The late Shaykh Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee (rahimahullaah) was asked: Some people claim that Bin Ladin is the awaited mahdee (leader) and they grant him the title “Chief of the Believers”. So what is your advice in this [matter]?
The Shaykh responded: These (ones) are the devils (shayaateen). They are the devils. Bin Ladin is a Shaytaan Khabeeth (a filthy devil), a Kharijite (a renegade revolter). It is not permissible for anyone to praise him. Anyone who praises him, then this is evidence that he is a Kharijite just like him … anyone who praises him, then this is evidence that he is a Kharijite just like him.
The view of orthodox Muslim scholars is that the contemporary groups characterized withextremism in takfir and jihad are “brethren of the devil” – they are those who have adopted the end result of the distillation of the ideologies of Vladimir Lenin, Alexis Carrell and Mawdudi taking place in the mind of Sayyid Qutb, subsequently expressed in his books, and then trying to justify these evil ideologies by drawing upon texts from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah.
It is obligatory upon all Muslims to warn from their evil and to banish them and their evil from the society, following the advice and guidance of the scholars in that for they are a calamity upon the Ummah.
Source ‘http://www.islamagainstextremism.com/articles/gnqfi-shaykh-ahmad-an-najmee-osama-bin-ladin-is-a-filthy-devil.cfm’>Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee: Osama bin Ladin is a Filthy Devil</a>
The following is a transcription of a live tele-link lecture given by By Shaykh Alee al-Hadaadee (Riyaadh, Saudi Arabia) to an audience in London organized by al-Athariyyah.
The Lecture
All praise is due to Allaah the Lord of everything He created and the peace and blessings of Allaah upon the best of Messengers, our Prophet Muhammad, whom Allaah sent to mankind as a mercy, and peace and blessings upon the family of the Prophet and his companions, and upon those who follow the guidance of the Prophet until the Day of Judgement.
O my noble brothers, we heard the unfortunate news, which occurred yesterday in the city of London, relating to those explosions which took place which resulted in many people dying and many people being wounded. And there is no doubt that this is an unfortunate and sad affair and it’s even worse if these acts have been committed and carried out in the name of Islaam, because Islaam is free and far removed from these types of acts. It does not command with these types of activities, and Islaam is not pleased with the likes of these activities.
Rather, Islaam prohibits the likes of these things. And Islaam is at war with these types of treacherous acts. And likewise, Islaam threatens a heavy punishment to those people who do these acts, in this life and the hereafter. Verily the true Islaam is that which has come in the Qur’aan (The book of Allaah) and in the Sunnah (The guidance of His noble Messenger). And not everything that is said to be Islaam is in actual fact considered part of the religion of Islaam.
And this is to be returned to the Qur’aan and to the Sunnah. We find in both of them a clear warning against every type of transgression. Warning against transgressing against a Muslim and a non-Muslim.
Allaah, the Most High, said:
And do not kill those souls whom Allaah has prohibited unless [justified by] a due [legal] right
And those souls that Allaah has prohibited, it is referring to the life of a Muslim. And it is referring to everyone who has an agreement with the Muslims, and likewise those non- Muslims who have been given right of safety by the Muslims.
The Messenger of Allaah said, in an authentic hadeeth reported by imam al-Bukhari,
Whoever kills a non-Muslim who has an agreement with the Muslims then he will not smell the fragrance of Paradise
And this is a severe threat. That the Messenger of Allaah, Muhammad, threatened those people and he promised them; he promised those who kill non-Muslims, after an agreement has reached between them, that they will not enter Paradise on the Day of Judgement. And by this hadeeth we surely understand and get to know, we obtain with certainty, that these bombings, if committed by a Muslim, they have oppose the book of Allaah. And they have opposed the Sunnah of the Messenger.
O my brothers, these types of activities will result in many evils and harmful effects.
The first of them
That transgressing against a person without any due right and taking a life without any right is a great crime.
The Prophet said,
A Muslim person will not cease to be clearly and correctly upon his religion as long as they do not spill blood which is impermissible for them
The second affair
That these types of activities enforce the breaking of a contract. For example the Muslim who has entered into Britain. He has made an agreement and a promise that he will preserve the security and the safety in that land and that he will not transgress against anyone without due cause. So these filthy activities of terrorism involve breaking a contract and an agreement one has made.
And Allaah says in His Noble book,
O you who believe, fulfil your covenants
And Allaah said,
Fulfil the covenant of Allaah
And the Messenger of Allaah, Muhammad warned against treachery and deception. The Messenger of Allaah said that the one who breaks his covenant or contract and is deceitful that Allaah, the most High, will expose him upon the Day of Judgement. And Allaah will make him known on the Day of Judgement amongst all of the creation, that he was deceitful.
The third issue
That these types of crimes involve great oppression. And oppression is from the greatest of all sins.
In the authentic collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim, the Prophet said,
Oppression is darkness on the Day of Judgement
And in the authentic collection of Muslim, the Prophet Muhammad said,
Allaah, the Most High, said, “O my servants, I have made oppression upon myself something impermissible and I have made it impermissible for you to oppress one another. So do not oppress one another (meaning that some of you should not oppress others)”
Our religion of Islaam prohibits transgression and oppression. It prohibits oppression even if this transgression is against someone that we hate. It is still impermissible. We have to be just when dealing with everyone.
Allaah, the Most High, said,
And do not let the hatred of a people cause you not to be just. Be just, because it is closer to piety
And the meaning of this noble verse: If you and another individual hate one another, it is still not permissible to oppress him or transgress against him. And it is not permissible to oppress him; rather it is obligatory that you deal with him justly. It is obligatory upon an individual to still fulfil their covenant or contract that he has with them, even if you hate them.
The fourth affair
That these types of crimes and activities distort the true image of Islaam. And this is in reality oppression. Oppression to Islaam and the Muslims, because the people now, at this point, if it is said to them that these bombings are from Islaam, then it will result in the people hating Islaam. And they will hate the Muslims. And they will run away from Islaam. And they will have a feeling towards Islaam of enmity and rancour. Likewise these crimes involve lying upon Allaah and lying upon the Messenger.
It is obligatory upon the Muslims, all of them, that they honour their agreements, and they honour their contracts, and that they speak truthfully when they speak. The true Muslim is not treacherous, and he is not deceitful, and he does not lie, and he does not oppress. This is what Islaam teaches and this is something this is clear from the religion. As for those activities such as bombing and what is similar, they distort the true religion of Islaam and they ascribe to Islam which in reality is not from it. Because verily the true Muslims, those who understand the reality of the religion of Islaam, in every place, they hate and reject and they criticise these criminal acts and they warn against them. And they warn against those people who call to these acts.
And the Muslims in every place feel sorry and sad when they hear about the affairs of these criminal activities no matter where they occur or happen upon the earth. Whether it takes place in the Muslim world or whether it takes place in other than the Muslim world. And our scholars have clarified and clearly explained, with clear clarifications which are strong and emphatic, that these types of acts are not from Islaam. And the scholars in truth they should be returned to.
The scholars in truth they should be returned to and they are those people to whom we should always turn back. We should return back to them to understand the rulings of Allaah, the One who is free from all imperfections. Because the scholars possess knowledge. Knowledge which allows them to differentiate between that which is truth and that which is falsehood. And they can distinguish between that which is from the religion of Islaam and that which is not. And we are delighted and happy with what occurred today, when we heard from the mufti of Saudi Arabia, his eminence the Shaykh Abdul Azeez Aal ash-shaykh (May Allaah the Most High who is free from all imperfections preserve him). The Shaykh issued a clarification which has been spread through the media, through the media outlets here in Saudi Arabia.
The Shaykh, his eminence, criticised and detested those explosions which occurred in London. And the Shaykh explained that Islaam is free of these of these activities. So may Allaah reward the Shaykh, the mufti of Saudi Arabia, with good. And we ask Allaah, the Most High, that He grants all of the Muslims success to understand the Book of Allaah, and to understand the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah. And that Allaah grants them success and allows them to implement the religion of Islaam in the correct manner, how it should be implemented.
Far away and distant from extremism and far away from fanaticism, the true religion of Islaam is a religion of mercy, a religion of justice and a religion that commands that the contracts be fulfilled and kept. The religion of Islaam is not a religion that allows lies, it is not a religion that is barbaric and it is not a religion of treachery.
So my brothers, this is the real Islaam that we have explained to you today. And we say that those who did these crimes and took part in these explosions and these people who have caused Islaam to carry the burden of their crimes, in reality they have not harmed anyone but themselves. Because the religion of Allaah and the true Muslims are free from these actions, from these barbaric crimes. And I ask Allaah, the Most High, that He preserves the security and safety, and that Allaah preserves the state of contentment. I would suffice with what I have said. And the salaat and the salaam of Allaah upon our Prophet Muhammad.
Questions and Answers
Question. What is the Islaamic punishment for those who take part in these crimes?
Answer. Allaah, the Most High, said,
Those who are at war with Allaah and His Messenger and spread corruption in the earth; they will be killed, or they will be hung, or their hands and their legs will be cut off, or they will be exiled from the land
Those people who are caught or take part in these activities, like bombings, which take innocent lives their punishment is death. Because they are individuals who spread corruption in the society. They are not allowed to remain. That is why Allaah commanded that the people who do these types of acts be killed. And if they do not repent from these types of acts then in the hereafter is waiting for them a severe torment.
Question. How do we act with those people who rejoiced at yesterdays events?
Answer. No-one would be happy with these occurrences except one who is severely ignorant. The one who is ignorant of the true understanding of Islaam, he is the only one who would be pleased with the likes of these activities. Allaah does not like oppression and the Messenger Muhammad did not like oppression. Likewise the believers from the Muslims, they hate any type of oppression and they do not rejoice when it appears.
What right does anyone have to kill innocent people who are in a state of security? And what right do the people have to kill innocent women who likewise believe they are in a state of security? And what right do the people have to kill innocent children who are likewise in a state of security? Those who board the car or that which is similar, and the trains, and these people walk in the streets, and they seek their daily needs. These people, what right does anyone have to kill them.
They haven’t committed any crime that warrants this type of atrocity. So the one who is happy at the like of this occurrence either they are extremely ignorant or they are people who love transgression are oppression. And they love barbaric acts. And we ask Allaah that he guides them and he rectifies their state. And Allaah knows best.
All Praise is due to Allaah, and may the salaah and salaam be on Prophet Muhammad, his household, and the noble companions and those who follow them until the Day of Resurrection.
Question: If someone makes a statement of kufr or opposition to the Sunnah and he is a practicing Muslim, can we say he is a kafir? Answer: If a person commits an action of kufr or says a statement of kufr, then this person in particular can only be called a kafir only after certain criteria are met.
These criteria include:
1. The conditions must be fulfilled that the action and/or statement is kufr and entails kufr.
2. It is necessary to check if there exist certain impediments that prevent the imputing of kufr on this particular person.
Actions and/or statements of kufr can be declared in general as such, however making them applicable on a specific person requires fulfilling the conditions and removing the impediments pertaining to takfeer. This is such because there may be causes which would prevent from imputing kufr on a particular person. Moreover, it is not left for anyone to indulge in takfeer as this is the right of Allaah, (subhannahu wa ta’ala), and is a very grave matter to the extent that if you impute kufr on a person incorrectly, then the kufr may return on you; this applies to imputing kufr on the common Muslim as well as the rulers. The Prophet (: sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) commanded the Muslim in the authentic hadith:
“Say that which is good or stay silent.”
If this is for general matters, then what about takfeer? Then, by all means, it is necessary to refrain from indulging in this matter and leave it to the grand and reliable scholars of Islaam. They are the ones who can deduce the correct rulings vis-à-vis the kufr of a specific person. Similarly, this is not a matter for even the senior students of knowledge to take part in openly.
It seems nowadays that most people have nothing else to do but speak about the hukaam (the leaders)1 and takfeer, day and night, in dreams and in awakness. If we claim to be on the path of the salaf (the righteous predecessors), then Muslims should not engage themselves in this matter. Regrettably, most common Muslims make analysis of the whole world political affairs and make judgments with ease and little fear of Allaah (subhannahu wa ta’ala). However, none of this is the business of the common Muslim.
Their involvement in these matters can only aggravate situations and cause disunity. Some argue that, “Politics is from Islaam; Islaam and politics are the same.” They come through these doors. When you ask them about politics, you will find they read twelve newspapers, watch all the satellite news channels, and sit in countless circles, day and night, analyzing politics and so-called current affairs. This is what they consider as ”politics”! At the very least, this is counterproductive and not beneficial for the person who will be responsible for every minute of his life, which he is required to fill with what is good and beneficial. The legislative policies in Islaam are the true “politics.” And this is not for the common Muslims to deal with, not to mention the “media” politics, filled with lies, counter-lies, endless analysis, deceptive statements, emotional speeches, etc. I ask Allaah (subhannahu wa ta’ala) to teach us all that which is beneficial and to save us from all that is evil. Aameen.
All Praise is due to Allaah, and may Allaah’s salaah and salaam be on Prophet Muhammad, his household, and the noble companions and those who follow them until the Day of Resurrection.
Saleh As-Saleh rahimallah
Original material transcribed from www.understand-Islaam.net
The Heresies of Sayyid Qutb in Light of the Statements of the Ulamaa
Author: SalafiPublications.Com
Source: Baraa’ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyah Ahl il-Bid’ah (by Isaam bin Abdullah as-Sinaanee)
Article ID : NDV010009
Prologue Over the past years, the Qutubiyyah have tried relentlessly to defend their leader and Imaam, Sayyid Qutb and to hide his great errors and calamitous statements. To this end they presented to the common-folk what they portrayed as Tazkiyaat (praises or certifications) of some of the Ulamaa and Mashayikh for Sayyid Qutb – whilst being ignorant, or pretending to be ignorant – of the principles of al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel. The true reality, however, was that this was a ploy to justify their innovated methodology and its repugnant principles and as a plot to introduce the concepts of Bidah and Qutubiyyah amongst the ranks of the Salafis and to prey upon the ignorance of the common-folk. This paper is a refutation of those Qutubis who try to make the mediation of Imaam Ibn Baaz for Sayyid Qutb prior to his death a justification of Qutb’s deviant creed and methodology and as a way of praising and propagating his misguided and heretical writings. Comprising the statements and refutations of the Imaams of the Salafi Da’wah and its Mashayikh against Sayyid Qutb and those with his affectations, this paper consists of excerpts from the book “Baraa’ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyat Ahl il-Bid’ah wal-Mudhammah”, checked by Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan who made additional comments and notes and read over the book twice. The book was also read by Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Uthaimeen who praised it and made some minor changes to his own words that were quoted therein. 1. Fatwaa of Shaikh Nasir ud-Deen al-Albani The Muhaddith and Imaam, al-Albani – rahimahullaah – said, commenting upon the book ‘al-Awaasim Mimmaa Fee Kutub Sayyid Qutub Min al-Qawasim’ of Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee, “Everything with which you have refuted Sayyid Qutb is the truth (haqq) and is correct (sawab). And it will become sufficiently clear from this refutation to every one who has read anything from “The Islamic Heritage” that Sayyid Qutb had no knowledge of the Usool (fundamentals) or the Furoo’ (subsidiary matters) of Islaam. So may Allaah reward you with the best of reward, O brother Rabee’ for fulfilling the obligation of explaining and uncovering his ignorance and deviation from Islaam.” Source: From the Shaikh’s own handwritten letter which he wrote prior to his death in 1999. A photocopy of the original is included in the book itself as an appendix. 2. Fatwaa of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Azeez Ibn Baz Some parts of the book of Sayyid Qutb ‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’ were read to him such as his speech about Moosaa – ‘alaihis-Salaam – upon whom he said: “Let us take Moosaa – as the example of the leader of excitable nature – and this excitable impulse quickly passes away and he regains his composure, as is the case with the excitable folk.” Then he said with regard to the Saying of Allah – the Most High – “Fa as-ba-hu fil madinati kha bi fan…” :- “This is the description of a well known state: the restlessness or fear of one expecting evil at every turn – and this is the characteristic of the excitable folk.” [‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’: p.200,201,203. 13th ....] So the Shaikh replied to this: “Mockery of the Prophets is apostasy in its own.”[*] And is was said to him that Shaikh Rabee’ al-Madhkhalee has written a refutation of Sayyid Qutb, so the Shaikh said: “Rebuttal of him is good.” [*] And unfortunately the Qutubi movement clothing itself as Salafiyyah, has not only gone to the extremes in Takfir but has also fallen into the extremes of Irjaa’ in that it seeks to defend, nay even promote, the books and writings of their leaders and mentors which contain statements of disbelief and apostasy (examples will be given in Part 2, inshaa’allaah). Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee said, commenting upon Imaam al-Albani’s description of the Qutubiyyah as “The Khawarij of the Era”, that “it is more befitting that they be called Murji’ah of the Era before they are called Khawarij of the Era”. Refer to al-Asalah (Vol. 24) Source: During a lesson of Shaikh ‘Abdul – ‘Azeez ibn Baaz – hafizahullaah – in his house in Riyaadh 1413H, ‘Minhaajus-Sunnah tapes of ar-Riyaadh 3. Fatwaa of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Azeez Ibn Baz A section of the book “Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat” (p.242) was read out to the Shaikh and in which Sayyid Qutb accuses of Mu’awiyah and Amr Ibn al-Aas of lying (kadhib), deception (ghish), treachery or trickery (khadee’ah), hypocrisy (nifaaq), and taking bribes (rishwah). So he replied: “These are repugnant words!! These are repugnant words. Revilement of Mu’awiyah and of Amr Ibn al-Aas. All of this is repugnant and evil words. Mu’awiyah and Amr and whoever was with them made ijtihaad and erred[*], and those who perform ijtihaad and err then may Allaah pardon us and them. [*] Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan in checking through this made the comment, “Being resolved that they erred is not clearly apparent, but if it was said, “They were mujtahidoon, if they were correct they have two rewards and if they erred they have one reward, yet their error is forgiven”, it would have been much better and more just.” The questioner then said, “What about his statement that there is hypocrisy (nifaq) in them both, is that not takfir of them?” Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, “This is an error and a mistake which is not disbelief. For his revilement of some of the Companions or just one of them is evil (munkar) and sinfulness (fisq) and he deserves to be given exemplary punishment for it – we ask Allaah to pardon him – however, if he reviled most of them and declared them sinners then he would become an apostate, because they are the Carriers of the Revelation. When he reviles them then this means that he is reviling the legislation.” The questioner then said, “Should not these books in which these statements exist be forbidden?” Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, “It is necessary for them to be torn to pieces”. Then the Shaikh said, “Is this in a newspaper?” The questioner said, “In a book, may Allaah be benevolent to you.” The Shaikh asked, “Whose book?” The questioner said, “Sayyid Qutb…”. The Shaikh said, “These are repugnant words”. The questioner, continuing, “… in ‘Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat’” Source: The cassette ‘Sharh Riyaad us-Saaliheen’ dated 18/7/1418H. 4. Fatwaa of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Uthaimeen Question: “What is your saying concerning a man who advises the Sunni youth to read the books of Sayyid Qutb, especially ‘Fee Dhilaal il-Qur’aan’ and ‘Ma’aalim Fit-Taareeq’, without warning about any of the errors and deviations present in these books?” Answer: “My statement – may Allaah bless you – is that whoever gives sincerity of purpose to Allaah, His Messenger, and his brother Muslims, that he should encourage the people to read the books of those who have preceded us from the books of tafsir and other than tafsir. These books contain more blessings, are more beneficial and are much better than the books of the later ones. As for the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb – may Allaah have mercy upon him – then it contains great calamities, however we hope that Allaah pardons him. In it are great calamities, such as his tafsir of Istiwaa and his tafsir of “Qul Huwallaahu Ahad”, and similarly, his description of one of the Messengers with something unbefitting.” Source: From the Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Ibtaal Qawaa’id wa Maqaalaat Adnaan Ar’oor, and checked by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen himself on 24/4/1421H, with one slight revision who changed the phrase “Anaa Ra’yee…” to “Anaa Qawlee…”. 5. Fatwaa of Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan Question: “[Adnaan Ar’oor] said, “Why is Imaam Ahmad not reproached for his takfir of the one who abandons prayer and yet Sayyid Qutb is reproached merely because some of these expressions occurred from him (i.e. his takfir of Muslim societies). So we say: This one performed takfir of the Muslim societies (i.e. Qutb), and yet Imaam Ahmad – may Allaah have mercy upon him – is not reproached despite his judgement of kufr against all these societies [meaning that the majority of them do not pray].” So what is your comment upon this?” Answer: Imaam Ahmad is a scholar and a sage (erudite, sagacious) who knows the evidences and the manner of extracting proof from them and Sayyid Qutb is an ignoramus (jaahil) who has no knowledge or cognisance and neither does he have any evidences for what he says. Hence, equating between Imaam Ahmad and Sayyid Qutb is injustice (dhulm) [because Imaam Ahmad has many evidences from the Book and the Sunnah for the one who deliberately abandons the prayer whereas Sayyid does not have a single piece of evidence for his takfir of the Muslims in general. Rather the evidences are in opposition to what he says].” Question: “Likewise he (Adnaan Ar’oor) says, “I do not know of anyone who has spoken about the affairs of Manhaj in the manner that Sayyid Qutb has spoken of them. And he is correct in the vast majority of what he has written.” He (Ar’oor) was asked about this statement of his and he replied, “By the word minhaaj here I mean the issues of reform, elections and assassinations. And by “in his time” I mean the Fifties.” Answer: “He (Ar’oor) does not know because he is ignorant. As for us, then we know – and all praise is due to Allaah – that the scholars both prior to and after Sayyid Qutb, opposed him.” Source: From the Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Ibtaal Qawaa’id wa Maqaalaat Adnaan Ar’oor. What is in square brackets was added by Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan himself as a further clarification. Note This is only a small selection of the quotations from the Ulamaa which number around 25 or so. All of the above quotations are found in the cassette “Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb”, published by Tasjeelaat Minhaaj us-Sunnah of Riyaadh. Summary Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) was asked, “The one who praises Ahl ul-Bid’ah, is he to be counted amongst them?” So he replied, “Yes, there is no doubt about this, the one who praises them is one who actually calls to them“. [Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb]
Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said, “It is obligatory to punish everyone who ascribes himself to them – the people of innovation – or who defends them, or who praises them, or who reveres their books, or who detests that they should be talked about, or who begins to make excuses for them by saying he does not understand what these words mean or by saying that this person also authored another book and what is similar to these types of excuses, which are not made except by an ignoramus or a hypocrite. Rather, it is obligatory to punish everyone who knows of their condition and did not assist in repelling their evil, for repelling their evil is one of the greatest of obligations.” Majmoo ul-Fataawaa (2/132)
Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah also said: “And in the face of those who perform takfir in falsehood are a people who do not know the aqidah of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as it truly should be known, or they know some of it but are ignorant of some of it. Yet whatever they do know of it, they do not always explain it to the people but conceal it. And they do not forbid the innovations that oppose the Book and the Sunnah, nor do they rebuke the People of Innovations and neither do they punish them. In fact, they may even criticise absolutely any talk of the Sunnah and the fundamental principles of the religion [i.e. Tawhid etc.]. Or they may accommodate everyone, with all their varying madhhabs… This approach has overcome many of the Murji’ah, some of the Jurists, Sufis and Philosophers. And both of these two approaches (i.e. that of the Takfiris and the Murji’ah and those with them) are deviant, and outside the [confines of the] Book and the Sunnah.” Majmu’ ul-Fatawa (16/427) Epilogue So dear brother and sister for the sake of Allaah, flee from the books of Sayyid Qutb and flee from those who promote or recommend his books and flee also from those who defend and promote those who defend and promote the books of Sayyid Qutb – fearing for your religion and your aqidah and your manhaj and the repugnant Irjaa that has overcome many of the Qutubiyyah. And if a Qutubi Revivalist comes to you and says, “Shaikh al-Albani encouraged everyone to read a chapter in Milestones”, then reply to such a one: “O Qutubi! This is a very old saying, uttered when the true nature and extent of Qutb’s deviations and heresies were not known to Shaikh al-Albani (save the affair of Wahdat ul-Wujood). And then the Noble Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee exposed the affair of Sayyid Qutb, – giving sincerity of purpose to Allaah, His Messenger and the Muslims in all of that – and so when the affair became abundantly clear – and especially in more recent times – the Noble Imaam, al-Albani made the statement above to Shaikh Rabee’ “Everything with which you have refuted Sayyid Qutb is the truth (haqq) and is correct (sawab)… So may Allaah reward you with the best of reward, O brother Rabee’ for fulfilling the obligation of explaining and uncovering his ignorance and deviation from Islaam“. And are you ignorant or merely pretending to be ignorant of the principle of al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel that the specific criticism takes precedence over the general praise!! And O Qutubi, would you like us to become blind-followers of men and abandon researching the proofs and evidences? And O Qutubi, has not your fraud become uncovered already in that Al-Karaabeesee and al-Muhaasibee were more superior and knowledgeable than Sayyid Qutb and they had works that contained “admonitions and lessons” more powerful and far reaching than the sentimental writings of Qutb, but alongside that Imaam Ahmad forbade them severely, with great harshness and reprimanded the one who tried to argue that they contain benefit?! So may Allaah restrain you O Qutubi, we are people of evidence and proof and implementers of the manhaj of the Salaf – by the permission and praise of Allaah and not merely blind-followers of individuals and personalities. Salaaman!!”
Amongst those who have criticised Sayyid Qutb include:
Shaikh Abdullaah ad-Dawaish – may Allaah have mercy upon him. He criticised ‘az-Zilaal’ a number of years ago and recorded over 180 mistakes in the matters of ‘aqeedah and manhaj in his book ‘al-Mawrid az-Zalaal fit -Tanbeeh alaa Akhtaa az-Zilaal’
And for his takfeer of the whole Ummah he was even criticised by some of the prominent figureheads of Ikhwaan, indicating that at his time, his ideas were not really widely accepted.
Shaikh Mahmood Muhammad Shaakir and others criticised him in his lifetime and refuted him regarding his reviling and slander of Uthmaan (ra) and the other Companions such as az-Zubair, Sa’d, Abdur-Rahmaan bin ‘Awf and also some of the taabi’een.
Shaikh Muhammad Hamood an-Najdi in his book ‘al-Qawl ul-Mukhtasir al-Mubeen fee Manhaahij al-Mufassireen’ regarding his position on the Sifaat…
Muhammad Tawfeeq Barakaat in his book ‘Sayyid Qutb Khulaasatu Hayaatihi’ (p.176-177) said:In these pages we shall try – with the help of Allaah – to state the most important criticisms that have been directed at Sayyid Qutb – may Allaah have mercy upon him – whether it is positive or negative, trying to do that to the best of our capability. And to the extent of my knowledge, there has not appeared any Muslim writer who has been promoted to such a high level, or whose position has been disparaged and reduced to a low level as the likes of Sayyid Qutb – and we are not festering this second aspect [i.e Qutb's disparagement]. Let us then look at some of the things that have been said about him, generally:
It has been said: That he is a new prophet for a specific Jamaa’ah of the Muslims
It has been said: That he does not know what comes out of his head, the strong sentiments and fluency of the language led him to words which are but useless [no meaning behind them]
It has been said: That he is a man of imaginations/ideas, he makes his rulings upon whims and he flies in the wind/breeze of the soul therefore he does not correctly know the true state of affairs
It has been said: That he used to speak about the ahkaam (rulings) of the Sharee’ah without having any knowledge whatsoever of fiqh
It has been said: That he desires to bring about a massive barrier between the Muslims and the Islamic fiqh
It has been said: That he desired to cut the people off from the books of tafseer with the use of sentimental words in his Zilaal
It has been said: That he declared all the Muslims to be disbelievers and did not leave save a few people who were still revolving around Islam.
And many more things have been said about him
Shaikh Muhammad Naasir ud-Deen al-Albaanee who criticised him for his speaking with ‘wahdatul-wujood’ and said that he was merely a writer [adeeb], who was ignorant, with no knowledge, and that he did not call to the Tawheed of Allaah.
It is not correct therefore to claim that Sayyid Qutb is being criticised and disparaged now, in the Nineties by a single or perhaps two or three scholars. Rather a fair number of scholars have criticised him for many things and additionally he was criticised during his lifetimes very heavily for many matters in which he made grave and serious errors. Amongst them are: His rebuke and censure of the Prophet of Allaah, Moosaa (alaihis-salaam) and making him the object of ridicule.
Sayyid Qutb said, in at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan: “Let us take Moosaa – he is the example of the fiery, excitable leader [quotes Qasas 28:15] and here his zealous , excitable spirit appeared, just as his emotions in favour of his nation were shown; but this emotional impulse quickly passed away – and he regained his composure – and this is what happens with the excitable folk. [Quotes Qasas 28:15-17, 18] – and this change shows a well-known manifestation, that of one who is afraid, distressed and expecting evil in every moment – and this is also the sign of the excitable (folk). Then along with this and along with the fact that he promissed that he would not aid the wrongdoers – then let us see what he did [quotes Qasas 28:18]. He desired to attack the other man just as he did the day before, and his zeal and emotion led him to forget his having sought forgiveness, his regret, his fear and his anxious watchfulness… So let us leave him here, to meet him again, at a second period in his life, ten years later. So perhaps he had calmed down and became a man who was of calm nature and gentle-natured. No indeed! So here he was, being called from the right hand side of the mountain: that he should throw down his staff, so he threw it down and it became a snake – moving quickly, he hardly saw it before he jumped and ran, not looking back and not turning aside… he was the same highly strung youth… …”
His rebuke and censure of the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , especially Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu). [The way of the Rawaafid] On this issue he was corrected and refuted by Mahmood Shaakir in his lifetime but he maintained his position and did not recant. His refusal is in the magazine ar-Risaalah vol 977 in the year 1952. This was after Mahmood Shaakir wrote four treatise against him the titles of three of them being: hukmun bilaa bayyinah, laa tasubboo ashaabee, al-alsinatu al-muftireen. They were published in the magazine al-Muslimoon starting in Muharram of the year 1372 hijri.In spite of this he still allowed the book ‘Al-Adaalat ul-Ijtimaa’iyyah’ to be published before his death. He said in the aforementioned book for example: “Indeed, it was a truly a trial that Alee was not the third of the Rightly Guided Caliphs” (p.191 5th edn & p.162 12th edn.) “And we tend to the opinion that the khilaafah of Alee was the natural extension of the khilaafah of the two shaikhs [i.e. Abu Bakr and Umar] and that the era of Uthmaan was merely a gap in between” (p.206 5th edn.) “And it is unfortunate that the khilaafah came to Uthmaan when he was an old man; his determination had weakened and did not reach the goals intended by Islaam; and his resolve was too weak to steadfastly face the plots of Marwaan and plots of Umayyah beyond that.” (p.186 5th edn.) “The Companions saw this deviation from the spirit of Islaam, and would call one another to al-Madeenah to save Islaam and to save Islaam from the trial; and the khalifah – in his old age, and his state brought about by advanced age – did not possess control of his affair to the expense of Marwaan. It is difficult to accuse the spirit of Islaam in the person of Islaam, but it is likewise difficult to pardon him for the error of the unfortunate occurrence of his taking the khilaafah whilst he was a weakened old man, who was surrounded by evil courtiers from Banu Umayyah…” (p.189 5th edn and its meaning is on p.161 of the 12th edn.) His declaration of all societies to be disbelievers without exception. [The way of the Khawaarij] And this is confirmed by Yoosuf al-Qardaawi in his book – The Priorities of the Islamic Movement (p.110) where he explains that the books of Sayyid Qutb appeared in which Qutb performs takfeer of all societies and in which he announces a destructive jihaad against the whole of mankind. His saying that the Qur’aan is created. [The saying of the Jahmiyyah]. His saying that existence is one (wahdatul wujood). [The way of the Soofiyyah] In his explanations of Surah Ikhlaas and also the beginning of Surah Hashr. He said, for example, in his Zilaal (6/4002): “Verily it is a single existence, and there is no other reality save that of His, and there is no true and real existence save His – and every other existing thing then its existence is an extension of His existence … and when this perception becomes firmly established, the one which sees nothing in existence except the reality of Allaah…” And in some of his other books, Sayyid Qutb affirms this and also praises the Soofees and their actions He said in his Zilaal (6/3291): “And there are a people who worship Allaah, because they thank him for His favours which they cannot count – and behind this worship, they do not look for Paradise or Hellfire, nor to pleasure or punishment at all…” His saying of the divine indwelling (hulool) and also Jabr (mankind having no free will – being compelled to act). [The way of the Jabariyyah]. His denial of some of the Attributes of Allaah in the way and style of the Jahmiyyah. [The way of the Mu'attilah] For example his denial of Istiwaa by explaining it away – that it is merely an allegorical expression as he said in his Zilaal (3/1762) and also in many other places such as: (1/53), (/1/54), (3/1296), (4/2045), (5/2807) And likewise his denial of the Meezaan (Scales) in the way and style of the Jahmiyyah (4/2481). His attacks on the Miracles of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) . His refusal of the acceptance of ahaad hadeeth in matters of Aqeedah. [The way of the Mu'tazilah] He said in his Zilaal (6/4008): “And the Aahaad hadeeth are not to be taken in the matters of aqeedah, the source is the Qur’aan – and something being mutawaatir is a condition [that has to be fulfilled] in accepting hadeeth in the issues of belief…” And in this he is more astray than the Ash’arees His denial of the magic that was practiced upon the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) . His denial that Eesaa (as) was raised to the heaven His claim that the point of dispute between the Messenger and the Pagans was with respect to Tawheed ur-Ruboobiyyah only and that Tawheed ul-Uloohiyyah is but Tawheed ur-Ruboobiyyah. He said in his Zilaal (4/1846): “Then the issue of Uloohiyyah was not the point of difference, indeed, it was the issue of Ruboobiyyah which the messages (of the Messengers) addressed. And this was what the final message was addressing also.” His claim that the Sifaat (Attributes of Allaah) are but mere imaginations (takhyeel). And for those who call for Haakimiyyah and raise its banner high, then it is well known to the lowest student of knowledge that the Haakimiyyah of Allaah Azzawajall applies even more so to His Essence, His Names and Attributes [as well as His Sharee'ah etc.] So the one who does not judge – in the matters related to knowledge about Allaah – by what Allaah has revealed – then it is more befitting for him to be labelled a rejector of the Haakimiyyah of Allaah Azzawajall. What is required is justice and fair speech and speaking the truth, even if it be against one’s own soul – and applying the fundamental principles of Islamic Belief justly and fairly to every individual that they apply to – and this is a sign of a Muslims honesty, integrity and love for the Revelation of Allaah. His refusal to pray Salaatul-Jumu’ah with the justification that there is no khilaafah at the present time. Alee Ashmaawee says in his book: “The Secret History of Ikhwaan ul-Muslimeen” (at-Taareekh as-Sirree li-Jamaa’atil-Ikhwaan il-Muslimeen): “And the time for the Jumu’ah prayer arrived so I said to him: ‘Let us leave and pray’ and it was a surprise that I came to know – and for the first time – that he did not used to pray Jumu’ah” (p.112) His speaking with “Hurriyatul-I’tiqaad” [The Freedom of Belief] – meaning that people can be left upon the religion that they are upon. [So Christians should be left as Christians - Jews as Jews etc...] – Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen was asked ‘What do you say about the one who speaks with Hurriyatul-I’tiqaad?’ The Shaikh replied: ‘The one who allows Hurriyatul I’tiqaad – that a person can believe in whatever religion he wishes is a Kaafir…’. NOTE: TAKFEER IS NOT BEING MADE HERE – Since even though someone utters something which necessitates disbelief, the conditions have to be fulfilled and the preventive barriers [mawaani'] have to be removed before the verdict of disbelief can be issued and that is for the Ulamaa’ alone – BUT THIS IS TO SHOW THE NATURE OF QUTB’S IGNORANCE OF FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES OF THE RELIGION. Shaikh al-Albaanee commented about Qutb that he is merely a writer (adeeb), lacking in Islamic knowledge. “For Islam does not desire the freedom of worship for its followers only, rather it affirms this right for all the different religions and it tasks the Muslims to fight and defend this right for all people and it [even] allows them to fight under this flag, the flag which guarantees the freedom of worship for the adherents of all other religions…so that it is realised that it is a free world order… (Nahwa Mujtami’ Islaamee p.105) “And Islaam does not feel uneasy about the differences of mankind in aqeedah and manhaj, rather it considers this as something necessitated by natural disposition and a goal from ahgher will in life amongst the people…(Nahwa Mujtami’ Islamee p.103)” His speaking about the Qur’an with mere personal opinion. There are 181 mistakes in matters of aqeedah and issues of knowledge in his Fi zilaal il-Quraan as pointed out by Shaik Abdullaah bin Muhammad as-Dawaish in his book, Al-Mawrid uz-Zilaal fit-Tanbeeh alaa Akhtaa’a az-Zilaal and as the saying goes: Al-Lamsu wal-Basar khairun min as-Sam’i wal-khabr. For a full and excellent refutation of Sayyid Qutb refer to the following books by the Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee al-Madkhalee, which have been recommended by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin, Shaikh Bin Baz and others. 1. Adwaa al-Islaamiyyah alaa Aqeedati Sayyid Qutb
2. Mataa’in Sayyid Qutb fis-Sahaabah
3. Al-Awaasim mimmaa fee kutub Sayyid Qutb minal-Qawaasim
4. Al-Hadd ul-Faasil bainal-Haqq wal-Baatil After reading these it should become clear to the one who is free from ta’assub and hizbiyyah that Sayyid Qutub is most certainly not a mujaddid, in the league of the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah as is ignorantly propagated by many.
What is the of Islaamic position towards the bombings that took place in
London?
Answer:
In the name of Allaah. All praise is due to Allaah, Lord of the creation and may the peace and blessings of Allaah be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and all of his companions.
It is well known that the religion of Islaam is a universal religion for the whole of mankind and the jinn. Allaah the Most High and the One free from all imperfections has legislated laws for the whole of mankind and the jinn. From these laws are the commands and prohibitions. Amongst these prohibitions is that Allaah has forbidden oppression.
Allaah the Mighty and Majestic said:
“And certainly Allaah is never unjust to His slaves.” 1
And He said:
“Surely, Allaah wrongs not even of the weight of an atom (or a small ant)”2
And He said in a Hadeeth Qudsi,
“My slaves, I have forbidden oppression for myself and have made it forbidden amongst you, so do not oppress one another.” 3 (This is an authentic hadeeth qudsi reported upon Allaah the Mighty and Majestic.)
Oppression is forbidden amongst mankind. It is not allowable for anyone to oppress another, and there is no difference in this between a man and a woman, a slave and the free one, and this (applies) to the whole of mankind – oppression is forbidden! Based upon that, there is no doubt that this bombing is a form of (oppression), because Allaah said in another place (in the Qur’aan):
“No soul shall bear the sin of another.” 4
This means that no person should be punished due to the sin of another. Therefore, the people who perpetrated these acts have nothing to support (their behaviour) from the texts of (the Quraan and the Sunnah).
This is the answer to this question and it has been responded to in a summarised manner.
Question 2:
What is the ruling of suicide bombings in Islaam?
Answer:
Allaah the Most High and the One free from all imperfections, has prohibited the people from killing themselves. He said, “Do not kill yourselves”. 5
It is impermissible for a person to aim to kill himself, especially using these methods which entail killing himself and other innocent people, who have not committed any crime that warranted such a punishment. That is why (the suicide bomber) is oppressing his own soul from one perspective, and oppressing others from another.
Question 3:
If a Muslim knows that someone is planning to blow up a building here in
Britain, can he inform the police?
Answer:
This is an obligation. It is mandatory that he informs them (the police) because this is transgression without any right; this is oppression on his part. The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said, “Aid your brother whether he is the oppressed or the oppressor.”
The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam was asked, “How do you aid an oppressor?” He said, “Prevent him from his oppression.”6
(Informing the authorities) will prevent a Muslim from being unjust, and this will prevent people from being oppressed due to the result of (his plans). From another angle, this will be beneficial to the society as there are many Muslims amongst them. So this can be considered from (the following) three aspects:
1: Helping the one who intends to commit suicide, (by preventing him from hisoppression).
2: Helping those who will feel the consequences of this attack, due to the killing and
injuries that would occur.
3: Helping the other Muslims, those who might be harmed by this.
These three aspects are including in the saying of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam:
“Aid your brother whether he is the oppressed or the oppressor.”
Taken from the paper ‘Ash-Sharaq Al-Awsat’ 6 July 2006
At this time last year a great evil took place. It visibly affected peoples’ wealth and lives, and injured the image of Islam and the Muslims throughout the whole world. This time last year attacks were made against the London underground system and (London) buses and explosions went off. Tens of people died and were injured, as a result of these (actions). Some Muslim youth, who reside in those lands, carried out these disgraceful acts. What is the correct stance that the Muslim should adopt towards this type of activity? What advice is it incumbent upon us to offer to the Muslims abroad? I say that there is not a shadow of doubt that a small group of people, whom ascribe themselves to Islam, have arisen, in the last few years, traversing upon the methodology of the kharijites (a deviant sect) of the past. This (deviant sect) have left the religion like an arrow leaves its prey. Actually, this present group of people could possibly be viewed as being more astray and misguided than the original kharijites, because they have not only declared Muslims to be infidels and killed them but, instead, they have added to this by violating their covenants and transgressing against the people of the book and other than them, who have agreements with the Muslims; even the kharijtes of the past never done this. So pay attention oh my Muslim brother. Islam has not sanctioned this type of activity. Opposite to that, Islamic law warns against these acts in the clearest fashion and discourages going down these paths. On top of that, even Arab and Islamic customs reject these appalling acts that deeply damage the image of Islam. This has caused many non-Muslims to flee from Islam and shun its people. For this reason, the attacks against London last year that were carried out by some misguided, astray Muslim youth are forbidden. Especially, (bearing in mind) that they killed tens of innocent people with their bombs. These (youth) have committed a grave sin. In the light of Islamic law, this is viewed as a violation of a covenant and treachery. An affair that has resulted in many negatives which have (damaged) the co-existence of these people, and I am referring to how the British people (interact) with the Muslims who reside in those lands. These bombings have placed the rest of the Muslims of Britain in a difficult situation and, perhaps, caused some aggravation. The least of them being that this has portrayed the Muslims as a possible security threat. It is not acceptable to reserve the slightest doubt about the fact that those responsible for the bombings in London and any other similar acts have carried out something forbidden in the light of Islamic law. No matter what excuses they offer. I say (for arguments sake) even if the non-Muslims, whom we were residing in their lands, were at war with us and we entered their lands and remained there with an agreement of their protection, it is impermissible to deceive and betray them. The people of knowledge, like Ibn Qudaamah in Al-Mughni (a famous piece of classical Islamic jurisprudence), have mentioned this in the books of Islamic jurisprudence Therefore, there is no ambiguity that these bombings of the subway in London were a blatant form of deception. My advice to my Muslim brothers who are residing in Britain, in the west generally or in any non-Muslim land is to be cautious of those conspirators amongst you, who falsely claim that they are implementing the correct Islam. In reality, these people strive to destroy the relationship that (the rest of the Muslims) have with their countries that have hosted them for their whole life. Also, their activities deprive them (i.e. the rest of the Muslims) of the benefits of life, ruin their relationship with their hosting nations and citizens, spoil their reputation before the people and damage the rights they have acquired. It is upon the Muslims in those lands to work together to uproot this deviant group, if advice brings no fruits, they should abandon and shun them, and inform upon every trouble maker from amongst them. To allow the rest of the Muslims in that land can live in peace and spread the true Islam. They should be torches of light and guidance, guiding the people to the magnificence and excellence of this great religion that Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, revealed as a mercy for the whole of mankind.
Those who travel to and enter non-Muslim lands under a pact of safety (Visas), how could they then prove treacherous and betray it!?
How can a Muslim not realize this?
Do you not see that if a man enters a non-Muslim country and is given a pact of safety (a visa), that this is a betrayal? Every betrayer of a trust will have a banner raised over him on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said: ‘This is the treachery of so and so’ – by name. This would be publicized on the Day of Resurrection, because he is treacherous.
The Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وسلّم) said:
((Do not betray even those who betray you.))
Even the person who betrays you, you mustn’t betray him! But these people, how is it that they enter with a pact of safety (a visa) and then prove treacherous? This is not the way of the believers, nor is treachery a characteristic of the Prophet, may the Salaat and Salaam be upon him, or his companions, and we seek refuge with Allaah from that.
Question: Some people – may Allāh guide them – do not believe the pledge of obedience and allegiance to the governments to be an obligation in these countries. What’s your advice regarding this?
Answer: We advise everyone to listen to and obey them as we’ve previously and always said. We warn against rebelling and revolting against any of the leaders in authority; these are some of the greatest sins. Rather, they are from the religion of the Khawārij. This is the religion of the Khawārij and Mu’tazilah; they reject the command to listen to and obey the leaders if they see them commit a sin, eventually opposing and rising up
against them. This is wrong and contradictory to what the prophet ( ) commanded. He ordered that one must listen to and obey the leaders in the good they command. He said: “Whoever sees from his leader something of disobedience to Allāh, then he should dislike what he does of sinning against Allāh, but he must not remove even a hand-span away from obedience (to him).”
And he ( salaalahualaihee wa salaam) said: Whoever comes to you while you are all in a state of unity and he seeks to cause rebellion and tries to divide you, then (the legitimate ruler could) execute him.”
So, it is not permissible for an individual to revolt against or leave the allegiance and obedience to his legitimate leader (government, president, king, etc). Neither is it permissible to promote such concepts because these acts are some of the greatest evils and foremost means leading to tribulations and enmity among people. As for the one who calls to that, this is the religion of the Khawārij. Such a person deserves capital punishment because he disunites the people and thereby plants the beginnings of a revolution. It is an obligation to warn with the utmost effort against this. It is also an obligation upon the leader of affairs that if he comes to know of someone promoting this ideology, he must forcefully apprehend him in order to prevent further calamities among.
Reference This fatwā was taken from a book called “Al-Fatāwā Ash-Shar’iyyah fī Al-Qadhāyā Al-‘Asriyyah,” a collection of various rulings by Muhammad Ibn Fahd Al-Husayn. Recorded by Muslim (no. 1855) from the ḥadīth of ‘Awf Ibn Mālik al-Ashja’ī (). the Muslims. Recorded by Muslim (no. 1852) from the ḥadīth of ‘Arfajah Ibn Shurayḥ (). Also, like many other legislations in the Quran and Sunnah, this is a conditional, legitimate capital punishment verdict to be determined and carried out by legitimate leaderships or governments, not unconditionally by individuals. Taken from the casette: Aḥdāf al-Ḥamalāt al-‘Ilāmiyyah Ḍid Wulāh wa ‘Ulamā’ Bilād al- Ḥaramayn.
Question: A verdict is spreading among the youth that permits killing security and police officers and that they’re considered apostates from Islam. We hope from your eminence the clarification and legitimate ruling of this and the dangerous effects such a criminal act upon this land and its security.
Answer: All praise is for Allaah, the Lord of all creations and may prayers and peace be upon Allāh’s Messenger. Such a religious verdict has no basis to it and couldn’t have come from any real student of knowledge, let alone a scholar who understands the fundamentals of Islam. Security officers and police officers are Muslims. They assist the government in establishing safety in the land and in arresting criminals. So, it is incumbent for all Muslims to cooperate with them, assist and support them, not kill them. As for someone who says it is permissible to kill them, such a person understands nothing of Islam except its name. Allāh knows best, and we seek refuge with him.
This fatwá was taken from a book called “Al-Fatāwā Ash-Shar’iyyah fī Al-Qadhāyā Al-‘Asriyyah,”
a collection of various rulings by Muhammad Ibn Fahd Al-Husayn.
Taken from a private sitting in the house of Shaykh ‘Abd al-Muḥsin Āli-‘Ubaykān. It was recorded
And do not kill those souls whom Allaah has prohibited unless [justified by] a due [legal] right 
Whoever kills a non-Muslim who has an agreement with the Muslims then he will not smell the fragrance of Paradise
