Salafi Fatwas Encouraging Slaughter of Civilians

“ISIS is a true product of Salafism, and we must deal with it with full transparency.”

[Shaykh Aadil al-Kalbani, a prominent Salafi scholar and former Imam of the Haram Shareef in Makka]

[Note: The article below was written a number of years ago, well before the advent of ISIS, Boko Haram, the salafi-influenced Pakistani Fake Taliban (as opposed to the Afghan Taliban who are still largely rigid Hanafis), and other salafi-influenced groups whose “Jihad” closely resembles the “Jihad” of the Father-Figure and inspiration of ALL Salafi sects today, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. A future article will reveal descriptions of the “Jihad” of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, from the writings of his direct students, which will provide an accurate portrayal of the brutality, mass-takfeer, and massacres that characterised Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s “Jihad”, and which will also make clear that Salafi groups such as ISIS, Boko Haram, Shabab, etc. are actually the most faithful adherents to the sect founded or “revived” by their Father-Figure. During rare moments of lapses from their normal mode of Taqiyyah (deception and covering up of true beliefs), prominent Salafis have admitted that Salafism itself is the source of all the abominations committed by groups such as ISIS. For example, Shaykh Aadil al-Kalbani, a prominent Salafi scholar and former Imam of Makka, recently let slip that, “ISIS is a true product of Salafism, and we must deal with it with full transparency.”]

THE SALAFI AND MODERNIST GENOCIDE OF THE DEEN

THE RESULT OF ABANDONMENT OF RIGID ADHERENCE (TAQLEED) TO THE FOUR MADH-HABS

INTRODUCTION

In this day and age of ignorance, flagrant desires, and impiety, the natural consequence of ‘opening the doors of ijtihaad’ (directly formulating rulings using Quran, Sunnah and other evidences) for the scholars of today, and avoiding rigid adherence to one of the four accepted madh-habs (accepted schools of thought formulated over a millenium ago), is countless permutations or versions of ‘Deen’ (religion).

An ominous example that portrays vividly the catastrophic consequences of the modernist and Salafi methodologies that allow the pure Deen (religion) to become subject to re-interpretation, is the increasing number of fatwas legitimising the murder of innocent men, women, and even children and babies.

The horrific worldwide genocide perpetrated against hundreds of millions of Muslims world-wide in recent times, has naturally resulted in innumerable victims, along with those who empathize with them, seeking legitimacy for  reprisals of the same nature. The Salafi and modernist methodologies provide them that very scope to overturn hitherto immutable aspects of the religion, including overturning the categorical prohibition on targeting civilians, transmitted by the four madh-habs over a millenium ago.

Below is a sample of fatwas/statements by some of the scholars who have adopted the Salafi and modernist methodologies of “Direct interpretation of Qur’an and Sunnah” or “Pick n Mix Taqleed” or “Reforming and Updating” the ancient rules of Jihad in order to justify the merit  of the numerous atrocities being committed today in the pure name of Jihaad. The new growing breed of hybrid modernist/Salafi “Deobandis” tend also to be enamoured by such scholars, or the methodologies (e.g. part-time Taqleed) that lead to such abominations.

These fatwas which are well-known and well-accepted in many Salafi and modernist “Jihadi” circles where, at worst, they are tolerated as ‘valid ikhtilaaf’, serve to tarnish and desecrate the pure name of Jihaad and Islam (see also: The Crimes and Atrocities of the Pseudo-Jihadis Have Nothing to do with True Jihad).

The Kuffaar enemies of Islam who gleefully orchestrate and instigate many of these atrocities, all of which serve their imperialistic motives, do not even need to dirty their own hands. In a number of previously classified documents that were leaked by whistleblowers, gullible ‘Jihadis’ are often manipulated to serve the Kuffaar agenda. Such easily-led ‘Jihadis’ are often labelled with the term “patsies” or “useful idiots.”

In reality, Salafism and modernism allow the production of a tailor-made ‘Deen’ to cater for every person’s unique taste-buds. Due to its inherent malleability and flexibility, a Salafi or modernist ‘Deen’ (religion) is really the product of the inclinations, temperament and desires of each individual’s unique and chaotically varying intellect which is constantly being shaped and moulded by the individual’s circumstances and environment.

Those who attempt to open the Pandora’s Box of ijtihad for themselves using such slogans as “strongest daleel”, “Quran & Sunnah”, “changing times, changing needs”, “pick ‘n mix from the madh-habs”, “reforming, updating, improving” etc., have absolutely no right to hypocritically condemn others who employ the very same methodologies whilst arriving sincerely at a radically different version of ‘Deen’.

O Salafi and Modernist Hypocrites! Why do you grant yourselves or your scholars the right to leave the rigid constraints of the 4 madh-habs for a ‘stronger or better ruling’, but then stupidly criticise other Salafis or modernists for adopting the exact-same process while coming to radically different conclusions to yours? 

SALAFI and MODERNIST FATWAS LEGALIZING MASS-GENOCIDE OF WOMEN, CHILDREN, BABIES, etc.

Important Note:
The chaotic standards used by Salafis to measure who is Kaafir and who is Muslim, usually determined by political expediencies, results in there being absolutely no restriction in who can potentially become Mubaahud Dam or Waajibul Qatl i.e. a legitimate target. Thus the fatwas/statements below are not only used to justify the targeting of non-Muslim civilians. Muslims can be instantly transformed into non-Muslims on the spur of an ijtihaadi moment.

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s Famous Ruling Allowing Equal Retaliation in Slaughtering Women and Children

This is a well-known ruling quoted by many Salafi Jihadis. In Shaykh Ibn Uthaymins explanation of Bulugh al-Maram Tape 3, side 2 is found the following extract:

“And the second [benefit]: the prohibition of killing women and children during war.

And if it is said, if they did this to us, that they killed our children and women, can we kill them [their women and children]? What is apparent is that it is allowed for us to kill their women and children, even if that were to cause us to miss [the opportunity of] taking them as wealth (slaves), due to what this contains from breaking the hearts of the enemies and weakening and belittling them, and due to the generality of Allah’s saying,
“And whoever transgresses against you, then transgress against them the like of what they have transgressed against you.” [Surah al-Baqarah]
….

[The questioner continues]…then we are allowed to kill their women and children. But O sheikh, they, the men are the ones who killed the women, and the women are innocent, so how can they be punished due to the crimes of men?

[The sheikh says] This is because of the greater benefit, the greater benefit to those who are fighting. Because if we do not do to them what they do to us, this would be humiliation in front of them.

(Another questioner asks question and sheikh answers)

[The questioner says] If they kill our women and children, how can we kill their women, meaning this is a great loss!

[The sheikh says] Yes, but there is a greater advantage in it, which is the honor of the Muslims, because of we don’t kill them, this is an humiliation for us, and the honor of the Muslims is more important than wealth.

(After some questions, a questioner asks question and sheikh answers as follows)

[The sheikh says] … “then transgress against them the like of what they have transgressed against you.” [Surah al-Baqarah]

[The sheikh says] What justice?

[The questioner says] Justice with their women.

[The sheikh says] Never……..[incomprehensible…] They killed our women, we kill their women. This is justice. It is not justice that we say, if they kill our women we will not kill their women. Also, we note that this (killing them) influences [or hurts] them (the Kuffaar) much and greatly.”

Such is the subjective nature of ijtihaad today, that for every Salafi who attempts to brush the above ruling off as just ‘a slip’, or with some other stupid reasoning, there will be another Salafi who will agree completely with Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s fatwa and use of dalaa-il (evidences).

Quotes from Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s direct students confirming the existence of, and agreeing with the fatwa and the use of dalaa-il, will be produced here soon insha-Allah.

AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION WITH A STUDENT OF IBN UTHAYMIN

The following is an interesting conversation on twitter with prominent Salafi Shaykh Assim al-Hakeem, regarding Ibn Uthaymin’s ruling permitting and encouraging the killing of innocent women and children:

https://twitter.com/Abu_Muslim123/status/402391553827557376

ABDUL: Salaams, are there any truth to the allegations found below…Is it fabricated that Shaykh Ul-Islam compared Allah’s sitting on throne with sitting on back of mosquito? Is it fabricated Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s fatwa killing women & children? It’ll be good if someone can refute those allegations

SHAYKH: Sheikh Ibn Taimiyah did say that but it should be taken in context and not extracted like that! Even if he did say that [referring to Ibn Uthaymin], he is a scholar and must be respected but this doesn’t mean we have to follow him in everything.

ABDUL: Jazakallah. Ok but those who firmly believe that according to Quran & Sunnah he is correct, then they can follow that fatwa?

SHAYKH: No, they can’t because it is wrong no matter who says it.

ABDUL: To you it’s wrong and I respect that, but to Shaykh Uthaymin & many others it’s right – so shouldn’t we respect that as well?

SHAYKH: Sheikh Ibn Othaimeen is my Sheikh and I follow him. However, he is not a Prophet and we must follow Quran and Sunnah.

ABDUL: But Shaykh Uthaymin & many others also used Quran & Sunnah – if someone believe their Daleel is correct then they can follow him?

SHAYKH: Yes, they can and Allah will hold them accountable to their understanding. [!!!!!!!!!!!]

ABDUL: Jazakallah Shaykh for helping my understanding.

“It is permitted to do to the Kuffar what they do to us”

Imām Hamūd Ibn ‘Uqlā’ Ash-Shu’aybī, a close friend of Bin Baz, and a teacher of many prominent Salafi scholars including Ibn Uthaymin, declares unambiguously, using the very same logic found in Ibn Uthaymin’s fatwa above, that the Salafi religion permits committing the very same atrocities the Kuffaar commit:

“And from the statements of the People of Knowledge regarding the permissibility of taking revenge in equivalence:

From the knowledge that it is permitted to do to the kuffār what they do to us, there is a refutation and a clarification for those who repeat the word “innocents”, because Allāh, Glorified and Most High permitted that for us.

And from the texts, which indicate that, is His, the Most High’s statement:

“Then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him”

And He, the Most High, said:

“And those who, when an oppressive wrong is done to them, they take revenge. The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof.””

[“The Clarification of What Occurred in America”]

“Killing women, children, and elderly of America is Permissible – Nay! It is from the forms of Jihaad” – However, 4,000,000 Death Toll is the Limit!!!

Shaykh Yūsuf Al-‘Uyayrī states:

“So from amongst the situations in which it is permissible to kill those protected kuffār– is when the Muslims punish the kuffār with the likeness of which they (i.e. the Muslims) were punished.

So if the kuffār target the women, children, and the elderly of the Muslims- then indeed it is permissible in this situation to do the same thing to the kuffār.

As Allāh (Most High) has said:

 “Then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him. And fear Allāh, and know that Allāh is with the pious.” [Al-Baqarah:194]

 “And those who, when an oppressive wrong is done to them, they take revenge. The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof, but whoever forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allāh. Verily, He likes not the wrong-doers. And indeed whosoever takes revenge after he has suffered wrong, for such there is no way (of blame) against them. The way (of blame) is only against those who oppress men and wrongly rebel in the earth, for such there will be a painful torment. And verily, whosoever shows patience and forgives that would truly be from the things recommended by Allāh.” [As-shuraa:39-43]

“And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allāh), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. But if you endure patiently, verily, it is better for the patient ones.”[An-nahl:126]

And these Verses are general regarding everything- and the specific reason for its revelation does not restrict its meaning; because a basic principle in the Sharī’ah is that “The text is according to the generality of its words, and not restricted by the reason (of its revelation)”

And the Verse is general- it is permissible for the Muslims to treat their enemies with the likeness of everything they perpetrate against the Muslims. So when the enemies target the women and children of the Muslims- then it is the right of the Muslims to retaliate equally- so they can target the women and children of the kuffār; and this is because of the generality of this Verse….

So if the Muslims equally dealt with America [in a similar fashion], it would be perfectly permissible for them to kill around 10 million American civilians…

Indeed, from the things regarding which there is no doubt- Is that killing the women, children, elderly of America, including any other American who does not fight- is perfectly permissible (Jā’iz Halāl)- Nay, it is from the forms of Jihād which Allāh (Most High) and His Messenger ملسو هيلع للها ىلص have commanded us with 159, “Then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him” 160 and His saying, “And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allāh), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted.” 161 . But there is one condition- It is not permissible for the Muslims to kill more than 4 million non-combatant American civilians, nor is it permissible to banish more than 10 million Americans!! And this is so that we do not surpass the equality of our retaliation. And Allāh knows best.”

[“Haqīqat Al-Harb As-Salībiyyah Al-Jadīdah”]

 

Based on Principle of “Equal Treatment” There is No Need for Daleel (Evidences) For Killing 10,000,000 Civilians!!!

Shaykh Nāsir Ibn Hamad Al-Fahd states:

“Indeed, the issue of striking America with these types of weapons is permissible without mentioning further evidence, except the following Verses:

“And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allāh), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted.”

“Then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him. And fear Allāh, and know that Allāh is with the pious.”

“The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof.”

And whosoever looks at the transgressions of the Americans against the Muslims and their lands in these recent times, will realize the permissibility of this (using weapons of mass destruction against America) – by merely basing it upon the principle of “Equal Treatment”; and it would not even require mentioning more evidences.

So if a nuclear bomb was dropped upon the Americans, killing 10 million civilians, and destroying their lands to the extent that they have destroyed our lands – This would be permissible without any need to even mention another evidence. More evidence would only be required if we wanted to kill more than this number!!”

[“Hukm Istikhdām Aslihat Ad-Damār Ash-Shāmil”:Chapter 2]

 

“It is the Right of the Muslims to equally retaliate by targeting their women and children… . Indeed, it is Incumbent to be Equal in the service (they have given us)”

Shaykh Abū Jandal Fāris Az-Zahrānī Al-Azdī States:

The Tenth Evidence: Equal Retaliation

“.And these Verses are general regarding everything- and the specific reason for its revelation does not restrict its meaning; because a basic principle in the Sharī’ah is that “The text is according to the generality of its words, and not restricted by the reason (of its revelation)”.

So it is permissible for the Muslims to treat their enemies with the likeness of everything they perpetrate against the Muslims. So if they assassinate our Mujāhidīn, then we will assassinate them; and if they mutilate the Muslims, it is permissible to mutilate them; if they target our women and children- then it is the right of the Muslims to equally retaliate by targeting their women and children- and this is because of the generality of the Verses…

America has killed, and continues to kill, more than an approximately of 1,320,700 in ‘Irāq due to its economic sanctions; and America has also killed thousands of lives in Afghānistān for the cause of “the Jihādī commanders” who reside there… and the list continues… Then for what reason is it forbidden for us to kill them, crush them, targeting them, and assassinating them- until the point when we have reached the same number with which they have afflicted us. So we will kill them for the reason of Bush, Blair, and Sharon- just as they killed us for the reason of so-and-so. Indeed, it is incumbent to be equal in the service (they have given us).

[“Tahrīdh Al-Mujāhidīn Al-Abtāl ‘Alā Ihyā’ Sunnat Al-Ightiyāl”]

 

A “lot of scholars say” that “if the disbelievers were to kill our children and women, then we should not feel ashamed to do the same to them, mainly to deter them…”

Shaykh Usama bin Laden states in a famous interview, using the same reasoning as Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s, that in order to deter the non-Muslims, we should not feel ashamed to slaughter their innocent women and children:

“The scholars and people of the knowledge [ahlu al-`ilm], amongst them ‘Sahib al-Ikhtiyarat’, and Ibn al-Qayyim (rahimahullah), and Shawkaani, and a lot of others, and Qurtubi (rahimahullah) in his tafseer, say that if the disbelievers were to kill our children and women, then we should not feel ashamed to do the same to them, mainly to deter them from trying to kill our children and women again.”

His unique ijtihad upon Qurtubi’s tafseer is a particularly salafi-style far-fetched one, if one reads the actual statement of Qurtubi:

وأن المثلة بهم غير جائزة وإن قتلوا نساءنا وأطفالنا وغمونا بذلك ; فليس لنا أن نقتلهم بمثلة قصدا لإيصال الغم والحزن إليهم ; وإليه أشار عبد الله بن رواحة بقوله في القصة المشهورة : هذا معنى الآي

“And mutilating them is not permissible, even if they kill our women and children and cause sorrow to befall us. And it is not permissible for us to kill them while mutilating with the intention of making them feel grief and sorrow…”

[Tafseer Qurtubi, 5/8]

Civilians Are No Longer Civilians Due to Their Possible Participation in Voting for Their Government

“Mufti” Anwar Awlaki

The very same Salafi methodology which allowe Anwar Awlaki, only a few years ago, to strut around as a modernist, liberal Imaam also provides ample scope, once subject to the pressures of a wholly different environment, to cater for the ijtihaadi conclusion that civilians are no longer civilians.

Whilst Anwar Awlaki did (at least once) refer to and agree t Ibn Uthaymin’s famous fatwa encouraging the mass murder of women and children, he seems to prefer the ruling of prohibition of killing civilians, and then proceeding to bypass such a prohibition by instantly transforming the civilians into war combatants:

“The American people as a whole are participants in the war because they elected this administration, and they finance this war. In the recent elections as well as previous ones, the American people had other options and could have elected people who did not want war….”

“Al-Qaeda organisation has its options, and the American people live [in] a democratic system and that is why they are held responsible for their policies.

The American people are the ones who have voted twice for Bush the criminal and elected Obama who is not different from Bush as his first remarks stated that he would not abandon Israel, despite the fact that there were other anti-war candidates in the US elections, but they won very few votes. The American people take part in all its government’s crimes.

If they oppose that, let them change their government. They pay the taxes which are spent on the army and they send their sons to the military, and that is why they bear responsibility.”

In another interview:

Al-Malahem: Do you support such operations, though they target what the media calls “innocent civilians” etc.?

Anwar Al-Awlaki: With regard to the issue of “civilians”, this term has become prevalent these days, but we prefer to use the terminology used by our scholars of Fiqh. They use the terms combatants or non-combatants. A combatant is someone who bears arms – even if it be a woman. Non-combatants are people who have no participation in the war.

The American people as a whole are participants in the war because they elected this administration, and they finance this war. In the recent elections as well as previous ones, the American people had other options and could have elected people who did not want war. Nevertheless, these candidates got nothing but a handful of votes. Also before anything else, we must ex- amine this issue from the perspective of Islamic law, as this is what will settle the issue regarding its permissibility.”

And:

“Yes, I support what Umar Farouk has done after I have been seeing my brothers being killed in Palestine for more than 60 years, and others being killed in Iraq and in Afghanistan. And in my tribe too, US missiles have killed 17 women and 23 children, so do not ask me if al-Qaeda has killed or blown up a US civil jet after all this. The 300 Americans are nothing comparing to the thousands of Muslims who have been killed.

You have supported Nidal Malik Hasan and justified his act by saying that his target was a military not a civilian one. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s plane was a civilian one, which means the target was the US public?

It would have been better if the plane was a military one or if it was a US military target. Al-Qaeda organisation has its options, and the American people live [in] a democratic system and that is why they are held responsible for their policies.

The American people are the ones who have voted twice for Bush the criminal and elected Obama who is not different from Bush as his first remarks stated that he would not abandon Israel, despite the fact that there were other anti-war candidates in the US elections, but they won very few votes. The American people take part in all its government’s crimes.

If they oppose that, let them change their government. They pay the taxes which are spent on the army and they send their sons to the military, and that is why they bear responsibility…”

[Interview with al-Jazeera Arabic]

“We MUST also make their women and children as our enemies and targets”

“Mufti” al-Alawki also quotes Ibn Uthaymin for support for his ruling that “we must make their women and children enemies and targets”:

“When the enemies are attacking the women and children, we must also make their women and children as our enemies and targets. Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen said, ‘if the enemies are killing our women and children, to me it means that we can also kill the women and children of our enemies as it would weaken their hearts and embarrass them.”

It is better to target civilians than soldiers!

In another publically broadcasted interview – that is still very easily available – Anwar Awlaki explains unambiguously why it is a better, and “much more potent and powerful” tactic to target a civilian population:

“If you ask me as a tactic, is targeting the civilian population of the West a good thing to do? I would say yes, because it is much more potent and powerful. Soldiers are expected to die anyway…when you hit the civilian you hit them where it hurts most and that is what our tactics are about..”

It is permissible to use the verse, “Kill them wherever you find them.” To kill American Jews in America

Shaykh Abdullah Azzam

Usually labelled with the subjective word ‘moderate’ by his admirers, his Salafi tendencies occasionally induced in him sudden bouts of ijtihaad:

Taken from audio tape “Questions and Answers from California Masjid” (side B) [1988]:

Questioner:
Final question – Is it permissible to avenge the American Jews who are present in America specifically, [based on the verse] ‘Kill them wherever you find them'”?

Abdullah Azzam:
“Of course it’s permissible.”

Questioner:
“But especially in America he might face the law…”

Abdullah Azzam:
“Someone is prepared to die. If he’s prepared to die, then let him go ahead. As for it is permissible from this angle? Permissible.”

[Transcript can be found in al-Thakhair al-‘Itham 4/844]

It is legitimate to kill “non-combatants like the old, the blind, or non-Muslims”

The Prominent Saudi Shaykh, Ali al-Khudairi states explicitly that it is legitimate to kill old and blind non-combatants:

“It is legitimate to kill all infidel Americans… it is astonishing to mourn the [American] victims as being innocent. Those victims may be classified as infidel Americans which do not deserve being mourned, because each American is either a warrior or, a supporter in money or opinion, of the American government. It is legitimate to kill all of them, be they combatants or non-combatants like the old, the blind, or non-Muslims.” [Ali bin Khudeir al-Khudeiri, ‘fatwa’, al-Hayat, 13 February, 2002.] 

Strangely, whenever there are reports of massacres of civilian populations perpetrated by these Salafi Jihadis, their supporters are the first to deny their occurrence, pleading to everyone not to trust the news conveyed, despite the fact that the fatwas above labelling the killing of non-Muslim civilians, and Muslim civilians who have been deemed to have apostasized, as Jihaad, and as such the greatest of deeds. In fact, Husn-e-Zann should entail attributing all reports of such ‘greatest of deeds’ to the Salafi Jihadis, whatever the source of the news may be, thus adding to their credit of ‘good deeds’.

ENDNOTE

The purpose of producing the small sample above is to demonstrate the fact that the Salafist and Modernist methodology of abandoning rigid taqleed of the Madh-habs, opening the doors to unbridled ijtihaad, and essentially re-inventing the wheel, provides scope for practically ANYTHING to be justified and be regarded as part of Deen.

The very same methodology used to legitimise the mass genocide of women and children, is also used by those who justify compromising and apologising for every aspect of our religion, even upto the point of complete assimilation with the Kuffaar.

In short, the Salafi and Modernist methodologies leads to endless permutations of ‘Deen’.

Other articles will go further to illustrate the uncontrollable chaos and anarchy that result from abandoning intelligent and rigid taqleed of the authentic Madh-habs. Fatwas will be produced from those who believe that Hell-fire will end for every single disbeliever (Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibnul Qayyim, and others), from those who believe that a grown man can become the bosom close relative of a strange woman simply by drinking her milk (directly and indirectly) for a subjective ‘need’ (Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Albani, al-Huwayni & others), and from those who believe in unambiguously anthropomorphic concepts (for a starter, see this: Does the ‘Salafi’ Aqeedah Lead to Anthropomorphism?).

On the other hand, the four Madh-habs of fiqh, and the two Madh-habs of aqeedah, have passed through such an unsurpassably rigorous process of scrutiny by innumerable accepted authorities throughout many centuries (and one that was clearly divinely ordained), that it is practically impossible for anomalies to have become part of Deen for those who adhere to such Madh-habs authentically.

Islam means, and the test of our Imaan demands, complete submission – both to the aspects of the purely transmitted Deen which conform to our chaotically varying intellects and desires, and to the aspects that do not.

←Back to Contents of Jihad Section

←Back to Contents of “Salafism and Barelwism – Twin Deviants at Opposite Poles”

Why the Imperative Need to Direct the Blame on Ourselves?

The Oppression of the Enemies of Islam upon this Disgraced, Downtrodden, Humiliated Ummah is Merely a Manifestation of Divine Punishment From Allah (Azza wa Jal), the Most Just… 

Whilst it is Our Transgressions, Our Misdeeds, and Our Reluctance to Submit Fully to the Pure Untainted Shari’ah Which Serves Only to Increase this Punishment from Allah (azza wa jal)…

9 thoughts on “Salafi Fatwas Encouraging Slaughter of Civilians

  1. Talib

    Masha’Allah akhi….. very eye-opening and insightful article. Very very well written. These salafis who prominently discard the deen by way of their nafs really are sounding like Nazis. One would have to be extremely ignorant to think that killing non-combatant women, children, elderly and those who hold religious positions can be slaughtered. The coprocreep salafis are mere german roaches that cant seem to be eliminated with basic bug spray….. articles like this is a great step into educating those who are unaware. As always I will pass this article along

    Reply
  2. Ruqqayah Ahmad

    Masha Allah they really cross the line. But sheikh (or admin) can we have the sources where the Shaykhs sayings are cited from? Preferably their official websites or book scans? Many wahabis will say this writing is only an attempt to slander them.

    And if I remember correctly , Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen once said there is no such thing terrorism in Islam, and people who do terrorism do worse than Qarmatians (the heretic Shia Ismaili sect who massacred thousands of hajj jamaah in Makkah in Abbasid era). Why did the Shaykh make a contradicting fatwa??? One fatwa he said terrorism is haraam and khawarij-like, and the other fatwa said it’s ok to kill women and children as “revenge”?

    Reply
    1. admin Post author

      These fatwas are well-known amongst the Salafis. For example, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s fatwa is quite famous and was openly available on his official website for some time before it was deleted.

      All of the scholars mentioned above say that they are against terrorism and transgression. However, their “Qur’an and Sunnah” methodology leads them to be all over the place when it comes to defining terrorism e.g. one of them defines transgression as exceeding the killing of more than 10,000,000 civilians!

      Reply
  3. Abu

    An interesting conversation on twitter with prominent Salafi Shaykh Assim al-Hakeem, regarding the Salafi ruling permitting and encouraging the killing of innocent women and children:

    https://twitter.com/Abu_Muslim123/status/402391553827557376

    ABDUL: Salaams, are there any truth to the allegations found below. Could u pls refute:

    http://reliablefatwas.com/does-the-salafi-aqeedah-lead-to-anthropomorphism-tajseem/

    http://reliablefatwas.com/salafimodernist-genocide-deen/

    SHAYKH: this is completely wrong and promotes the Aqeedah of Ash’aree. It is a deviant website and must be avoided.

    ABDUL: Jazakallah. So it’s a fabricated that Shaykh Ul-Islam compared Allah’s sitting on throne with sitting on back of mosquito? Is it fabricated Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s fatwa killing women & children? It’ll be good if someone can refute those allegations

    SHAYKH: Sheikh Ibn Taimiyah did say that but it should be taken in context and not extracted like that! even if he did say that [referring to Ibn Uthaymin], he is a scholar and must be respected but this doesn’t mean we have to follow him in everything.

    ABDUL: Jazakallah. Ok but those who firmly believe that according to Quran & Sunnah he is correct, then they can follow that fatwa?

    SHAYKH: no, they can’t because it is wrong no matter who says it.

    ABDUL: To you it’s wrong and I respect that, but to Shaykh Uthaymin & many others it’s right – so shouldn’t we respect that as well?

    SHAYKH: sheikh Ibn Othaimeen is my Sheikh and I follow him. However, he is not a Prophet and we must follow Quran and Sunnah.

    ABDUL: But Shaykh Uthaymin & many others also used Quran & Sunnah – if someone believe their Daleel is correct then they can follow him?

    SHAYKH: yes, they can and Allah will hold them accountable to their understanding.

    ABDUL: Jazakallah Shaykh for helping my understanding.

    HUSSEIN: So those people who agree with shaykh uthaymin’s understanding of Quran/Sunnah & kill women/children are entitled to do so?

    SHAYKH: entitled by Who to do so?

    HUSSEIN: Entitled by Qur’an/Sunnah according to Uthaymin & others who directly follow [Daleel]. Why should our ijtihad be upheld but not theirs?

    SHAYKH: no one is perfect and no one is above the Quran and Sunnah. This view of killing women and up children is rejected. regardless of who had said it. It was out Prophet who forbade it and it is not a matter of ijtihad.

    ABU: Uthaymin & co. also use Qur’an and Sunnah to prove their point & they knew what Prophet (saw) said about this issue

    SHAYKH: did scholars differ with them? If yes, Allah ordered us to solve this dispute by referring to Quran & Sunnah

    HUSSEIN: but who’s to say our understanding of Quran/Sunnah is right and theirs wrong we all take from the same source. so we only refer to what we subjectively think is the solution so in that sense both views are right

    SHAYKH: they can’t be both right as the truth at the side of Allah is one and not many. only scholars can determine this and not laymen.

    HUSSEIN: i agree but on principle of deriving from Quran/Sunnah how can we say they are wrong and we are right definitely but Shaykh Uthaymin determined it permissible on to his ijtihad, being the truth according to him

    SHAYKH: Quran 4:59. no one is perfect or flawless.

    ABU: shaykh you said “YES” someone who believes Uthaymin’s Daleel from Quran & Sunnah is correct can follow him.

    SHAYKH: don’t you think that the topic has gotten a bit out of proportion? What is it exactly that you want? do you want to go and kill children and women? Would this satisfy you?

    ABU: No. Look how dangerous your manhaj is. Many who follow Quran/sunnah including your teacher allow it & even you said ok to follow

    Reply
    1. admin Post author

      Shaykh Assim is a student of Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin.

      He more or less acknowledges the existence of this fatwa, agrees with you that you can follow that fatwa if you agree with Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s Daleels, and then backtracks!

      Reply
  4. Subhanallah

    May Allah protect us from such transgression. I no longer wonder why I actually have met some Salafi muslims who passionately supporting Anwar Al Awlaki and the like (who supports the killing of women and children), and supporting the bombing actions in the West glorifying it as “martyrdom operation” and they even say “kuffar America and British did this to Muslims so we must do the same to them”, Subhanallah!!!!

    Reply
  5. Abul Lais

    Whilst the deviation of the salafis is well known, many hanafis have taken a similar (or even worse) stance. I have met “Hanafis” who are even worse in “mixing and matching” than the salafis. Exact same thing goes for the pseudo-shafi’is of southeast asia (S’pore, Malaysia, Indonesia).

    The worst example I have heard from my own ears from at least THREE pseudo-shafi’i scholars is that qadha-e-umri (fulfilling a lifetime of missed prayers) is not obligatory!!! How easy to gain cheap publicity and fame by mutilating and falsifying the orthodox Sunnah! It’s so much easier to tell some one “Allah (ta’aala) is most merciful” than to ask him to offer 40 years of missed prayers.

    And then the bid’ah and pacifism/defeatism engulfing many of the Deobandis is equally putrid in the extreme. Our beloved shakh Mufti A S Desai (may Allah ta’aala bestow even more ability upon him for khidmat-e-deen) has pointed this out many times, that if we don’t curb the innovations creeping into our home, soon we will have a Deobandi-Barelwi hybrid sect sinking in the same hole.

    I am not writing the above out of hatred for the 4 orthodox madhaahib, but its simply to point out a blatant reality: whilst salafi-bashing is easy and trendy nowadays, what is equally (if not much more) important and urgent is to clean the fisq and najis that has entered our own homes. Nowadays people are claiming to be hanafi/shafi’i yet treacherously betraying the very teachings of the noble imams (rahmatullahi ‘alaihim ajma’een). This is pretty much symptomatic of our BIGGEST problem today: whilst jew-bashing seems to be the in-thing nowadays, what people DON’T realize that their transgressions and rebellion has even surpassed the Bani Israil of bygone times.

    So along with exposing salafis let’s ALSO reform the salafist tendencies in our hearts!

    And along with exposing Barelwis let’s ALSO reform the Barelwist tendencies in our hearts!

    And so on and so forth.

    Wassalaam.

    Reply
    1. admin Post author

      Assalamualaykum,

      Yes I agree with you. The article above is as much an attack on the catastrophic methodology of abandoning rigid taqleed of the four madh-habs as it is of the Salafis and modernists who are at the fore-front of espousing this deviation. And yes this deviation has infiltrated all groups including the deobandis as alluded to explicitly in the introduction to the article.

      The root of all deviation today is abandoning rigid taqleed of the four madh-habs. Every excuse under the sun is sought by all groups today for abandoning rigid taqleed in order to gain leverage to manouvre room to satisfy one’s own desires and what one wishes to believe to be part of Deen.

      In many ways Deobandis today have even surpassed groups as deviant as the Barelwis in their abandonment of the Hanafi madh-hab. For example, the major Barelwi scholars today still adhere to the official ruling of the Hanafi madh-hab on minute amounts of alcohol being Haraam completely, whilst the modernist breed of Deobandis will unhesitatingly drink alcoholic fizzy drinks without a second thought.

      It is no wonder that the Divine Axe is falling on us everywhere. We do not wish to submit our desires to the pure Deen but rather we wish to the submit the Deen to our filthy desires.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *