Part 10
Written by: Mawlawi Ahmad Ali
The statements and positions of the Salaf and reputable Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah regarding the assistance and cooperation of disbelievers against Muslims (Muẓāharah ‘alā al-Muslimīn):
Imām Ahl al-Sunnah, Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī (رحمه الله):
Imām Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī (may Allah have mercy on him), in his tafsīr Ta’wīlāt Ahl al-Sunnah (Volume 9, Page 608), under the explanation of the verse:
﴿يٰۤاَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا لَا تَتَّخِذُوْا عَدُوِّىْ وَعَدُوَّكُمْ اَوْلِيَآءَ﴾
states:
“وفي هذه الآية دلالة أن ذلك الذنب الذي ارتكبه ذلك الرجل لم يخرجه من الولاية.”
Translation: This verse indicates that the sin (assistance or spying for the disbelievers) committed by this man did not remove him from the status of being a believer.
He elaborates further:
“لأنه قال: ﴿لَا تَتَّخِذُوْا عَدُوِّىْ وَعَدُوَّكُمْ اَوْلِيَآءَ﴾ ولو كان ذلك الذنب يكفره ويخرجه عن الإيمان لم يكن ذلك الكافر عدوًّا له، بل يكون وليًّا له بقوله: ﴿وَاِنَّ الظّٰلِمِيْنَ بَعْضُهُمْ اَوْلِيَآءُ بَعْضٍ﴾، ولأجل أنه قال: ﴿يٰۤاَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا﴾: سماه: مؤمنًا.”
Translation: Because Allah says:
﴿لَا تَتَّخِذُوْا عَدُوِّىْ وَعَدُوَّكُمْ اَوْلِيَآءَ﴾
(Do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies). If this sin had made him a disbeliever and removed him from faith, then those disbelievers would no longer be his enemies but would have become his allies, as Allah says:
﴿وَاِنَّ الظّٰلِمِيْنَ بَعْضُهُمْ اَوْلِيَآءُ بَعْضٍ﴾
(Indeed, the wrongdoers are allies of one another). Furthermore, Allah addressed him with “يٰۤاَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا” (O you who have believed), affirming his status as a believer.
“والدليل على أن ذلك الذنب كان كبيرة: أنه أخبرهم بأن رسول اللَّه – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيهِ وَسَلَّمَ – جهزهم للقتال، وفيما أخبر: أمر بأن يستعدوا لقتال النبي – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيهِ وَسَلَّمَ – وحربه. ولا يشكل أن من أمر بقتال رسول الله – صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيهِ وَسَلَّمَ – كان مرتكب كبيرة، وإذا كان كذلك، وقد أحله اللَّه – تعالى – في جملة المؤمنين بقوله: ﴿يٰۤاَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا لَا تَتَّخِذُوْا عَدُوِّىْ﴾ وبما وصفناه من الدليل – ثبت أن الكبيرة لا تكفره، ولا تغير اسم الإيمان عنه.”
Translation: This provides evidence that the sin committed by Ḥāṭib (رضي الله عنه) was a major sin. He, in his statement (informing the polytheists that the Prophet ﷺ was preparing for war and attacking them), effectively instructed them to prepare for war against the Prophet (ﷺ).
This is clear, and there is no ambiguity: whoever commands war against the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has committed a major sin, not disbelief. Thus, Allah still counted him among the believers in His words:
﴿يٰۤاَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا لَا تَتَّخِذُوْا عَدُوِّىْ﴾
(O you who have believed, do not take My enemies as allies). Based on the evidence provided, it is clear that committing a major sin does not render one a disbeliever nor take away the title of Islam. (Tafsir al-Māturīdī, Volume 9, Page 608)
Imam Muhammad (رحمه الله):
For this reason, Imam Muhammad (may Allah have mercy on him): states in Sharh al-Siyar al-Kabir, Volume 2, page 144:
وَلَوْ قَتَلَ مُسْلِمًا كَانَ فِي صَفِّ الْمُشْرِكِينَ يُقَاتِلُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مَعَهُمْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ سَلَبُهُ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا وَإِنْ كَانَ مُبَاحَ الْقَتْلِ، وَلَكِنَّ سَلَبَهُ لَيْسَ بِغَنِيمَةٍ؛ لِأَنَّهُ مَالُ الْمُسْلِمِ، وَمَالُ الْمُسْلِمِ لَا يَكُونُ غَنِيمَةً لِلْمُسْلِمِينَ بِحَالٍ، كَأَمْوَالِ أَهْلِ الْبَغْيِ. فَإِنْ كَانَ السَّلَبُ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ لِلْمُشْرِكِينَ أَعَارُوهُ إيَّاهُ فَذَلِكَ لِلَّذِي قَتَلَهُ؛ لِأَنَّ مَا عَلَيْهِ مِنَ السَّلَبِ غَنِيمَةٌ. وَهُوَ مُبَاحُ الْقَتْلِ فِي هَذِهِ الْحَالَةِ، فَيَدْخُلُ فِي تَحْرِيضِ الْإِمَامِ عَلَيْهِ.
Translation: “If a Muslim is killed while standing in the ranks of the polytheists, fighting against the Muslims along with them, his belongings (weapons and possessions) are not lawful for the one who killed him. This is because, even though his killing is permissible, his belongings (salab) are not considered spoils of war, as they are the property of a Muslim, and the property of a Muslim cannot, under any circumstances, be treated as spoils of war, similar to the possessions of rebels (ahl al-baghy). However, if the belongings he carried were lent to him by the polytheists, they become the rightful property of the one who killed him, because in this case, such belongings are spoils of war.”
Allama Shami (رحمه الله):
Similarly, Allama Shami (رحمه الله) states in Radd al-Muhtar, Volume 4, page 154:
نَعَمْ لَوْ قَتَلَ مُسْلِمًا كَانَ يُقَاتِلُ فِي صَفِّهِمْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ سَلَبُهُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ وَإِنْ كَانَ مُبَاحَ الدَّمِ لَكِنَّ سَلَبَهُ لَيْسَ بِغَنِيمَةٍ كَأَهْلِ الْبَغْيِ إلَّا إذَا كَانَ سَلَبُهُ لِلْمُشْرِكِينَ أَعَارُوهُ إيَّاهُ.
Translation:
If a Mujahid kills a Muslim who was fighting against the Muslims in alliance with the disbelievers, standing in their ranks, the belongings of the slain Muslim are not lawful for the Mujahid. Although the slain Muslim becomes mubah al-dam (permissible to kill) due to his support of the disbelievers, his possessions do not become spoils of war. The ruling regarding his belongings is similar to that of rebels (ahl al-baghy), where their possessions cannot be claimed as war booty because war booty is defined as property taken from disbelievers.
However, if the belongings of the slain Muslim were owned by the disbelievers and were lent to him temporarily, then these belongings are considered spoils of war and may be lawfully claimed by the one who killed him.
Further Clarification in Sharh al-Siyar al-Kabir (Volume 1, Page 305):
If a harbi (a combatant from the disbelievers) enters Dar al-Islam (Muslim territory) under a treaty of peace (aman) and then commits murder (intentionally or unintentionally), theft, highway robbery, forced zina (adultery) with a Muslim or a dhimmi woman, or spies for the disbelievers, his treaty is not invalidated. The reasoning provided is that if a Muslim were to commit such acts, none of them would nullify his faith, as the text states:
وَإِذَا دَخَلَ حَرْبِيٌّ دَارنَا بِأَمَانٍ، فَقَتَلَ مُسْلِمًا عَمْدًا أَوْ خَطَأً، أَوْ قَطَعَ الطَّرِيقَ، أَوْ تَجَسَّسَ أَخْبَارَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ فَبَعَثَ بِهَا إلَى الْمُشْرِكِينَ، أَوْ زَنَى بِمُسْلِمَةٍ أَوْ ذِمِّيَّةٍ كُرْهًا، أَوْ سَرَقَ، فَلَيْسَ يَكُونُ شَيْءٌ مِنْهَا نَقْضًا مِنْهُ لِلْعَهْدِ. إلَّا عَلَى قَوْلِ مَالِكٍ، فَإِنَّهُ يَقُولُ: يَصِيرُ نَاقِضًا لِلْعَهْدِ بِمَا صَنَعَ؛ لِأَنَّهُ حِينَ دَخَلَ إلَيْنَا بِأَمَانٍ فَقَدْ الْتَزَمَ بِأَنْ لَا يَفْعَلَ شَيْئًا مِنْ ذَلِكَ، فَإِذَا فَعَلَهُ كَانَ نَاقِضًا لِلْعَهْدِ بِمُبَاشَرَتِهِ، مِمَّا يُخَالِفُ مُوجِبَ عَقْدِهِ، وَلَوْ لَمْ يَجْعَلْهُ نَاقِضَ الْعَهْدِ بِهَذَا رَجَعَ إلَى الِاسْتِخْفَافِ بِالْمُسْلِمِينَ. وَلَكِنَّا نَقُولُ: لَوْ فَعَلَ الْمُسْلِمُ شَيْئًا مِنْ هَذَا لَيْسَ بِنَاقِضٍ لِإِيمَانِهِ، فَإِذَا فَعَلَهُ الْمُسْتَأْمَنُ لَا يَكُونُ نَاقِضًا لِأَمَانِهِ.
وَالْأَصْلُ فِيهِ حَدِيثُ حَاطِبِ بْنِ أَبِي بَلْتَعَةَ، فَإِنَّهُ كَتَبَ إلَى أَهْلِ مَكَّةَ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا يَغْزُوكُمْ فَخُذُوا حِذْرَكُمْ. وَلِذَلِكَ قِصَّةٌ. وَفِيهِ نَزَلَ قَوْله تَعَالَى: ﴿يٰۤاَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا لَا تَتَّخِذُوْا عَدُوِّىْ وَعَدُوَّكُمْ اَوْلِيَآءَ﴾ [الممتحنة: 1]
فَقَدْ سَمَّاهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى مُؤْمِنًا مَعَ مَا فَعَلَهُ. وَكَذَلِكَ أَبُو لُبَابَةَ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمُنْذِرِ حِين اسْتَشَارَهُ بَنُو قُرَيْظَةَ أَنَّهُمْ إنْ نَزَلُوا عَلَى حُكْمِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ﷺ مَاذَا يَصْنَعُ بِهِمْ؟ فَأَمَرَّ يَدَهُ عَلَى حَلْقِهِ، يُخْبِرُهُمْ أَنَّهُ يَضْرِبُ أَعْنَاقَهُمْ. وَفِيهِ نَزَلَ قَوْله تَعَالَى: ﴿يٰۤاَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا لَا تَخُوْنُوا اللّٰهَ وَالرَّسُوْلَ﴾ [الأنفال: 27] الْآيَةُ.
فَعَرَفْنَا أَنَّ هَذَا لَا يَكُونُ نَقْضًا لِلْإِيمَانِ مِنْ الْمُسْلِمِ، فَكَذَلِكَ لَا يَكُونُ نَقْضًا لِلْأَمَانِ مِنْ الْمُسْتَأْمَنِ، وَلَكِنَّهُ إنْ قَتَلَ إنْسَانًا عَمْدًا يُقْتَلُ بِهِ قِصَاصًا؛ لِأَنَّهُ الْتَزَمَ حُقُوقَ الْعِبَادِ فِيمَا يَرْجِعُ إلَى الْمُعَامَلَاتِ.
This indicates that espionage, which is a significant form of assistance and support, does not invalidate a Muslim’s faith.
