and who always keeps you at the center of the events will be more effective than a person with Islamic knowledge who does not speak directly to you and who has to use interpreters who may be late in translating his statements or may not translate all of his statements.

However because of the worldwide battle against ISIS, there have emerged communication bridges between groups that are fighting against ISIS and who speak different languages. For example, we see that Dr. Ayman al Zawahiri’s words get translated into Russian by the Islamic Emirate of the Caucasus (1) or get translated into Turkistani by the Turkistan Islamic Party, (2) and we have seen Shaykh Ayman trying to address these organisations by mentioning their merits. And we have seen how the ideologues and the leaders of the Arab groups have released statements in solidarity with the Islamic Emirate of Caucasus against the attempts of ISIS to split its ranks, (3) and we have seen how when the Turkistan Islamic Party released a speech from its top most leader refuting ISIS, they put the Arab scholars of Jihad in the background. (4)

So I think we are facing a situation known as “the globalization of the Jihadi organisations” in contrast to “the globalization of ISIS.”

And this has resulted in intermingling and openness towards each other due to the existence of a common enemy. Previously the Russians were fighting the Caucasians and the Chinese were fighting the Turkistanis and the Americans were fighting Al Qaeda, most of whom have been Arabs. However these organisations have now found themselves against a united common enemy, which is ISIS, which is trying to dismantle them. And this has led to them eventually coordinating with each other to fight this new enemy which is threatening the fortresses from within, as opposed to the enemy which is not common to them all and threatens the fortresses from the outside.

And this is another principle: Whenever there is a single enemy, there is a larger chance of unity and cooperation.

So due to this, there began to circulate writings which refute ISIS and translated works have begun to spread in different languages about a single issue only, that is refuting the misconceptions caused by ISIS. And I think this is something that has not happened before.

This is one matter. As for the other matter, it is why have younger ideologues inclined towards ISIS, while their teachers have inclined towards Al Qaeda?

I have answered this question in my previous reply, and I have said that the greater a person’s age and the more his experience in life, the greater will be his caution in dealing with any newly occurring matter, as opposed to the one who has no experience and whom you mostly see acting without forethought and who is more emotional rather than being logical.

Secondly, these students took the lead at a time when those Shaykhs were imprisoned- I mean the two Shaykhs Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi and Abu Qatada al Filistini. And I think they said to themselves that “we must fill the vacuum left by our Shaykhs”, and they put themselves on the same level of their Shaykhs, and they began to speak on fresh matters which are very complicated, in a manner which is different from that of their Shaykhs who used to be calm and careful. And here let me write a historical testimony:

Turki Bin’ali had gone to Syria twice. The first time, he claimed, he wanted to send relief aid, and the second time was the one in which he did not return. And before he went for his first time, he was told not to listen to only one side, specifically in the matter of the dispute between Jabhat un-Nusrah and ISIS. But when he returned from Syria, we sat down together, and there was a change in his tone of speech about Jabahat al Nusra and it had become very harsh. (5) And when he was asked and told “Have you tried to hear from Jabhat un-Nusra when you were in Syria to understand their point of view?” he said “No, rather the Islamic State and its representatives are trustworthy and they do not lie!”… And so there is no need to hear both sides…!

This is not something which someone else has told me, rather I saw it with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears. So all his books and speeches and articles with which he supported ISIS were built upon this foundation, which is hearing only from one side which as per his claim, does not lie. Then it became clear to us with the passage of time that these representatives would lie even in their official publications. So look at what happens when a student takes the place of a teacher while he is not qualified!!

On the other hand, Shaykh Abu Qatada was asked after 20 years, did he benefit from the events in Algeria when he was young. And he said “Yes, I have benefitted greatly, one of the most important of which was to not be deceived by the way how a questioner formulates his question, because sometimes he will lie and deceive and formulate questions which are not in accordance with reality in order to get the Fatwa he wants to support his stance against his opponents. So whenever I feel that a person is doing this, I would ignore his questions so that he does not take my Fatwas to misuse them in an improper manner”. (6)

But the person with little experience will fall into this mistake and he will sympathise with the questioner who has formulated his question that shows him as being oppressed, and he will issue a Fatwa according to what he likes and desires.

What makes a person forget himself or forget his real position is those around him, especially when they praise and exaggerate in praising the student of knowledge, and when he is addressed as ‘Shaykh’ and ‘scholar’ and with other such names. And when many people repeat these words it causes him to actually think that he has become a Shaykh and a scholar and that he is entitled to speak on the most complex matters. Therefore he should not be misled by such words of praise, and they must not cause him to forget his actual position. And if he knew what his actual position is, he will not be affected by such praises and speak on critical issues while not being qualified for it, because he knows his true worth, and he will not be carried away by these people who praise him as he knows that they are exaggerating or maybe they are exaggerating for other purposes, such as to cause you to fall into this trap, and hence you would be careful. But the one with little experience is often naïve and not cautious or aware.

In the end, how is it possible for the gap between the generations to have an effect in supporting different organisations? There is no doubt that the influence of the teachers is much greater, and the level of their fame and their positions are greater than these students who emerged only through the internet. Shaykh al Maqdisi is a person who is well-known to the most prominent leaders and to all the chiefs of the Jihadi movement, and likewise Shaykh Abu Qatada. They are considered by many as sources of reference on religious matters for Al Qaeda, (7) as opposed to these students who are not famous, because many of the students used to write under pseudonyms and some of them did not reveal who they are even to this day. So some are hesitant in promoting or mentioning people who are unknown, and many of them have stopped writing after joining ISIS.

And this is because of two issues. First, they are busy in teaching and education because ISIS has seized large areas in Iraq and Syria and it needs to fill this vacuum by teachers of Sharia, who hold seminars, speeches and lessons. And the one who becomes busy with that will find it difficult to write replies and research on the internet. The second issue is that which Shaykh Al Maqdisi himself informed me, from his contact with people in ISIS which was that the minister of information who was recently killed had prevented these people from writing under their real names, fearing that they would achieve high status and then split later, which could be used as propaganda to dissuade people from joining ISIS. Apart from that there is no doubt that the teachers are the ones with more influence and credibility than the students and they are ahead of them for the following reasons:

  1. Because their knowledge on religion and awareness on Islamic and religious matters is more than the students.
  2. Because they are well known and are people who had their stances and sacrifices and firmness that are known for over three decades, unlike many of the students who write under pseudonyms and who only jumped towards the forefront in few years and who are actually unknown, except to a small group of people, and their stances, sacrifices and firmness are unknown. And because of previous security issues there was a fear of promoting people who are unknown. (8) Thus many of these people have been ignored. As for those from the students who are known, they are not widely known amongst the Mujahideen and their sacrifices are nothing in front of those of their teachers who suffered trials and tribulations.
  3. Another issue is that the style of the Shaykhs when they respond would remain within the confines of scientific method, as opposed to the response of their students to their teachers. They would respond to their teachers by transgressing the boundaries of scientific method and go in a method which contains insults, rudeness and by using words of filth, derision and mockery, which would make them in a weaker position in the sight of the neutral observer.

ISIS knows that the teachers have a greater influence than their students. Because of that, even if some of the students join them, they would still not be content with that, rather they would be determined to discredit the Shaykhs by tarnishing their image. For example, the publication which was released under the title “Smashing the idol of Al Maqdisi” after Shaykh al Maqdisi became a mediator between them and the Jordanian government in the matter of the Jordanian pilot, Muadh al Kasasbah, they deliberately tried to confuse between “mediation” and “representation”, and they portrayed him as a representative of the government which he makes Takfeer upon. And hence because he has become their ‘representative’ then he has deviated from his path in the matter of disassociating from these governments. This is despite the fact that in the same recording, there are words which confirm that he is not a representative, such as him describing the Jordanian pilot as an apostate..!!

Another matter is that they have gone beyond the stage of confusing and reached the stage of lying. They stated in one of their magazines, that Shaykh Abu Qatada has alliance to the Tawaghit! (9) This is despite the fact that just one week before the release of the magazine, Shaykh Abu Qatada wrote in a tweet “The Muslims have not stopped falling into the same mistakes which they made before, the crime of allying with the Tawaghit”…!! (10)

But why does ISIS strive so hard to do this? It is because they know that the students are not enough and that it is the teachers who have a greater influence.

ISIS is trying to neutralize the influence of these Shaykhs, and when they will no longer have influence, then their students will at once take a superior position. Shaykh Abu Ahmad al Jazaairi, who is a Shariah leader of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghrib, has spoken the truth when he said: “Bringing down the symbolic personalities means necessarily the rising of the inferior ones. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said “When there doesn’t remain any scholar then the people will take the ignorant ones as their leaders and they will be asked, and they will give Fatwas without knowledge, thus becoming misguided and misguiding the others”. (11)

==========================

Footnotes:

(1) It is the speech entitled “The scholar with action” which is part of the series “Carry the weapon of the martyr”. It has been translated by the media committee of the State of Dagestan VD.

(2) It is the speech “Turkistan- Patience and then victory” from the series (The Islamic Spring). It has been translated by “Sawt ul Islam” which is the media wing of the Turkistan Islamic Party.

(3) The joint statement “A statement about the recent events in the Causasus” issued on 28 January 2015, which had the participation of a group of Shaykhs the most notable being Shaykh Ibrahim Rubaish, Shaykh Harith al Nadhari, Shaykh Khalid Batarfi, Dr. Sami al Uraidi , Abu Maria al Qahtani and Dr. Abdullah al Muhaysini.

(4) A special interview by Sawt ul-Islam with the leader of the Turkistan Party, Shaykh Abdul Haq, in Feburary 2016

(5) As a fact, the tone of Turki Bin’ali regarding al Nusra was different in the past. I had written a response to one of the opponents, but before publishing it, I sent it to Turki Bin’ali in his Facebook account,  on 20 October 2013. So he replied to me privately and said “May Allah bless you. These are beautiful points, but do not cause differences between JN and ISIS, for we are with JN against the Tawaghit and their lackeys, but we condemn their mistake in leaving ISIS”. But when he returned back from Syria, his stance became different and he no longer even agreed to spread the videos showing the operations carried out by Al Nusrah against the Tawaghit and their stooges. And he would compel you to take your stance and choose to support ISIS and be hostile to everyone who oppose them, the first and foremost being Jabhat al Nusra.

(6) Shaykh Abu Qatada said in his third audio meeting in Al Fajr room on Paltalk on 22 April 2015: “We benefited a lot from the experience in Algeria, and the greatest of them was in the problem of lying and using different technical words. For example, if a Sunni man from one of the Jihadi groups in one of the countries send you a message saying “Oh Shaykh, an innovator has appeared amongst us and we have found with him documents indicating that he will contact the regime to reconcile with them, and we have found with him documents showing that he is planning a coup to overthrow the leadership in order to reconcile with the regime and deviate the Jihad into such and such path etc.”, and you think that he is a Sunni. So what answer will you give him if you are a student of knowledge? The answer would be: He is causing corruption in the land, and the least you can do is stop him, and if you cannot end his innovation without killing him, then kill him. This is what the scholars say. But we would discover later on that the innovation was not like how the questioner had mentioned but it was something else. So is the mistake in your Fatwa, or is the mistake and the lie from the questioner? And because of that, the questions asked by some brothers would remain with me pending for months and I would not reply to them. They are trustworthy brothers but they narrate the incidents as they like and as they see.

(7) Shaykh Ayman Al Zawahiri in his book “The Exoneration” has considered Shaykh Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi as a reference point for Al Qaeda (p.44) as well as Shaykh Abu Qatada (p.47). And Turki bin Ali wrote a book entitled “Al Qawl An-Narjisi Bi Adaalat Sheikhina Al Maqdisi” (a book containing collections of statements from different scholars who spoke about the virtue of Sheikh Maqdisi and praised him) and another book “Al Qilaada Fee Tazkiyath Sheikhina Abu Qatada” and in these two books Bin’ali gathered a collection of testimonies of Jihadi leaders from all the fronts of Jihad regarding these two Shaykhs. The students of these Shaykhs did not gain even a small fraction of the trust that the leaders of Mujahideen have in these Shaykhs.

(8) Leadership status in the Jihadi organisations should only be given to a person who has undergone hardships and trials and has remained firm. Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin says while putting down the condition to qualify for leadership that “It is necessary that the top level leadership be from those who have been tested and examined thoroughly.” [First set of Abbottabad Documents, Index number- SOCOM-2012-0000016] And one of the types of this test is to go to battles and fight, because the spy often sells his principles in exchange for money in order to live, but in the battles there is a very big possibility for him to get killed and so his true nature will be seen. Shaykh Usama bin Ladin says: “For example, here we feel reassured when people go to the front lines and get tested there” [First set of Abbottabad Documents, Index number: SOCOM-2012-0000003]. And from previous experience, the Jihadi groups learnt about the problem of the leadership being taken over by people who are unknown or who did not have any previous experience in the field of trials. Muhammad Suroor Zayn al Abideen (the one to whom the Suroori movement has been ascribed to, which is a Salafi school of thought) who had associated with some people who were involved in the Syrian Jihadi during the Eighties, had mentioned the incident of the infiltration into the leadership by a person named as Abu Abdullah al Jasari who used to read the Quran a lot and offer prayers at night and wake the youth for prayer, and just because of these actions he was made part of the leadership even though he was unknown and no one from the Islamic groups knew him. Then he took part in the arrest of Adnan Al Uqla and the top leadership and in aborting the armed struggle. (Refer to his book: How to protect the Islamic ranks from the hypocrites, p.77) Shaykh Abu Mus’ab al Suri has confirmed this information in his book “The Jihadi Islamic revolution in Syria – Experiences and Lessons” (p.150)

(9) The “Rumiyah” magazine, first issue, page 29-30, September 2016

(10) His personal twitter account is “@sheikhabuqatadh” on 25 August 2016.  Link here

(11) His personal twitter account is “@ahmed_karim25” on 15 May 2016.  Link here

Muw image 1

Justpaste link: https://justpaste.it/ahmedinterview4

With comments by interviewer: http://www.jihadica.com/the-role-of-ideologues/

Fear Allah In The Matter Of Iraq

Brief Messages To A Victorious Nation

 Part 3

img_20161017_223548

 Fear Allah In The Matter Of Iraq 

By Sheikh Ayman Al-Zawahiri (May Allah protect him)

1437 H.

In the name of Allah. All praise is due to Allah. And may prayers and peace be upon the Messenger of Allah and upon his family and his companions and whoever follows him.

Dear Muslim brothers in every place, may peace, mercy and blessings of Allah be upon you.

To proceed:

Cities, villages and mosques and Ahlus Sunnah in Iraq are being burned in these days, and they are being tortured and killed under the pretext of fighting Ibrahim al Badri’s (i.e Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi) group. However the basic goal is the extermination of Ahlus Sunnah in Iraq in an organized campaign which is led by the Safavid Iran and its subservient government in Iraq along with their militias and their mercenaries who are carrying out the plans of the Safavid Iran in the region. And because of that, these same militias are fighting against our people in Sham.

It is the Crusader Safavid Nusairi alliance, which is striving to conquer the region through American – Iranian understanding. As for the governments of the region, that claim to resist the Iranian Safavid plans, they are in reality tools of America in the region, and they are in alliance with America and Israel, and they do not possess their own freedom. So how can they help others in gaining their freedom?!

No one will defend Ahlus Sunnah against the Safavid Crusader campaign except Ahlus Sunnah themselves. So Ahlus Sunnah throughout the world must unite to expel those enemies who are collaborating to exterminate them. And they must not consider what is happening in Iraq and Sham as a local problem. Rather it is the tragedy of all the Muslims.

The Ahlus Sunnah in Iraq must not surrender merely when the cities fall into the hands of the Safavid Shiah army. Rather they must once again reorganize themselves for a long guerilla warfare in order to defeat the new Crusader Safavid occupation of their areas just like how they defeated it before.

And it is necessary for them to review their past experiences to rectify the mistakes which has led them to be isolated from their Muslim nation and which pushed them into the abyss of extremism and Takfeer and into spilling of sacred blood, or becoming dependent on America’s agents in the states around the region.

As for our brothers, the heroes of Islam from amongst the Mujahideen of Sham, I urge them to support their brothers in Iraq to reorganize themselves, as their battle is one, and Sham is a reinforcement for Iraq, and Iraq is the innermost part of Sham.

Oh our people in Iraq, do not become weak nor grieve nor despair, but ponder upon the statement of Allah the most high:

“Those (believers) to whom the (hypocrite) people said, “Verily, the people have gathered against you (a great army), therefore, fear them”. But it (only) increased them in Faith, and they said: “Allah Himself is Sufficient for us, and He is the Best Disposer of affairs”. So they returned with Grace and Bounty from Allah. No harm touched them; andthey followed the good Pleasure of Allah. And Allah is the Lord of Great Bounty. (3:173-174)

So stand firm, and have patience, and be increasingly patient, and be on guard and walk in the footsteps of the leader, the martyr, as we see him, Abu Mus’ab Al Zarqawi, may Allah have mercy upon him, who began his Jihad in Iraq with just only a few men and materials. And get rid of all the previous deviations, which led to the greedy ones climbing for power upon your shoulders, those who violated the sanctities of the Muslims. And rearrange your rows in a righteous Jihad towards a righteous Khilafah, and do not become weak nor be sad for you will surely be the superior ones if you are true believers.

And our final call is that all praise belongs to Allah, the lord of all that exists. And may peace and blessings of Allah be upon our master Muhammad and his family and his companions.

And may peace, mercy and blessings of Allah be upon you.

Translated by G.I.M.F