ISIS Justification Statement: Paris and Brussels

Introduction

ISIS posted a justification statement, not just a confirmation statement, for their responsibility and perceived rightfulness for the Paris and Brussels attacks. They did not just say “yeah, we did it!” they said “and this is why.” So why do ISIS feel that they are justified in using terrorism?

The Justification Statement

Take your time reading this. Here it is in full:


Paris Attack (13th Nov. 2015) and Brussels Attack (22nd March, 2016) in the light of the Islamic Shari’ah.

Justifying the Paris attacks/Brussels attack(& the likes of it) in the light of the Qur’ān and sunnah and the ijmā’ & quotes from the scholars of the salaf.

We have seen so many people in the social media claiming that The Islamic state was not justified in killing the French “innocent” citizens in the blessed ghazwa in Paris, and that of the Brussels attack now. We have also seen some evil “scholars” – Scholars for the dollars quoting the textual evidences out of context. Today , we shall tackle this topic with evidences from the Qur’ān and sunnah and the ijmā’ & quotes from the scholars of the salaf.

First we want to make it clear to all that what makes the kafir’s blood permissible to spill is not him fighting the Muslims, rather it is his “KUFR” that necessitates his killing. So if one asks, can you kill a Kafir (who does not fight Islam and muslims)? the answer is a big YES.

[■] Explaining the “Mafhūm Al-Mukhālafah” (the understanding of the opposite) in Usūl Fiqh:

This is like when Allāh said: “And never pray (funeral prayer) upon any of them (i.e. the hypocrites) who dies, nor stand at his grave.” (At-Tawbah verse 84). So because the disbelieving hypocrites were those whom Allāh specifically identified as being prohibited to have the funeral prayer performed upon and their graves visited, then this necessitates that the Muslims are those who are to be prayed upon and whose graves are to be visited. And this is understood by the rule: “Mafhūm Al-Mukhālafah” (the understanding of the opposite), because if we say the disbelievers are those whom Allāh specified a prohibition regarding something, then this necessities that the opposite ruling would apply for those who are opposite to them (i.e. the believers). So this is the explanation for the rule: “Mafhūm Al-Mukhālafah”, which is also referred to as: “Dalīl Al-Khitāb”. ○●○●○●○

The example of the prohibition of praying the funeral prayer for the disbeliever indicating the permissibility of praying the funeral prayer for the Muslims and visiting their graves was used by Shaykh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah frequently, as he said: “And do not ever pray upon anyone of them who dies and do not stand at their graves.” Therefore, the ‘Dalīl Al-Khitāb’ is that the believers are prayed upon and their graves are to be stood at.” [“Majmū’ Al-Fatāwa ”, Vol. 3/399; also look to Vol. 24/330 & Vol. 24/346 & Vol. 27/448] 🔺🔺🔺🔺 🔻🔻🔻🔻

Allah says: “…But if they repent and perform As-Salat, and give Zakat, then leave their way free…” (At-Tawbah Verse 5)

NOTE: Repentance in the above ayah means saying the shahadatain and entering Islam. Ibn ‘Umar narrates that the Rasulullah(saw) said: “I have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and until they establish the Salah and pay the Zakah. And if they do so then they will have gained protection from me for their lives and property, unless [they commit acts that are punishable] in accordance to Islam, and their reckoning will be with Allah the Almighty.” [Sahih Bukhari & Sahih Muslim] Therefore, the ‘Dalīl Al-Khitāb’ in the above ayah & hadeeth is that, if the kuffar don’t become Muslims, their blood would not be protected and would be legal to spill and their wealth would be halal to take. 🔺🔺🔺🔺 🔻🔻🔻🔻

Allah also has made the blood of every kafir legal to spill in the general ayah: “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush” (At-Tawbah verse 5).

Allah just said the mushrikeen (idolaters), so he never differentiated the “innocent civilians” from the “fighting soldiers”. So who are we to differentiate the kuffar today? 🔺🔺🔺🔺 🔻🔻🔻🔻

Ijmā’ of the ulamaa on the legality of spilling the blood of the Kuffar:

● Ibn Kathir said: “Ibn Jareer narrated an Ījmā'(scholarly consensus) that it is permissible to kill a kafir if he has no protection even if he is in Baytul Harām or Baytul Maqdis” [Tafsīr Ibn Katheer 2/6]

● Al Qurtubi said: “The ulamaa have gathered in consensus(ijmā’) that; if a kafir was to wrap his neck with his hands and the backs of all the trees in the Haram (Makkah) (in an effort to save his life); that would not prevent his killing if he had no previous contract of security” [Tafsīr At-Tabari 6/61] ♢♢♢♢♢

Quotes of the ulamā’ of the salaf about the legality of spilling the blood of the kuffar even if they don’t fight us:

● Imam Ash-Shafi’ said: “Allah the exalted & blessed legalized(to spill) the blood and wealth of the kafir unless he pays the jizya(tax) or he is granted protection for a certain period” [Al Umm 1/264] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

● Imam Ash-Shawkāni said: “As for the Kufar, their blood is basically legal (to spill) as it is in the ayah of the sword (At-Tawbah verse 5), what about if they start fighting(us)?” [Al Sayrul Jarār .. 🔺🔺🔺🔺

● Umar bin Al Khattab said to Abu Jandal (May Allah be pleased with them both): “For verily they are Mushrikeen (polytheists), and the blood of one of them is like the blood of a dog” [Reported by Ahmad & Al Bayhaqi] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

● Ibn Muflih said: “There is no expiation nor blood money paid for killing a kafir that has no peace treaty, because his blood is generally permissible (to spill) like the pig” [Al Mubdi’ 8/263] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

● Ash-Shawkāni said: “The kafir, whether he fights(the Muslims) or not: his blood is permissible (to spill) as long as he is a kafir” [Al Sayrul Jarār 4/369] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

● Al Kāsāni: “Basically: Anyone(who is a kafir) from the fighters(i.e. the male that has reached the fighting age): it is permissible to kill him whether he fights(the Muslims) or not” [Badā’ As-Sanāi’ 7/101] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

● Al Qurtubi said: “If a Muslim meets a kafir that has no contract(of protection): it is permissible for him to kill that Kafir” [Tafsīr Al-Qurtubi 5/338] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

● As-Sarkhāsi said: “There is no sin upon one who kills the apostates before calling them to Islam because they are the same with the kuffar and the Message(of Islam) has reached them” [Al Mabsūt 10/120] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

●Imam An-Nawawi said: “As for the kafir that has no contract of peace(with a legitimate Islamic State to which he pays Jizya), there is no liability in killing him, from whatever religion he might be” [Rawdhatu Tālibīn 9/259] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

●Ibn Hajar Al ‘Asqalāni said: “The existence of the disbelief (Kufr) is what permits the blood” [“Fat’h Al-Bārī ”, Vol. 12/326; publication of “Maktabat Dār As-Salām” & “Maktabat Dār Al-Fayhā’ ”, 1st Edition, 1418 H.] 🔻🔻🔻🔻

♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢♢

For those that say that we mistranslated these Quranic verses of Jihad and Qitaal and we go against the ‘known’ ‘ulamaa’: then give them this audio by Shaykh Ibn ‘Utheymīn who they respect a lot who says exactly what we have said now Shaykh Ibn ‘Utheymin (rh), said in a tape recording regarding this topic: “And the second (matter) is the forbidden of killing women and children in times of war. But if it is said: ‘If they (the kuffār) do this to us – meaning that they kill our children and women – Then do we then kill them?’ The apparent [dhāhir] is that it is (permissible) for us to kill their women and children- And due to the generality of the Statement of Allāh: “Then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him”{ Al-Baqarah: 194} [Refer to the side “B” from the third cassette of Kitāb al-Jihād from Sharh Bulūgh al-Marām. Starting at time frame 29:09] 🔻🔻🔻🔻

In addition to the above categories of those of the kuffar that we shouldn’t kill, we have :

1. The Children

2. The Women

3. The Old etc.

》》 So All those kuffar categories we mentioned that their blood is protected; they can be killed anytime should they violate their contracts by:

A.) If the dhimi/Mu’āhad starts fighting the Muslims etc he is killed and his blood would be legal to spill despite him paying jizya 🔺🔺🔺🔺

B.) If the kuffar kill our children/Women/old we do the same: Allah Says: “So whoever has transgressed against you, then transgress against him in the same way that he has transgressed against you” [Al Baqarah 194]

So how many Muslim women and children and old have The French Kuffar killed in Syria, Iraq and other parts of the muslim lands???? We have not yet settled the scores, a few hundreds ain’t enough yet

Allah also says: “And if you punish [an enemy, O believers], punish with an equivalent of that with which you were harmed” [An-Nahl 126]

Allah Also Says: “And the retribution for an evil act is an evil one like it” [Ash-Shūrah 40] 🔺🔺🔺🔺

Allah also says: “And those who, when an oppressive wrong is done to them, they take revenge” [Ash-Shūrah verse 39].

So, this was a piece of article for the one who cry and mourn on the death of the Kuffar, while the death hundreds of muslim men, women, old and children dying daily in the airstrikes don’t effect them in anyway.

MAY ALLAH ACCEPT THE EFFORTS MADE TO COLLECT THESE PROOFS N EVIDENCES N MAY HE UNITE THIS UMMAH UNDER ONE LEADER AND ONE BANNER, MAY ALLAH GRANT IZZAH TO ISLAM N MUSLIMS EVERY WHERE ON THE EARTH N MAY HE GRANT VICTORY TO THIS RELIGION ESTABLISHING THE SHARI’AH OF ALLAH IN EVERY CORNER OF THE EARTH.

AAMEEEN.


Does your brain hurt yet?

Hypocritical Muslims According to ISIS

Now, I understand that this is a contentious issue. I am not going to justify terrorism but demonstrate ISIS’s own justification reasoning. I am also going to warn people that this may be purely propaganda. It may not reflect the true nature of the organisation.

The first section of this statement is directed at believing and practicing Muslims who attend the funerals, vigils, or other remembrance services. The suggestion is that a Muslim who does this is a hypocrite – a munafiq. The Qur’anic justification for this is found at 9:84 amongst other places. This is a concept known as takfirism: to accuse someone of not being a true Muslim. Takfirism usually goes by Qur’anic and Hadithic standards, as well as opinions of the scholars.

The suggestion is that anyone who attends a remembrance service for these terrorist attacks, are committing “kufr” – they are showing themselves as unbelievers who do not follow the scripture; or that they are being “munafiq” – they are being hypocritical Muslims not following the scripture laid down before them. This is a common concept within neo-Salafiyya communities, and those who follow Wahhab’s works. In fact, it is observed traditional Sunni Islam to be employed against Shia Islam and vice versa.

ISIS just take it one step further. To say that those out of the fold of Islam are permissible to be killed. This is a step into justifying violence based on religious and sectarian grounds.

“Mafhūm Al-Mukhālafah”

The concept of Mafhūm Al-Mukhālafah – the understanding of the opposite –  that is a concept that can be used as a legal and theological precedent. If a person says to you that it is “illegal to park here” then you know that it must be legal to park elsewhere. In short, this is what the concept entails. This is the premise and foundation from which ISIS begin to justify their violence (in this statement).

ISIS use it in this way: if it is impermissible to kill a Muslim under certain circumstances, then is it permissible to kill a non-Muslim under the same circumstances, and where is it permissible to kill a Muslim (or munafiq), if at all, under any circumstances? In terms of war doctrine, they are legitimate questions. ISIS answer this with quotes from the scholars of the salaf, as well as Quranic and Hadithic authority, to suggest that “kuffar blood is… halal to spill.” This, to ISIS, is even applicable if a non-Muslim does NOT fight the Muslims as I will explain in the next few paragraphs.

Violence as a Religious Pathway

In regards to violence, we gain two direct understandings: the first is that ISIS are a violent religious terrorist organisation, the second that ISIS justify terrorism and violence through this religious understanding. They use religious concepts to commit violence in the name of, and on behalf of, Allah. They believe that “kuffar blood is halal to spill” even when the “kuffar” has not been aggressive towards them. They offer multiple narratives towards this, let us explore a few.

The first is that the position of disbelief, of being kuffar, automatically makes you an ‘unprotected’ person because you have no official ‘contract of security’ or ‘covenant’ with Allah. You can only become protected by joining Islam, according to ISIS. Now this contradicts both history and examples from first-generation standards, including that of enforcing covenants and taxes in place of exile or death, but none the less offers a glance into the fascistic nature of this organisation.

The second is that they also wiggle around concepts such as the killing of women or children, the elderly, or practices that are otherwise seen as haram in the general population’s eyes. They exploit the ‘generality’ of statements from the Qur’an. I suggest that this is not citing nor interpreting the Qur’an in a systematic or qualitative way. That seems like a weak principle on which could potentially put you in the hellfire.

The third is that a stated goal is to ‘settle scores.’ Does this mean killing exactly as many Muslims the French have killed? If so, how is this even possible? Does it make any sense at all? This pseudo-vigilante, revenge violence, rhetoric is a damning sign for the future. This is also how they justify, or I should say loop around, practices that may be considered haram by other scholars–by suggesting the practice is retaliation ‘equivalent’ to how you are ‘harmed.’

Are they khawarij? You tell me. Either way they do use religious sanctions to justify killing and violence.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the justification statement released by ISIS confirms the religious trends of the group. In using theological and religio-legal precedents, the group aims at bending the religious narrative towards their own objectives and goals.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s