Between az-Zarqawi & IS(IS)

Below is an excerpt taken from a dialogue between Abu Mus’ab az-Zarqawi (rahimahullah) and a questioner released by al-Furqan Foundation itself.

The reader at the end will be astonished at the audacity of how the so-called “Islamic State” today ascribe themselves to Abu Mus’ab az-Zarqawi (rahimahullah) and claim they follow his “manhaj”, when it’s clear to anyone with the least knowledge of history and jihad that between the way of az-Zarqawi (rahimahullah) & that of the “Islamic State” is the distance of the East and the West!

The adherents to this so-called “Islamic State” by clinging to az-Zarqawi (rahimahullah) have brought nothing but ruin & shame to his name.

May Allah open up their blind eyes & deafened ears.

Q: There are also those who blame you with your dealings in regards to the innovators.

A: Any party or group which ascribes to Islam, worships Allah with jihad in his path and fighting the enemies of the religion from among the Crusaders and apostates then we are with them.

As long as they are Muslims then we aid them, ally with them and don’t disassociate from them, even if they indulge in some innovations, at the same time this doesn’t prevent us from freeing ourselves from their innovation

Q: Who is better, a Muslim engaged in bid’ah (who fights) or a Muslim of pure ‘aqeedah but doesn’t fight jihad?

A: As for the one who says he’s Muslim of pure ‘aqeedah but leaves jihad then he’s a fasiq.

And as for the Muslim who fights in the path of Allah then he’s better than the one who abstains from jihad, even if he’s engaged in bid’ah, and I’ll make the matter more clear for you: there are the Taliban for example, what’s known from them is that they’re Maturidis who are graduates from the school of Deoband and from them is also known that they don’t accept except to rule by Allah’s law, they fought in Allah’s path and stood in the face of America’s tyranny.

They have some mistakes and we know of this, but they are better to me than those with the “correct ‘aqeedah” (the scholars of the Arabian Peninsula) who pledged to the taghoot ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul’Azeez, rather what “correct ‘aqeedah” do these carry and who’s better in the sight of Allah? Mullah Muhammad ‘Umar or them? Rather Mullah Muhammad ‘Umar is better than the earth filled with the likes of them.

What has our theoretical ‘aqeedah benefited us which they hold? And what has the ‘aqeedah of ibn Taymiyyah, ibnul Qayyim and Muhammad ibn ‘AbdulWahhab benefitted them while it’s gathered in their minds and locked up in their chests, it doesn’t come out in the open and no effect of it seen on the tawagheet. Rather they hinder from Allah’s path by their pledging to the taghoot, negating the jihad, calling for the fighting of the mujahideen and by labeling them as the “misguided party”, so what an evil of an “’aqeedah” they carry if it isn’t followed by action & doesn’t bear fruit: [Say: "Worst indeed is that which your faith enjoins on you if you are believers. Al-Baqarah, 93]

The Taliban are a hundred times better than those, rather there’s no comparison or similarity between them.

Another example is that of Sh. ‘Abdullah al-Janabi, and he’s a Sufi, we disagree with him and despite that Sh. Abu Anas ash-Shami would kiss his head, we expected good from him and hoped to draw him to the way of the Salaf and Sh. Abu Anas gifted him one of the books of Shaykhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah.
What (more) could we want from the man when he raises the banner of jihad and calls towards the fighting of the enemies of the Muslims? He by Allah is better in our sight than those who discourage and sit back from jihad.

Despite this we wouldn’t compromise, rather we would discuss with him, but in the time of war and fighting we would draw our weapons along with him against the transgressing Crusading enemy.

So O brother: Bring me a Sufi who carries an innovation (but) fights in the path of Allah, I’ll kiss his feet and he’s better in my sight than the one who refrains from jihad, even if he claims to carry the correct ‘aqeedah. For the person as long as he’s a Muslim and mujahid, he’s upon good and is better than any kind who sits back from jihad. His jihad doesn’t prevent me from disassociating myself from his innovation nor does it lead me to leave out aiding him.

It’s well known that the scholars fought along Yazeed the Khariji when he fought the Fatimids, despite that he was from the sect described “the dogs of Hellfire”.

Yes, I fight alongside the innovator, except if he indulges in a nullifier of the religion and this is another situation. As for the one who indulged in a nullifier then I don’t fight with him nor under his banner, but this doesn’t prevent me from giving him da’wah with kindness and to hope for his (return to) Islam and guidance to the path of the Sunnah. At the same time I will not raise the sword against him, so long as we fight the same enemy.

As for the innovator, then we have patience with him, we invite him (to good), fight along him, we don’t conform to his mistake or compromise, and we continue inviting him until he returns to the Sunnah.

This is the religion of Allah: We have patience with him, invite him with goodness and we aid him due to what he’s upon from Islam. We don’t tell him: “You’re good with this innovation of yours & there’s no harm in it”, rather we’re straightforward about its dangers, with kindness and goodness and reminding him of the rights of the brotherhood of Islam which brought us together.

And despite what is narrated from some of the Salaf that they would expel the innovator from the fronts, then this was during the days of establishment, as for today then we are facing a transgressing enemy craving after the eradication of Islam and exterminating the religion in its entirety. Because of that its obligatory to fight beside every Muslim, without stipulating his disavowal from innovation, and this is what Shaykhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah did when he fought the Tartars, for he fought along the Sufis, the Ash’aris and under the banner of the Mamelukes, who consisted of the ‘aqeedah of Sufis, Ash’aris and strongly adhering to a school of thought.

The reality is that there was no generation or army after that of the Sahaba & Tabi’een that was “pure”.

And we confirm that there are mistakes, there are amongst the mujahideen who have some innovations, but this doesn’t prevent us from fighting along with him against the transgressing enemy.

As for our joining our own group, then we stipulate following the Sunnah, leaving of the innovations, abstaining from major sins, this is what stipulate upon ourselves and who follow us. As for the one who’s unable to meet that, then not joining us doesn’t mean going against him or ignoring the rights he has over us by aiding him with the sword in fighting and by tongue in naseeha towards him.

[Taken from: “A dialogue with Shaykh Abu Mus’ab az-Zarqawi, 1427 AH” by al-Furqan Foundation, pg. 23-24]

by Saahibul Hijratain