Translation by Maaz Qureshi
That which called upon me to address this issue was that I saw many biased ones charging Shaykh Ibn Baaz (d.1420H), Shaykh al-Albaanee (d.1420) and Shaykh Ibnul-’Uthaymeen (d.1421H) with irjaa‘ because they explain the aayah referring to ruling by other than what Allaah revealed with the tafseel (elaboration) which was known amongst the Salaf. So they do not perform takfeer in an absolute manner, and they prohibit revolting against the oppressive Muslim rulers, as long as kufr bawaah (clear disbelief) is not seen from them. Rather, even if kufr bawaah is seen, they further prohibit rebellion when there is no clear Sharee’ah benefit, nor capability of that. So I say:
: In the past, the statement of khurooj (rebellion) has been the way of the Murji‘ah. So indeed, Ibn Shaaheen relates from ath-Thawree (d.167H) that he said, “Beware of these misguided desires!” It was said to him, ‘Explain them to us, may Allaah bestow mercy upon you.’ So Sufyaan said, “As for the Murji‘ah, then they say...’” and he mentioned some things from their statements, up until he said, “And they hold the usage of the sword against the people of the Qiblah!” And he also relates that it was said to Ibnul-Mubaarak, “Do you hold the view of irjaa‘?” So he said, “How can I be of the Murji‘ah when I do not hold the usage of the sword?” Rather, as-Saaboonee (d.449H) relates with an authentic isnaad to Ahmad Ibn Sa’eed ar-Rabaatee that he said: ’Abdullaah Ibn Taahir said to me, “O Ahmad! You hate these people (the Murji‘ah) out of ignorance, but I hate them upon knowledge. Firstly, they do not hold obedience to the ruler...” I say, these are clear proofs demonstrating that these are the real Murji‘ah, and that our previously mentioned Scholars are free from that.
AN IMPORTANT OBSERVATION:
So the strange state of affairs is that Safar al-Hawaalee does not understand this clear connection between the Khawaarij and the Murji‘ah, so he says, ‘And this statement was mentioned from Imaam Ahmad (d.241H), its understanding is perplexing. It is his statement, ‘Verily the Khawaarij are the Murji‘ah.” Then he comes with a blow that is unbearable, “It is possible to explain this statement to refer to the irjaa‘ of the Companions.” I say, if he had followed up the previous narrations, he would have come to know that it is not perplexing to understand that the Murji‘ah join along with the Khawaarij in rebellion against the rulers. So therefore, it is not surprising that the affair of irjaa‘ came at the end of the rebellion. Qataadah (d.104H) said, “Irjaa‘ only emerged after the fitnah of Ibnul-Ash’ath.” And also from the proofs of their irjaa‘ is:
: They do not exclude themselves from having perfect faith (eemaan) and whatever comes as a result of that, even though they proclaim with their tongues that they are upon the manhaj (methodology) of the Salaf. Do you not see that they say, ‘ash-Shaheed Hasan al-Bannaa,’ and ‘ash-Shaheed Sayyid Qutb,’ even though it is said to them, ‘If describing them with martyrdom is obligated by the movement, which you cannot avoid saying, then the least you can do is say: if Allaah wills.’ Indeed, al-Bukhaaree (d, 256H) inserted a chapter in the Book of Jihaad from his Saheeh concerning that, so he said, “Chapter: It is not to be said so and so is a Shaheed (martyr).” And he mentioned proofs pertaining to that. And they say, ‘You only speak ill of jihaad and scorn the news-reports about the affairs of the world.’ So this proud refusal from excluding oneself from having perfect eemaan is the basis if irjaa‘. ’Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn Mahdee – rahimahullaah – said, “The basis of irjaa‘ is to leave off istithnaa‘ (excluding oneself from the possibility of having perfect faith).”
: Then, I return to the beginning, so I say that the first Murji‘ah came from the direction of their magnification of eemaan and their disdain for sins. So due to that, they wished to keep far away from the view that sins could nullify eemaan. So they said, ‘Sins cannot harm in the presence of eemaan!’ So thereupon they went astray. As for these ones today, then they come from the direction of magnifying politics. So everyone who is with them in their movement, then he is a person with whom an alliance should be formed. So sins do not harm one who has fiqh (understanding) of the movement, even if it reaches Shirk with the Lord of the Worlds. Do you not see how their leaders and pivotal figures fall into major sins, yet they do not have enough of a sense of honour for their Religion to move? They only have a sense of honour for their party or movement!!
Do you not see how they stand up out of anger and do not sit when they hear Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh al-Albaanee speaking of leaving off bloody battles with the Jews and to turn to strengthening the Muslims instead, whilst this is a fatwaa from true Mujtahideen? As for when one of their activists errs, then it is an obligation of the movement to lower their gaze, regardless of how horrendous it may be. So how many of them have passed verdicts requiring spilling the blood, taking the honour and wealth, then they make vain attempts to carry such verdicts out. Along with this, if one of them actually reached some level in the search for knowledge, then this would be the best opinion one could have for them!
So this ’Alee Ibn Haaj has passed a fatwaa commanding the killing of thousands of Muslims and to evict the rest of them from the safe countries. And he says whatever he says in praise of democracy and other than that from what I have quoted from him previously. Despite this, no one criticizes him, except that he is a government agent in their eyes! And before him, Sayyid Qutb came along attacking some of the Prophets of Allaah the Exalted, and he attacked the Companions for whom Paradise had been testified to. And he held that Sharee’ah politics resembled extreme Socialism and other than that from the feigned intelligence that Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee has clarified in his latest books. Indeed, al-Albaanee said about him, “Verily, the carrier of the flag of al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel today in present times and in truth is our brother, Dr. Rabee’. And those who refute him never do so with any knowledge. Rather, the knowledge is with him...”
And this is a commendation from a specialist in the field! Then at-Turaabee – of the alleged Islaamic State in Sudan – comes to organize conferences for the unity of religions and the praise of the religion of the grave worshippers and he erects a large number of churches, such that could not be found in any secularist state before his.
Then there is the passiveness that these people show to the Afghanis in regards to their state, even though they do not change from the religion of the Qubooriyyah (grave worshippers) and things of deviation! Rather, they fight the tawaagheet in defense of their state! And we have not forgotten how they plotted against the leadership of Kunarul-Islaamiyyah! This was the only city in Afghanistan in which pure and unadulterated Tawheed had been established. And the Prayer was established within it in the most excellent of manners, and likewise, the Sharee’ah punishments were established. And no other city was known to have waged war against narcotics like it did. Then came the state of al-Ikhwaan, which had become angered and disturbed; to the extent that they destroyed it and assassinated its leader, the Salafee Scholar: Jameelur-Rahmaan (rahimahullaah). So they combined the greatest of major sins together in an absolute sense, and that is Shirk and killing a person without due right. All of this and other than it is much indeed, yet their eemaan is not harmed, nor is their leadership abolished!
Rather, woe is to the one who even thinks of criticizing them, because he is criticizing the corroborators of Jihaad! Rather, they entertain hopes that, along with these shameful occurrences of disbelieving innovations, the desired Islaamic state is like the one in Afghanistan and Sudan, as occurs in the audio cassette of Salmaan al-’Awdah, Limaadhaa Yukhaafoon minal-Islaam. However, the affair is not like that, because Allaah the Exalted said,
“It will not be according to your desires, nor those of the People of the Book. Whoever does evil, then We shall recompense him for it, and he will not find any helper besides Allaah.” [Sooratun-Nisaa‘ 4:123]
So due to this, some of the people of knowledge have called them the Extreme Murji‘ah, because the Murji‘ah magnify eemaan and hold it to be the basis of the Religion. So as for these ones, then they also magnify a part from the various parts of the Religion, that part is politics. They do this in spite of knowing that these politics of theirs are not free from Socialism and democracy, as is widely known amongst those who have perused the books of Sayyid Qutb and other than him from amongst those who are upon his way. Rather, I say in short, it is the fiqh of the activist innovator. And the Murji‘ah did not deny the harm caused to a person by his commission of Shirk. Rather, they knew that no good deed could be of benefit along with disbelief (kufr). As for these ones, then they intercede for their Scholars, even if they have spoken with clear disbelief, as has preceded!
: This point is followed by another point pertaining to the Murji‘ah, that is the fact that they do not explain the Sunnah to the people. Along with that, they leave off the refutations upon the innovators. Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) – rahimahullaah – said after speaking about the people of Takfeer, “So in front of these ones who perform takfeer based upon falsehood are people who do not know the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as they are obligated, or they know some of it and are ignorant of some of it. So whatever they know, they do not explain it to the people. Rather, they hide it, and they do not oppose the innovations that contradict the Book and the Sunnah, nor do they refute the people of innovation and rebuke them. Rather, it is as if they rebuke speaking about the Sunnah and the foundations of the Religion absolutely, or they accommodate everyone with all of their various madhaahib. And this is a path that has overcome many of the Murji‘ah and some of the Soofiyyah, jurists and philosophers. So both of these deviants paths – meaning, the people of takfeer and the Murji‘ah – have left from the Book and the Sunnah.”
So no two people will differ about the fact that this is from the greatest of foundations that the political activists have institutionalized. So then is there anyone who will oppose their statement, ‘Let us excuse each other for that which we differ in, and let us work together upon that which we agree with.’ And indeed I have explained in a previous footnote, from the words of Hasan al-Bannaa, that they are unrestrictedly referring to all forms of differences. They utter this statement because if they took to refuting the people of innovation, they would lose many of their followers whom they would like to push further into misguidance! Then this is not enough for the people of innovation. Rather, I have previously quoted the words of the Ikhwaan concerning their pleasure to have attained brotherhood with the Christians! I have also quoted the words of Hasan al-Bannaa and al-Qardaawee in saying that there is no dispute between us and the Jews! So what can come after this?! So these are four principles in which they agree with the Murji‘ah, so now who has more of a right to be described with irjaa‘?
 Refer to Madaarikun-Nadhr fis-Siyaasah (p. 259-264) of ’Abdul-Maalik Ramadaanee.
 Refer – if you wish – to the notes upon the manhaj (methodology) of Muhammad Qutb. And it is binding to read the book, at-Tahdheer min Fitnatit-Takfeer for the view of the three aforementioned Scholars; with the checking of the brother, ’Alee Hasan al-Halabee, for it is beautiful.
 Related in Kitaabul-Lateef (no. 15) and by al-Laalikaa‘ee in Sharh Usoolul-I’tiqaad (no. 1834).
 Related in Kitaabul-Lateef (no. 17).
 Refer to ’Aqeedatus-Salaf Ashaabul-Hadeeth (no. 109) of as-Saaboonee.
 Safar al-Hawaalee: He was mentioned by Shaykh Muqbil in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 72) and by Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee in al-Mawridul-’Adhabiz-Zilaal (p. 241).
 Refer to Dhaahiratul-Irjaa‘ (1/361) of Safar al-Hawaalee.
 Hasan: Related by ’Abdullaah Ibn Ahmad in as-Sunnah (no. 644), al-Khallaal in as-Sunnah (no. 1230), Ibnul-A’raabee in his Mu’jam (no. 714), Abul-Qaasim al-Baghawee in al-Ja’diyyaat (no. 1061), Ibn Battah in al-Ibaanah (no. 1235) and al-Laalikaa‘ee in Sharh Usoolul-I’tiqaad (no. 1841).
 Hasan al-Bannaa: He was mentioned by Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee in Jamaa’ah Waahidah (p. 128, 187) and in al-’Awaasim (p. 64). He was also mentioned by Shaykh Rabee’ in Ahlul-Hadeeth (p. 38, 47) and an-Nasrul-’Azeez (p. 112-113, 167). And Shaykh Muqbil mentioned him in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 18, 66, 148-150). And Shaykh Muqbil said about him in al-Makhraj minal-Fitnah (p. 99), “A deviant innovator.” And he said (p. 151), “A misguided deviant…from amongst the imaams of the people of innovation.” And he said (p. 152), “An imaam from the imaams of the people of innovation and misguidance.” And he said (p. 160), “Indeed, Hasan al-Bannaa was more misguided than Sayyid Qutb!!” And he was mentioned by Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee in al-Mawridul-’Adhabiz-Zilaal (p. 127) as “the founder of the Ikhwaanee manhaj.” And he also mentioned him (p. 110-112, 114, 116-119, 133-135, 137-141, 150, 152, 154-156, 159-161, 165, 179-182, 187, 190, 194, 197, 200, 205, 207).
 Sayyid Qutb: He was mentioned by Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee in Jamaa’ah Waahidah (p. 76, 129, 131, 138, 152, 154, 165-167). And Shaykh Rabee’ commented (p. 159) about Qutb’s books: Fee Dhilaalil-Qur‘aan, al-’Adaalatul-Ijtimaa’iyyah and Ma’aalim fit-Tareeq, “They are filled with takfeer.” And he said (p. 160), “They – the people of innovations and misguidance – have endeavoured to make lawful the manhaj of Sayyid Qutb, the ignorant takfeeree, under the titles: the new manhaj of as-Salafiyyah, confrontational Salafiyyah, the Salafiyyah of belief and modern confrontation in place of this magnificent Salafee manhaj.” And he said about his manhaj (p. 171), “He has gathered together great misguidance and innovations.” And he said (p. 173), “The books of Sayyid Qutb are takfeeriyyah.” And Shaykh Rabee’ also mentioned him (p. 170, 173, 187). And Shaykh Zayd al-Madkhalee mentioned him in the introduction to an-Nasrul-’Azeez ’alar-Raddil-Wajeez (p. 21, 24), and Shaykh Rabee’ mentioned him in the same book in a number of places, (p. 83, 88-89, 102, 104, 120, 122, 166-167, 190, 193, 198). And him and his followers were mentioned by Shaykh Rabee’ in Manhaj Ahlus-Sunnah fin-Naqd (p. 63). And Shaykh Rabee’ said about him in al-Haddul-Faasil (p. 5), “A great misguided individual.” And Shaykh Mqubil stated in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 64), “He was considered a writer and not a mufassir.” And he said (p. 65), “And I ask Allaah the Magnificent to preserve our brother Rabee’ Ibn Haadee since he has clarified the beliefs of Sayyid Qutb and whatever he has of deviation.” And he said (p. 66), “So the one who inclines towards adh-Dhilaal, then it is feared that he will fall into ad-dalaal (misguidance). So if you absolutely must read adh-Dhilaal, then I advise you to read that which was written by the brother ’Abdullaah Ibn Muhammad ad-Duwaysh and that which was written by Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee – hafidhahullaah.” And Shaykh Muqbil said about him (p. 161), “The themes within the books of Sayyid Qutb are the wheels for the rest of the books of misguidance.” Refer also to Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 147, 152). And Shaykh Muqbil stated in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 148), “I read what the brother Rabee’ Ibn Haadee – hafidhahullaah - wrote about the affair of Sayyid Qutb, his belief of Hulooliyyah (oneness of Allaah with His creation), such that he is Huloolee, his curses upon ’Uthmaan and I read about the Takfeeree tendencies in the books of Sayyid Qutb. Indeed, many from amongst Jamaa’atut-Takfeer use the statements of Sayyid Qutb as evidence.” And Shaykh Muqbil said (p. 151), “He is from the imaams of the people of innovation.” And he said (p. 152), “And he is an imaam from amongst the imaams of the people of innovation.” Shaykh ’Ubayd al-Jaabiree stated in the audiotape, ad-Dawaabit (side 1), “It is not Fee Dhilaalil-Qur‘aan (In the Shade of the Qur‘aan), rather it is Fee Dhilaalish-Shaytaan (In the Shade of the Shaytaan).” He was mentioned by Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee in al-Mawridul-’Adhabiz-Zilaal (p. 189, 248). For further elaboration upon the affair of Sayyid Qutb, refer to the following books by Shaykh Rabee’: al-’Awaasim mimmaa fee Kutub Sayyid Qutb minal-Qawaasim, Nadharaat fil-Kitaab at-Tasweerul-Fannee fil-Qur‘aan, Adwaa‘ ’alaa ’Aqeedah Sayyid Qutb and Mataa’in Sayyid Qutb fis-Sahaabah.
 Related by al-Khallaal in as-Sunnah (no. 1061), al-Aajuree in ash-Sharee’ah (p. 139), Ibn Battah in al-Ibaanah (no. 1188). And that which is similar to it is related by Ibn Shaaheen in al- Kitaabul-Lateef (no. 16) and by al-Laalikaa‘ee in Sharh Usoolul-I’tiqaad (no. 1835). The apparent disconnection (inqitaa’) in this isnaad does not do any harm, since the likes of it has come in a connected (mawsool), authentic isnaad from at-Tabaraanee in Tahdheebul-Aathaar (no. 1519), and the likes of it has been mentioned from Sufyaan. Refer to al-Hilyah (7/33) of Abee Nu’aym and by al-Jawzajaanee in al-Abaateel (no. 42).
 Translator’s Note: ’Alee Ibn Haaj ‘perpetrated the kufr (disbelief) of democracy as a lie upon Islaam. So he said in section (no. 5), “And Islaam does not know the legislation of an authority, except through two affairs: [i]: restriction to the rules of the Sharee’ah; [ii]: the ruler is chosen through the agreement of the cabinets. So if a condition from these two conditions for the system is missing, then something from the two requirements is missing. So there is no legislation, nor anything to be legislated by the system, except through two affairs...So when the agreements of the cabinets and the Ummah are ignored, then the Ummah has been robbed of its right to choose.” I say, indeed his second condition has pulverized his first condition. So when will the cabinets agree upon the regulations of the Sharee’ah? So in this speech is a demolition of the Caliphates of ’Umar, ’Uthmaan and ’Alee (radiyallaahu ’anhum ajma’een). Rather, in it is a demolition of all of the Caliphs...And he slipped further into misguidance when he took to establishing the correctness of democracy and then attributed that to Islaam. And he used the statements of the thinkers and the disbelieving authorities as proofs.’ From the words of ’Abdul-Maalik Ramadaanee in Madaarikun-Nadhr (p. 245-246).
 From a cassette recorded under the title, Manhajul-Muwaazinaat (no. 86). And refer to al-Mahajjatul-Baydaa‘ li Himaayatis-Sunnatil-Ghiraa‘ (p. 15) of Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee.
 Hasan at-Turaabee: Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee mentioned him in Jamaa’ah Waahidah (p. 58, 187), an-Nasrul-’Azeez (p. 88-89, 166-167) and al-’Awaasim (p. 77). Shaykh Muqbil mentioned him in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 28, 72, 114); and on (p. 56), Shaykh Muqbil said about him, “Turaabee – may Allaah cover his face with dust – is closer to kufr (disbelief). And I believe that if he was in the time of Imaam Ahmad, he would have been ruled a heretic.” And Shaykh Muqbil said (p. 202), “And if there was no one in Sudan except for at-Turaabee – may Allaah cover his face with dust – he would be enough misguidance for all of it.” And he said about him (p. 226), “He has combusted.” And Shaykh Yahyaa al-Hajooree said about him in Mushaahadaatee fee Britaanyaa (p. 31), “He calls to the unification of religions.” He has been refuted by many of the people of knowledge, such as Shaykh Muhammad Amaan al-Jaamee – rahimahullaah - and Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee in his audio cassettes.
 Salmaan al-’Awdah: He was mentioned by Shaykh Muqbil in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 72). And Shaykh Rabee’ mentioned him in Manhaj Ahlus-Sunnah fin-Naqd (p. 41). And he was mentioned by Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee in al-Mawridul-’Adhabiz-Zilaal (p. 35-38). And refer to the book, Ahlul-Hadeeth by Shaykh Rabee’.
 Such as some of the Ikhwaanul-Muslimeen who were nurtured in an environment of Salafiyyah, but their hizbiyyah (biased partisanship) prevented them from explaining the creed of Salafiyyah and commanded them with bigoted partisanship and it prohibited them from informing the people about the other madhaahib besides the Sunnah. This is because doing such a thing would split the ranks according to their philosophy.
 Refer to the words of Hasan al-Bannaa in Mudhakkiraatud-Da’wah wad-Daa’iyah (p. 64-65) pertaining to the necessity of remaining silent about the known differences concerning the issues of ’aqeedah, such as the circles of the people of Soofee paths, and tawassul (seeking a means of approach) by the righteous, and supplicating to the inhabitants of the graves! So he said at the end of this discourse, “So the Muslims have differed about these issues of hundreds of years and they will not cease to differ! And Allaah the Blessed and Exalted is pleased with us to have mutual love and unity.”
 Such as the Ikhwaan who say, ‘We rebuke the innovation itself, but we do not rebuke the one who performs it, and we oppose the innovation, but we do not oppose the one who does it.’
 Such as the Ikhwaan who say, ‘Speaking about the Sunnah is superficial, and speaking about the Beautiful Names and Attributes of Allaah is a waste of time.’
 Such as the Ikhwaan, since you will “consider them united, yet their hearts are dispersed.” Therefore, amongst them is the Soofee with all of their various tareeqahs (paths), and the Ash’aree, Maatureedee, Raafidee and Mu’tazilee. ’Alee Ibn Haaj, why do you not oppose the people of the turuq (paths), whilst you have heard from them that which is injurious to Tawheed? Since, for one man to be guided through you is better for you than the leadership which you have turned all of your attention to. Indeed, the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) said, “That Allaah guides one person through you, is better for you than red camels.” Related by al-Bukhaaree (1/432) and Muslim (7/141-142).
 Refer to Majmoo’ul-Fataawaa (12/467) of Ibn Taymiyyah and Badaa‘i’ut-Tafseer (5/458) of Ibnul-Qayyim.
 One of the leaders of the Ikhwaanul-Muslimeen stated, “Our position with respect to our brothers, the Christians in Egypt and the Arab world is clear and one that is quite old and well known: What is due to them is what is due to us and what is binding upon them is what is binding upon us. They are our partners in this land. In our long struggle in this land, they are our brethren and they have every right in the land, both the material and the spiritual, religious or political… and whoever states anything other than this then we are free of him and of what he says.” Refer to the al-Mujtama’ magazine (30th Dhul-Qa’dah, 1415H).
 Yoosuf Ibn ’Abdullaah al-Qardaawee: He was mentioned by Shaykh Rabee’ in Jamaa’ah Waahidah (p. 58). And Shaykh Rabee’ mentioned him in al-Haddul-Faasil (p. 30, 139) and also in an-Nasrul-’Azeez ’alar-Raddil-Wajeez (p. 146). And in his book, Manhaj Ahlus-Sunnah (p. 121), Shaykh Rabee’ said about al-Qardaawee, “Indeed, he defends and gives victory to the people of innovation. Rather, he propounds their principles and he adopts the mode of conduct of Ghazaalee in this age. Rather, he is even more dangerous.” And Shaykh Muqbl Ibn Haadee (d.1421H) said about him in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 102), “He calls to madness.” And the Shaykh also mentioned him in Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 67, 283-284). And the Shaykh said about him (p.280), “Indeed, he has cut something off from the Religion and we fear that he will complete that. So the man is a hizbee.” And he said about him (p. 281), “A hizbee man.” And Shaykh Yahyaa al-Hajooree spoke about al-Qardaawee in his book, Mushaahadatee fee Breetaanyaa (p. 29), “Indeed, I saw him whilst he was walking with a thawb that was musbil (reaching below the ankles). And his beard and face were dark.” And he also said (p. 30), “And he was calling to the unity of religions in England.” Two of the best refutations upon al-Qardaawee available are Iskaatul-Kalbil-’Aawee (Silencing the Howling Dog) by Shaykh Muqbil and Raf’ul-Lathaam by al-’Adeenee.
 Stated the accommodator of innovation, Hasan al-Bannaa, “And I affirm here that our dispute with the Jews is not one concerning the Religion, because the Qur‘aan has encouraged us to befriend them and be cordial with them. And Islaam is a Sharee’ah for humankind before it is a Sharee’ah for a specific group of people. And it has praised them (the Jews) and has placed agreement between us and them, “And do not dispute with the People of the Book except by that which is best.” And when the Noble Qur‘aan touches upon the issue of the Jews it does so from an economic and legal point of view,” Ikhwaanul-Muslimoon Ahdaath Sana’at Taareekh (1/409-410). Stated the howling dog, Yoosuf al-Qardaawee, “We do not fight the Jews for the sake of ’aqeedah!! We are fighting against them for the sake of land!! We do not fight them because they are disbelievers!! We fight them because they have occupied our land and have taken it without due right.” Refer to ar-Raayah (no. 4696).
“Make things easy and do not make things difficult. Give glad tidings and do not repel people..”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest