New Age Islam
Tue Aug 04 2020, 06:55 PM

Radical Islamism and Jihad ( 20 Nov 2012, NewAgeIslam.Com)

Comment | Comment

Taliban Fatwa on Terrorism That Needs To Be Refuted: Circumstances In Which The Slaughter Of Common People Among The Infidels Is Justified --- Part 3 – Ibn-e-Taiymiyyah’s view

 

Some Muslims just love being in denial. They read newspapers, watch television, see the Taliban and other Jihadists perpetrating unspeakable horrors in the name of Islam, quoting verses from Quran all the time. But they refuse to see, even if pointed out, any connection between a certain intolerant interpretation of Islam and their dastardly conduct. This intolerant interpretation of Islam has been with us all through last 14 centuries of history, in one form or another, under one name or another. They were called khwarij or kharjis (seceders from Islam) then, and are called Wahhabis today, though themselves prefer to be called Salafis (believers in fundamentalist Islam as it was practiced by first few generations of Muslims) and muwahhids (strict believers in oneness of God). Their apologists in the media want them to be simply known as Muslims, so as to implicate all Muslims in their nefarious activities.

Muslims, aware of this game, however, want to disassociate themselves with Jihadi ideology and practice. Thankfully, Wahhabis are still a small minority sect, though they are gaining in influence with the massive injection of petrodollars in the propagation of their ideology in the last four decades. It is important that we mainstream Muslims keep exposing their ideology, highlighting and countering it so that the propagators and apologists of Wahhabism, Salafism and related ideologies like Ahl-e-Hadeesism, Qutubism, Maudoodism, Deobandism, etc, are not allowed to pose as mainstream Islam.

In view of this urgent need New Age Islam is reproducing an article from the Taliban mouthpiece Nawa-e-Afghan Jihad (July 2012). This is the 3rd part of a continuing article in this monthly magazine explaining why Wahhabis believe that killing innocent civilians – men, women and children - among infidels (all non-Wahhabi Muslims, ex-Muslims and non-Muslims including ahl-e-Kitab) is permitted in their version of Islam. It is imperative for all mainstream Muslims to realize the real, murderous nature of Talibanism, and unequivocally denounce this ideology on the basis of Quran and Sunnah for the sake of world peace as much as for preserving the good name of Islam. Those Wahhabis who do not subscribe to these extremist ideas generated by the founder of this sect, Mohammad ibn-Abdul Wahhab and his ideological mentor Ibn-e-Taimiyya should disassociate themselves with the sect completely. If you are Wahhabi not because you appreciate the intolerance and extremism of this ideology but simply because you abhor visiting Sufi shrines and showing respect to the Sufi saints, you must understand that you don’t have to be a Wahhabi to abstain from vesting shrines. There are many non-sectarian Muslims or even Muslims belonging to other sects who do not visit shrines but are also not Wahhabis. You don’t have to be a Wahhabi or Salafi to be a muwahhid. – Sultan Shahin, Editor, New Age Islam

------------------------------

 

 

 

Circumstances in which the slaughter of common people among the infidels is justified --- Part 3

by Sheikh Yousuf Al-Abeeri (RH)

Translated from Urdu by New Age Islam Edit Desk

 

Nawa-e-Afghan Jehad, September 2012

Sheikhul Islam Hadhrat Ibn-e-Taiymiyyah while replying to a query issued a fatwa considering the general nature of the verse. In his book ‘Al Fata’wa’ 30/362 he writes:

“What do you say about a man whose property was taken away unjustly and he was humiliated and was physically hurt but having the belief that whatever is with God is better and everlasting he did not take revenge. Will God reduce his rewards in the hereafter since he forgave his tormentor or will he get the full rewards? What will be better for him? Taking revenge with him on the Day of Judgment and pray to God for his punishment or forgive him and accept God’s judgment on him?”

He replied:

“The reward of the victim is not reduced or lost if he forgives the oppressor even if his loss is small; rather in this case his reward becomes the responsibility of God because if he did not forgive the oppressor, he had the right to take revenge on the oppressor on an equal measure. And if he forgives him and entered into a peace agreement with him, his rewards are with God and obviously whatever is with God is better and everlasting.”

God says:

And the retribution for an evil act is an evil one like it, but whoever pardons and makes reconciliation - his reward is [due] from Allah. Indeed, He does not like wrongdoers. “(Ash Shura: 40)

Thus God informs that evil deserves retribution without transgression and it applies to all forms of evil involving wealth, life and honour. He further said, “And if someone forgives and makes peace, his rewards are with God.”

God says, “And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allah), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. But if you endure patiently, verily, it is better for As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.). “(Al Nahl: 126)                      

And God permitted Muslims to punish the oppressor in the same way they were harmed or hurt. And then said, “And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allah), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. But if you endure patiently, verily, it is better for As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.). “(Al Nahl: 126)

Thus it was made clear that demonstrating patience is better that taking revenge. How can then his rewards be reduced or lost?

Now when it is permissible to take equal revenge on a Muslims what should be the punishment for a combatant infidel who has committed excesses? Nawawi (R.A) has written in ‘Al Muhazzab’ 2/186:

“If someone kills someone with a sword, he will be punished with a sword because of God’s ordainment in the Quran:

[Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him. ‘(Al Baqara: 194).

Since the sword is the sharpest weapon for killing, if he is killed with any other weapon as punishment it will be an injustice to him because he deserves to be killed with a sword. It is possible that the killer has burnt the victim to death, or thrown him into water, or stoned him to death, or pushed him from a height or battered him to death with wood or confined him without food and water till he died. In all the cases the victim’s kin has the right to take revenge (maslah) in the same way because of God’s ordainment:

“And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allah), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. But if you endure patiently, verily, it is better for As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.). “(Al Nahl: 126)                                                  

And because of the hadith that was narrated by Hadhrat Bra’a (R.A.) which says:

“We shall burn him who has burnt (someone) and we shall sink him into water who has sunk (someone).” (Religious scholars disagree on the issue of burning as has been discussed earlier.)

Because of all these (verses and hadiths) the basis of retribution (qasas) is similarity (in revenge) and these means are also possible in similarity. Therefore, it is appropriate to execute revenge with these tools and means but taking revenge with the sword is also appropriate because the allegation of murder and torture has been proved against the killer. Therefore, if he (the kin of the victim) lets go some his rights by agreeing to take revenge with the sword, it is permissible for him.

In his book Naailul Awtar 6/39, Ash Shawkani has written:

‘God’s ordainment that “And the retribution for an evil act is an evil one like it, but whoever pardons and makes reconciliation - his reward is [due] from Allah . Indeed, He does not like wrongdoers. “(Ash Shoora: 40) and his ordainment that “And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allah), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. But if you endure patiently, verily, it is better for As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.). “(Al Nahl: 126) and his further ordainment that “[Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him. “(Al Baqarah: 194) make it clear that the generality of the arguments in favor of sanctity of blood, property and wealth and honour of people is rendered into specificity by the three verses mentioned above. It means that the sanctity of man’s blood, property and honour does not remain intact by virtue of these three verses.

Ibn-e-Qaiyim has written in Aalamul Mouqiyeen 1/138:

‘God’s ordainment that ““[Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him. “ (Al Baqarah: 194) and his ordainment that “And the retribution for an evil act is an evil one like it, but whoever pardons and makes reconciliation - his reward is [due] from Allah . Indeed, He does not like wrongdoers. “(Ash Shoora: 40) and his ordainment that “And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allah), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. But if you endure patiently, verily, it is better for As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.).“ (Al Nahl:126) corroborate the like punishment (maslah) in terms of honour, wealth and blood and jurisprudential scholars have explained the justification  of burning the fields and cutting off of the trees of the enemies in case they do the same with us. Exactly on the same issue, God declared it appropriate the cutting off of the date trees of the Jews by the sahaba in order to demean them.

This is an argument in favour of the view that God likes the oppressor to be insulted and declares it appropriate. And if burning of the property of such a wicked and deceitful person is justified because he has committed excesses against the Muslims in terms of wealth or property then it is more justifiable and greater justice that the Muslims should burn his property and goods if he has burnt and destroyed and innocent Muslim’s property.

If despite God’s benevolence and mercifulness, if His financial rights are to be paid strictly (Zakat: this inference is of translator) then it becomes greater justice and all the more obligatory for the men to pay the rights of other men because men are more strict and unforgiving in claiming their rights. That’s why God has made qasas a Shariah law to deter people from oppression and tyranny though it is possible that financial compensation could be made obligatory to compensate for the torment the victim has gone through.

But the law of qasas, ordained by God is better as it serves to pacify the anger and agony of the victim or his kin and a safer way to ensure the safety of life and parts of the body otherwise people would kill someone or cut off a part of someone’s body at will and pay the ransom. This is contrary to common wisdom or human principles. And this exactly applies in case of excesses meted out to property of people.

After the presentation of the  arguments quoted from the learned scholars above, the punishment through maslah that has appeared in the Quran does not remain specific to the cause of the revelation of the particular verses but are general ordainments dealing qasas, hudood (Islamic jurisprudence) and with the affairs of the Muslims with oppressors and fasiqs. If it is permissible for a Muslim to take revenge on another Muslim in proportion to his crime or excesses, then it becomes more appropriate and permissible to punish a combatant infidel in the same way he has hurt or harmed a Muslim.

 Source: Nawa-e-Afghan Jehad, September 2012

URL of Part 1 of the Series: http://www.newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/taliban-fatwa-on-terrorism-that-needs-to-be-refuted--circumstances-in-which-the-slaughter-of-common-people-among-the-infidels-is-justified-----part-1/d/9355

URL of Part 2 of the Series: http://www.newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/taliban-fatwa-on-terrorism-that-needs-to-be-refuted--circumstances-in-which-the-slaughter-of-common-people-among-the-infidels-is-justified-----part-2-–-tit-for-tat/d/9368

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/taliban-fatwa-on-terrorism-that-needs-to-be-refuted--circumstances-in-which-the-slaughter-of-common-people-among-the-infidels-is-justified-----part-3-–-ibn-e-taiymiyyah’s-view/d/9381

 

Loading..

Total Comments (1)

  • 1 .
    The principle of punishment in proprotion to one's crime or excesses as permitted by the Quran has been the soul source of the Taliban's ideology of mindless and fruitless violence. The verses and qouted by its spokesman do not sponsor the kind of violence and killing of children and women they want Muslims to believe in. Islam has permitted to adopt all the strategies and tricks in times of war and the war was fought under the leadership of legitimate Islamic governments. The Taliban are an outlawed outfit living in mountains and jungles destroying schools, mausoleums and attacking processions of Muslims on sectarian basis. People they kill with the help of suicide bombers are not at war with them. They catch them unawares taking them to be enemies. They cut the hair of sikhs and ask for jeziya though they do not have a government or country to rule. Their rule is not recongnised by the Muslims they rule.How can they claim to be the representatives of the Islamiic state.
    By ahmad 22/11/2012 07:25:42