Refutation of the Doctrinal Positions of the Dawlat ash-Shaytan: Evaluating and Responding to Da'esh

Evaluating the Claim to Khalifat of Abu Bakr al Baghdadi

Upon declaring its self an Islamic State, The Dawlat al Shaytan known as Dawlat al Islamiyy fi Iraq, named its leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi as Khalif. The man we call Abu Bakr al Baghdadi appears to have been a supporter of Saddam Hussein, the Ba’athist dictator of Iraq.  Saddam supported the doctrines of dialectic materialism, political socialism, and atheism.  Even though he placed the words, “Allahu Akbar” on the Iraqi flag, after the First Gulf War, he was not a practicing Muslim, and he only used Islam to further his own agenda. 

In examining the traditional qualification enumerated by al-Mawardi, he fails in every count.  As to qualification number seven, being of the family of Quraish, the grounds for this declaration is his self-professed descent from Hussein ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib.  In classic Sunni Fiqh, this would render him ineligible for Khalifat.  In both al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah, and the classic book of Shafii fiqh, Umdat al Salik, by the Shafii scholar, al Misri, only the Quraishi are eligible to be Khalif.  Again, this is based on several reported prophetic hadith.  As a result of the debate over the role of Imamate, the Sunnis have held that while both the Umayyads and Abbasis were legitimate khulafaa’, the descendents of Ali ibn Abi Talib could not be. The Sunnis have never provided a cogent reason for this position.  However, the most likely reason is that given the relationship of the sons of Ali and Fatimah to the Prophet SAW, the sons of Hassan and Hussein have a claim to authority that follows the traditional lines of authority in many tribal societies.  Because their claims are weaker under Arab tradition, they have sought other means to exclude the sons of Ali and Fatimah. 

Consider the case of the Abbasi.  The Abbasi were descendents of Abbas ibn Abdul Muttalib, who as we noted above, was not considered fully Quraish.  However, Sunnis have accepted them as khulafaa’;  while the sons of Ali ibn Abi Talib ibn Abdul Muttalib have not been so accepted.  Doctrinal positions on the eligibility of the family of Ali and Fatimah developed to exclude them from power, even in conditions where other Bani Abdul Muttalib were accepted.  

Therefore, under Sunni conceptions of the Khalifat in Islam, a Husseini, such as Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, is not eligible as Khalif.

Moreover, he fails the other enumerated qualifications for Khalif.  He is not just.  This is evidenced by his intolerant behavior toward Ahl al Kitab, and other non-beligerent non-Muslims, and particularly his brutal murder of Muslims, including the slaughtering of the Western journalist convert to Islam and the burning of the Jordanian pilot.  [1]

He also fails as to knowledge.  He has no religious education or training as a mujtahid.  He does not even have an Injazah or training as a Imam or Daiyya.  He is ignorant of Deen, as his speeches quickly reveal.  He quotes ayaat of the Qur’an and Hadith available on any Salafi or even Islamaphobe website, and then fails to provide a real tafsir of these ayat.  Mere quotation of sources may impress some, but no Alim would fail to provide a thorough discussion of the evidence and reasoned dalil behind his positions.  As we shall see his quotation of Qur’an ayaat fails to take into account other ayaat and evidence that fully explain the obligation of Jihad and the conditions for which Qital is permitted.  The only thing he seems to have any knowledge of is Arab tribal traditions, such as the homeland of the Bani Kinana, the pre-Islamic practices of conquering neighbors and enslaving their women and children after killing all the men, the paying of fa’I or booty to fighters, the gifting of slave women as concubines and sex slaves to fighters, and other practices of jahiliyyah. 

He also fails to evidence the mental judgment to organize people and manage their affairs.  Unable to recruit local followers, he has utilized Western criminals to use the internet to recruit fellow Westerners.  Certainly, this reveals that he is capable of propaganda and brainwashing, but not true Islamic organization.  Moreover, he has been unable or unwilling to control mentally unstable and criminal elements.  They kill Muslims, destroy property wantonly, and wage hiraba on the local populace.  Moreover, his speeches do no evidence sound judgment or rational thinking.  They evidence only the most base appeals to emotions or primal instincts.  His calls to jihad promise a share of the fa’I or booty, and women and slaves.  Recently, it has been reported that thousands of recruits are leaving because Baghdadi has failed to fulfill these promises.  He has been killing these deserters as apostates. 

As we examine the forms of choosing the Khalif, and certainly the early Rashidun, al-Baghdadi has also failed to obtain his position under these forms.  He was not chosen by the leaders of the Arab clans; he is not the son of the former Khalif, either Ottoman or Abbasi; he is not even related to the family of either the Ottoman or Abbasi Khulafaa’, he was not elected by a select group of Ulema; he was not elected by the general body of the Ummah.  In short, his Khalifat is self-declared and is not legitimate in Islam.

Furthermore, the position of Khalif itself is not Sunnah. As noted by Ibn Taymiyyah, centralized Khalifat is not actually Sunnah.  No one is a successor to the RasulAllah SAW, while judicial authority is with the Ulema.  Enforcement authority should be elected and based on consensus, and should be obeyed as long as the authorities keep the peace and maintain law and order, but they need not be centralized.  In fact, regional authorities provide better law enforcement. 

What is the nature of this Khalifat of al-Baghdadi?  He seems to claim not only the authority to enforce the law, but also the ability to make it.  His fighters kill hostages and prisoners, against the letter of Islamic law.  They kill in manners prohibited in Islam, such as slaughter (beheading) and burning.  They basically do as they please.  After the Umayyad experiment with Ra’y and Mu’tazillah doctrine, which held that the amir could make law, even if it conflicted with the revealed law of Allah, the Shariah, how could we even consider al-Baghdadi’s version of Khalifat? 

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is an atheist stooge of the Ba’athist, Saddam Hussein, who lacks the consensus of support of the Ummah to be an executive of that Ummah.  Moreover, he lacks the religious knowledge and rational ability to advise the community as an Imam or Alim.  He is a dangerous tool of Shaytan, luring our children to hellfire. 

SECTION II

One of the central doctrines of the jihadi movements and of the Da’esh is the fard nature of jihad.  While jihad is fard, the interpretation of that term by the modern literalist schools is false.  Based more on their own nationalistic and anti-Western reactionism, than on any proper usool basis, their interpretations have misguided many.

The Meaning of Jihad

Jihad!   A loaded word these days.  What does it mean actually?  It comes from the Arabic root J-H-D, meaning to strive, to exert effort.  For example, a mujtahid is one who exerts effort in deriving fiqh from the sources of law.  Jihad is a call to action, not a call to violence.  Jihad is a call to put our faith into practice. 

Jihad fi Sabillillah or Striving in the Path of Allah, means to exert effort, to strive for the Pleasure of Allah SWT in the righteous manner He has prescribed for us.  Faith is not just on the tongue.  Can we really claim we are Muslims if our actions go against the basic tenants of our faith?  Can we say we worship only Allah, and still pray to idols or statues?  Can we claim la illaha illa llah and still think other things have a power over us? 

Jihad means putting our faith into practice, not just talking the talk, but walking the walk. Unfortunately, those who do not really walk the walk have terrorized this term, and twisted it into an object of fear and hate.  We need to reclaim this term from those who at the whisperings of Shaytan, have hijacked and distorted its true meaning. 

Jihad – to strive to put our faith into ethical action is Fard al-Ayn – incumbent upon every Muslim, not just incumbent on the Community.  Every human action has a hukm shariah or legal status.  There are five; Fard/Obligatory, Mustahabb/Beloved, Mubah/Permissible, Makruh/Detested, and Haram/Prohibited.  Furthermore, because people are both individuals and members of society, the responsibility for an action may be with al-Ayn/Individuals or with al-Khifayyah/Collective.  For example, knowledge of inheritance law is a Fard al-Khifayyah.  Prayer is a Fard al-Ayn.  Jihad is a Fard al-Ayn.  Striving to put our faith into action is the responsibility of each individual Muslim. 

Every Muslim must be diligent in putting into practice the Sunnah of our Beloved Prophet – to engage in Jihad of the Body, Jihad of the Mind and Jihad of the Soul. 

Jihad of the Soul involves Ibaadaat – worship, dhikr or remembrance of Allah and wird or spiritual development of the soul from a nafs amr bi su to a nafs lawwammah to nafs al-mutmayeenah.  . 

Jihad of the Mind or Aql involves study of the deen and testifying to the truth of this deen to others (what we call dawah. We may think we know this deen because we learned it from so and so.  But do we really know it?  How many of us study books of great knowledge or study with some of the great shuyuk we are blessed to have in this area?  Are we really studying or are we attending lectures so we can socialize with friends or are we memorizing and parroting the lectures of so and so in an effort to show off.  What is our niyat? 

Finally, Jihad of the Body involves not military service but service to the humanity, any form of service to the humanity.  This includes all forms of charity work and community service.  Serving in soup kitchens, building homes for the homeless, and helping in disaster are all forms of Jihad.  Military service only becomes necessary if all other efforts fail and our deen itself is at risk.  Fighting for any other reason than protecting the deen itself is haram. 

When we talk about protecting the Deen, what we are really talking about is preventing injustice, which is Islamically defined as anything that inhibits the freedom of belief. 

Allah SWT says in the Qur’an al Hakim

2:256 There is no hate, compulsion, duress, coercion or force in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.

Human beings are created with free will, and we have been given guidance and hikmah, the revealed knowledge and knowledge of morality, so that we can freely chose to turn toward Allah or reject Him.  This freedom is essential to moral responsibility.  A person who is compelled to murder someone by another on pain of death is not morally responsible and the Hadd punishment cannot be applied in his case.  Duress and force remove all human freedom.  It is essentially unjust.

Islam prohibits injustice of any kind; anything that inhibits our freewill and blocks us from the path.  The Quraish of Makkah were chastised by Allah not only for their shirk, but also for preventing people from hearing the truth. 

Islam prohibits injustice to Allah, injustice to ourselves by prohibiting suicide and the consumption of certain harmful foods and intoxicants, injustice to other people by prohibiting usury, backbiting, lying and cheating, and injustice to other creatures by prohibits bad treatment of animals, destruction of trees and crops in time of fighting, and waste of resources.

Allah SWT warns us very strongly against using violence and killing. 

 Allah SWT says in the Qur’an al Hakim:

2:32.  On that account: We ordained
For the Children of Israel
That if any one slew
A person—unless it be
For murder or for spreading
Mischief in the land—
It would be as if
He slew the whole people:
And if any one saved a life,
It would be as if he saved
The life of the whole people.
Then although there came
To them Our Apostles
With Clear Signs, yet,
Even after that, many
Of them continued to commit
Excesses in the land.

Violence and aggression has plagued humanity since Cabel or Cain killed his brother Abel. 

27. Recite to them the truth
Of the story of the two sons
Of Adam. Behold! they each
Presented a sacrifice (to God):
It was accepted from one,
But not from the other.
Said the latter: "Be sure
I will slay thee." "Surely,"
Said the former, "God
Doth accept of the sacrifice
Of those who are righteous.

28. "If thou dost stretch thy hand
Against me, to slay me,
It is not for me to stretch
My hand against thee
To slay thee: for I do fear
God, the Cherisher of the Worlds.

29.  "For me, I intend to let
Thee draw on thyself
My sin as well as thine,
For thou wilt be among
The Companions of the Fire,
And that is the reward
Of those who do wrong."

30.  The (selfish) soul of the other
Led him to the murder
Of his brother: he murdered
Him, and became (himself)
One of the lost ones.

Murder is a hadd crime, one of the most heinous crimes. It is so much so that Allah (SWT) has proscribed the punishment Himself, and has left little to human discretion. 

6:151. Say: "Come, I will rehearse
What God hath (really)
Prohibited you from": join not
Anything as equal with Him;
Be good to your parents;
Kill not your children
On a plea of want;—We
Provide sustenance for you
And for them;—come not
Nigh to shameful deeds,
Whether open or secret;
Take not life, which God
Hath made sacred, except
By way of justice and law:
Thus doth He command you,
That ye may learn wisdom.

4:92 It is not for a believer to kill a believer unless (it be) by mistake. He who hath killed a believer by mistake must set free a believing slave, and pay the blood- money to the family of the slain, unless they remit it as a charity. If he (the victim) be of a people hostile unto you, and he is a believer, then (the penance is) to set free a believing slave. And if he cometh of a folk between whom and you there is a covenant, then the blood-money must be paid unto his folk and (also) a believing slave must be set free. And whoso hath not the wherewithal must fast two consecutive months. A penance from Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise.

93 Whoso slayeth a believer of set purpose, his reward is hell for ever. Allah is wroth against him and He hath cursed him and prepared for him an awful doom.

2:178. O ye who believe! The law of equality
Is prescribed to you In cases of murder:
The free for the free, The slave for the slave,
The woman for the woman. But if any remission
Is made by the brother Of the slain, then grant
Any reasonable demand, And compensate him
With handsome gratitude. This is a concession
And a Mercy From your Lord.
After this whoever Exceeds the limits
Shall be in grave penalty.

When it comes to individual murder, Allah (SWT) has allowed discretion to the family of the deceased.  They may invoke the death penalty, or they may ask for the payment of diya and exile for the murderer.  But when it comes to killing by a group, then Allah (SWT) has called this hiraba, and has proscribed a severe penalty.

33. The punishment of those
Who wage war against God
And His Apostle, and strive
With might and main
For mischief through the land
Is: execution, or crucifixion,
Or the cutting off of hands
And feet from opposite sides,
Or exile from the land:
That is their disgrace
In this world, and
A heavy punishment is theirs
In the Hereafter;

34. Except for those who repent
Before they fall
Into your power:
In that case, know
That God is Oft-forgiving,
Most Merciful.

Harb, Qital, and Fitnah

Muslims are forbidden to wage war, to cause tulmult and oppression and to create fitnah.  Allah SWT says the fitnah is worse than Qatl – tulmult and oppression is worse than killing.  And Muslims are commanded to strive against injustice.

2:191. And you are free to fight them even unto death[2]

And turn them out From where they have Turned you out (remove them from Makkah;
For tumult and oppression Are (ashaddu) worse than fighting;
But fight them not At the Sacred Mosque,
Unless they (first) Fight you there;
But if they fight you, fight back in return.
Such is the reward Of those who deny the free practice of faith.

2: 217 They question thee (O Muhammad) with regard to warfare in the sacred month. Say: Warfare therein is a great (transgression), but to turn (men) from the way of Allah, and to disbelieve in Him and in the Inviolable Place of Worship, and to expel His people thence, is a greater with Allah; for fitnah is worse (akbar) than killing. And they will not cease from fighting against you till they have made you renegades from your religion, if they can. And whoso becometh a renegade and dieth in his disbelief: such are they whose works have fallen both in the world and the Hereafter. Such are rightful owners of the Fire: they will abide therein.

These ayaat clearly show that war is prohibited, in fact any form of killing is prohibited, unless for a specific legal reason.  In the ayaat above, Allah mentions that creating fitnah and oppression in the land is one legally valid reason to fight others.  He also tells us why.

Al-Hajj 22:39  Sanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged; and Allah is indeed Able to give them victory; 

40 Those who have been driven from their homes unjustly only because they said: Our Lord is Allah - For had it not been for Allah's repelling some men by means of others, cloisters and churches and oratories and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft mentioned, would assuredly have been pulled down. Verily Allah helpeth one who helpeth Him. Lo! Allah is Strong, Almighty –

41 Those who, if We give them power in the land, establish worship and pay the poor-due and enjoin kindness and forbid iniquity. And Allah's is the sequel of events.

Here, Allah SWT teaches us that without this thing we hate, fighting, many would be unjustly killed for the simple reason that they believed and put their faith into practice.  A necessary evil?  Perhaps; but one whose abandonment would lead to untold oppression and death. 

Mahatma Gandhi espoused the non-violence as a means to strive against oppression, and it worked in India.  It worked because the oppressor had a sense of morality, a sense of shame.  The British knew that what they were doing in India was wrong morally, and the British public supported Gandhi.  But would it work today?  Yes, it could in places where the oppressor still has a conscious.  But what about men like Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qadhafi, Bashar al-Assad.  They are atheists or madmen.  They have no conscious, no sense of morality.  Direct action and non-violent means would only lead to a nation of the dead.  Such people must be repelled somehow.  And unfortunately, this sometimes means resorting to fighting.[3] 

2:216. Fighting is prescribed
For you, and ye dislike it.
But it is possible
That ye dislike a thing
Which is good for you,
And that ye love a thing
Which is bad for you.
But God knoweth,
And ye know not.

Certainly, sometimes we have to fight to prevent further fitnah and oppression.  However, when we do so there are very specific rules of engagement detailed in the Qur’an and Sunnah. 

The Hukm of Military Aggression

The ayaat and hadith mentioned by Abu Bakr al Baghdadi in his speeches were spewed forth without tafsir.  Instead, they constitute a ransom assemblage of ayaat designed to brainwash people into the idea that fighting and violence is an absolute obligation, without shuruut, and that we have abandoned it. 

Have the Jihadis ever asked themselves what would happen if all the world’s population was Muslim?  If jihad is fighting and violence, then who would we fight?  Killing a fellow Muslim is haram – in fact it is a great evil.  So what would they do?

No doubt, as we have seen, Jihad is a Fard al-Ayn, but its expression as military violence is not.  In fact, when people are at peace, have peace treaties and good relations with one another, it is haram.

al-Anfal 8:61. But if the enemy Incline towards peace, Do thou (also) incline
Towards peace, and trust In God: for He is the One That heareth and knoweth
(All things).

2:191 And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

192 But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

193 And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.

at-Taubah 9:5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

6 And if anyone of the idolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the Word of Allah, and afterward convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are a folk who know not.

7 How can there be a treaty with Allah and with His messenger for the idolaters save those with whom ye made a treaty at the Inviolable Place of Worship ? So long as they are true to you, be true to them. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty.

Repeatedly, Allah SWT tells us that to continue to fight or kill those who incline to peace is Haram.  Particularly in Surah At-Taubah, Allah SWT teaches us to warn our enemies first before taking our right to defend our faith.  The Quraish were given four months to come back into compliance with the Peace Treaty of Hudaibiyyah, before they would be fought for having broken the treaty when they attacked the Pagan tribe with which the Muslims had a mutual protection treaty.  [4]  And even if we suspect that a group is only coming to the peace table to safe itself, and that it does not have sincere intentions, we must still cease fire and meet them at the peace table. 

No where is this more born out than in two hadith. 

Narrated Usama bin Zaid bin Haritha:

Allah's Apostle sent us (to fight) against Al-Huraqa (one of the sub-tribes) of Juhaina. We reached those people in the morning and defeated them. A man from the Ansar and I chased one of their men and when we attacked him, he said, "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah." The Ansari refrained from killing him but I stabbed him with my spear till I killed him. When we reached (Medina), this news reached the Prophet. He said to me, "O Usama! You killed him after he had said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah?"' I said, "O Allah's Apostle! He said so in order to save himself." The Prophet said, "You killed him after he had said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah." The Prophet kept on repeating that statement till I wished I had not been a Muslim before that day. Al Bukhaari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 11:

In the second hadith, Khalid ibn Waleed was sent to Bahrain to give dawa to the people in the Eastern provinces of Arabia.  They had accepted Islam but did not know how to express it.  So, when Khalid arrived they said, “Saba’ana”  “We are Sabaen Monotheists.”  Khalid misunderstood them, and perhaps due to some existing enmity, thought they were rejecting Islam, so he attacked them and killed some people of the tribe.  The Prophet SAW was furious and said, “I am innocent of what Khalid has done.”  He sent Ali to pay the diya for the murdered tribe members.[5]

Moreover, narrated Al-Miqdad bin 'Amr Al-Kindi:

An ally of Bani Zuhra who took part in the battle of Badr with the Prophet, that he said, "O Allah's Apostle! If I meet an unbeliever and we have a fight, and he strikes my hand with the sword and cuts it off, and then takes refuge from me under a tree, and says, 'I have surrendered to Allah (i.e. embraced Islam),' may I kill him after he has said so?" Allah's Apostle said, "Do not kill him." Al-Miqdad said, "But O Allah's Apostle! He had chopped off one of my hands and he said that after he had cut it off. May I kill him?" The Prophet said. "Do not kill him for if you kill him, he would be in the position in which you had been before you kill him, and you would be in the position in which he was before he said the sentence." The Prophet also said to Al-Miqdad, "If a faithful believer conceals his faith (Islam) from the disbelievers, and then when he declares his Islam, you kill him, (you will be sinful). Remember that you were also concealing your faith (Islam) at Mecca before." Al Bukhaari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 5:

The evidence from the Qur’an and Sunna prove conclusively that killing a person that professes Islam and inclines to peace with the Muslims is absolutely Haram, and is an act of hirabah. 

  

4: 92 It is not for a believer to kill a believer unless (it be) by mistake. He who hath killed a believer by mistake must set free a believing slave, and pay the blood- money to the family of the slain, unless they remit it as a charity. If he (the victim) be of a people hostile unto you, and he is a believer, then (the penance is) to set free a believing slave. And if he cometh of a folk between whom and you there is a covenant, then the blood-money must be paid unto his folk and (also) a believing slave must be set free. And whoso hath not the wherewithal must fast two consecutive months. A penance from Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise.

93 Whoso slayeth a believer of set purpose, his reward is hell for ever. Allah is wroth against him and He hath cursed him and prepared for him an awful doom.

94 O ye who believe! When ye go forth in the sabeel of Allah, be careful to discriminate, and say not unto one who offereth you peace: "Thou art not a believer," seeking the chance profits of this life (so that ye may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils. Even thus (as he now is) were ye before; but Allah hath since then been gracious unto you. Therefore take care to discriminate. Allah is ever Informed of what ye do.

Shurut al Qital fi Sabillillah

The Permissible Reasons for Qital

Throughout our history, Muslims have agreed that war and violence are haram, and that killing is a grave sin.  Killing a human being is only permissible under two conditions mentioned in the Qur’an:  1. for murder and 2. for fasad.  There are no other reasons.

Hirabah, and zina are, in fact, forms of fasad, as is riddah.  To kill anyone with out one of these “rights” or permissions given by Allah SWT to kill one of His human creations, is a grave crime.  To kill “bi ghaiyri al haq” is to forfeit one’s own life.

Here, we need to define a few terms.  Murder or qital of an individual is the killing of a person without a reason.  Reasons include self-defense and the defense of others being attacked by that person.  An individual does not have the right to kill a criminal without due process, unless he is defending himself.  If he is able to withdraw or use non-lethal means, he MUST DO SO, in Islam, as well in many Western jurisdictions.  ISLAM DOES NOT HAVE A STAND YOUR GROUND PROVISION.  In fact, you are required by Shariah to withdraw. 

Consider the following hadith:

Narrated Al-Ahnaf bin Qais:

I went to help that man (i.e., 'Ali), and on the way I met Abu Bakra who asked me, "Where are you going?" I replied, "I am going to help that man." He said, "Go back, for I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'If two Muslims meet each other with their swords then (both) the killer and the killed one are in the (Hell) Fire.' I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! It is alright for the killer, but what about the killed one?' He said, 'The killed one was eager to kill his opponent."  Al-Bukhaari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 14:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr:
The Prophet said, "Whoever killed a Mu'ahid (a person who is granted the pledge of protection by the Muslims) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise though its fragrance can be smelt at a distance of forty years (of traveling)."

Al-Bukhaari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 49:

However, as we have seen, Islam recognizes that without the ability to repel oppressions, great death and oppression would cover the Earth.  Therefore, Allah SWT has given us the conditions under which we may resort to Qital fi Sabillillah.  We note first that it is called Fighting in the Cause or Path of Allah. Only such fighting is permissible because it is in the Cause of Allah, and is a subclass of Jihad fi Sabillillah or Striving in the Cause of Allah  Any other form of fighting is Haram, absolutely and ab initio. 
The Shurut or conditions for Qital agreed upon by the majority or Jamhuur of the Ulema are the following:
1. It must be declared by an Imām who is completely answerable to the people and their legal apparatus, the most important representatives of whom are the scholars.
2. The position of the law is that it may be declared only at such a time when it can be reasonably proven that;

• there are aggressive designs against Islam; and,

• there are concerted efforts to eject Muslims from their legally acquired property; and,

• that military campaigns are being launched to eradicate them.

3. At such a time the ruler can declare and execute the provisions of combative or military action referred to as Qital fi Sabillillah.
The Imam must fulfill the requirements of
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ أَطِيعُواْ اللّهَ وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ وَأُوْلِي الأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ 
Even though many have interpreted this to mean amirs or leaders with the power of enforcement, we do not hold this, as detailed above.  We hold that this verse refers to those mentioned in the ayat cited below:

Al-Imran 3:104. Let there arise out of you A band of people
Inviting to all that is good, Enjoining what is right,
And forbidding what is wrong: They are the ones To attain felicity.

And not only must the person calling to Qital fi Sabillillah be of the Ulema, but he must be the Imam – the one who has emerged from the Ummah as we have described above in the section on Imamate.  No other person is qualified to judge the situation and send our brave men into harms way.  Amirs and enforcement authorities are too often guided by self interest and power lust.  Only the Imam, chosen by the Ummah itself, and qualified with sufficient knowledge and humility can make such a momentous decision. 

In this regard, we discuss the classic conception of Amirate of Jihad, as detailed by al-Marwadi.  He states that jihad is concerned with fighting musrikuun. [6]  He confines such authority to administering the army, calling for jihad, negotiating peace treaties, and  attending to the distribution of fa’i.  He also details whom the Muslims may fight.  These are mushriks who have heard the word of Islam, and who then decide to physically fight the Muslims.  Those who remain at peace, who sign peace treaties and who have not heard the word of Islam may not be fought. [7]

Despite these very clear commands regarding the use of violence in Islam, history is replete with war.  The reasons are fairly standard, greed, lust for power; but the greed and lust of rulers is not enough to get the people to fight one another.  And of course, the rulers themselves cannot fight alone.  While heroes such as Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib and Imam Hussein and Salahuddin al-Ayyubi fought in the forefront of the army, those driven by green and lust rarely do.  How can you enjoy all that power and wealth if you are dead?  The Khalifs reveal their priorities in declaring jihad by the manner in which they led it – from their apartments. 

The other problem for these so-called Muslim leaders, is that Islam prohibits killing other Muslims and those with which we have peace.  So, in order to take others land and get all their wealth, those others have to be  … permissible to kill.  And the only people we have a right to fight are mushriks who wage war with us or apostates who resemble mushriks, in that they oppose Islam and resort to violence to do so.  So, in order to fight, the leader must declare the other guy a kafir, one who knows about Islam, but who rejects it.  Thus, we have among us many who resort to takfir – declaring any opponent a kafir.  These include the modern Shabaab, and the jihadis, including at times, the Ikhwan.  Apparently, Da’esh is also using this tactic to declare even converts and other Muslims suitable for brutal execution.

Abandoning Jihad

Jihadis claim that the Ummah has abandoned Jihad.  Yes, we have, and so have they.  All of us have abandoned the true meaning of Striving in the Way of Allah.  We fail to support our communities in charity work; we fail to treat one another fairly; we fail to practice our religion; we fail to support and nurture it.  We disgrace it by either criminal behavior or violent intolerance. 

Yes, we have abandoned true Jihad.  And we have also abandoned the Maqaasid ash-Shariah, the objectives of Jihad, of our Deen.  What is the purpose of life, of love, or faith?  Why do we do what we do? Not just what.  We teach our kids to make wudu and make salaat, but why?  It’s just what we do.  Then we wonder why they become terrorists.  Gee, are you really surprised?  They know nothing about the deen.  They watch the same media; the same video games; the same internet sites, as everyone else.  What do they know of Islam except violence?  Oh and maybe a few rules about how to wash your face and hands.

We have abandoned Jihad.  We have abandoned faith-based ethical action in favor of greed, self interest and entertainment. 

We have also abandoned the Objectives of the Shariah – that Divine Legislation sent to us by Allah SWT to guide us and help us create a just society.  Those objectives are:

1. Protection and promotion of Deen
2. Protection and promotion of Life
3. Protection and promotion of Property
4. Protection and promotion of Dignity
5. Protection and promotion of the Intellect

All Shariah law and fiqh lead to these five objectives.  We must always keep them in mind in considering any action.  Had our Jihadi proponents considered these objectives they would see that their actions are not ethical and are in fact, destroying our Deen, our lives, our property, our dignity, and our intellect.  The actions of the jihadis and the Dawlat ash-Shaytan are only benefiting Shaytan.  They are not fi Sabillillah.  They are fi Sabillishaytan.  (Istaghfiru Allah). 

Moreover, they have purposefully distorted the ayat of Allah.  They have taken the words out of context, and twisted them for their own purposes. 

al-Imran 3:78. There is among them A section who distort
The Book with their tongues (As they read) you would think
It is a part of the Book, But it is no part
Of the Book; and they say, That is from God,"
But it is not from God: It is they who tell
A lie against God, And (well) they know it!

Why Has Islam Become Associated With Violence

Given that Islam is the religion of Peace and that we are commanded to act with justice and to strive against oppression, then how did our religion become associated with violence?  The answer is simple really.  Throughout our history from the time of the Umayyads until today, leaders have abused the call to strive against oppression to justify expanding their territories through war.  They have abused the called to Jihad – of putting out faith in to action – and used it to brainwash people into fighting for their benefit, for their self aggrandizement, for their accumulation of wealth. 

The abuse of the term Jihad was reinforced by groups who came into Islam that had cultures that historically glorified ritualized warfare and conquest.  Certain ethnic groups, including the Mongols and Turks had social structures that followed rigid hierarchies of military-style leadership. Each tribal group or horde had an amir with absolute power, with captains, lieutenants, and other sub-group leaders. Discipline was strictly enforced, and obedience to the leadership was unquestionable.  Such is the very necessity of military command.  When such people looked at the lives of the Prophet and his Sahabi, they then focused on aspects that they felt supported their pre-existing cultural norms.  However, the tribal peoples of Arabia never had such rigid structures of command, and still do not today.  Leaders in Arabia always ruled by consensus and were seen not so much as leaders and commanders, but as elders.  Tribes are not legions or armies; they are families. 

At any rate, those people who feared Islam, who fought against it over the years, have also contributed to this negative definition of Jihad. Some, such as the Catholic Europeans have their own conception of Holy War.  They too seek to justify violence against fellow Christians and others, and so it is to their benefit to paint Islam as violent and oppressive. 

And all of this continues today.  Even after the so called Arab Spring, we still have leaders pretending to be pious and saintly and declaring jihad against their own people.  And the media continues trying its best to paint Islam as violent.

We need to reclaim our deen from these extremists – those who abuse our faith for their own ends and those who are seeking to destroy our deen.  In some cases, they are the same people. 

Permissible Means of Qital

Once an Imam has determined that it is necessary for us to fight then we must understand two things.

First, Qital fi Sabillillah is a Fard al Ayn for those who are physically able or who can assist in other necessary ways.  This includes physical combat, nursing and medical assistance, communications, strategic planning, administrative assistance, and diplomacy.  In short, it is incumbent upon all Muslims to assist in any manner they are capable. 

Second, we must understand that Islam does not hold “By Any Means Possible.”  The ends DO NOT justify the means in Islam.  The means must be halal. 

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz wrote to one of his governors, "It has been passed down to us that when the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, sent out a raiding party, he would say to them, 'Make your raids in the name of Allah in the way of Allah. Fight whoever denies Allah. Do not steal from the booty, and do not act treacherously. Do not mutilate and do not kill children.' Say the same to your armies and raiding parties, Allah willing. Peace be upon you."   Muwatta (Imam Malik) Book 21, Number 21.3.11: [8]

The Response of the Ummah to the Threat of the Dawlat ash-Shaytan

and Other Extremist Jihadi Movements

How should we respond to the threat posed to our Ummah by the Dawlat ash-Shaytan? 

Reform

Our response to this threat to Islam must begin with reform.  Our first and most important area of reform must be to correct the misinterpretations of Islam posited by this group and other extremists.  Then, we must educate our youth in not only the letter of Shairah Law, but in the spirit.  Teaching them black and white rules of how to make wudu and make salaat is not sufficient to develop the Islamic thinking necessary to recognize the machinations of Shaytan.  Black and white thinking only leads to intolerance.  We must teach our youth how to think like a Muslim. In this vein, our Ulema need to teach the entire Ummah the correct understanding of Ikhtilaf, and the role of the Maqaasid ash-Shariah in usool al fiqh. 

We also need to address the factors within civil society that are fueling extremism and violence among all our youth.  We must partner with all people of faith and ethical action to guide our youth away from the demoralizing influence of Sciencism and Atheism.  Evangelical Atheism has painted all religion as evil and the source of violence in the world.  However, it is the Materialism/Sciencism/Capitalism/Atheism complex that is reducing us to selfish animals.  We need to present well-reasoned arguments from the prospective of Philosophy, Theology, Science, and Theory of Knowledge to show the weaknesses in thought and reason in Materialist, Scientist, Capitalist and Atheist positions. 

Our Deen has answers to all of the issues these ideologies address. However, our blind following has led us to reject reason and cling to superstitions and fallacious arguments.  For example, Dr. Yasir Qadhi, despite his PhD in Theology from Harvard, recently rooted his argument against atheism in the Qur’anic ayaat.  While this might be of interest to Muslims, it is simply illogical to argue a point from evidence that the opponent denies as valid.  Any Western Philosopher, with even a rudimentary knowledge of logic, would be able to successful argue against such a position.  Do we then wonder why our children are leaving us?

We need to deeply engage in Interfaith Action.  We need to call upon our ethical allies in an all out campaign to counter the extremism of our time. 

Our age is the age of extremism; extreme sports, extreme entertainment.  Our youth crave adrenalin and anything that will make them feel alive.  Our youth live in the “fast food” world of instant gratification, of surface with no substance.  Recently, the Washington Post featured an article on the demise of baseball.  Describing baseball as “a bunch of thinking,” a child said he lived “a different lifestyle from baseball.  In basketball and football, you live in the moment.  You got to be quick.  Everything I do, I do with urgency.”  [9] 

Why would our youth want to live in the moment and abandon thought?  Are they so Zen as to be great masters without knowing it?  Not really.  They do not want to think, because thinking has consequences.  They live in the moment since it only requires action or reaction.  Depending only upon innate reflexes and instinctual behavior, they do not have to think.  Thinking has consequences.  It could lead to thinking out truth, about death. 

They are fascinated by Zombies.   World War Z and other media transport them to a virtual of world of Zombies vs Humans.  They role play games in which they shoot the zombies.  But who are the zombies?  They are.  They spend all day half dead in front of screens, laptops, cell phones, I-boxes of various kinds.  They are not living.  They spend days on end in a virtual world.  Unable to deal with the reality of death, they are unable to deal with the reality of life either.  They are zombies, neither alive nor dead.

Added to this virtual zombie land our children live in, they are also wired.  Energy drinks, Monster, white sugar, guarana, caffeine, Ridalin, and Mollys keep our children going and going, like human energizer bunnies.  Everyone takes this stuff – there are all sorts of excuses.  Kids take legal and illegal speed to study, to compete in school, to compete for internships, to work, to socialize…  everyone in America is doing it.  You cannot compete in the job market today unless you take speed and work 50 to 60 hours a week.  You can’t take a vacation without it either.  Our youth go on raves for days on end without sleeping or even eating just to “have fun.” 

Despite the fact that many of our youth are doing this, many “successful,” but many are not.  For every “top” doctor, “top” intern, hyperactive second generation 4.0 grade point average college student; there are youth who are not able to “make it.”  They may be just as intelligent, perhaps even more so, but they lack social skills in a world where who you know is everything.  Or their parents do not have the status in the community. Or they are lost in a virtual world. Or the mollys catch up to them faster then others and they become hopeless drug addicts, with mental and physical damage.

Some of our kids spend so much time playing video and computer games that they are unable to function in the real world.  In the World of War Craft, they are someone.  But in the real world they are losers.  In the virtual world, life is exciting.  In the real world, life is painful and boring.  In fantasy land, you can be anything, in real life, you are a failure.  What happens to these kids?   They end up going off the fight for the Dawlat ash-Shaytan or the Shabaab or any other jihadi group out there that offers excitement.  They can be kings for a day.  Like the kid from America said on Youtube about his experiences with the Shabaab, “It’s like Disneyland over here.” 

Too many of our children are falling through the cracks.  Whether we are rich or poor, we are loosing them.  We must get them back.  No more liquid crack, no more virtual fantasy land, no more ignoring real issues like lack of social skills, lack of rational development, lack of guidance.  Our Imams and our parents must educate themselves in how to deal with these issues.  It is Fard upon us to do so.

But, many of us as so busy chasing the Duniyah ourselves, we have allowed our children to flounder in Materialism, Sciencism, Capitalism and Atheism.  The perpetrators of the violence in France were non-practicing.  One was a criminal who had spent 6 years behind bars for theft.  They had fallen through the cracks and were claiming support of either al-Qaeda or the Dawlat as a way to feel important.  They were living in a virtual fantasy, trying to feel better about themselves.  Their actions were not based on anything other than psychological issues.  Many of the Western converts and nationals that have ended up in Syria or Yemen are there for the same reason.  They are desperate for meaning, for importance in a world that tells them they are nothing but whirling electrons.  Where are the parents of these children?  We race to embrace the money of the West.  Did you really think you could avoid its ideology?  Did you think about the children you would bring into that world?  Do you care? 

The Dawlat ash-Shaytan is our own creation.  We created it by our own failings.  Only serious reform of ourselves and our understanding of our Deen will truly address the issue.

Re-education

We must also respond by re-educating ourselves about our deen.  We all think we know Islam.  How can any of us really know all of it?  Don’t delude yourself.  Allah SWT has all knowledge.  Islam is submission to Allah and to the idea that He has all knowledge and you don’t. We continue to learn all of our lives.  So why would you ever think you know all there is to know of Islam? 

Every year during Ramadan, I review my first book of fiqh, Fiqh as-Sunnah, by Sayed Sabiq.  How many books have you read in your life?  Do you remember everything you learned in them?  Human beings learn best by using the knowledge they have read or been taught.  If you do not use the knowledge, then you need to review it regularly in the effort to retain it in an uncorrupted file in our memory card, the brain.  Memory in humans is an electro-chemical process.  We are still learning how it works, but just like some computer hard drives, the bites of information appear to be stored rather randomly throughout the brain in the cells.  The cells are connected by electrical and chemical signals, and some how we assemble the various bites of information into a single memory.  However, corruption and deterioration can occur over time, just as in the computer memory.  We may remember some aspects of an event far more clearly than others, for example.  Reviewing our deen, then, should be part of our yearly wird or spiritual exercise.  And why in world would we refuse to do so? 

However, many refuse to review.  Attend a jumuah any Friday and count the attendees, then attend a talk on fiqh or religious practice at the same masjid.  How many came?  We don’t want to learn our religion.  We either “already know it,” or we don’t care.

At the same time, our Ulema and our Imams and Daiyyas need to re-educate themselves.  Our Ulema must be able to present the deen in a manner that is relevant to present people.  Our fiqh and its dalil must be current, and not simply a rehash of the past.  Many of our Daiyyas use examples and teaching stories from two centuries ago.  Some of us enjoy them, either because of nostalgia for the “simpler” days, or because they remind us of things “back home.” However, in the context of America or Europe, they have no relevance.  It is not that the old stories are “wrong” somehow, they are not.  It’s that they are not appropriate for the audience. 

In this instance, we must be reminded of the Doctrine of Nur al ‘An, the Doctrine of the Present Light.  In fiqh, we understand that things change.  New physical inventions, new countries, new environments, new jobs, new languages all arise over time.  Islam has no intention of freezing us in the 7^th century CE.  Our Deen in marvelously flexible in that it can be applied in any given situation.  The objectives and principles remain the same, the details can and will change.  We must understand our audience and its needs, and adjust   our teaching methods so as to further their understanding. 

All of this should be self-explanatory, but we must also understand that our audience, our Ummah, is diverse.  In the West, we come from every nation, every madhdhab, every ideology, on every lean camel.  In order to serve our Ummah, we must help it understand iktilaaf.  We must embrace iktilaaf, and help our muqallidun to understand the minaahij of the madhaahibs, so they can understand why there are differences in fiqh.  They must know how to recognize real valid iktilaaf from bidah and practices that have no dalil in the Islamic sources.  It is doubtful that our muqallidun will retain must of this information, however, just as with the fiqh dalil, the important point is to know that it exists, that there is a reason for it, and that it is not just arbitrary.  We must all understand that iktilaaf is normal.  The thing which is not normal is fitnah.

Therefore, the next thing we need to teach ourselves is respect for on another.  The greatest preventative of fitnah is to understand it.  It is based on the sin of Shaytan, kibriyyah.  And the best way to eliminate it is to be ever-mindful of it in ourselves.  We need to inculcate self-reflection.  Too often our brothers and sisters are reflecting on the behavior of others and not observing themselves.  They scream at their brothers and sisters for trivial matters, and ignore their own failings.  If you are truly following the Sunnah, why don’t you follow the hadith of the Prophet and look at yourself first? 

The Prophet SAW asked Abu Bakr once if he wanted Allah to be merciful and forgive him on Yawm al Qiyamah.  Abu Bakr of course, said yes.  The Prophet SAW then told him to be merciful and forgive his cousin – the one who had insulted his own daughter, Aisha.  Abu Bakr was an amazing man.  He immediately did so.  Many of us would have argued and argued. 

Self reflection is not easy.  It is so much easier to blame others.  It also requires self-discipline, something our Ummah sorely lacks today.  On one hand we stand for hours in Tarawih prayer, but we demand instant gratification for trivial worldly matters.  We are spoiled brats, throwing temper tantrums at each other. 

We demand to be treated with respect by others, but seldom treat anyone else as anything other than dirt.  What is wrong with us?  What is wrong with our thinking?  Simple.  It’s no Islamic.

We need to re-educate ourselves to not only act Islamically, but to think Islamically.  If we did so, we would not argue of trivial fiqh issues, and use them as an excuse to fight and even kill one another.

Re-view and Re-newal

Our Deen Geeks also need to review our Deen.  Many have spoken over the years of mujaddid or renewal of the Deen.  Others have been talking about the Maqaasid ash-Shariah and using them to augment the interpretation of the Qur’an and the Sunnah.  The contribution of the Salafi movement has been to call into question the authenticity and adequacy of the dalil behind our fiqh. While many have resisted this, falling back on tradition and unquestioned blind obedience.  The Salafi are correct; blind following of our forefathers is haram. 

However, the Salafi also practice a rigid form of blind following of scholars by finding that the opinions of the Salaf are binding.  Moreover, even if they question the findings of Salaf, they often utilize as evidence hadith that are of questionable authenticity.  Some are not even hadith, but athaar or reports regarding the sayings and opinions of Sahabi, and Tabi’ and Tabi’tabi’een.  For example, several years ago Salafi campaigners sought to undermine itikhaf in the masjid practiced during Ramadan.  They quoted part of an athaar that Ibn Masud was asked by another Sahabi about the practice of the people of Kufa of making itikhaf in the masjid during Ramadan.  He asked if Ibn Masud had ever heard the Prophet say that itikhaf was only possible in three masaajid, the Haram in Makkah, the Prophet’s Mosque and al-Quds.  He responded that he did not know this hadith.  However, the Salafi edited the report to sound like Ibn Masud related a hadith that itikhaf could only be performed in three masaajid.  [10] 

We need to develop a new minhaj of Usool al Fiqh that is based on the authentic revealed sources, the Qur’an and authentic Sunnah, and on the overall objectives of the Deen of Islam, as evidenced in these sources.  We also need to determine a more sound approach to authenticating reports of the Sunnah.  In this area, we may not agree, but any position must be reasonable and avoid weak and/or possibly fabricated reports.  Certainly, all purposeful distortions, such as promulgated by the Zahari Salafi, must be exposed and forbidden.  Finally, after developing this new minhaj, we need to re-extract the fiqh from the Sources.  In this instance, it would be best to start from scratch from the Sources, and not simply review previous fiqh to determine if it is supported.  In order to avoid the errors of the past, we need to start from scratch. 

Finally, we must accept that reasonable people can reasonably disagree.  We must accept iktilaf and not allow it to cause fitnah.  The traditional madhaahib all have reasonable minaahij, be they those of the Hanafi, Shafii, Maliki, Hanbali, Ja’afai and Zaydi.  The Salafi minhaj as practiced by Sheikh Uthaimin has weakness in regard to its allowance of daif hadith in preference to rational methods, but if such hadith could be thought of as representing ijma, perhaps the position would be a bit stronger.  However, the Zahiri Salafi position is untenable.  Rigid literalism seldom results in reasonable positions, and the method of grading of hadith utilized by Albani is not acceptable.  Although Ibn Hazm and Abu Dawud also were Zahiri, they never advocated such weak methodologies for determining evidence.  Moreover, if one still feels that literalism is acceptable, such literalism mandates that the sources are absolutely authentic or sahih, if not mutawatir.  How can any literalist accept evidence that is literally defective? 

Conclusions

The Khalifat of Abu Bakr Baghdadi is just as much of a farce, albeit a dangerous one, as are the interpretations of extremists of Islamic Law.  Such interpretation could only be promulgated by enemies of Islam.  Like the Khawaarij before them, these elements, including but not limited to, the Da’esh or Dawlat al Islamiyy, Boku Haram, al-Shabaab, and al-Qaeda, have exceeded the limits of Allah, and are outside of Islam.  Such violent criminals have repeatedly behaved in a manner consistent with the Hudd crime of hiraba, and have killed millions of innocent Muslims, Ahl al Kitab and peaceful innocents.  They must be brought to justice, tried for hiraba, and punished according the methods prescribed in the Qur’an – cutting off of the hands and feet on opposite sides, or banishment, or death penalty, or crucifixion. 

However, we must also counter the forces that cause our youth to become attracted to these groups, including poverty, Sciencism, Atheism, Materialism, Virtualization, marginalization of practicing Muslims, marginalization of Muslim minorities in Western societies, and ignorance of the Deen of Islam.  We need to establish a real Islamic state based on Wilayat al Ummah and Shurah, were Muslims will be free to think and be free of non-Islamic rules and considerations. We need to establish a new minhaj of Usool al Fiqh and re-establish the Fiqh of this Deen.  And we need to involve our Ummah, especially our youth in all facets of this process.  If we do not, we will not have any Ulema in the next generation, and our religion will be left without any guidance.  Although the removal of the Ulema from this world is one of the signs of Yawm al Qiyaamah, do we want to be the ones under whose watch this terrible sign is manifest?  Especially, do we want to be the ones who cause it?

---

[1] Burning as a punishment is expressly forbidden by the Prophet, as only Allah may inflict the punishment of burning.  Beheading in the manner practiced by the jihadi groups is also haram.  To take a knife and cut the throat of a person like a sheep is slaughtered in Zabiha is haram.  Only the heretical Khawarij ever used this method for killing a human.  Moreover, capital crimes are restricted by Allah to those numerated in the Qur’an, and the defendant must be given due process.  If the death penalty is proscribed it must be carried out in the most human manner, with no torture or mutilation. 

[2] The Arabic is more literally translated as “fight them wherever you find them.”  This is an expression or turn of phrase having the meaning that it is permissible to fight and kill another group.  In this case, the Muslims had a peace treaty with the Quraish.  However, the Quraish attacked a tribe with which the Muslims had a mutual protection treaty.  So the Muslims were not sure if they had the right to respond and attack the Quraish.  Allah is telling them that after a four month grace period in which to negotiate a peace, the Muslims were permitted to fight the Quraish. 

[3] This opinion has also been expressed by the great proponent of non-violence, the Dalai Lama.  “It is often necessary to take a strong stand to counter unjust aggression.”  (http://www.dalailama.com/messages/world-peace/the-reality-of-war).

[4] Muhammad and the origins of Islam. Peters, Francis E. (1994), SUNY Press. p. 334. ISBN 978-0-7914-1875-8.  and The Arabs in History. Lewis, Bernard (1967), Harper & Row. p. 200. ISBN 978-0-06-131029-4.  Note especially that the tribe the Muslims were defending was Pagan.  The Banu Khuzaa were allies of the Muslims and the Banu Bakr who attacked them were allies with the Quraish.  In fact, the Quraish aided the Banu Bakr in the attack and allowed them to slaughter the Banu Khuzaa in the confines of the Haram in Makkah, against all law, even the custom of the Quraish. 

[5] The Sealed Nectar (Raheeq al Maktum), Mubarakapuri. 

[6] al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah, p. 57. 

[7] Id.  p. 60-61.

[8]  A similar hadith has been related by Abu Bakr, and is included in his advice to generals.

[9] Behind the Curve: In  a quickly changing society, baseball is striking out with youths,  Marc Fisher, The Washington Post, Monday April 6^th, 2015.  P. A1. 

[10] While there is an hadith that travel for the purposes of worship is only authorized to three masaajid, the Haram, the Prophet’s Mosque and al Quds, this does not apply to itikhaf by residents of other towns.  In fact, the Prophet SAW received the first revelation while making itikhaf in a cave, during the month of Ramadan.