ibnYaseen
5th May 2007, 06:19 PM
I read this (http://abuqutaybah.blogspot.com/2007/04/mukhaalafatul-kuffar.html) on Abu Qutaybah's blog, and hope brothers here can help me understand this properly, in relation to the current realities and proper context according to our present time and place (i.e. the West and UK more specifically).
I came across the following words of Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah and I thought I would share them with you. It raises some important and controversial issues that need to be discussed more in our communities by those qualified to do so:
"To be at variance (mukhaalafah) with them (i.e disbelievers) should not happen except when the religion is dominant and manifest…When the Muslims were at first weak, being at variance with them was not legislated, but when the religion became complete and dominant, it was then legislated. The similitude to that is like today; thus if a Muslim was in daar al harb (land of war) or in daar al kufr which was not daar al harb, he would not be commanded to be at variance with them in their outer appearances/manners (al hadiyy adh-dhaahir) due to the harms that would result in that. In fact it could be recommended or even obligatory for him to agree at times with their outward appearances since that would entail religious benefit; from calling them to the religion and looking into their internal affairs to inform the Muslims about them, or to repel their harm that would face the Muslims and other matters that have good purposes behind them.
As for Daar al Islam & Hijrah by which Allah honored the religion by it, and placed on the disbelievers' humiliation and the jizyah; mukhaalafah was then legislated. If it is therefore apparent that the matter of differing and agreeing with them differs according to time and place, the reality of the ahadeeth about this matter becomes apparent."
From Iqtidaa Siraat al Mustaqeem (1/418-419), Maktabah ar-Rushd, (1404h.)
I came across the following words of Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah and I thought I would share them with you. It raises some important and controversial issues that need to be discussed more in our communities by those qualified to do so:
"To be at variance (mukhaalafah) with them (i.e disbelievers) should not happen except when the religion is dominant and manifest…When the Muslims were at first weak, being at variance with them was not legislated, but when the religion became complete and dominant, it was then legislated. The similitude to that is like today; thus if a Muslim was in daar al harb (land of war) or in daar al kufr which was not daar al harb, he would not be commanded to be at variance with them in their outer appearances/manners (al hadiyy adh-dhaahir) due to the harms that would result in that. In fact it could be recommended or even obligatory for him to agree at times with their outward appearances since that would entail religious benefit; from calling them to the religion and looking into their internal affairs to inform the Muslims about them, or to repel their harm that would face the Muslims and other matters that have good purposes behind them.
As for Daar al Islam & Hijrah by which Allah honored the religion by it, and placed on the disbelievers' humiliation and the jizyah; mukhaalafah was then legislated. If it is therefore apparent that the matter of differing and agreeing with them differs according to time and place, the reality of the ahadeeth about this matter becomes apparent."
From Iqtidaa Siraat al Mustaqeem (1/418-419), Maktabah ar-Rushd, (1404h.)