Post by peterd on Jan 24, 2008 17:29:25 GMT -8
Egypt's Christians Are Not Dhimmis, But Citizens
"Article 11: On the impermissibility of doing any harm to the Christians in our land, and elucidation of the fact that they are not dhimmis but citizens. The principle regarding them is 'treat them as they treat you' (al-mu'amala bi'l-mithl).
"It is obligatory to act kindly towards one's neighbor, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. Violation of this is a cardinal sin. All of them fall under what Allah said (Koran 60:8): 'Allah does not forbid you from dealing kindly and justly with those who did not fight you over religion and did not drive you from your homes; Allah loves those who deal justly.' This is in addition to the Prophet's particular injunction regarding the Copts of Egypt, due to their being tied [to us] by blood relations and relations of marriage.(8)
"Article 12: [This article deals with] the question of the individual jihad that Allah mentioned (Koran 4:84): 'Fight [jihad] for the sake of Allah, and impose this only on yourself.' This [verse] expresses permission and not obligation, and I provide the proof of this. The permission is subject to some stipulations, among the most important of which are: asking the permission of the Emir or the ruler, if there is one; that he not harm other Muslims, as the Prophet said in an accepted hadith, '[Refrain from doing] harm to others or to oneself'; that he not carry out aggression that Allah has forbidden by killing Muslims or non-Muslims whose lives are inviolable or by destroying their possessions, as Allah said (2:190): 'Do not be aggressors, for Allah does not love the aggressors.'
"Article 13: [This article contains] advice to the Muslims in general, [dealing with] a number of issues, such as the obligation to study religion, to seek one's livelihood, things that are permitted, and staying away from wrong actions and sins, and so on."
Jihad is In Force Until Judgment Day; The Islamic Caliphate Is Coming Before the Mahdi Appears
"Article 14: Advice to the rulers of Muslim lands, the most important [part] of which is [that they should] implement the Islamic shari'a, by which there is good for the land and for the people, and in which there is the glory of this world and salvation in the next world. [They should] then take care to reduce corruption and iniquities [committed by the government against the people, mazalim], raise the level of religious instruction, and care for those who engage in it.
"Article 15: [This article contains] the good tidings that Islam, the Muslims, and their triumph will remain until Judgment Day is nigh, that jihad is in force until Judgment Day is nigh, and that the Islamic Caliphate is coming before the appearance of the Mahdi, and other good tidings, together with their proofs…"
Sayyed Imam then summarizes the four additional notices in the Document:
"Notice 1 is about my Islamic writings, and that they are merely the passing on of religious knowledge to the people, and are not fatwas. The laws stated in my writings are in the abstract and can only be applied to particular cases by a qualified scholar, which I am not. I take back anything in my writings that is [found to be] contrary to an opposing true and sound shari'a proof.
"Notice 2 is an elucidation of the shari'a reasons and practical reasons that make clear that fighting against the rulers in Egypt is not permitted. Among the shari'a reasons are the imbalance [in forces between the rulers and the mujahideen] and the incapacity [of the mujahideen]. Among the practical reasons are the incapacity of popular movements to bring about regime change in Egypt throughout history… [see translation below]
"Notice 3 is a refutation of the dubious argument that this document is a call to desist from supporting the mujahideen. Correction of mistakes is an obligation and is not a withdrawal of support. The Prophet said: 'I am free of guilt before you for what Khaled [Bin Al-Walid] has done'(9)… Was the Prophet withdrawing support [for jihad]?
"Notice 4 is a refutation of the dubious argument that 'there is no loyalty to a prisoner'… The summary of what I said on this matter is that 'what is important is the proof [contained in] what is written, and not where it was written'. Whoever has an objection to anything I have said based on a shari'a proof, I am ready to consider it [i.e. his objection] and discuss it, and I am ready to accept the truth, even when it is contrary to what I have said…"(10)
On the Shari'a Reasons and the Practical Reasons for Not Clashing with the Egyptian Authorities
The Document of Right Guidance for Jihad Activity in Egypt and the World consists of 15 articles and four notices; in the second notice, published on November 22, 2007, in the Kuwaiti Al-Jarida daily and translated here, Sayyed Imam explains the reasons for his ruling forbidding taking up arms against the Egyptian government:
"This notice is a clarification of what I mentioned in the sixth article on the prohibition on fighting against the rulers.
"Allah willed that I would have a relation with one of the Islamist groups [i.e. the Egyptian Jihad] at a certain time for the sake of working towards imposing Islamic shari'a rule in Egypt, this as the obligation of any Muslim.
"After studying the matter from the shari'a perspective and after consulting with scholars and studying the reality [of the situation], I came to the conclusion in the year 1412h/1992 that clashing with the ruling authorities and their [security] forces in Egypt would never achieve this shari'a benefit [i.e. the imposition of shari'a law].
"I tried to turn this Islamist group [i.e. the Egyptian Jihad] away from conflict and to give it a da'wa direction – this was before it embarked on any clashes in Egypt(11) – but they did not agree to this, so we went our separate ways, and I broke off relations with this group, and all of the Islamist groups, in early 1993.
"I want to relate to the distinguished reader the shari'a and practical facts on which I based my decision on the futility of entering into clashes with the Egyptian authorities for the sake of imposing shari'a rule, and their consequent impermissibility in the shari'a, due to the vast harms they entail while not achieving the hoped-for benefit. so that whosoever wishes may benefit from it."
Jihad Requires Preconditions that Do Not Exist Today
"1) From the shari'a perspective: clashing with the ruling authorities in the name of jihad is not permitted, due to the absence of many of the conditions for it, the existence of a number of impediments, and the predominance of harms [they entail], on both the particular and the general levels.
"Allah said (Koran 33:21): 'In Allah's Prophet you have an excellent example, for he who looks to Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much.' And the Prophet did not wage jihad, nor did Allah command him with jihad, until after jihad's formative elements were present, and these are among the conditions for its being an obligation and the preconditions for its success – and they do not exist [at present] in most countries. Among them are:
" – An abode of emigration (hijra) and support. This is not [just] a hide-out. The Prophet did not emigrate to Medina until after its population swore allegiance to Islam and pledged [to give the Muslims] safe haven, support, and a place that would be inviolable… and he didn't emigrate to it until he sent someone to investigate the situation in Medina and of its population on the ground… None of this exists [today].
" – Parity in numbers and equipment. This… is among the conditions necessary for making persistence [in battle] obligatory and for victory to be likely. When there is no parity between the two sides of the conflict, jihad is not obligatory, since inability cancels out obligation. This is the situation of the Islamist groups in most Muslim countries.
" – Safeguarding the Muslims' children, women, and families. This is impossible [today], and one who enters into conflict [under such conditions] causes harm to his family. In the Al-Ahzab raid, the Prophet placed the families in a fortress in Medina. [Today] this is impossible. In the fourth article I cited Al-Shafi'i's Kitab Al-Umm, where he writes that if someone fears that his family [will be exposed to harm] from the enemy if he goes out to fight jihad, then he is not permitted to go out [to fight jihad]. The proof of this is what Allah said (Koran 33:13): 'And a party of them asked the Prophet for permission [not to fight], saying "our houses are exposed," but they were not exposed, and they only wanted to flee.' The meaning of this verse is that if the houses were [in fact] exposed to the enemy, they could ask for permission [to stay behind] without reproach.
" – Expenses necessary for jihad. When this is impossible, the obligation of jihad falls… and it is not permitted to steal money from those whose property is inviolate under the pretext of funding jihad, as explained previously. It is not permitted to do that which is forbidden in order to carry out that which is not obligatory.
" – A group to whom one can turn [in time of need]. This does not exist [today]…
" – Differentiating the ranks [i.e. differentiating combatants from non-combatants] is difficult, and this leads to killing people whose lives are inviolate, and Muslims, whom one is not allowed to kill in the confrontation…
"When the preconditions for jihad and its formative elements are not in existence, and the impediments to it are in existence, it is not permitted by the shari'a to persist in the option of confrontation with the authorities in order to impose shari'a law, and one must turn to the other shari'a options that are feasible, such as da'wa, reform, and so forth. This is especially true given that previous experience has made clear the grave damages caused by this confrontation, on both the particular and the general levels, and the principle is that 'warding off damage takes precedence over obtaining benefit'…"
Popular Uprisings Have Never Been Able to Accomplish Regime Change in Egypt
"2) From the practical point of view: The incapacity of the Islamist groups to change the ruling regime in Egypt by way of confrontation can be understood by looking at history. Taking history into account is a shari'a obligation, as Allah has censured those who do not take it into account, and the fundamental principles say that censure is only incurred for the abandoning of an obligation.
"Allah said (Koran 22:46): 'Have they not traveled in the land, and they have hearts with which to understand and ears with which to hear? It is not their eyes that are blind, but their hearts within their breasts that are blind.' And the sheikh and historian 'Abd Al-Rahman Al-Jabarti wrote in his history book 'Aja'ib Al-Athar: 'Studying and reading history adds to one's comprehension,' since studying history provides one with a concise summary of the extensive experiences and knowledge of one's predecessors.
"Throughout history, the regime in Egypt has only changed in one of two ways. The first way is that of foreign invasion, like the Persian and Roman invasions, the Islamic conquest, the Ottoman invasion, and the British occupation of Egypt. The second way is that of change from within the ruling government. For example, Salah Al-Din Al-Ayyubi fought against the Fatimids when he was their governor. He put an end to their state and turned Egypt from a Shi'ite state into a Sunni one. Or like the great Muhammad 'Ali Pasha, who seized rule in Egypt in 1805 when he was an Ottoman officer. He seized rule and started Egypt on the path to modernization. Or like Gamal 'Abd Al-Nasser, who seized rule in Egypt in 1952 and brought about profound political, economic, and social change in Egypt.
"Throughout history, regime change in Egypt has only occurred in these two ways, and the Islamist groups are incapable of either of them. They are not part of the ruling class, and they cannot invade from abroad – not to mention that they do not possess what everyone acknowledges as the elements necessary for conventional warfare, or even for guerilla warfare.
"Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya wrote: 'Egypt remained an abode of apostasy during the 'Ubaydi Fatimid era – 200 years according to the scholars – until Salah Al-Din Yousef Bin Ayyub transformed it' – that is the gist of what he wrote. There were great Sunni scholars in Egypt at that time, and they did not do a thing, and did not change that regime. [Likewise,] never in history have the popular movements – and among them, the Islamist groups – changed the regime in Egypt.
"Since taking history into account is an obligation… one must not try something that not only brings no benefit, but entails preponderant damage."
"Wisdom Requires Situating Things in Their Proper Place and Not Confusing Them"
"The jurisprudential principle states that 'the easier [option] is not rendered void when the more difficult [option is not feasible].' There are many legal proofs for this, like the verse (Koran 64:16): 'Fulfill your duty to Allah as much as you can…', and the hadith, 'Do as much as you can of what I have commanded you,' and the hadith related by 'Omran Bin Husayn on how to pray when one is sick… 'Pray standing, and if you cannot do this, pray sitting, and if you cannot do this, then pray [while lying] on the side,' as recorded in Bukhari's [compendium of hadith].
"On the basis of this principle, if changing [things] by force is difficult, then the obligation devolves onto changing [things] through words; and if this is difficult, the obligation is limited to condemning [the wrong] in one's heart, which is obligatory in any case…
"Changing [things] through words is Islamic da'wa, in its various forms and according to one's ability. Allah said (Koran 2:286): 'Allah only imposes on someone that of which he is capable…'
"The alternative is not to kill civilians, foreigners, and tourists, to destroy property, and [to commit] aggression against the lives and property of those who are inviolable under the pretext of jihad. All of this is forbidden. Wisdom requires situating things in their proper place and not confusing them. Allah said (Koran 2:269): 'He grants wisdom to whom he pleases, and he to whom wisdom has been granted has been given a great good; and none but men of understanding remember'.
Those Who Issue Fatwas and Are Not Competent To Do So Bear Liability for the Damage
"I repeat that taking history into account is obligatory, and Allah has censured those who do not… What popular movements did not succeed in accomplishing in the past, they will not succeed in accomplishing in the present. This is due to Egypt's nature as a centralized state, whose rule extends to the depths of the country and its extremities… because it is a 'river state.' The fact that rule extends to the extremities insures that popular opposition is [always] nipped in the bud. States and peoples [all] have their particularities that remain with them always…
"When jihad was decreed, it was [in order] to put an end to harm to the religion and its people [i.e. Islam and the Muslims]; if it brings worse harm, then it is not obligatory, since '[one] harm is not cancelled out by a similar [harm] or one that is worse'…
"It is my view that those who are not specialists in judicial rulings and in military affairs who set off clashes and push their brothers into unbalanced military confrontations bear liability for all the losses incurred by their brothers and other inviolable persons. One who is not known to be a doctor and [nevertheless] practices medicine is liable for the damage he does; likewise, one who issues a fatwa without being competent to do so bears liability. Even if he escapes the liability in this world, its consequences in the next world remain."(12)
"Article 11: On the impermissibility of doing any harm to the Christians in our land, and elucidation of the fact that they are not dhimmis but citizens. The principle regarding them is 'treat them as they treat you' (al-mu'amala bi'l-mithl).
"It is obligatory to act kindly towards one's neighbor, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. Violation of this is a cardinal sin. All of them fall under what Allah said (Koran 60:8): 'Allah does not forbid you from dealing kindly and justly with those who did not fight you over religion and did not drive you from your homes; Allah loves those who deal justly.' This is in addition to the Prophet's particular injunction regarding the Copts of Egypt, due to their being tied [to us] by blood relations and relations of marriage.(8)
"Article 12: [This article deals with] the question of the individual jihad that Allah mentioned (Koran 4:84): 'Fight [jihad] for the sake of Allah, and impose this only on yourself.' This [verse] expresses permission and not obligation, and I provide the proof of this. The permission is subject to some stipulations, among the most important of which are: asking the permission of the Emir or the ruler, if there is one; that he not harm other Muslims, as the Prophet said in an accepted hadith, '[Refrain from doing] harm to others or to oneself'; that he not carry out aggression that Allah has forbidden by killing Muslims or non-Muslims whose lives are inviolable or by destroying their possessions, as Allah said (2:190): 'Do not be aggressors, for Allah does not love the aggressors.'
"Article 13: [This article contains] advice to the Muslims in general, [dealing with] a number of issues, such as the obligation to study religion, to seek one's livelihood, things that are permitted, and staying away from wrong actions and sins, and so on."
Jihad is In Force Until Judgment Day; The Islamic Caliphate Is Coming Before the Mahdi Appears
"Article 14: Advice to the rulers of Muslim lands, the most important [part] of which is [that they should] implement the Islamic shari'a, by which there is good for the land and for the people, and in which there is the glory of this world and salvation in the next world. [They should] then take care to reduce corruption and iniquities [committed by the government against the people, mazalim], raise the level of religious instruction, and care for those who engage in it.
"Article 15: [This article contains] the good tidings that Islam, the Muslims, and their triumph will remain until Judgment Day is nigh, that jihad is in force until Judgment Day is nigh, and that the Islamic Caliphate is coming before the appearance of the Mahdi, and other good tidings, together with their proofs…"
Sayyed Imam then summarizes the four additional notices in the Document:
"Notice 1 is about my Islamic writings, and that they are merely the passing on of religious knowledge to the people, and are not fatwas. The laws stated in my writings are in the abstract and can only be applied to particular cases by a qualified scholar, which I am not. I take back anything in my writings that is [found to be] contrary to an opposing true and sound shari'a proof.
"Notice 2 is an elucidation of the shari'a reasons and practical reasons that make clear that fighting against the rulers in Egypt is not permitted. Among the shari'a reasons are the imbalance [in forces between the rulers and the mujahideen] and the incapacity [of the mujahideen]. Among the practical reasons are the incapacity of popular movements to bring about regime change in Egypt throughout history… [see translation below]
"Notice 3 is a refutation of the dubious argument that this document is a call to desist from supporting the mujahideen. Correction of mistakes is an obligation and is not a withdrawal of support. The Prophet said: 'I am free of guilt before you for what Khaled [Bin Al-Walid] has done'(9)… Was the Prophet withdrawing support [for jihad]?
"Notice 4 is a refutation of the dubious argument that 'there is no loyalty to a prisoner'… The summary of what I said on this matter is that 'what is important is the proof [contained in] what is written, and not where it was written'. Whoever has an objection to anything I have said based on a shari'a proof, I am ready to consider it [i.e. his objection] and discuss it, and I am ready to accept the truth, even when it is contrary to what I have said…"(10)
On the Shari'a Reasons and the Practical Reasons for Not Clashing with the Egyptian Authorities
The Document of Right Guidance for Jihad Activity in Egypt and the World consists of 15 articles and four notices; in the second notice, published on November 22, 2007, in the Kuwaiti Al-Jarida daily and translated here, Sayyed Imam explains the reasons for his ruling forbidding taking up arms against the Egyptian government:
"This notice is a clarification of what I mentioned in the sixth article on the prohibition on fighting against the rulers.
"Allah willed that I would have a relation with one of the Islamist groups [i.e. the Egyptian Jihad] at a certain time for the sake of working towards imposing Islamic shari'a rule in Egypt, this as the obligation of any Muslim.
"After studying the matter from the shari'a perspective and after consulting with scholars and studying the reality [of the situation], I came to the conclusion in the year 1412h/1992 that clashing with the ruling authorities and their [security] forces in Egypt would never achieve this shari'a benefit [i.e. the imposition of shari'a law].
"I tried to turn this Islamist group [i.e. the Egyptian Jihad] away from conflict and to give it a da'wa direction – this was before it embarked on any clashes in Egypt(11) – but they did not agree to this, so we went our separate ways, and I broke off relations with this group, and all of the Islamist groups, in early 1993.
"I want to relate to the distinguished reader the shari'a and practical facts on which I based my decision on the futility of entering into clashes with the Egyptian authorities for the sake of imposing shari'a rule, and their consequent impermissibility in the shari'a, due to the vast harms they entail while not achieving the hoped-for benefit. so that whosoever wishes may benefit from it."
Jihad Requires Preconditions that Do Not Exist Today
"1) From the shari'a perspective: clashing with the ruling authorities in the name of jihad is not permitted, due to the absence of many of the conditions for it, the existence of a number of impediments, and the predominance of harms [they entail], on both the particular and the general levels.
"Allah said (Koran 33:21): 'In Allah's Prophet you have an excellent example, for he who looks to Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much.' And the Prophet did not wage jihad, nor did Allah command him with jihad, until after jihad's formative elements were present, and these are among the conditions for its being an obligation and the preconditions for its success – and they do not exist [at present] in most countries. Among them are:
" – An abode of emigration (hijra) and support. This is not [just] a hide-out. The Prophet did not emigrate to Medina until after its population swore allegiance to Islam and pledged [to give the Muslims] safe haven, support, and a place that would be inviolable… and he didn't emigrate to it until he sent someone to investigate the situation in Medina and of its population on the ground… None of this exists [today].
" – Parity in numbers and equipment. This… is among the conditions necessary for making persistence [in battle] obligatory and for victory to be likely. When there is no parity between the two sides of the conflict, jihad is not obligatory, since inability cancels out obligation. This is the situation of the Islamist groups in most Muslim countries.
" – Safeguarding the Muslims' children, women, and families. This is impossible [today], and one who enters into conflict [under such conditions] causes harm to his family. In the Al-Ahzab raid, the Prophet placed the families in a fortress in Medina. [Today] this is impossible. In the fourth article I cited Al-Shafi'i's Kitab Al-Umm, where he writes that if someone fears that his family [will be exposed to harm] from the enemy if he goes out to fight jihad, then he is not permitted to go out [to fight jihad]. The proof of this is what Allah said (Koran 33:13): 'And a party of them asked the Prophet for permission [not to fight], saying "our houses are exposed," but they were not exposed, and they only wanted to flee.' The meaning of this verse is that if the houses were [in fact] exposed to the enemy, they could ask for permission [to stay behind] without reproach.
" – Expenses necessary for jihad. When this is impossible, the obligation of jihad falls… and it is not permitted to steal money from those whose property is inviolate under the pretext of funding jihad, as explained previously. It is not permitted to do that which is forbidden in order to carry out that which is not obligatory.
" – A group to whom one can turn [in time of need]. This does not exist [today]…
" – Differentiating the ranks [i.e. differentiating combatants from non-combatants] is difficult, and this leads to killing people whose lives are inviolate, and Muslims, whom one is not allowed to kill in the confrontation…
"When the preconditions for jihad and its formative elements are not in existence, and the impediments to it are in existence, it is not permitted by the shari'a to persist in the option of confrontation with the authorities in order to impose shari'a law, and one must turn to the other shari'a options that are feasible, such as da'wa, reform, and so forth. This is especially true given that previous experience has made clear the grave damages caused by this confrontation, on both the particular and the general levels, and the principle is that 'warding off damage takes precedence over obtaining benefit'…"
Popular Uprisings Have Never Been Able to Accomplish Regime Change in Egypt
"2) From the practical point of view: The incapacity of the Islamist groups to change the ruling regime in Egypt by way of confrontation can be understood by looking at history. Taking history into account is a shari'a obligation, as Allah has censured those who do not take it into account, and the fundamental principles say that censure is only incurred for the abandoning of an obligation.
"Allah said (Koran 22:46): 'Have they not traveled in the land, and they have hearts with which to understand and ears with which to hear? It is not their eyes that are blind, but their hearts within their breasts that are blind.' And the sheikh and historian 'Abd Al-Rahman Al-Jabarti wrote in his history book 'Aja'ib Al-Athar: 'Studying and reading history adds to one's comprehension,' since studying history provides one with a concise summary of the extensive experiences and knowledge of one's predecessors.
"Throughout history, the regime in Egypt has only changed in one of two ways. The first way is that of foreign invasion, like the Persian and Roman invasions, the Islamic conquest, the Ottoman invasion, and the British occupation of Egypt. The second way is that of change from within the ruling government. For example, Salah Al-Din Al-Ayyubi fought against the Fatimids when he was their governor. He put an end to their state and turned Egypt from a Shi'ite state into a Sunni one. Or like the great Muhammad 'Ali Pasha, who seized rule in Egypt in 1805 when he was an Ottoman officer. He seized rule and started Egypt on the path to modernization. Or like Gamal 'Abd Al-Nasser, who seized rule in Egypt in 1952 and brought about profound political, economic, and social change in Egypt.
"Throughout history, regime change in Egypt has only occurred in these two ways, and the Islamist groups are incapable of either of them. They are not part of the ruling class, and they cannot invade from abroad – not to mention that they do not possess what everyone acknowledges as the elements necessary for conventional warfare, or even for guerilla warfare.
"Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya wrote: 'Egypt remained an abode of apostasy during the 'Ubaydi Fatimid era – 200 years according to the scholars – until Salah Al-Din Yousef Bin Ayyub transformed it' – that is the gist of what he wrote. There were great Sunni scholars in Egypt at that time, and they did not do a thing, and did not change that regime. [Likewise,] never in history have the popular movements – and among them, the Islamist groups – changed the regime in Egypt.
"Since taking history into account is an obligation… one must not try something that not only brings no benefit, but entails preponderant damage."
"Wisdom Requires Situating Things in Their Proper Place and Not Confusing Them"
"The jurisprudential principle states that 'the easier [option] is not rendered void when the more difficult [option is not feasible].' There are many legal proofs for this, like the verse (Koran 64:16): 'Fulfill your duty to Allah as much as you can…', and the hadith, 'Do as much as you can of what I have commanded you,' and the hadith related by 'Omran Bin Husayn on how to pray when one is sick… 'Pray standing, and if you cannot do this, pray sitting, and if you cannot do this, then pray [while lying] on the side,' as recorded in Bukhari's [compendium of hadith].
"On the basis of this principle, if changing [things] by force is difficult, then the obligation devolves onto changing [things] through words; and if this is difficult, the obligation is limited to condemning [the wrong] in one's heart, which is obligatory in any case…
"Changing [things] through words is Islamic da'wa, in its various forms and according to one's ability. Allah said (Koran 2:286): 'Allah only imposes on someone that of which he is capable…'
"The alternative is not to kill civilians, foreigners, and tourists, to destroy property, and [to commit] aggression against the lives and property of those who are inviolable under the pretext of jihad. All of this is forbidden. Wisdom requires situating things in their proper place and not confusing them. Allah said (Koran 2:269): 'He grants wisdom to whom he pleases, and he to whom wisdom has been granted has been given a great good; and none but men of understanding remember'.
Those Who Issue Fatwas and Are Not Competent To Do So Bear Liability for the Damage
"I repeat that taking history into account is obligatory, and Allah has censured those who do not… What popular movements did not succeed in accomplishing in the past, they will not succeed in accomplishing in the present. This is due to Egypt's nature as a centralized state, whose rule extends to the depths of the country and its extremities… because it is a 'river state.' The fact that rule extends to the extremities insures that popular opposition is [always] nipped in the bud. States and peoples [all] have their particularities that remain with them always…
"When jihad was decreed, it was [in order] to put an end to harm to the religion and its people [i.e. Islam and the Muslims]; if it brings worse harm, then it is not obligatory, since '[one] harm is not cancelled out by a similar [harm] or one that is worse'…
"It is my view that those who are not specialists in judicial rulings and in military affairs who set off clashes and push their brothers into unbalanced military confrontations bear liability for all the losses incurred by their brothers and other inviolable persons. One who is not known to be a doctor and [nevertheless] practices medicine is liable for the damage he does; likewise, one who issues a fatwa without being competent to do so bears liability. Even if he escapes the liability in this world, its consequences in the next world remain."(12)