Jihadist Writer Discusses Ibn-Taymiyah Ruling on Holding Others As Infidel

Jihadist Writer Discusses Ibn-Taymiyah Ruling on Holding Others As Infidel
Jihadist Websites
Thursday, November 12, 2009



“Now, some people hold as infidel anyone who has a different opinion or belongs to groups other than theirs.”


On 31 August, a forum participant posted to a jihadist website a study by Husayn Bin-Mahmud on Ibn-Taymiyah`s discussion of “Al-Mubtadi” (innovator in religion) and “Al-Mu`ayyan” (individual accused of infidelity). The writer compiled a collection of fatwas by Ibn-Taymiyah on this subject and then commented on them. He differentiates between holding someone infidel because they invent something that is not in the religion, and holding them infidel for specific reasons. The 42-page study is mainly based on Ibn-Taymiyah`s “Majmu al-Fatawa.”


A summary of the study follows:


Takfir, or holding other people infidel, is a risky trap into which many people have fallen. People take two opposite sides in this matter. One party never holds anybody infidel, saying that faith is something pertaining to the heart, while actions are not out of faith. If you commit all sins of infidelity and polytheism mentioned in the Koran, they will not hold you infidel as long as you say that there is no god but God. These kind of people are called “Murji`ites.” Some of these Murji`ites of our age say that the religion of the Jews and the Christians is right, God forbid, calling these deviated religions heavenly religions and sects of Abraham.


The other party holds infidel the Muslims who commit major sins, which are called “Kharijites.” Now, some other people hold as infidel anyone who has a different opinion or belongs to groups other than theirs.


There are other people in between. They say that faith is in the heart and is expressed by the words of mouth and actions of the body. It increases and decreases. They hold infidel anyone who says or does any opinion or action contrary to the Shari`ah. They differentiate between an absolute ruling and a specific one. These are the Sunnis, who take a medium position between the Murji`ites and the Kharijites. They do not hold as infidel all the people who say that there is no god but God, and at the same time, they do not hold infidel anyone who commits a major sin.


Ibn-Taimiyah has a useful chapter on this subject entitled “Rafa al-Mala an al-A`immah al-A`lam,” Majmu al-Fatawa, Vol 2, p 231-290.


Some interpretation schools hold the Al-Jahamiyah as infidel, because they deny the attributes of God in contradiction to the holy books. He does not hold the Murji`ites infidel for their innovation in religion because their innovation is a matter of difference between scholars in subordinate themes, like naming things.


He also does not hold the Shia infidel, in spite of their innovation in religion. He has the same opinion on the Al-Qadariyah (adherents of the doctrine of free will), the non-extremists from the Al-Rafidah (Shiites), and the Kharijites.


The four schools of Sunni thought hold as infidel anyone who claims that the Koran is a creation and that God can not be seen in Heaven. However, they differed whether that kind of infidelity denies their Islam or not. They also differed whether those people would be eternally in Hell. Contradiction of evidence was behind their differences. Giving a general ruling that whoever says a certain word (of infidelity) is an infidel neglected the circumstantial evidence and conditions, and takfir is not definite without those conditions.


To prove this opinion, Ibn-Taymiyah did not hold the Jahamiyah infidel for asking him to believe in the creation of the Koran and denial of God`s attribute, although they imprisoned and tortured him. On the contrary, he prayed to God to forgive them. If he had believed they were infidel, he would not have prayed for their forgiveness, because it is not permissible to ask God to forgive an infidel. He took their interpretation as a mistake, which God may forgive.


In Islamic tradition, as narrated from the Prophet, a ruler may interpret matters. If he is right, he is doubly rewarded, but if he errs in his interpretation, he will be rewarded only once. Misunderstanding or misinterpreting does not change a Muslim into an infidel. Infidels are those who disbelieve in God or the basic beliefs or refuse God`s rulings, believing that they are not mandatory after received God`s messages through His messengers and prophets. Other people, who believe that God`s message applies to the public and does not apply to the elite, like philosophers, are infidels too, as well as those who believe that the Prophet is sent exclusively to certain people, as claimed by many Jews and Christians.


To sum up, there are two major criteria:


a. A Muslim has to believe that knowledge, faith, and guidance are in the Prophet`s tradition, and anything otherwise is sheer infidelity. Denial of God`s attributes, disbelief that God can be seen in the other life, that He is on the Arch, that the Koran is His word, that He talked to Moses, or that He took Abraham as a friend, is infidelity.


b. General “takfir,” like general threatening, has to be absolute and cannot be specific like in cases of committing major sins. Sinners might get their Shari`ah punishment in life and become residents of Paradise after their death. On the other hand, there are many people who are not punished in life, but they will reside in Hell as infidels, like non-Muslims who pay jizyah (tax paid by non-Muslims living under Islamic rule) and hypocrites who pretend to be Muslims but are not.


The real reward and punishment is in life after death, but punishment on earth is only to deter people from committing crimes and sins. The predecessors called for killing innovators in religion because they misguided the people to corrupt their religion, whether they said that they were infidels or not.


Accusing anybody of infidelity necessitates evidence that they disagreed with the messengers. No one has the right to hold anyone else infidel, regardless of their mistakes and errors, without evidence.


Some rulers can not rule in accordance with God`s Shari`ah for circumstantial reasons, such as Nagashi, king of Abyssinia at the time of the Prophet. He believed in Islam, but could not announce it because he was the king of a Christian country with a powerful stronghold of Christian priests and he had to keep his faith a secret.


This ruling on Nagashi could apply to contemporary rulers in Muslim countries, although none of them is under real pressure to conceal their faith and take hostile attitudes against Islam and Muslims. Supposing that they are under pressure, they deny it and claim they do not suffer from any kind of pressure or coercion.


All Arab countries apply non-Islamic laws. Their constitutions say that the Koran is a major source of legislation, which is evidence of polytheism, because they admit the presence of sources of legislation other than Islam.


The Saudi Government is infidel because it has commercial laws and foreign regulations other than those in Islam and is loyal to the enemies of God. It supported the non-Muslim United States in its war against Muslim Afghanistan and Iraq under the pretext of fighting terrorism. He also says that the Saudis financed US military campaigns to kill the Muslims and spoil the honor of Muslim women in both countries. They paid money to the Christians in southern Sudan to kill the Muslim Sudanese, among other examples.


It is not easy or safe to hold people infidel because this requires certain prerequisites. Before you hold anyone infidel, you must be totally aware of the Shari`ah conditions in question, the circumstantial conditions of those people, the exact rulings and their meanings, the absolute objectives of the Shari`ah, the conditions and obstacles of implementation, and the difference between what is general and absolute and what is conditional. You also have to be impartial, pious, careful, and have to spare no effort in your effort.


Knowledge is important in deciding what is right and what is wrong. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Knowing only the basics of religion, some semi-ignorant people give themselves the right to decide on dangerous matters of religion, while scholars took years and years of study before dealing with a single issue of controversy. For example, the countries that neighbor Saudi Arabia know very little or nothing about the Wahhabi movement. They only know ablution, prayer, and basic principles of faith. But then, they discuss intricate issues of faith, which the greatest ulema could not settle.


Graduation in knowledge is important. Before saying that a certain person is infidel, one has to know very well the realities of faith and infidelity and the difference between them. Otherwise, innocent Muslims can be victims of misjudgment.


Islamic Army in Iraq`s Al-Fursan Magazine Article: `Matters of Takfir According to Ibn-Taymiyah`
Jihadist Websites
Tuesday, November 7, 2006


On 18 October, a jihadist website posted the 10th issue of Al-Fursan magazine released by the Islamic Army in Iraq. This 64-page issue contained a number of articles about jihad -- particularly in Iraq -- and emphasizing jihad`s importance in Islam, including an article citing the rules and requirements for declaring a Muslim to be a non-believer as explained by Ibn-Taymiyah, an influential thirteenth-century Islamic scholar.


A translation of the article follows:


Some Issues of Takfir According to the Imam and Mujahid Ibn Taymiyah (God`s Mercy upon Him)


1. First issue: Sins and mistakes are not kufr. It is not permitted to declare a Muslim an infidel for a sin he has committed or for an error he has made, such as matters about which people who turn to the qiblah (i.e., Muslims) have disputed. As for the Kharijites and renegades whom the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) commanded to be fought, the commander of the faithful, Ali ibn Abi-Talib, one of the well-guided caliphs, fought them, and those who were authorities in matters of faith -- both companions of the Prophet and the following generation -- agreed that they should be fought. Neither Ali ibn Abi-Talib, nor Sa`d ibn Abi-Waqqas, nor any of the Prophet`s other Companions declared them to be infidels; they classified them as Muslims though they fought them. Ali did not fight them until they spilled innocent blood and raided Muslim property. He fought them so as to repel their wrongdoing and violence, not because they were infidels; and so he did not take their women captive or plunder their property. If men whose straying was confirmed by explicit text and by common consent were not declared to have become infidels despite the command of God and the Prophet to fight them, how can one do so with regard to various groups that become confused about the truth in matters where men more knowledgeable have erred? No member of these groups may declare the others to be infidels or proclaim their lives and property to be forfeit, even if the group is involved with confirmed innovation. How much more so if the group declaring the other to be infidel is also involved in innovation? And the innovation of the latter might be even grosser! Usually they all are ignorant of the truths about which they disagree. The rule is that Muslims` lives, property, and honor are inviolable to other Muslims and become forfeit only by the permission of God and His Messenger.


-- Collected Fatwas, 3:282-283.


2. Second issue: The difference between absolute takfir and specific takfir. I have often explained that the reports from the pious forefathers and imams of absolute pronouncement of takfir against those who said certain things are also true. One must, however, distinguish between the absolute and the specific. This is the first matter of major principles over which the community disputed. It may be termed “the question of God`s threat” (mas`alat al-wa`id). The Koranic passages concerning this threat are absolute. For example: “Those who devour the property of orphans unjustly, devour Fire in their bellies, and shall assuredly roast in a Blaze.” (Koran 4:10). Similarly the rest of what has come down to us: whoever does thus and so, shall have thus and so; the matter is absolute and general. It is similar to those of the forefathers who said, “Whoever says thus and so, is thus and so.” But the condemnation of the threat is cancelled for a particular person because of repentance, compensatory good deeds, atoning tribulations, or accepted intercession. Takfir is part of the threat. Even if the person has attributed lies or falsehoods to the Prophet, he may be new to Islam or have grown up far away in the desert. Such a person is not declared an infidel for his denials until conclusive proof has been presented to him. The man may never have heard the texts in question, or he may have heard them but they may not have been shown to be authentic, or someone in error may have opposed them and persuaded him of a misinterpretation.


-- Collected Fatwas, 3:230-231.


3. Third issue: Conditions and impediments before takfir. The truth of the matter is that words sometimes are kufr, and an absolute pronouncement is made deeming the sayer of such words to be an infidel. One says: Whoever says thus and so is an infidel. However, the particular person who has said the words is not judged to be an infidel until the conclusive argument whose denier is an infidel has been presented to him. This is as in the Koranic passages of threat. God says: “Those who devour the property of orphans unjustly, devour Fire in their bellies, and shall assuredly roast in a Blaze.” (Koran 4:10). This and similar threatening texts are true, but a particular person is not judged subject to the threat and a particular Muslim is not condemned to Hell since the threat possibly does not apply to him due to the absence of certain conditions or the presence of certain obstacles.


-- The prohibition may not have reached him.


-- He may repent of having committed the prohibited act.


-- He may have great good deeds to his credit that blot out the punishment for the prohibited act.


-- He may be tried with misfortunes that atone for him.


-- An accepted intercessor may intercede for him.


Similarly with regard to statements whose authors are pronounced to be infidels:


-- The texts making it an obligation to know the truth may not have reached the person.


-- He may have them but be uncertain of their authenticity.


-- He may not have been able to understand them.


-- He may have become subject to doubts for which God will forgive him.


If a believer is earnest in the search for truth and errs, God will forgive him his error whatever it may be, whether it concerns theoretical matters or practical ones. This is the position that was held by the Companions of the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) and by the great majority of Muslim legal authorities.


-- Collected Fatwas, 23:345-346.


© Compiled and distributed by NTIS, US Dept. of Commerce. All rights reserved.


Shiite Cleric Calls For Ignoring `Takfiris` Protest Against Revising Curricula
Al-Watan
Wednesday, July 22, 2009


Unattributed report: “Muhammad al-Mahri: `The Followers of Ibn-Taymiyah Are the Ones Who Put the Takfiri Curricula, Which Must be Canceled`“


Muhammad Baqir al-Mahri, representative of the Shiite religious authorities in Kuwait, has stressed that it is important to cancel what he called the takfiri curricula. In the meantime, he urged those whom he called the fanatic takfiris (those who label other Muslims infidels) to leave Kuwait if they remain devoted to their curricula.


This was mentioned in Al-Mahri`s statement, in which he said: “Eliminating the takfiri doctrine from the educational curricula, which were written by the stiff-necked takfiris, who are influenced by Ibn-Taymiyah`s ideas, is an important, national, and Shari`ah obligation and it is necessary to revise and modify the educational curricula according to the Islamic sects and the doctrine of the people of Sunnah, who do not call Muslims infidels.”


He added that “accusing Muslims of infidelity, dividing Muslims, and inciting sedition and corruption among them came from outside Kuwait through fanatic scholars, who are influenced by the above mentioned shaykh.”


He said that “accusing people of infidelity and apostasy is not part of the Sunni creed in Kuwait. The takfiri groups have to either live in Kuwait and comply with the constitution, law, and show tolerance to others, or leave Kuwait. Kuwait is for all, Sunnis, Shiites, Muslims, Christians, Bedouin, and city dwellers.”


Al-Mahri added that “what is included in the educational curricula of grades nine and ten sows hatred and grudge in the students, tears away at national unity, and divides the Muslims` ranks.”


Al-Mahri said that “some of the Kuwaiti stiff-necked MPs who know nothing whatsoever of knowledge, and they prefer political interests and electoral gains over Kuwait, its people, and its public interests.”


Al-Mahri added that “accusing people of infidelity is not one of the Islam and monotheism principles but the opposite is quite true. Takfiris` threats to the Kuwaiti decent government and the respectful minister are valueless, and they indicate the takfiris` failure to infer scientifically.”


Al-Mahri added that “the takfiris are the ones, who incited sedition and wreaked havoc across the land, and accusing the minister of inciting sedition contradicts with what is going on the ground, and they the ones who got involved in sedition without being aware.”


Al-Mahri added that “the respectful minister has to go ahead in the revision of the educational curricula, because truth should be followed.”


Al-Mahri said that “this takfiri group should know that the interest of Kuwait is above all other interests, and the homeland is the most precious thing in our lives, adding that the homeland is for everybody, and it is not only for takfiris”


Al-Mahri concluded by saying: “Eliminating the takfiri curricula is in the interest of the country and the faithful, and it brings about love and peaceful coexistence, enhances the national unity, and strengthens bonds of Islamic brotherhood and love. We reiterate that the takfiris` protest against revising the curricula is valueless and we should ignore anything they say, because they want to incite sedition in the country, and they do not want reform. Anyone who observes the political arena in the Kuwait can see this clearly.”


(Description of Source: Kuwait Al-Watan Online in Arabic -- Website of popular, independent, centrist daily with close ties to the ruling family; publishes a range of political views; URL: http://www.alwatan.com.kw)