Shaykh Ṣāliḥ al-Fawzān: Fighting Khārijites and Rebels Is Legislated and Is Not ‘Fitnah’

Question:

I am from the security forces, with Allāh’s praise, and my question is: Is it permissible for us to kill that faction which engages in terrorist activities? There are those who say that this is ‘fitnah’ and that it is not permissible for us to kill them because they are Muslims?

Shaykh Ṣāliḥ al-Fawzān

This is false speech. The one who says it is not permissible to kill them, his speech is false, perhaps he is among them. The evil that cannot be repelled except with killing, then they are killed. When their evil is not repelled except with killing, then they are killed, in order to repel their evil. The evil (harm) is not to the security forces alone, it is to the whole society. So when they make come out as an armed opposition, then it is obligatory are to be killed.

As for when they surrender without armed opposition, then it is not permissible to kill them. They are presented for legal judgement [in a court] and inspection of their affair.

But when they come out with arms, then it is obligatory to kill them. “If they fight you then kill them, and such is the recompense of the disbelievers.” (2:191-).

And those who desert [the Muslims] and encourage the Khārijites and defend them, they must fear Allāh (عز وجل). If they are ignorant, they must remain silent and not speak about what they do not know. And if they have knowledge and they oppose that knowledge, then they are in great danger of sharing with them in sin. Because when they praise them, they share with them in sin, even if they do not share with them in the deed, they shared with them in their intentions and justified their actions, so their ruling is the same as theirs.

Notes

01 Giving allegiance and obedience to the ruler is from the great foundations of the religion, and it is tied to stability, security, welfare of the servants and their beneficial interests. When this principle is violated it leads to tremendous evil that engulfs the whole society.

02 Likewise, whoever causes a split when a nation is united behind a ruler, vying for rulership, then to fight against him and repel him is from the great foundations of the religion, and this is one of the recurring points in the books of creed. The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: (مَن أتاكُمْ وأَمْرُكُمْ جَمِيعٌ علَى رَجُلٍ واحِدٍ، يُرِيدُ أنْ يَشُقَّ عَصاكُمْ، أوْ يُفَرِّقَ جَماعَتَكُمْ، فاقْتُلُوهُ) “Whoever comes to you while your affair is united behind a single man, desiring to sow discord among you or to divide your community, then kill him.”^[1]

03 Recently, these principles have been violated in nations such a Sudan and Yemen, and the scholars of the Muslims have clarified these mighty foundations of the Sunnah. In Sudan, the Muslim leader is fighting Khārijites and rebels who are attempting to split Sudan. Likewise, in Yemen, the firmly-rooted scholars of the Muslims such as Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله) made clear statements, supporting an Arab coalition for a united Yemen, against the Khārijites, rebels and secessionists. Both these countries and what happens therein represent a security risk for Saudi Arabia.

04 There are factions claiming attachment to Salafiyyah and preaching its creed theoretically speaking, but who then oppose it in their words and deeds, expressions and ommissions, and loyalties and disloyalties. This is violation of the Salafī methodology and represents compromising Salafiyyah for political and worldly ambitions. Not providing clarity in these issues and taking clear stances in order to support the truth and the just cause founded upon it when the affair is crystal clear, represents a lapse in scholarly duty at best and betrayal at worst. Further, calling it a ‘fitnah’ is misrepresentation and falsehood as explained by Shaykh al-Fawzān.

05 As for those who support the rebels and secessionists whether in intention, sentiment, word or deed, then they are put alongside them, according to Shaykh al-Fawzān.

Note: There has been an attempt to confuse these issues by declaring them as “fitan” or “nawāzil” (crises) in which speech should be avoided. However, this is a display of pseudo-scholarship because a nāzilah in its specific meaning is an urgent and pressing issue for which no ruling exists in the revealed texts and for which there is no prior ijtihād. Hence, the scholars are required to investigate the issue and derive a ruling for it.

As for this issue, then it is from the foundations of the religion which has been given the most clear explanation in the Book and the Sunnah. It is obedience and loyalty to the ruler and fighting behind him against the Khārijites and rebels who contend with the leader. The ruling is clear cut, and all that is required is for the ruling and those who enact it to be supported.

It appears that the use of the words “fitnah” and “nāzilah” and the slogan “return to the scholars” without stating who exactly these scholars are may be a tactic to confuse people about the realities of events in which there are hands, strings and ambitions attached.

Footnotes

1. Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (no. 1852).