Refuting Islamophobic Claims That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam: Part 5- On The Concept of Darul Islam and Darul Harb
New Age Islam Special
Correspondent
30 January
2021
The
Jihadist narrative dividing the world into Darul Harb and Darul Islam is
completely baseless and unsupported by the Quran, Sunnah, and traditional
interpretations of Islam. Therefore, Islamophobes have no right to claim the
lie that the Jihadist narratives are based on traditional interpretations of
Islam. This write-up will present some traditional proofs to refute the
Islamophobic claim and in a bid to reform the Jihadist mentality which
repeatedly encourages Muslims to migrate from their own country and join the
Jihadist ranks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Both Darul
Islam and Darul Harb are the jurisprudential terms (Fiqhi Istilahat) which were originally coined by the jurists of the
early period of Islam but to deal with national transactions (Mua’amlaat) and relations (Ta’lluqaat) required by the then
circumstances of the world. However, the conditions (Sharai’t) laid down by those jurists for land to become Darul Islam
or Darul Harb revolved around what we simply describe in modern times as ‘basic
religious rights’, such as freedom of faith and rituals (‘Ibadat)’. The land which granted such religious rights was declared
‘Darul Islam’, whereas the land which banned the basic requirements of Islam
was treated as Darul Harb.
According
to the Jihadist ideologues, Darul Islam is a land governed by the Islamic
state, that is, the land where Islam should be the state religion and the laws
of that land or country must be enforced in accordance with Islam, and Darul
Harb is a land not governed by the Islamic state. The Jihadist narrative as
such vehemently conflicts with the traditional version of Darul Islam and Darul Harb
wherein the former term was applied to the land which granted basic religious
rights, no matter whether or not the state religion of that land was Islam, and
the latter term to the land which banned the basic religious rights such as
freedom of faith and rituals.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite this
clear definition, the Jihadist ideologues hold that their understanding of this
binary division of the world is based on the four jurisprudential schools,
their jurists, and authorities in law.
For example, Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, a Wahhabi-Jihadist cleric, “the
most influential Jihadi Theorist” as per the Combating Terrorism Centre of the
United States Military Academy (USMA), and best known as the spiritual mentor
of the founding father of ISIS Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (the initial leader of
al-Qaeda in Iraq) writes,
“And we
hold the view of the jurists regarding the abode [Dar] wherein if the laws of
Kufr were uppermost and the dominance therein was for the Kuffar
[‘unbelievers’] and their legislations then it is Dar al-Kufr. This term is
applied to the abode if the rulings of Kufr are uppermost, even if the majority
of its people are Muslims, just as the term Dar
Al-Islam is applied upon the abode in which the laws of Islam are
uppermost, even if the majority of its inhabitants are Kuffar as long as they
are submitting to the rule of Islam [Dhimmah]”
[Al-Maqdisi, This is Our Aqeedah pp.25)
Al-Maqdisi
believes that no state currently meets the criteria for Darul Islam. He asserts
that the implementation of Sharia as state law is a precondition for Darul Islam
(see ‘This is our Aqeedah’). This way his assertion inspires the jihadist
supporters worldwide to declare war on the leaders of the Muslim majority
countries without forgiving the civilians. As a result, the entire world has
become a site for potential conflict.
We have
mentioned above that the paradigm of Darul
Islam and Darul Harb developed
throughout Islamic history under political and jurisprudential definitions,
though the binary division of the world as such is not mentioned directly in
the Quran and Ahadith. These terms were devised by the early Muslim jurists,
almost a century after the Prophet (peace be upon him) to suggest legal
rulings, required by the challenges of the time.
However, as
a result of the political fragmentation of the Muslim world, historical
changes, and establishment of the new world order, the concept of Darul Harb
has been completely affected and has almost no significance today among
mainstream Muslims. Many contemporary Muslim jurists across the world regard
the democratic countries as part of the Darul Islam or Darul Amn, arguing that
Muslims therein can freely practice and proselytize their faith and creeds.
They quote all of the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence, Hanafi, Shafei,
Maliki, and Hanbali to support their argument.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below are
some quotations that are taken from classical and traditional corpus of Islamic
jurisprudence, which reject the Jihadist definition of the Darul Islam and
Darul Harb, and suggest that the present states of the world cannot be declared
Darul Harb.
In
accordance with the traditional and classical scholarship, the countries that
provide with the right to practice ritual prayers [Salah/prayer], the annual
fast of Ramazan [Roza/Siyam], the building of mosques, the call to prayer [Azan], and the right to exhibit the
wearing of Islamic dress and the performance of Muslim marriage cannot be
declared ‘Darul Harb’. These countries, according to some contemporary jurists,
are Darul Aman [the abode of peace],
and to some, are Darul Islam [the abode where Islam is freely practiced].
For
example, Abul Hasan al-Mawardi, the Iraqi judge and scholar of Muslim polity and
law says,
The public
acts of worship of Islam such as group prayers in mosques and calls for prayers
are the criteria by which the Prophet, peace be upon him, differentiated
between the Darul Islam [the Land of belief] and the Darul Harb [the Land of Disbelief].
Imam
Nawawi, a popular classical Syrian scholar supports al-Mawardi’s definition of
Darul Islam and writes in his great legal work ‘Rawda al-Talibin’,
“If a
Muslim is able to declare his Islam openly and living therein (non-Muslim
majority countries), it is better for him to do so, because this fulfils the
criteria for a country to be Darul Islam”
In his book
on Shafi’ii jurisprudence, ‘Al-Hawi al-Kabir, Imam Mawardi further says,
“Where a
Muslim is capable of protecting and isolating himself, even if he is unable to
proselytize and engage in combat, in such a case it would be compulsory for him
to remain in this place and not emigrate. For such a place, by the fact that he
is able to isolate himself, has fulfilled the criteria of Darul Islam”
The corpus
of Hanafis, Shafiis, Malikis and Hanbalis obviously suggests that the open
practice of Islamic acts such as ritual prayers, annual fast, call to prayers [azan],
etc. are sufficient for the land to be considered Darul Islam even if it is a
non-Muslim majority country. For example, the Shafi position is based on a Sunna (as narrated in a hadith) that
fighting or Jihad should not take place in a region where the call to prayer
(azan) is heard, as the free practice of Islam indicates that the land, in
general, was not hostile to Muslims and Islam. Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim
report a hadith in this regard,
“Whenever
Allah’s Apostle attacked some people, he would never attack them till it was
dawn. If he heard the Azan [the call to prayer], he would delay the fight, and
if he did not hear the Azan, he would attack them immediately after dawn”
(Sahih Bukhari)
Imam Nawawi
interprets this hadith,
This hadith
is evidence that verily the call to prayer [azan] forbids invading a people of
that area and this is an evidence of their Islam.
Besides we
have also checked the opinions of the influential Indian jurists and scholars
who are followed as pioneers by Indian Muslims including Sunni-Sufis or
Barelvis, Deobandis, Ahl-e-Hadithis and Salafis. Without going through their
opinions in detail, it is better and time-saving to see the conclusions of
their detailed discussions respectively as follows;
In 1881, a
person namely Mirza Ali Baig Badayuni sent a questionnaire consisting of three
questions to Imam Ahmad Raza Barelvi, the first of which was: Is India
Dar-ul-Harb or Dar-ul-Islam?
In response
to this questionnaire, Imam Ahmad Raza wrote a pamphlet namely "E’laamul
A’alam Bianna Hindustan Dar-ul-Islam" which was first published by Hasani
Press Bareilly in form of treatise in 1927 and later included in “Fatawa
Razviyya”, a collection of his Fatawa.
The fatwa
begins with the following words:
“India is
Dar-ul-Islam, not Dar-ul-Harb at all. This is based on the jurisprudential
school (Mazhab) of our great Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah bless him and grant him
peace)” (Fatawa Razviyya, vol.14)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maulana
Amjad Ali Azmi, a very trustworthy and close spiritual caliph (Sufi Khalifa) of
Imam Ahmad Raza also issued a similar fatwa in response to a question posed in
a later period as follows;
“India is
Darul Islam. It is a grave mistake to call it Dar-ul-Harb” (Fatawa Amjadiyya,
Vol. 3, published and printed by Dairatul Ma’arif al-Amjadiyya, Ghosi,
Maunathbhanjan, UP)
According
to Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi, a pioneer among Deobandi School of Thought, India
is not Dar-ul-Harb but Dar-ul-Islam. He writes;
“Generally,
the meaning of Dar-ul-Harb is mistakenly understood that it is the place where
war is obligatory; then in this sense, India is not Dar-ul-Harb, because war is
not valid under the terms of the treaty” (Ashrafia, Ashrafia Publishing House,
Bhoon Police Station, Saharanpur District)
He further
writes: “And India is not Darul Harb also according to the Sahibayn (Imam
Muhammad and Imam Abu Yusuf, the two great students of Imam Abu Hanifa),
because although the rules of polytheism are practiced in it, the rules of
Islam are also practiced without fear and danger. That both types of rules and
practices freely exist in one land or one country does not make the country
‘Darul Harb’. Similarly, India is not Darul Harb as per the criteria and words
of Imam Abu Hanifa” (Tahzeer al-Ikhwan, Maulana Thanwi, printed by Ashraf
al-Matabi’, Thaana Bhawan, Saharanpur, UP)
In the
biography of the Salafi Ghair-Muqallid cleric and Muhaddith (hadith scholar),
Maulana Nazeer Hussain Bihari (d. 1902), the biographer Maulana Fazle Hussain
Bihari (d. 1916) writes;
“He
(Maulana Nazeer Hussain Bihari) never called India Dar-ul-Harb”
(Fazl-e-Hussain, Al-Hayat Baad al-Maut, printed by Al-Kitab International
Muradi Road, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi)
The founder
of Markazi Khilafat Committee (1919), Maulana Abdul Baari Firangi Mahali
Lakhnawi (d.1926) writes,
“We declare
India Darul Islam” (Maktoob Maulana Abdul Baari Firangi Mahali, printed by Akhbar-e-Mashriq,
Gorakhpur)
The reason
and condition whereby India was declared Darul Islam by the above-mentioned
pioneers and influential clerics of Indian Muslims is that Muslims in India are
permitted to learn and profess their faith and practice their religious rituals
freely such as prayer (Namaz/Salah), the Call to Prayer (Azaan), Eidain prayers and annual fast etc. In
obedience to the early jurists of Islam, these Indian jurists and authorities
too did not make the condition of Islam as a State Religion for a country to
become Darul Islam. This means that whether or not a country is governed by
Islam as a state religion, if the country grants basic religious rights as
pointed out above, it is Darul Islam
and not Darul Harb. In the present
world, the granting of basic religious rights is approximately part of the
constitutional rights in all the countries, so there is no way for the Jihadist
ideologues to justify their claim and invite Indian Muslims or otherwise to
migrate. Besides, Islamophobes too should not claim the lie that he Jihadist
narrative is based on the classical or traditional interpretations of Islam.
-----------
Related Article: