Did the Prophet Mohammed kill a Jewish Poet?

Did the prophet Mohammed kill a Jewish Poet?

An EDL member claimed in a post that the Prophet Mohammed killed many people unjustly and was a murderer and warlord.

One of the incidents he quoted to justify his claim was that the prophet (s) ordered the killing of a Jewish poet, so his companions carried this out.

I gave some foundations in a post which all of a sudden disappeared soon after I posted it and the thread closed down – typical of that forum! (EDL forum that is). It was so disappointing especially when I wrote extensively about why and how fabricated ahadeeth (sayings and actions of the prophet) appeared in the early and later part of Islam and what the scholars of Islam did and are doing to expose them and confine them.

However the foundations I mentioned spoke mainly about the authenticity and science of hadeeth. It also related reasons why orientalists made up lies about Islam and how Allah (God) promised he would preserve the truth (Islam). The way he preserved it was through bringing forth scholars who specialised in checking the authenticity of ahadeeth, and incidents attributed to the Prophet Mohammed.

The EDL member then said:
“Ok, according to Bukhari, Muhammed ordered the death of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf, what level of authenticity do you regard Bukhari as?”

I said: Indeed the level of Bukhari is authentic and its ahadeth are acceptable, and we do indeed find part of the incident of the poet being assassinated (Kaáb ibn Ashraf) in Bukhari. However it is only part of the complete incident. To arrive at a complete picture of the incident we need to examine other sources as well to see the truth of the incident and why he was killed.

So when we look further a field we find according to Montgomery and Watt (orientalists) that he (Kaáb ibn Ashraf) plotted with the Quraish to kill the Prophet Mohammed. This would not have been a problem had Kaab been at war with the him but remember he was a Jew in Madina and bound by a treaty with the Muslims. After the Quraish suffered a defeat at the battle of Badr he became treacherous to his oath and agreement and went to Mecca to incite the Quraish and plot to kill Mohammed. Thus according to the customs of the society at that time (Jews, Christians, Muslims and Pagans) one who breaks his oath or treaty with an aim to kill others is to be killed. So that is why we found no objection to his killing by the remaining Jews in Madinah, they were shocked and fearful after the incident.

Uri Rubin also quotes from early sources claiming that Zamakshari, al-Tabarsi, al-Razi and al-Baydaw all agreed with the above and added that Mohammed was informed by Gabriel that Ka ‘b had signed an agreement with the Quraish to kill the Prophet Mohammed.

As for his (Kaáb ibn Ashraf) insulting poetry against the Prophet Mohammed, this crime was secondary to his plotting to kill Mohammed. Ka áb use to write and openly speak his evil poetry in Madinah about the Prophet where the Prophet was residing with his companions, yet the prophet did not kill or ordered his killing there. He could have easily killed him then if that was the reason for killing him. But no Ka ab was killed in Mekka when he went to plot the killing of Mohammed and incite another war between the Quraish and the Muslims. He was assassinated by the Prophets companions in Mekka.

So the situation was not as you claim; that Mohammed killed a poet for making up poetry insulting him.

You have a better, clearer picture of the incident. I am sure no one would disagree that to kill someone who is plotting to kill you, and also inciting another war is a wise and praiseworthy decision.


The Salafis are a Thorn in the Side of the Extremists


Ibn al Qayuim (rh) said:

So whenever Shaytan brought about an innovation from these newly invented matters, or from other than them, Allah established from His party an army—those who refuted it and warned the Muslims against it, all for the sake of sincerity and sincere advice for Allah, His Book, His Messenger and the people of Islam. And He made it an inheritance by which the party of Allah’s Messenger and those allied to his Sunnah should be distinguished from the party of innovation and its helpers. And there occurs in a report whose isnad (chain of narration) escapes me at the moment:

“There is a pious servant who stands in the way of every innovation plotted against Islam, such that he speaks out making its signs clear.” So take the benefit of those gatherings and place reliance upon Allah, since mercy descends upon them.

We ask Allah that he makes us from them, and joins us with them, and that He makes us their later-followers, just as He has made them predecessors for us through His grace and beneficence.”


Tahdhīb Sunan Abū Dāwūd (7/61-62)

Punish the innovators….

Ibn Taymiah (r) said:

“It is an obligation to punish all those who originate to them (oppressors, innovators and people of desires) or defends them or praise them or praises their books or is known to help them or support them or dislikes speech against them or makes excuse for them like ‘we don’t know what this speech of theirs really means’ or one who says: “did he really write this book?” and other similar excuses which no one but a jahil (ignorant) or hypocrite would make.

Rather it is an obligation to punish all those who know their condition but do not aid in refuting them. Because refuting them is from the greatest of obligations. Because they corrupt the intellect and religion of the elders, scholars, kings and leaders and they spread corruption in the earth and they block the paths leading to Allah.”

Majmoo al Fatawaa V2/P132

I say this punishment can only be exercised by a leader who has authority in the land. As for refuting them and exposing their falsehood and warning against their rhetoric, then this is an obligation on all those who have knowledge and ability.

Sheikh Khalid al Anbary on the Woolwich Killing

Sheikh Khalid al Anbary on the Woolwich Killing


We have read the news from the international newspapers about a Muslim who lives in London who transgressed against a non-Muslim soldier in the street of London.


This type of action is not permissible from the shariah of Allah Most High, and subhaan-Allah on the same day another Muslim man killed a Muslim Saudi soldier in a town called Taif and this is from the biggest evidence that terrorism does not differentiate between Muslim and non Muslim. So a Muslim country had been harmed by extremism and terrorism just as non Muslim countries have been harmed.


So I say this action the Muslim man conducted is not allowed in the shariah of Allah Most High because he lives amongst the people of Great Britain and has British nationality. The scholars of Islam have said that nationality or visa attained at entrance into a non Muslim country is considered as an established agreement of safety (of that country) which a Muslim must uphold and not exposethe people of that country he has entered into to any type of harm or evil and corruption.


In this regard the Prophet (s) said in an authentic hadeeth narrated by Abdullah Ibn Amr:  “whoever kills one who is under an agreement… (Meaning between them and us is an agreement or oath, and as I mentioned before the nationality or visa from a non Muslim country is an indication of the agreement and oath).


The prophet (s) also said: “whoever kills one who has an oath of safety will not smell the fragrance of paradise, and its fragrance will not be smelt for the distance of forty years.”


Also Abu Dawood and Abu Ya’laa narrate that the prophet (s) said: “whoever oppresses one who is under a pledge, or belittled him or burdened him with more than he could bear or took from him something which he has not consented to then I am his evidence (against you) on the day of judgment.”


The Muslims have made ijmaa on, that if a Muslim enters a land of the non Muslims then it is an obligation upon him to make the residents and citizens of that country feel safe and it is not allowed for him to harm any one of them not by killing them, stealing from them or any other form of harm, evil or corruption.


If it was said, and it was said; that he (the murderer) done this because the British soldiers are killing Muslims in some countries, then I say even in this situation it is not permissible for you to negate the oath, agreement which you have undertaken yourself  the day you were given nationality or you entered the country with a visa. This is because Allah Most High said in Surah al Anfaal: 

“and if they seek help from you in the religion then upon you is to aid them.  Except in the case where there is an agreement between you and a people. Allah is all aware of what you do. (Anfaal: 72)


So between you and the citizens is an oath as exemplified by the nationality you have obtained.


Imam Muslim narrates that Hudaifah and his father were on their way to Madeenah and they met some polytheists of Quraish whom they took a pledge with that they would not fight with Mohammad (s). So when they met with the Prophet (s) they mentioned that the polytheists took a pledge and oath from them. So the prophet (s) said leave us (do not fight with us in al Badr) we will seek Allah help against them.” So he rejected them and told them to fulfill their agreement with the Quraish.


So Islam is a religion of upholding oaths and agreements.  So indeed the Messenger is the Messenger of mercy in truth. Such transgressions like this (murder) are presenting Islam in the most ugly light for the non-Muslims.

Islam has been seen in reality, in the eyes of the non Muslims, as terror, the exact terror which does not know except the spilling of blood and killing of the innocent thereafter creating a barrier in the way of Islam and the way of Allah Most High. This is what I wanted to say in this regard.


May His peace and blessings be upon Mohammad (s)

When is Fighting the Enemy not Permissible

There is a saheeh hadith in Imam Ahmad collection that the Messenger of Allah (s) said:

 “Give glad tidings to this ummah of a high status in the sight of Allah, aid from Allah, empowerment in the earth. So whoever from them does a righteous action of the hereafter for the dunya he will have no reward for it in the hereafter.”

So the glad tiding will come and the promise is true without any doubt. But comprehend the condition of this glad tiding which is Sincerity. As he (s) states: “So whoever from them does a righteous action of the hereafter for the dunya..” This action in its appearance will look good but the intention behind it is for the dunya, so they will not be helped by Allah. What about the one who does not do a righteous action, rather he does evil deeds??

<…and let him not associate any partners with Allah in his worship..> Surah Khaf

So the condition, is that the actions we do, must not contain any shirk inside it, it should be solely for the sake of Allah.

<…and they have not been ordered except to worship Allah sincerely making religion for him alone..> Surah Al Bayinah

A group of believers went out with the Messenger of Allah in the battle of Hunayn amongst them were those who were new in Islam. They passed by a tree, which the mushrikeen use to hang their swords on for good luck, called Dhaatul Anwaat. They said to the Messenger: oh Messenger of Allah make for us a Dhaatul Anwaat just as they have a Dhaatul Anwaat

 The Messenger said to them: “Allahu Akbar or Subhan-Allah by he who’s hand my soul is in, verily it is a sunnan, you have said a thing which the people of Musa said: <Make for us a god like unto their God.>Araf 138

The Messenger did not leave them to say what they want because they were new in Islam, because it is not permissible to remain silent with regards the rights of Allah that he should be worshiped alone. This is an enormous condition.

So as long as this ummah does not take heed in establishing tawheed. As long as this ummah remains silent over the magicians, sorcerers, those who give out ta’weez, worshipers of graves, worshipers of peers and faqeers it is not possible for this ummah to witness help from Allah, to witness empowerment on the earth.

Also contemplate the anger of the messenger of Allah upon what they asked for. And understand they only asked for hanging the swords, they did not worship the tree or call upon it, or eat its dirt, or place flowers around it, or do tawaf around it. Yet He (s) still admonished them.

Contemplate also, that the Messenger (s) was on his way to battle. With all the worries on his mind of preparing and engaging in battle he stopped all that to attend to a matter of Tawheed and shirk! He did not say, I will deal with this problem after the battle, because of its serious nature and connection to victory of the imminent battle ahead.

How do you think his (s) anger would be upon those who actually call for help and aid from a person in his grave or carry some of the soil from his grave in his pocket or around his neck? or do tawaf around the grave.

Ibnu Qayim (rh) said:

If by taking this tree to hang swords on it, and stand around it is associating partners with Allah. Bearing in mind they did not worship it and did not ask anything of it, then what about standing around a grave and calling upon the dead for help?[1]

Today, we find amongst us those who blame the people of tawheed for not going out to fight with them in jihad when they fight with worshipers of graves and people of shirk and biddah.

We find them complaining about unity and blaming us for causing disunity. What unity will come, what victory will come what aid and help will come from Allah if we do not free ourselves from shirk and biddah.

Ibn Taymiah teaches tawheed in a defensive battle:

When the tatar took aver the land of Shaam, the Muslims went out to fight them, amongst them were those who were involved in doing acts of shirk. Ibn Taymiah use to correct their aqeedah and call them to tawheed as he mentioned in his reply to al Bakari were he states…

 “And some of our elders from the shayookh of those who have insight from our companions use to say: this is the greatest thing you have clarified for us: “that this knowledge is from the fundamentals of the religion.” And this person and others like him use to call upon the dead, believing they were present. They may have done worse than that because they would only call upon the dead in extreme circumstances, calling for a cure and aid and help…when the enemies would come they would call upon the dead seeking help in the deceased from the difficulty facing them…” [2]

You should know that this battle Ibn Taymiah is speaking about was a defensive Jihad, as some say when it is defensive we do not need to correct the tawheed before we defend. On the contrary, here you can see Ibn Taymiah correcting their aqeeda first.

Even if there were righteous people in the army, which contained shirk they would be defeated.

Ibn Taymiah then said after these words: “Those who seek help from them (the dead) if they were with you in the fighting they would be defeated as those of the Muslims who were in the battle of Ahud were defeated.”

So understand here the importance of correcting the aqeeda of those who fight or call themselves ‘mujahideen’. Even if there were righteous amongst them they would loose.

And what about those who fight and wage war on the people of tawheed how would it be if you fought in their rows. (Like in Afghanistan the 7 party alliance)

Ibn Taymiah brought an excellent point here because those Muslims who took part in the battle of Uhud did not do shirk, or call to shirk, they sinned, they disobeyed Allah Messenger. What about those of today who make shirk, call to shirk and fight the people of tawheed calling them wahaabis and so on.

Is it comprehendible that the Muslims will be victorious, will be empowered by Allah and be raised in his sight when they have so much shirk and biddah in them? Is it truly possible for us to get victory right now?

“Give glad tidings to this ummah of a high status in the sight of Allah, aid from Allah, empowerment in the earth. So whoever from them does a righteous action of the hereafter for the dunya he will have no reward for it in the hereafter.”

He who left fighting because of biddah and shirk

Then he Ibn Taymiah may Allah have mercy on him said:

This is why the people of knowledge of this religion did not fight at that time because of the lack of legislative fighting which Allah and his Messenger ordered with. They did not fight because of the evil and corruption and impossibility of attaining Allah help, where there would be no reward in the dunya or the hereafter…many of them who took part in this fighting though it was unlegislative they will be rewarded for their intention…[3]

Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz said:

“Do not fight with the Qadariyah because they will not be aided by Allah.”[4]

Victory of the Muslims against the Tatar came only after they corrected their Aqeeda

 Then he Ibn Taymiah said:

“And when the people fixed their affairs and where truthful in their asking for help and aid from their lord he helped them against their enemy with a mighty aid, such that the Tatars where never defeated in such a way before. So when the correct worship of Allah and following of his Messenger was applied, which did not exist before then Allah helps his Messenger and those who believe in this life and the hereafter…”[5]

This clearly shows there is no empowerment in the earth until the correct religion is empowered first. As Allah states:

< Verily Allah will not change a condition of a people until they change their themselves …> Ar-Rad, verse11

[1] Ighathatu allahfaan 2/ 205

2. Talkhees al Kitaab al istigaatha 2/731 – 738

[3] Talkhees al Kitaab al istigaatha 2/731 – 738

[4] Narrated by Ibn Batta in Al Ibana / Al Qadr  1848

[5] Talkhees al Kitaab Al Istigaatha 2/731 – 738

If Sheikh Ibn Baaz was alive he would have warned against Anwar al Awlaki

Sheikh Ibn Baaz (rh) was asked: Can we co-operate with the jamatul jihad?


Answer: They are not to be co-operated with, nor are they to be given salaams to. Rather, they are to be cut off from, and the people are to be warned against their evil. Since they are a fitnah (tribulation) and are harmful to the Muslims, and they are the brethren of the Devil (Shaytaan)!

Those who love, respect and except Ibn Baaz (rh) as their scholar cannot now make us salafis blameworthy for refuting and exposing Anwar al Awlaki, Abu Hamza, Abu Qatada, Faisal al Jamaici and other jihadis/takfiris.

Can we Draw Some Benefits from the Stockholm Bombings 2010 After the Woolwich Killing

Seven Islamic Points Regarding the Suicide Bombing in Stockholm

Written by Sheikh Abdul Haq al Turkamani

Head of Islamic Research Centre in Sweden

Translated by Abdul Qadir Baksh

الحمد لله رب العالمين، وأشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له إله الأولين والآخرين، وأشهد أن محمدًا عبده ورسوله المبعوث رحمة للعالمين، صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وأصحابه أجمعين.

To proceed: here are some words regarding the suicide bombing which took place in Stockholm on Saturday evening 11/12/2010. We do not intend by this paper to just reject and condemn this criminal act because that is the least obligation upon us by our pure religion. Rather we intend to give a brief indication to some of the reasons which aid the understanding of some of these Muslims who have a hand in such terror and suicide bombing, and what the Islamic ruling is regarding it.

1. It is incorrect to explain the action of a suicide bomber as being due to psychological problems, or due to the influence of drugs. In reality they are intelligent, and are physically and mentally healthy. Many of them have a post graduation education. So they carry out these operations with complete conviction, a strong intention, a firm resolve and a satisfied tranquil soul.  The Quran speaks of a people who’s intentions were good (in what they believed themselves) they performed great good deeds but they did not tread the straight path (in those actions) which Allah had ordered for them. These people will come on the Day of Judgment ruined and in loss.

Say shall I not inform you of those who are the greatest losers regarding their actions, those who went astray working so hard doing deeds (which were not correct) thinking they were acquiring good by their deeds”. (Surah Kahaf v 103/4)

And we read in the history of religions that a person who punished himself through starvation, cutting him/herself and committing suicide. This was common amongst some of the religions of old. In India, the Jainism sect use to cut one of their veins which they knew would end their lives. This act in Jainism was considered the peak or highest level of their religion specific only to some of their high priests.

2. The fundamental beliefs which support suicide bombings are in reality a distorted and astray from the true teachings and purpose of the religion. Islam is the basis of all good and righteousness and it encourages maintaining good manners with people. But when the religion is distorted, it becomes a tool which strengthens evil, injustice and corruption. The appearance of sects which have strayed from the right path is not something specific to the religion of Islam, rather it was found and is still present in every religion. Europe has witnessed many wars, killing, torture and persecution in the name of religion. Islamic history still remains the cleanest, clearest and it is the least in oppression and in religious persecution in the history of mankind. The reason for this is (adherence to) the two main sources of the religion and that is the Quran and the Sunnah which have both been protected up to this day from change or additions. They are the two sources of references for the major scholars of Islam. Throughout the history of Islam, the Muslims scholars have fulfilled their duties , they were present in each generation and in each decade in every year without any break in the chain. They prohibited the distortion of the religion and exposed the movements which called to deviation. Furthermore, they countered any support for deviation with proofs from the Quran and Sunnah. They contained any distorted thoughts and ideas thus preventing them from corrupting the wider Islamic society. The Prophet (s) informed us of the appearance of deviated movements. He explained this in many ahadeeth (known as the ahadeeth of the khawaarij), about its dangers to the religion and to entire Islamic community. For this reason he (s) ordered the Muslims to fight them without any lenience. He also warned not to have any sympathy with the followers of such movements regardless of the many prayers, fasting and recitation of the Quran they perform.

3. From the very birth of Islam and over the many years, Muslims have been steadfast in the belief that the meaning of Islam is sincerity in worship to Allah, negating any partners with him, establishing the obligatory acts of the religion like prayer, fasting, zakat, hajj, possessing good manners and restricting themselves to the rulings of the shariah in halaal and haram. So whoever establishes these matters has indeed established his whole religion, and he will be of the people of Paradise in the Hereafter. The fruits of this religion are that the political, economic situation as well as the social cohesiveness of society will change for the better. These changes are not the goal in and of themselves but will come about as a result of implementing the religion.

About 100 years ago, a new explanation of Islam appeared. In summary it reduced Islam to a political and legal system.. This understanding of Islam meant that one had to change the political, economic and social structure of the world. And that the various acts of worship and religious injunctions were not the main purpose of the religion but rather they are means to another end. This new interpretation of Islam led to a number of violent rebellions in the Islamic world and led to further distortions in understanding of Islam. It gave birth to tremendous confusion and to misunderstandings about the objectives of Islam. Furthermore, it also presented a bad image of the Muslims. It was the cause of many internal revolts and trials.

Many Muslims adopted this explanation or were influenced by it unknowingly. They held that prayer, fasting, zakat, hajj, recitation of the Quran, and dhikr as well as the other symbols of worship have no meaning and no benefit if they do not produce concrete, tangible results, and do not achieve a change in the environment (political, economic and social). For this reason they viewed worship as something dry, and in fact they belittled and disparaged worship. This resulted in them not preparing for the important matters due to their abandonment of knowledge and righteous action. They also abandoned teaching and dawah. Another result (of this belief) was that they disrespected the scholars of Islam and drew their tongues against them by cursing, abusing and belittling them as well as accusing them of betrayal and disbelief.

There is no doubt that suicide bombings are also from the corrupt explanation of this new interpretation of Islam. A youth who is directed to worshipping Allah has a sincere desire to seek closeness to his Creator, and he prays for forgiveness and mercy. Such a person knows from the innocence of his intellect and from his natural disposition that the true religion is about dhikr, du’a, prayer, recitation of the Quran, good manners, and righteous deeds. This youth would be surprised if he comes across a group who believed in this new interpretation of Islam which is in complete opposition to what is engraved in his mind. For example, they say to him: “the purpose of this religion is to change the political, economical, military and social condition of the world! And there is no real meaning to prayer, fasting, recitation of the Quran and teaching the rulings of the religion if we do not establish the change. And those you see who pray and fast even the scholars and du’aat (callers to Islam) and the Muadhin who calls the people to prayers five times a day, all of them are not real Muslims rather they are disbelievers and apostates because they do not establish the true meaning of this religion. Their goal is to busy and amuse themselves with prayer, recitation of the Quran and the books of ahadeeth”.

If the youth is convinced by this new interpretation and it overwhelms his thinking such that his objective is now to change the world, he will not bother with prayer, other acts of worship or good deeds. He will completely distance himself from learning the rulings of the religion and from listening to the scholars. He will then strive to implement the goal he sees correct (the new interpretation of Islam). He will find himself shocked and in great despair over the situation of the Muslim world. He then feels hopelessness and despair. He becomes hostile to all around him and develops a strong inclination to take revenge and decides after a heavy physiological dispute within himself to carry out a suicide operation which has no meaning to it except taking revenge, even if it involved killing innocent civilians. It is sufficient for him that he is firmly truthful in implementing the idea of changing the world (according the new interpretation).  He would then consider himself of being from those who have established the religion believing that Allah will reward him with paradise and its blessings.

4. When we reject this action and free ourselves from it, we do so (freeing ourselves) from all who have a hand in it may it be through its implementation, helping, financial support, guidance, encouragement, agreement or other types of support. Indeed the methodology of the Prophet (s) was clear in this matter. He would always emphasise the rejecting of both the action and the doer, even if the doer was a Muslim. Rejecting the action then finding excuses for the doer and trying to interpret the action differently demonstrates inconsistency and hypocrisy. I will suffice here with mentioning one hadeeth which guides to this meaning and that is his (s) saying: “any man who gives a sign of safety to another man’s blood then kills him, then I am free from that killer even if the killed is a disbeliever”(Ahmed and Albani made it saheeh). This is in the case of treachery to one man, what about the one who is treacherous to the whole society that he resides with, enjoying its protection,  graduates from its institutions, and then turns his back on all of its kindness shown to him. Allah, the Most High says: “the recompense of good done to you is none except good done back” ( Surah ar Rahman: 60)

5. The rejection of terrorist activities does not only include rejecting suicide bombings which target civilians, rather one must present the complete picture of Islam and its realities. This religion orders us to abide by our oaths and agreements. It prohibits oppression, deceit and treachery. Islam also lays down strong foundations for human integration regardless of the many religions that exist. It restricts fighting to places of warfare alone, and it has rulings, protocols and manners which must be adhered to. For example, areas were civilians reside must not become to battle grounds which may cause the people to abandon their morality and integrity due to feelings of enmity and hatred against the enemy. The detailed rulings which determine these moral principles are many in the Quran and the sunnah. I will suffice with just one from the noble Quran which comes as a shock to many Muslims before the non Muslims because they have no knowledge of it. Their poor moral and emotional state prohibits them from accepting this holy instruction because of the difficult state they are in.

Allah says in Surah al Anfaal: “those who believe and did not do the hijrah, you have no allegiance to them in the slightest until they perform the hijrah – and if they seek help from you in the religion then upon you is to aid them.  Except in the case where there is an agreement between you and a people. Allah is all aware of what you do. (Anfaal: 72)

Performing hijrah (migration) to Madeenah before the conquest of Makkha was an obligation on all new Muslims in Arabia. So the Muslims who did not perform the hijra were not entitled to the rights and benefits that the citizens of the Islamic state in Madenah enjoyed except in one thing, and that was receiving help and aid against any hostility which occurred against them due to their Islam. So in this one particular case, the Muslims in Madeenah had to answer their request for help because of the religious bond they had with them. It was their religion (Islam) which was the cause of the enmity against them. However, there was one exception to this.  If there was a peace treaty or agreement between the Muslims and those transgressing enemy, then it was not permissible for the Muslims (who had signed these treaty) to aid their fellow Muslims. This is because the Muslims would have then broken a peace treaty, negated their agreement and become treacherous. So if they want to enter into a war with the transgressing enemy, it was an obligation upon them to first inform the other side (transgressing enemy) in an absolute, clear manner that the treaty or agreement had been cancelled just as is mentioned in the following verse: “and if you fear treachery from a people, then clearly denounce any obligations you have with them, for Allah does not love the treacherous.” (Anfaal v58)

The Muslims (of today) would have acted correctly had they followed their religion upon correct knowledge, and not upon blind following and emotions. This is what the Quran orders them with. I will give one example from the words of one of the greatest scholars of Islam Imam Shafi (rh) died in 204H may Allah have mercy upon him. He stated in his book ‘Al Umm’ which is considered from the most important books of Islamic fiqh the following:

“[In a situation where] a group of Muslims entered a land of war under an agreement of safety. In that war, the people at war with the Muslims took some of the Muslims women and girls as slaves and prisoners. The Muslims who entered under agreement of safety cannot fight the people who are at war with the Muslims until they make absolutely clear to them that they negate the agreement of safety, and after that they should give warning to them. If the safety agreement is then broken and made clear they are able to fight them. As for the period of when they had security (agreement) then they are not allowed to fight them.” (Al Umm V4/p375)

Also he stated: “When a group of Muslims entered a land of war under an agreement of safety.  Their enemies are safe from them until they leave them or the time period of safety expires.  And they are not allowed to oppress them or cheat them, even if the enemies take the Muslim women and children as captives. I do not like for them to be treacherous to their enemies I would rather they ask their enemies to return their agreement of safety to them. Only after they have openly disbanded their agreement and that is clear to both sides, then they should fight them for their Muslim women and children.” (Al Umm V4, p248)

This Quranic text – “And if you fear treachery from a people then clearly denounce any obligations you have with them for Allah does not love the treacherous” (Anfaal: 58) obliges us Muslims who reside in non Muslim lands to uphold our oaths and agreements by which they allowed us in, regardless if we entered with a temporary or permanent visa or with a view to attaining citizenship. This is despite the fact that the relationship between us and the country we reside in was different in the past. We now live in a secular country which does not deal with us based on religion and we receive our complete civil rights. Religion and good character remain one at all times no Islamic scholar in this age would disagree with this. So it is imperative upon us to fulfil our oaths and agreements. Deception and betrayal are both opposite to good character and are not permissible, this is something strongly prohibited in the Quran. We cannot partake in a war against the country we live in, even if our goal was to aid our oppressed brothers in the religion. And whoever from the Muslims chooses to carry out that which negates this (agreement and oath) he must first inform the official department of the government of the country in which he resides. The information must be clear and precise that he has chosen to give up his citizenship or has revoked the visa which he enjoys and that he cuts off all his ties with that country and makes clear he is now at war with it. He must also confirm that the official bodies of that government know his stance and that they understand his meaning. His message must be clearly understood that this is his choice and decision. That is the ruling of the Quran, and the manners of the people of Islam. [1]This does not mean that whoever does all this has become free to do  whatever he wants, as war has religious rulings and many moral conducts which he must adhere to, we have mentioned some of them above.

6. Some evil people have deliberately connected terrorist activities with as salafiyah and the salafis. The methodology of the dawah as-salafiyah is clear; it has no obscurity in it. It consists of following the Quran and the Sunnah upon the understanding of the companions and the major scholars of Islam.  From this standpoint the salafi’s free themselves from extremism in the religion and from terrorism and bombings. Such criminal acts are not condoned in Islam rather they are in opposition to the teachings of the Quran, Sunnah, and the Islamic verdict (fatawa) of the salafi scholars. The most famous of them in this era are Ibn Baz, Ibn Uthaimeen, and Al Albani and they have many fatawa against violence and terror and the extremist groups.

7. There is a huge responsibility upon the imams of the mosques, those active in dawah and those responsible for Islamic centres and institutes to make clear these rulings and being apparent in expressing them. They should explain them in details for the Muslims and the non Muslims. There is no excuse for anyone to remain silent whilst he acknowledges distortion and heresy that occurs in the name of Islam. Indeed Allah praised the truthful believers that they “relate the message of Allah and fear Him and do not fear anyone but Allah. And Allah is sufficient as a Reckoner. “ (Ahzaab:39) and He warned about hiding knowledge saying: “indeed those who conceal what we revealed of clarity, guidance, evidences and proofs after we have made it clear for the people in the book they are the ones cursed by Allah and cursed by the cursers”. ( Baqarah:159).

With Allah is all success.

Written by Sheikh Abdul Haq al-Turkamani

Head of Islamic Research Centre in Sweden


[1] T. N  – See surah Towbah verses 1 to 5

Shaykh Utheimeen (rh) on the Covenant of Safety

Likewise I invite you to have respect for those people who have the right that they should be respected, those between whom there is an agreement (of protection) for you. For the land in which you are living is such that there is an agreement between you and them. If this were not the case they would have killed you or expelled you. So preserve this agreement, and do not prove treacherous to it, since treachery is a sign of the hypocrites, and it is not from the way of the Believers. And know that it is authentically reported from the Prophet that he said,


Whoever kills one who is under and agreement of protection will not smell the fragrance of Paradise.


Do not be fooled by those sayings of the foolish people, those who say “Those people are Non-Muslims, so their wealth is lawful for us (to misappropriate or take by way of murder and killing).” For by Allaah – this is a lie. A lie about Allaah’s Religion, and a lie about Islamic societies.


So we may not say that it is lawful to be treacherous towards people whom we have an agreement with.


O my brothers. O youth. O Muslims. Be truthful in your buying and selling, and renting, and leasing, and in all mutual transactions. Because truthfulness is from the characteristics of the Believers, and Allaah – the Most High – has commanded truthfulness – in the saying of Allaah – the Most High –


O you who believe – fear and keep you duty to Allaah and be with the truthful


And the Prophet encouraged truthfulness and said,


Adhere to truthfulness, because truthfulness leads to goodness, and goodness leads to Paradise. And a person will continue to be truthful, and strive to be truthful until he will be written down with Allah as a truthful person.

And he warned against falsehood, and said,

Beware of falsehood, because falsehood leads to wickedness, and wickedness leads to the Fire. And a person will continue lying, and striving to lie until he is written down with Allaah as a great liar.

O my brother Muslims. O youth. Be true in your sayings with your brothers, and with those Non-Muslims whom you live along with – so that you will be inviters to the Religion of Islaam, by your actions and in reality. So how many people there are who first entered into Islaam because of the behaviour and manners of the Muslims, and their truthfulness, and their being true in their dealings.

The result of violent extremist behaviour…

A nice reply to those who say salafis are defeatists! and salafis don’t speak out they don’t revolt, they are in the pockets of the leaders rather they love the leaders. This is also an important lesson for all the Muslims living in the west to consider carefully when we witness extremists in our midst anger the non Muslim population including the governments.

So the wisdom in prohibiting the fighting was to protect the dawah from being cut off completely by the enemies. The Quraish use to be hostile and punish all those who believed then they use to wait for the reaction from the companions so they can then spill their blood and finally put an end to the dawah and its messenger (s) with the excuse he caused a revolt. The Quraish were continuously searching for ways with their plots trying to be smart and sly annoying the believers to find excuses to cause fighting. As Allah says

وَإِذْ يَمْكُرُ بِكَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ لِيُثْبِتُوكَ أَوْ يَقْتُلُوكَ أَوْ يُخْرِجُوكَ وَيَمْكُرُونَ وَيَمْكُرُ اللّهُ وَاللّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ
And when those who disbelieved devised plans against you that they might confine you or slay you or drive you away; and they devised plans and Allah too had arranged a plan; and Allah is the best of planners. (Surah al Anfaal verse 30)

In the UK the foreign policy and domestic terror laws are the annoying factor for Muslims. Some Muslims (be they insignificant in number) have no patience and cannot see a forth coming storm as a result of their ignorance and foolish behaviour.

How would I reply to one who says that salafi’s believe that they are the only saved sect ?

I say in reply:

This accusation is indeed a huge accusation against the salafis and it is untrue. Those who say this do not understand the hadeeth the salafis are referring to and they give their own interpretation to it also which is extremely dangerous and is the cause of division in the ummah. If only they would resort to restricting their understanding of the quran and hadeeth to the sahaba and first three generation.
The hadeeth in question where they derive their false accusations from is this:
The Messenger of Allaah (s) said: “My ummah will divide into 73 sects, all of them in the hellfire except one. He was asked, “Which one is that, O Messenger of Allaah?” He (s) said: That which I and my companions are upon.” [Abu Dawud, Ibn Maajah, Ahmad, Ad-Daaramee]

So anyone who strives to be of that one group will be of those saved on the day of judgement and enter paradise. the problem these people have is in the answer the prophet (s) gave when he described who these saved group will be, he said: “those who follow that which i and my companions are upon”
So salafis strive hard to follow what the messenger is upon and his companions where upon from dress to character to fiqhe and ageedah and sunnah. When they do this and call to this they encounter other muslims who do not accept the interpretation of the sahaba and want to stick to their desires and emotions and modern interpretations so they speak ill of the salafi trying to put others off what the salafi is calling to. they do this by saying : “oh you think you are the saved sect and everyone else is in the fire” this type of rheteric will put anyone off salafis and what they are calling to. especially when the salafi is always quoting the saved sect hadeeth intending to save others by it and bring them to the saved sect! those who have deseases in thier hearts twist this to make out the salafi is saying he is saved and anyone else is in the fire.

Pay no attention to this false accusation and lie agains the salafis it is untrue.
after saying that… i must say that in the past and present their are and were some salafis whos manners and characters have been terrible and they could have led other muslims to understand that is what they are saying ie they are saved everyone else is in the fire – so salafis should reflect on thier behaviour and the way they speak and not be over zealous to guide people to their way. they should just relay the message in the best way and hope Allah guides their hearts. Allah says: “you are not a controller over them” and he taala said: there is nothing upon you except to relate this great message” and he also said: “…do you become overwhelmed when they do not follow you..” so salafis must be a better example of the blessings Allah has bestowed on them of guidance.

Having said that, being upon the way of the salaf being part of that saved sect, following the messenger and his companions does not guarantee we will not enter the fire due to our sins. we may enter the fire due to our sins !
so no doubt there is only one saved sect…and that is the way of the salaf…i emphasis it is a way not a group or organisation. anyone can follow this way it is not specific to one set of muslims and not others it is the way of the prophet (s)