Shaykh Abdul-Qādir Bin Abdil-Azīz

At-Tibyān Publications

Shaykh Muhammad Al-Amīn Ash-Shanqītī stated, “Tanqīh (Verification) linguistically is to polish and purify. So the meaning of verifying the cause for the ruling is polishing and purifying the ‘Illah by removing that which is not worthy of being a cause and considering that which is worthy from it.” “Muthakkiratu Usūl Al-Fiqh”, page 292.

And some have made mistakes in this area, so they assumed that many Muslims residing in some countries while being safe and having the ability to openly display the outward symbols of their Religion like the Athān, Salāt, Fasting, and other that them is sufficient in considering the country to be Dār Islām, to the point that some stated: How can you say that such and such country is Dār kufr while there are over a thousand Masājid in its capital? And there is no consideration for all of this, and we clarified that the cause for the ruling upon the Dār is the hand of control and the laws implemented in it. And there is no consideration given to any other descriptions when judging upon the Dār. And from the descriptions that must be removed in this area, out of verifying the cause for the ruling, is what follows:

1-There is no entering of the religion of the majority of the population in ruling upon the Dār

And its evidence is that Khaybar was populated by Jews, then when the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم, conquered it in the year 7 H. he left them in it in order to take care of its farming, – Hadīth 4248 in Al-Bukhārī – and he sent an Amīr over them from the Ansār – Hadīth 4246 in Al-Bukhārī. So the majority of its people were jews, until ‘Umar Ibn Al-Khattāb, may Allāh be pleased with him, expelled them during his Khilāfah. And this did not prevent Khaybar from being from Dār Al-Islām, due to it being in the grasp of the Muslims, (and) their rulings being implemented in it. And regarding this, Ibn Hazm stated, “And the saying of the Messenger of Allāh, صلى الله عليه وسلم, ‘I am disavowed from every Muslim who lives amongst the mushrikīn.’ clarifies that which we said, and that he, عليه السلام, only intended Dār Al-Harb by that. Because he, عليه السلام, used his workers over Khaybar, and they were all Jews. And if the People of Thimmah are in their cities, (and) no one besides them mixes with them, then the one living amongst them for Imārah or for trade with them is not called a kāfir, nor someone who is performing something wrong. Rather, he is a Muhsin Muslim, and their state is Dār Islām, not Dār Shirk, because the Dār is only attributed to the one who is in control of it, the one who rules it and the one who owns it.” “Al-Muhallā”, Vol. 11/200. And Abul-Qāsim Ar-Rāfi’ī Ash-Shāfi’ī said, “And it is not from the conditions of Dār Al-Islām that there be Muslims within it, rather it is sufficient that it is in the hand of the Imām, and his Islām.” “Fat’h Al-’Azīz Sharh Al-Wajīz”, by Ar-Rāfi’ī, Vol. 8/14.

2-And there is no entering of the openness of the symbols of Islām and kufr in judging upon the Dār

As the Messenger of Allāh, صلى الله عليه وسلم, openly showed the Religion, called to it, openly declared his enmity and disavowal from the mushrikīn and that which they worshiped beside Allāh, in Makkah. And this was before the Hijrah from Makkah. And likewise, some of the Sahābah used to openly show the Salāt and recitation of the Qur’ān. And Makkah did not become Dār Islām by this. Rather, the Muslims made Hijrah from it, as the control in it was for the kuffār. And this is from that which shows the mistake of Al-Māwardī, may Allāh be merciful to him, in his statement, “If he is able to openly display the Religion in a country from the countries of kufr, then with that, the country becomes Dār Islām. So taking up residence in it is better than journeying away from it, due to what is hoped in that from others entering into Islām.” “Fat’h Al-Bārī”, Vol. 7/229. And Ash-Shawkānī narrated these words and refuted them, saying, “And not hidden is what is present in this opinion from clashing with the Ahādīth of the chapter, which rule with the forbiddance of taking up residence in Dār Al-Kufr.” “Nayl Al-Awtār”, Vol. 8/178.

And vice-versa, as some kuffār – like the People of Thimmah – living in Dār Al-Islām and openly showing the symbols of their religion does not make it Dār kufr, as the openly showing of the symbols of kufr is not by the force of the kuffār, rather by the permission of the Muslims.

So there is no entering of the open display of symbols in ruling upon the Dār, as Ash-Shawkānī stated, “The consideration is for the dominance of the word. So if the commands and the forbiddances in the Dār are for the People of Islām, in that those who are in it from the kuffār are not able to openly display their kufr except due to them being given permission for that from the People of Islām, then this is Dār Islām. And the apparentness of the attributes of kufr in it does not harm (the ruling), because they were not apparent through the strength of the kuffār, nor with their power, as is seen with the People of Thimmah from the Jews and the Christians and the People of ‘Ahd who live in the Islāmic cities. And if the matter is opposite, then the Dār is opposite.” “As-Sayl Al-Jarrār”, Vol. 4/575

3-And there is no entering of the security of some of the residents in judging upon the Dār.

As the kuffār from the People of Thimmah are secure in Dār Al-Islām, and this does not stop it from being Dār Al-Islām. And the Muslims who made Hijrah to Al-Habashah, were safe, and it was Dār kufr. And the Muslims were safe with the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم, regarding their selves, in Makkah, for the period of their covenant – from the Sulh of Hudaybiyah, until Fat’h Makkah – to the point that they performed the ‘Umrah of Qadhā’ during it. This security did not prevent the fact that Makkah remained Dār kufr until its conquering. As the Messenger of Allāh, صلى الله عليه وسلم, said, “There is no Hijrah after Al-Fat’h.” And he did not say that there was no Hijrah after the Sulh. So it clarifies that the cause which changed the ruling of the Dār was the control and not the security alone.

This is what concerns the verification of the cause for the ruling and the knowledge of the cause for the ruling upon the Dār. And from it you know that the countries which most of its people are Muslims, but are ruled by apostate rulers with the laws of the kuffār with the fabricated laws, today they are Diyār kufr, even if most of its people are Muslims who perform the symbols of their Religion, like the establishment of the Jumu’ahs, the congregational prayers, etc. In safety. So they are Diyār kufr because the control and rulings in it are for the kuffār. As for the Muslims openly showing the symbols of their Religion, then this does not return to the force of the Muslims, but it is due it being permitted by the disbelieving ruler. And if he wanted to switch their security to fear and tribulation through his force and his soldiers, then he would do that, as it is the state in many of the countries today, under the title of “Waging war on terror and religious extremism.”
 

Source: Mujahideen