Fatwas On The Matter For Syria Sheikh Abdul Karim Zidan's Answers To Problems In The Islamic Understanding Of The Syrian Islamic Movement Note: The translation below may need revision... We welcome any correction by emailing us.   Question: Is there a difference between saying: This sect or group of people is an infidel, and saying: Whoever believes - for example - in a god other than God is an infidel ? Answer: If a certain sect, squad, or group is known to hold certain beliefs (and these beliefs are contrary to Islam, and its owner is a disbeliever if he believes in them) and this sect is known to believe in these beliefs and this matter spreads from it and is known by it and this sect does not deny what is attributed to it from these false beliefs, then it can be described What suits this belief that you adhere to, such as unbelief, immorality, or the like, unless you renounce it and what is recorded in their books and declare this innocence. This sect is attributed to it, so it suffices for us to say: whoever believes these beliefs or says them is under the rule of Sharia an infidel or immoral  or the like of what this belief requires of legal rule). Question: Islamic jurisprudence is broad, flexible, and renewed according to spatial and temporal circumstances, and the Muslim jurist is obligated to read the legal text in consideration of the actual and temporal circumstance, meaning that he harmonizes between the jurisprudence of the text and the jurisprudence of reality, so it is one of the fruits of that ((ijtihad) to choose the appropriate jurisprudential ruling for the reality in the time period Live life, and when ijtihad stops, the gap begins to form and then widens between the legitimate vision and the realistic vision of life that recognizes the change of time and place and the necessity of finding modern legal legal solutions for all aspects of life, Isn't it ? Answer: What the trusted ancient scholars such as Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned regarding the rulings related to the Islamic faith and its contents, whether their statements came as a fatwa or as a matter of clarification, starting without a question. It does not enter the circle of ijtihad, but rather enters into the circle of receiving from the source of these beliefs, which is the divine revelation represented in the book and the purified Sunnah of the Prophet, As for the issues of ijtihad in their field, the rulings are based on (custom and habit), and from here came the jurisprudence rule (It is undeniable that rules of law vary with change in time). Question: The Islamic movement does not work according to a fatwa issued in a specific time and place, and for more than seven centuries, and this moderate movement in its entire history has never adopted that fatwa and worked with it .  What is your opinion ? Answer: As we mentioned in our answer to the second question, the matters of the Islamic faith are permanent and fixed and do not change with the change of place and time, and whoever believes in its change is either ignorant or misguided. As for the fact that the Islamic movement adopts moderation, moderation does not mean violating the legal texts and rulings because its true and correct concept is not to go to excesses in  religion, excess is reprehensible from Allah Almighty, when He says: ( يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ ) (O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion). That we know that there are wills and licenses in Islam, so what is determination must be taken into consideration, and what is determination is permissible or must be taken into account, and determination should not be taken (according to what is detailed in its place from the books of assets). One of the meanings of moderation is that the taxpayer takes what the legislator has decreed from the mandated rulings (obligation, recommendation, leaving the forbidden, doing the permissible or leaving it), so he takes what is obligatory and leaves what is forbidden and stops at the limits of the delegate, so he does not bind himself to it and makes it like the duty that it is not permissible to leave, because this is from The abhorrent exaggeration in Islam. Except for what we have said about the concept of moderation, it is not permissible to say it because it is a matter of innovation in the religion and evasion of its rulings under the pretext of moderation. What is obligatory is what the Shari’a enjoins, what is recommended is what it commands, what is forbidden is what it forbids, what is disliked is what is disliked to do, not from the face of prohibition, and what is permissible is what is permitted .  These rulings are what the Muslim adheres to and applies to his actions in order to know what is actually required of him or left in the form of obligation or recommendation. Question: We do not declare people to be infidels, and we do not allow ourselves to arbitrarily pronounce judgments against Allah's creation, the Mighty and Sublime. Answer: A Muslim does not declare another person to be a disbeliever unless this person does something that takes him away from Islam, so it is said that he said such-and-such or believed such-and-such and it is contrary to Islam. Among the provisions of the apostate that came in Islamic jurisprudence, the Noble Messenger, peace be upon him, said (He who changes his religion - i.e. apostates- kill him), and the change  of religion means apostasy from Islam or departure from it. From what he said or did, did it actually come from him ?  Is he insisted on it ?  If he insists on that act issued by him after he knows that he is a blasphemy and apostasy from religion, then he shall be punished by death as stated in the honorable hadith. Question: The principle that the Islamic movement has followed since its birth is that we are preachers, not judges, and that we do not judge people by the wrongdoing of each other, and that wisdom and good exhortation are the means of our call, and that arguing in the best way is the fruitful way to guide people and enlighten them to the realities of great Islam, isn’t it your honor ? Answer: Being advocates, not judges, is a true statement, but preachers explain to people the rulings of the true religion, which is Islam, and among its rulings are what the Muslim disbelieves and with which he turns away from his religion. He is the one who looks into a specific case and for specific people to know the legal ruling on the facts attributed to them. If it is proven about them with the legal evidence, he issues his ruling on them and orders its implementation. Thus, the correct meaning of this phrase (we are advocates, not judges) becomes clear. Turn away from his religion. Question: In our political project, we affirmed that we want Syria to be a country in which national unity is achieved and sectarian fanaticism is rejected, and in which different religions, sects and races coexist within the framework of the supreme interest of this country... Syria, and to establish its Arab and Islamic identity without marginalizing, canceling or excluding anyone... We affirm that this thought that encourages coexistence among Syrians should be a basic material on which generations are brought up, in addition to raising them on the values ​​of freedom, justice, truth and nullification of falsehood. And to defend human rights and the principle of equal opportunities... We follow these steps with the pride of the faithful Muslim and sacrifice - the sacrifice of the Mujahideen working for the good of our country and our people - with every price to achieve it, and we call on others to work for it...There is no time in these difficult and delicate circumstances for a margin of speech, nor for sterile arguments or sophistry that takes effort, time, and a purposeful and feasible path, and these are matters that only the criminal Assad regime can benefit from... This is the hand of the Syrian Islamic movement extended to all Syrians who seek to root out injustice, corruption and tyranny. The same hand that was extended during the independence stage and the various stages of resistance to tyranny... We always simplify it, and we did it the day we launched the National Honor Charter and our political project for the future Syria, and we are still doing, and we will continue to spread it until God inherits the earth and those on it.We always simplify it, and we did the day we launched the National Honor Charter and our political project for the future Syria, and we still do, and we will continue to simplify it until God inherits the earth and those on it. Answer: We want, we mean, and we work to find a true Islamic state in our country, Syria, because in this existence real good and righteousness is achieved for all the people of this Muslim country, because Islam takes care of the right of the Muslim by his Islam and the right of the non-Muslim by his affiliation to this country. The meanings of Islam and adherence to it and the call to it, whoever wins Islam as a belief and religion will win happiness in this world and the hereafter. There is in others. he Almighty said Say, (  قل إِنَّ الْهُدَىٰ هُدَى اللَّهِ ) (Indeed, the [true] guidance is the guidance of Allah) So whoever takes Allah’s guidance, he will neither go astray nor be miserab, Almighty said ( فَمَنِ اتَّبَعَ هُدَايَ فَلَا يَضِلُّ وَلَا يَشْقَىٰ ) (whoever follows My guidance will neither go astray [in the world] nor suffer [in the Hereafter])  In conclusion: Islam sees as a belief and a system for his life, his group and his state, for he does not attain true happiness in this world nor in the Hereafter, the Almighty said: ( وَمَنْ أَعْرَضَ عَن ذِكْرِي فَإِنَّ لَهُ مَعِيشَةً ضَنكًا وَنَحْشُرُهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ أَعْمَىٰ ) (And whoever turns away from My remembrance - indeed, he will have a depressed life, and We will gather him on the Day of Resurrection blind). In conclusion: Goodness, interest and happiness are its way of what Islam has legislated to obtain it, as well as repelling harm and injustice from people its way is what Allah Almighty has legislated to ward off it by appropriate means for it by saying and guiding with uprooting and banishing as prescribed by the provisions of Sharia. Question: What was popularized by the eminent observer general in the media [from the permissibility of a non-Muslim man _ or a woman to assume the presidency of the republic and we want a civil state and we do not want a religious state, but it was said that we do not aspire to establish an Islamic state.] What is your eminence’s opinion on this proposition ? Answer: It is not permissible, according to Sharia, for the head of the Islamic state to be a non-Muslim man because of the Almighty’s saying: ( يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ ) (O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you), It is required to implement the provisions of Islam and not disappointing this authority and cost this mandate man does not believe in Islam , peace be upon him say: (A people who make a woman their ruler will never be successful) and on this is the consensus of the jurists, and no one has ever disagreed with this ruling, just as it is a matter of interest that is assigned to the presidency of the state who is more capable than others in carrying out its tasks, and the man is usually stronger and more capable of carrying out the requirements of the presidency of the state, and history and reality testify to that. The number of women who assumed the presidency of the state we find them very few and rare even in non-Muslim countries. Saying that the movement wants a civil state and does not want a religious state, and we do not aspire to establish an Islamic state. The state by their saying [and the leadership of the state is a caliphate on the authority of prophethood in guarding the religion and the politics of the world with it] So the establishment of the Islamic state is a legal duty and it is not permissible to be negligent or lazy in carrying out this duty . He , peace be upon him ,  became its president and began the work of this presidency, including the conclusion of treaties, including the treaty of Hudaybiyah with the Quraish. As for negotiations with Israel, the legitimate requirement of all Muslims and their governments is to liberate Palestine from its Jewish usurpers by every possible means, and there is no doubt that this legitimate requirement, if it is achieved through negotiations, is the priority of others. The legitimate requires obtaining it by every legitimate means, including the use of combat, and it is noted that the condition for taking the means of negotiation to liberate the land must not be for long periods that are not needed by these negotiations and liberation arrangements, and that the condition of negotiations should not be prior recognition of them. Question: What was stated in the final statement of the Salvation Front about the Alawite sect in the text [The Salvation Front adheres to the national and Islamic affiliation of the Alawites themselves.] And the Muslim Brotherhood who signed this sentence in the statement believe in what they signed and are committed to, and it is one of their fixed bases and their original thought .  Is this really the original thought of the Brotherhood ? Answer: It was stated in this statement: (The National Salvation Front adheres to what the Alawites - that is, the Nusayris sect in the Levant - adhere to themselves of national and Islamic affiliation, and the Muslim Brotherhood who signed this sentence in the statement believe in what they signed and are committed to, and it is one of their fixed bases and their original thought). Sheikh Abdul Karim Zidan's comment: It is not legally permissible to say that the Salvation Front adheres to what the Alawites adhere to in terms of Islamic affiliation. The Sunnah and the Jama’ah are from their different sects, and among these beliefs are monotheism, justice, prophethood, imamate, and resurrection . Of  the caliphate because the Prophet stipulated them, and the first of them was Ali bin Abi Talib, and the last of them was the awaited Mahdi (Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Askari), who disappeared in the year 260 AH and will appear one day. The author of the statement quoted the Alawites as saying in unanimity: (and that it is a definitive argument if the infallible imam is in it ). Sheikh Abdul Karim Zidan's comment: Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah believe that consensus, if its conditions are met, is a legal proof, and not among its conditions is the existence of the infallible Imam, because with this condition the consensus does not have any meaning, because the reliance on it became the saying of the Imam and not the saying of someone else, even if it were all Muslims. The statement stated: They believe - that is, the Alawites - in the infallibility of their imams, as the author of the statement conveyed their saying regarding this infallibility. Sheikh Abdul Karim Zidan's comment: Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah believe that the infallibility of the Messenger  peace be upon him  only, and no one else .  The Alawites - as the author of the statement quoted from them - make what has been proven from their infallible imams attached to the Prophetic Sunnah in terms of the obligation to be followed .  In their enumeration of the origin of the legislation, they said: The Prophetic Sunnah, and what has been proven from the pure imams in word, deed and report is attached to it .  Every statement other than the Messenger of Allah, may Allah  bless him and grant him peace ,  must, for its acceptance, be ascribed to the Prophet, peace be upon him,  through trustworthy ones, and a statement other than the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, is not accepted on  its own, unless it agrees with the Qur’an and the Sunnah and does not contradict it. It is subject to what their statements are subject to in terms of taking it and responding. The author of the statement said, “The five: we believe that it is obligatory, according to the Almighty’s saying: ( وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّمَا غَنِمْتُم مِّن شَيْءٍ فَأَنَّ لِلَّهِ خُمُسَهُ...) الأنفال :41 (And know that whatever you gained of something, a fifth of it belongs to Allah…) Al-Anfal: 41 Comment by Sheikh Abdul Karim Zidan: What is meant by the fifth is one-fifth of the spoils of Islamic wars, and it does not include what a Muslim earns by his work and trade, and the noble verse concerns war spoils. There are publications on the statement of the Alawis’ belief ((Nusayriyyah)), and it is printed and numerous. The National Salvation Front has to remind the Alawites of what came in it of their creed contrary to Islam so that they disavow it if it is incorrect or acknowledge it, then judge them according to it, because it is not permissible to suffice with what they declare On some occasions, it is because of their pious belief, and piety is what the Shiites believe in, and the Alawites claim to be Shiites. The claim made by the sect that they are Muslims and that their book is the Qur’an must be confirmed by the conformity of what they believe and owe to God by it. It is known by presenting their published beliefs on what the Qur’an and Sunnah indicate and what the righteous predecessors were upon from the Companions and those who came after them from the followers who followed them in goodness. The concluding statement of the conference considered that the Ba'ath Party was one of the victims of the regime... Therefore, the Salvation Front calls on the Ba'athists to join the masses of the people to achieve the salvation of Syria from a corrupt and tyrannical regime. Sheikh Abdul Karim Zidan's comment: But after abandoning all that contradicts Islam of their beliefs and principles and what they advocate for. Question: Some articles expressing Khaddam's adherence to the sect, the party and the army indicated, as he published ((The Salvation Front Adopts a Speech of Reassurance towards the Baath, the Army and the Alawite Sect)) Free Syria 7/8/2006_ quoting Al-Shiraa. The question is: What is your legitimate opinion of this reassurance ? Answer: The front should not have issued its absolute support for what Khaddam said, but it should have asked him what it wanted by reassuring the party, the army and the sect before the front announced its support for this vague assurance because it is not permissible to accept what is vague without understanding the meaning and significance because this is a kind of saying without knowledge. This is not legally permissible. Question: What is your legal opinion regarding the position of those who issued these opinions from the men of the Islamic movement towards the Nusayris sect ? Answer: Every speech that contradicts Islamic law is rejected and invalid and cannot be accepted from any source - that is, from an individual or group, regardless of their position in society - because the infallible is the Messenger of Allah, peace be  upon him, and not anyone else, whether this person is an individual or a group, regardless of their status in society. So to say about the Nusayris sect: After what appeared from them that contradicts Islam in terms of saying or belief, and they approved this statement from them, and it is legally invalid, it is not permissible for a Muslim to accept it, support it, or praise those who say it. Assuming the presidency of the republic by a woman or a non-Muslim man As for the issue of accepting a woman’s assumption of the position of head of state, this is not permissible to say, nor to call for it, nor to be satisfied with it, with the explicit hadith of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him (A people who make a woman their ruler will never be successful). As for declaring not to aspire to the establishment of an Islamic state. It is not permissible for a Muslim or an Islamic group calling for Islam to neither aspire nor desire nor desire the establishment of the Islamic state, because Islam calls for that and the Noble Messenger  - may Allah bless him and grant him peace- implemented it, and his honorable companions followed him and established the Islamic State to the extent that they pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr for the caliphate and the Messenger  peace be upon him, was not yet buried, so he was the first head of state yet The  Prophet   peace be upon him.