PDA

View Full Version : Jihad Against the Kuffaar is of Two Types



Azzam
25-11-2004, 04:46 PM
I wanted to post this as the other thread dealing with Offensive Jihad was shut down.

Two types of Fard...

Fard Ayn

It is the Fard that is a compulsory duty on every single Muslim to perform like praying or fasting.

Fard Kifaya

It is the Fard that if performed by some, the obligation falls from the rest. The meaning of Fard Kifaya, is that if there are not enough people that respond to it, then all the people are in sin. If a sufficient amount of people respond, the obligation falls from the rest. The call for it in the beginning is like the call for establishing a Fard Ayn, but it differs in that a Fard Kifaya is absolved by the performance of some of the people. But a Fard Ayn is not absolved by any number of people performing it. That is why Fakhr ar Razi defined Fard Kifaya as the obligation that is carried out without looking to the souls of the ones who perform it.


Shaffie said: "A Fard Kifaya is a command directed towards everyone seeking only a response from some". The definition agreed upon by the majority of scholars, of them Ibn Hajib, al Amdi and Ibn Abdu Shakur, state that Fard Kifaya is obligatory upon everyone, but is absolved upon the performance of some. People are now arguing about the jihaad ruling, and they consider it as Fard Kifaya, that means it is obligatory upon everyone, but is absolved when some perform it.


JIHAAD AGAINST THE KUFFAR IS OF TWO TYPES
Defence of the Muslim Lands
Dr. Abdullah Azzaam (May Allah accept him as Shaheed)

Offensive Jihaad (where the enemy is attacked in his own territory).

Where the Kuffar are not gathering to fight the Muslims. The fighting becomes Fard Kifaya with the minimum requirement of appointing believers to guard borders, and the sending of an army at least once a year to terrorize the enemies of Allah. It is a duty of upon the Imam to assemble and send out an army unit into the land of war once or twice every year. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the Muslim population to assist him, and if he does not send an army he is in sin.

And the Ulama have mentioned that this type of jihaad is for maintaining the payment of Jizya. The scholars of the principles of religion have also said: "Jihaad is Da'wah with a force, and is obligatory to perform with all available capabilities, until there remains only Muslims or people who submit to Islam."

Defensive Jihaad

This is expelling the Kuffar from our land, and it is Fard Ayn, a compulsory duty upon all. It is the most important of the compulsory duties and arises in the following conditions:

A) If the Kuffar enter a land of the Muslims.

B) If the rows meet in battle and they begin to approach each other.

C) If the Imaam calls a person or a people to march forward then they must march.

D) If the Kuffaar capture and imprison a group of Muslims.

The First Condition: If the Kuffaar Enter a Muslim Land.

In this condition the pious predecessors, those who succeeded them, the Ulama of the four Madhabs (Maliki, Hanafi, Shaffie and Hanbali), the Muhadditheen, and the Tafseer commentators, are agreed that in all Islamic ages, Jihaad under this condition becomes Fard Ayn upon the Muslims of the land which the Kuffar have attacked and upon the Muslims close by, where the children will march forth without the permission of the parents, the wife without the permission of her husband and the debtor without the permission of the creditor. And, if the Muslims of this land cannot expel the Kuffaar because of lack of forces, because they slacken, are indolent or simply do not act, then the Fard Ayn obligation spreads in the shape of a circle from the nearest to the next nearest. If they too slacken or there is again a shortage of manpower, then it is upon the people behind them, and on the people behind them, to march forward. This process continues until it becomes Fard Ayn upon the whole world.


Sheikh Ibn Taymia says on this topic: "About the defensive jihaad, which is repelling an aggressor, is the most tasking type of jihaad. As agreed upon by everyone, it is obligatory to protect the religion and what is sacred. The first obligation after Iman is the repulsion of the enemy aggressor who assaults the religion and the worldly affairs. There are no conditional requirements such as supplies or transport, rather he is fought with all immediate capability. The Ulama, our peers and others have spoken about this." Ibn Taymia supports his opinion of the absence of the requirement of transport in his reply to the Judge who said: "If jihaad becomes Fard Ayn upon the people of a country, one of the requirements, in comparison to Hajj, is that one must have supplies and a ride if the distance is such that one shortens the prayer". Ibn Taymia said: "What the Judge has said in comparison to Hajj has not been stated before by anybody and is a weak argument. Jihaad is obligatory because it is for the repulsion of the harm of the enemy, therefore it has priority over Hijr . For Hijr no transport is considered necessary. Of the jihaads some take priority. It is furthered in a sahih hadith narrated by Ebaad Bin Asaamat that the Prophet (saw) said: "It is upon the Muslim to listen and obey in hardship and prosperity, in what he likes and dislikes, and even if he is not given his rights". Therefore, the pillar of the most important of obligations, is the marching forward in times of hardship as well as prosperity. As has been stated, contrary to Hajj, the obligation remains present in times of hardship. And this is in offensive jihaad. So it is clear that defensive jihaad carries a greater degree of obligation. To defend the sacred things and the religion from the aggressor is obligatory, as agreed upon by everyone. The first obligation after Iman is repulsion of the enemy aggressor who assaults the religion and the worldly affairs". Now we look at the opinions of the four Madhabs who are all in agreement on this point.

Opinions of the Mathhabs

Hanafi Fiqh

Ibn Aabidin said : "Jihaad becomes Fard Ayn if the enemy attacks one of the borders of the Muslims, and it becomes Fard Ayn upon those close by. For those who are far away, it is Fard Kifaya, if their assistance is not required. If they are needed, perhaps because those nearby the attack cannot resist the enemy, or are indolent and do not fight jihaad, then it becomes Fard Ayn upon those behind them, like the obligation to pray and fast. There is no room for them to leave it. If they too are unable, then it becomes Fard Ayn upon those behind them, and so on in the same manner until the jihaad becomes Fard Ayn upon the whole Ummah of Islam from the East to the West".

And the following have like Fatawa: Al Kassani, Ibn Najim and Ibn Hammam.

Maliki Fiqh

In Hashiyat ad Dussuqi it is stated: Jihaad becomes Fard Ayn upon a surprise attack by the enemy. Dussuqi said: "Wherever this happens, jihaad immediately becomes Fard Ayn upon everybody, even women, slaves and children, and they march out even if their guardians, husbands and creditors forbid them to."

Shaffie Fiqh

In the Nihayat al Mahtaj by Ramli: "If they approach one of our lands and the distance between them and us becomes less than the distance permitting the shortening of prayers, then the people of that territory must defend it and it becomes Fard Ayn even upon the people for whom there is usually no jihaad; the poor, the children, the slaves, the debtor and the women."

Hanbali Fiqh

In Al Mughni by Ibn al Qudamah: "Jihaad becomes Fard Ayn in three situations:

1) If the two sides meet in battle and they approach each other.

2) If the Kuffar enter a land, j*haad becomes Fard Ayn upon its people.

3) If the Imam calls a people to march forward it is obligatory upon them to march forward."

And Ibn Taymia remarked: "If the enemy enters a Muslim land, there is no doubt that it is obligatory for the closest and then the next closest to repel him, because the Muslim lands are like one land. It is obligatory to march to the territory even without the permission of parents or creditor, and narrations reported by Ahmad are clear on this."

This situation is known as the General March.

faqir
25-11-2004, 05:20 PM
On Offensive Jihad:

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=12128

faqir
25-11-2004, 05:30 PM
The other question that would arise, what is the position of the Ulema regarding offensive Jihad in the absence of Khilafah?

And, are the rulings of the Ulema of yesteryear on the issue of offensive jihad necessarily applicable today if the reality in which the rulings were issued no longer exists today?

Azzam
25-11-2004, 08:43 PM
The other question that would arise, what is the position of the Ulema regarding offensive Jihad in the absence of Khilafah?

And, are the rulings of the Ulema of yesteryear on the issue of offensive jihad necessarily applicable today if the reality in which the rulings were issued no longer exists today?

Logically speaking we need a state to launch an offensive otherwise there wont be anything to retreat to or a base land. In the absence of a khalifah it becomes obligatory to bring back the khilafah, different groups have different philosophies about how to do this. I am not saying that each one is right either.

But in the mean while, if the Muslim army is not strong enough to conquer or approach a land, then it becomes even more obligatory to train and prepare as Allah said in the Quran. So here the preparation will lead to something that needs to be done.

Allah told Muslims that they must rule because they have the rules from Allah and any other that rules by other than what Allah reveals is either a faasiq, a dhaalim or a disbeliever. So Allah gave this order to Muslims to cleanse the earth of Kufr. If they are not in a position to do that they must find a way to get to that.

For example if the Muslims do not have a masjid in their community to pray. They will start to raise funds and look for suitable locations and stuff to fulfill getting a masjid. Once they get the means they can build the masjid and start the 5 prayers.

I do not understand your second point?

faqir
26-11-2004, 08:10 AM
I do not understand your second point?

Meaning, is what the Ulema have mentioned in the past regarding offensive jihad necessarily applicable today if the reality of our situation differs from the period during which they gave their judgement?

The following quote came to mind:


In an important work of law, judicature and governement, the great Egyptian jurist of the Maliki school, Shihab al Din al Qrarafi (d.684/1285) is asked the following question:


What is the correct view concerning those rulings found in the madhhab of al-Shafi, Malik and the rest, which have been deduced on the basis of habits and customs prevailing at the time these jurists reached these conclusions? When these customs change and the practice comes to indicate the opposite of what it used to, are the fatwas recorded in the manuals of the jurists rendered thereby defunct, it becoming incumbent to issue fatwas based on the new custom? Or is it to be said, we are mere followers of the independent, authoritative jurists. It is thus not our place to innovate new rulings, as we lack the qualifications to do so. We issue, therefore, fatwas according to what we find in the books handed down on the authority of the independent, authoritative jursits"?




In his answer, al-Qarafi emphatically affirms that a ruling remains valid only as long as the custom or circumstances on which it was based remains intact and retains the same implications it had at the time the ruling was originally reached. Thus, he responds:


Holding to rulings that have been deduced on the basis of custom, even after this custom has changed, is a violation of consensus (ijma) and an open display of ignorance of the religion.

Azzam
26-11-2004, 01:11 PM
Meaning, is what the Ulema have mentioned in the past regarding offensive jihad necessarily applicable today if the reality of our situation differs from the period during which they gave their judgement?

The following quote came to mind:

I can answer this in more detail but I dont have time and the proper resources at the moment.

However, the ruling of offensive Jihad is not based on custom at all. Specific methods within in might, such as weaponry and tactics and so on.

The ruling of Jihad ut Talab (Offensive Jihad) is based on the Quran and Sunnah and has been obligated as something that needs to be done.

We cannot deduce this to say that we dont do offensive Jihad because times have changed. That is not a proper claim at all.

If this is the case then why do we have an uproar about killing non-combatants especially since the Kuffar do exactly this and this is a custom and practice from all the armies such as the U.S. and U.K., to thr Russians. This is known and accepted by all armies and no one is taken into account for it even though it may go against the Geneva conventions. If the conventions (which I dont believe in anyway) are disrespected by these countries and is being practiced on a large scale then why do we have Muslims severly condemn other Muslims when they also engage in these tactics.

I do not want to get into non-combatant issues, because it is not as simple as saying "We dont kill non-Combatants in Islam".

Such then how come there is a huge uproar against Muslims when they respond equally to the Kuffar in their tactics.

As I said earlier I dont want to get into fiqhi rulings and so on about non-Combatants.

Customs or Al Urf is a source of deriving rulings. It is not the ONLY source, and if something in the Quran and Sunnah is specific and contrary to the customs and traditions then those customs and traditions cannot be used a source of legislative ruling.

As for the issue of Jihad, then offensive Jihad must be looked at in context. It is not imperial ideology that first gets understood. Rather Allah said to spread Islam. If people hinder that and they will they must be pursued. If they are not then we wont have any success promoting the deen from our efforts.

Allah said that those who rule by what other than Allah reveals are transgressors, disbelievers, and tyrants and other things. Without the Quran there will be no Justice in the earth. If anyone believes there will be justice from other people then they are terribly mistaken.

Imam Mahdi will fill the earth with Justice as it was filled with injustice before him. How will he do it?

The earth has evil people in it and they are becoming more and more evil. This is a minority but they influence the whole world. The aim of Offensive Jihad is to humble these trouble makers and ruin them so they cannot cause their fitnah. So then Islam will be dominant above them.

This has been commanded in the Quran and practiced in the Sunnah by the Prophet SAW himself. He would fight and also send out expeditions to hunt down oppressors and trouble makers. To instill the platform that Islam in its true form can be shown to the people and that they may choose to accept Islam or settle for Jizyah.

So the dominant power has to be Islam otherwise there is no Justice on earth. We can see this anytime true followers of Islam were not in power.

Faqir,

I would like to know where you got this bit of information from about Sheikh Qarafi. Is it from a book that I can refer or something online.

There has been misleading information about this so I want to see the the whole content, who wrote it and what not.

Oh yeah one more thing. Remember that once someone I dont remember who argued that Jihad ut Talab is a fard kifayah when there is a khalifah. I got the impression that this person tried to lower the significance of Jihad ut Talab.

It is ruled as Fard Kifayah and there are a couple of ayaat that attest to this. However, remember that this is an obligation that must be done. If it is not then there is wrath on everyone. and people really used to rush to be picked to go and fight, so its from the humiliation of Muslims that when they hear the words Fard Kifayah they lower the status of it.

Abandoning Jihad leads to humiliation this is why we are in this mess to begin with. This is also mentioned in ahadith as well.

Also can you please show me the other 'ulema' of the past that spoke about Jihad ut Talab.

and please add the rest of Al Qarafi's fatwa, the part where Jihad ut Talab od Jihad ud dafa is mentioned. It is not mentioned in the above piece. The above piece seems to be a general ruling to issues dealing with customs where the shariah is flexible. I want to see where he ties this to Jihad ut Talab. If the writer has used this as a source, please mention who this author is and what sort of context he uses this above piece from Al Qarafi in. He cannot as I said earlier deduce Jihad ut Talab to a customary issue, because its not and never was a customary issue.

Azzam
26-11-2004, 01:18 PM
[QUOTE=faqir]Holding to rulings that have been deduced on the basis of custom, even after this custom has changed, is a violation of consensus (ijma) and an open display of ignorance of the religion.[QUOTE]

Please read my other former, longer post as well before this one.

This is what Al Qarafi ended with "Holding to rulings that have been deduced on the basis of custom"

These are for rulings based on custom, Jihad ut Talab in its general entity is not based on custom at all as I mentioned earlier, maybe the nature of human beings, but that does not change. If you think it is please provide evidence.

Please show me the specifics.

faqir
26-11-2004, 07:08 PM
Asalamu alaykum,

I took that specific quote from an excellent article by Dr. Sherman Jackson - not sure if its available on-line but its well worth a read. It is called "Jihad in the Modern World".

What do you make of what Mufti Desai mentions below:




I have a question about offensive Jihad. Does it mean that we are to attack even those non-Muslims which don't do anything against Islam just because we have to propagate Islam?

I have been reading Tafsir e Usmani for the last month or so. In it I have read that offensive Jihad (first attack) should be done by Muslims for 2 reasons. 1) For the sake of Allah (in the Way of God) 2) For the sake of subjugated people under oppression like in Kashmir, Palestine etc. Now the second reason I completely understand. But the explanation given of the first reason is "For the sake of Allah includes the propagation of Islam, the survival of Islam, the extermination of those hindrances which impede the progress and expansion of Islam." (explanation of verse 190, Surah baqara) I really don't understand this explanation. What does propagation of Islam mean here? Does it mean that we are to attack even those non-Muslims which don't do anything against Islam just because we have to propagate Islam? For example, there are many countries in the world which are not enemies of Islam in any way (at least I think so). Please explain to me against which Non-Muslims, the Muslims have to do Jihad and against which, Jihad is not allowed. JazakAllah Khair.








Answer 12128

2004-07-13



You should understand that we as Muslims firmly believe that the person who doesn't believe in Allah as he is required to, is a disbeliever who would be doomed to Hell eternally. Thus one of the primary responsibilities of the Muslim ruler is to spread Islam throughout the world, thus saving people from eternal damnation.

Thus what is meant by the passage in Tafsir Uthmani, is that if a country doesn't allow the propagation of Islam to its inhabitants in a suitable manner or creates hindrances to this, then the Muslim ruler would be justifying in waging Jihad against this country, so that the message of Islam can reach its inhabitants, thus saving them from the Fire of Jahannum. If the Kuffaar allow us to spread Islam peacefully, then we would not wage Jihad against them.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai






Do these conditions exist today?





Read also:


http://www.zaytuna.org/seasons/seasons2/53-64%20Seasons.pdf


Wasalam.