Official Announcement of the Islamic State, regarding the hukm (judgment) of the one who refrains from making takfir of mushrikin who ascribe themselves to Islam


The Official translation of the Announcement by the Central Office Overseeing Shar’i Dawawin of the Islamic State,
regarding the hukm (judgment) of the
one who refrains from making takfir of mushrikin who ascribe themselves to Islam and what
that entails of various opinions.


Download Link:

1 COOSD 155


Number: 155

Date: 22 / 8 / 1437 ( 29 / 5 / 2016 )


All praise is due to Allah. May blessings and peace be upon the imam of the mujahidin, our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and all of his companions. To proceed:

Allah SWT said, “And tell My slaves to say that which is best. Verily, Shaytan incites them against each other. Verily, Shaytan is a clear enemy to mankind” (Al-Isra 53).

Lately, an issue has circulated among the soldiers of the Islamic State that has led to disagreements regarding some matters over which the hearts and tongues have disputed, reaching the point of ruining relationships between the disputing parties. We have never held these issues lightly, as Allah’s Messenger SAWS warned us against them, describing them as cutting away the religion, saying, “For verily, ruining the bond of unity is the cutter.” (Reported by at-Tirmidhi, who graded it “hasan sahih.”)

We have looked into the basis of disagreement, which relates to the hukm (judgment) of the one who refrains from making takfir of mushrikin who ascribe themselves to Islam and what that entails of various opinions. What we have found is that the cause of disputation comes from two opinions, both being incorrect due to excess on one hand and negligence on the other. The following, by Allah’s permission, shows both opinions and then what we consider to be the actual hukm of Allah in this matter…

The First Opinion:

“Whoever refrains from making takfir of mushrikin (those who worship other than Allah), who ascribe themselves to Islam, is a mushrik exactly like them, because making takfir of them is part of the religion’s foundation (asl ad-din). So the refrainer is like one who worships other than Allah, and he is absolutely one of them in both name and ruling.”

The Second Opinion:

“Takfir is not part of the religion’s foundation (asl ad-din), but is one of its inferred requirements. So the one who refrains from making takfir of mushrikin, who ascribe themselves to Islam, has not disbelieved until the hujjah (evidenced argument) is established against him, all doubts are removed, and all false interpretations are ended.”

The meaning of the term “the religion’s foundation” (asl ad-din) in both opinions is: that by which tawhid is established before the advent of the prophetic proof.

After reviewing what preceded and seeking Allah’s assistance, we say:

The first opinion implies a corrupt concept, because major shirk (shirk akbar) has a reality and description that, if actualized, designates the one who possesses it as a “mushrik.” So if we were to equate the one who refrains from takfir with the one who worshiped other than Allah, then making takfir of the one who refrains from making takfir of the refrainer is absolutely necessitated, since major shirk is not excused by ignorance and the refrainer (according to the first opinion) is a mushrik like the initial person. And the one who refrains thereafter (from making takfir of the refrainer from making takfir of the refrainer) is also a mushrik, and so on.

This is the actual inference – not an imagined understanding – of this opinion’s line of reasoning, which leads to making “chain takfir,” an invalid bid’ah that originates from an incorrect understanding of the texts and that can never be controlled. This opinion is rejected due to the invalidity of its inference.

The second opinion also implies a corrupt concept, as it makes the takfir of the mushrikin like one of the obscure issues (masail khafiyyah), for which it is impossible to establish an evidenced argument and to make takfir of the refrainer as long as he has some doubt (shubhah) or misinterpretation (tawil). The essence of this opinion is the annulment of an agreed upon nullifier of Islam. And the existence of doubt is a passing matter that must be eliminated within any Islamic state that rules by the Shari’ah. As for making this passing matter a foundation upon which rulings are based, then this would result in the annulment of these rulings and the nullification of what it means to manifest the religion. This is in opposition to what is transmitted from the imams of the religion, including the imams of the Najdi da’wah RA.

It is inadmissible to use the terms “asl (foundational basis)” and “lazim (required inference)” regarding the meaning of “la ilaha illallah” and making kufr in taghut in this polemic way. That is because doing so is a fruitless, invented opinion with which Allah did not burden us. Rather, multiple corrupt inferences necessarily result therefrom, like excluding certain matters established by the advent of the prophetic proof from being part of asl ad-din (the religion’s foundation) according to this definition, and thus excluding belief in the prophethood of Muhammad SAWS from asl ad-din! Likewise, it leads to disputation between the mujahidin regarding what is included in the meaning of “asl” (foundation) and what is excluded from it. This is exactly what we warn against. And we strive to prevent this because disagreeing in this dangerous matter will lead to wrongly making tabdi’ and takfir of those who disagree (since the disagreement revolves around tawhid itself). This is unacceptable in the Islamic State, especially since those who are disagreeing are themselves mujahidin for Allah’s cause, those who disbelieved in the tawaghit, made takfir of them, took them as enemies, fought against them, and showed their disavowal from them and their followers.

Shaykh Sulayman Ibn ‘Abdillah Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhab TA was asked about a similar issue:

(The Sixth Issue: Regarding wala’ and bara’, is such part of the meaning of “la ilaha illallah” or one of its inferred requirements?

The answer is to say that Allah knows best. But it is sufficient for a Muslim to know that Allah made it a duty upon him to take the mushrikin as enemies and to not take them as awliya’, and He made it obligatory to love the believers and to take them as awliya’. He made this a condition of iman, just as He negated the iman of whoever shows love to whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger, even if they were their fathers, sons, brothers, or tribesmen. As for that being part of the meaning of “la ilaha illallah” or one of its inferred requirements, then Allah did not burden us with looking into that. He only burdened us with knowing that Allah made what was mentioned above a duty and obligation, and obligated acting upon so. This is fard and necessary without any doubt. And whoever considers that to be part of its meaning or inferred requirements, then that is fine and an added benefit. But whoever does not consider such, then he is not burdened to do so, especially during an argument or dispute, which leads to something wicked, including disagreement and division between the believers – those who upheld the obligations of iman, waged jihad for the sake of Allah, took the mushrikin as enemies, and took the Muslims as awliya’. Therefore, remaining silent on such matters that lead to division is definitely obligatory. This is what is apparent to me, keeping in mind that the two opinions over which there is a dispute are similar in meaning. And Allah knows best). (Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah fil-Ajwibat an-Najdiyyah (8/166).)

It is unacceptable to use the term “takfir al-‘adhir” (making takfir of the “excuser”) to describe the ruling of the one who refrains from making takfir of mushrikin who ascribe themselves to Islam because it is an inaccurate term.

While we do not accept ignorance as an excuse for major shirk, the innovated opinion of ‘udhr bil-jahl (to excuse the ignorant in their practice of major shirk) does not necessitate that every excuser refrains from making takfir, as there are those of them who might consider ignorance an excuse, but do indeed make takfir of the mushrikin because he considers the proof to have been established against them all, so he is therefore not actually a refrainer.

Just as refraining from making takfir of the mushrikin is not confined to the issue of “al-‘udhr bil-jahl,” it is also quite likely one refrains from making takfir of them out of arrogance, defiance, following desires, or by citing general texts that indicate the merits of “la ilaha illallah.”

So the term “takfir al-‘adhir” does not accurately describe the one who refrains from making takfir of the mushrikin, such a refrainer being whom the people of knowledge meant regarding this nullifier.

The one who refrains from making takfir of the mushrikin who claim to be Muslims commits an agreed upon nullifier, but his kufr is based upon establishment of the proof, unlike the one who worships other than Allah.

Making takfir of the mushrikin is an issue established by apparent, plethoric texts, which all people can understand. Establishing the argument thereof is by the Quran’s advent, by either it being conveyed to the people or them having the ability to reach it. Allah  said, “Say, ‘What thing is greatest in witness?’ Say, ‘Allah is a witness between me and you, and this Quran has been inspired unto me that by it I might warn you and whomever it reaches’” (Al-An’am 19).

The mujaddid Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhab RA said, “Know that the evidences for making takfir of the otherwise righteous Muslim who commits shirk with Allah or sides with the mushrikin against the muwahaddin, even if he does not commit shirk, are more than one can compile. They are in the speech of Allah, the words of His Messenger, and the discourses of all people of knowledge.” (Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah (10/8).) Shaykh ‘Abdul-Latif Ibn ‘Abdir-Rahman Ibn Hasan RA said, “It should be said that the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Messenger, and the opinions of the people of knowledge are explicit, repeatedly reported, and clearly prove making takfir of anyone who supplicates other than Allah, calling upon someone for something only Allah can do… and the entire Quran demonstrates and confirms this, even coming in different ways and expressions to explain and make note of this.” (Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah (12/190).) Some other scholars of the Najdi da’wah said, “The one who does not make takfir of the mushrikin has not affirmed the Quran, and the Quran has made takfir of the mushrikin and ordered making takfir of them, taking them as enemies, and fighting against them.” (Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah (9/291).)

However, this matter could be obscure regarding some mushrikin who ascribe themselves to Islam. That is due to the spread of ignorance, weakness of da’wah, and circulation of doubts. Here, the proof is established by demonstrating the clear, indicative texts regarding the kufr of these mushrikin. If someone refrains after this clarification is made, he commits kufr. Shaykh Sulayman Ibn ‘Abdillah TA said, “If someone doubts their kufr or is ignorant of their kufr, it is clarified to him using evidences about their kufr from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger SAWS. After that, if he doubts or hesitates, then he is a kafir according to all of the ‘ulama, since the one who doubts the kufr of a kafir is himself a kafir.” (Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah (8/160).)

But if the matter becomes manifest by the rise of the religion, its voice being raised, and its da’wah being conveyed (as is the case in the Islamic State, may Allah strengthen it), then there is no consideration given to any doubt that would suspend the legal ruling. This is what is known from the imams of guidance like those of the Najdi da’wah who faced this issue and died upon goodness. Some of the imams of the da’wah RA said, “So whoever does not make takfir of the mushrikin of the Ottoman State and the grave worshipers, like the people of Makkah and otherwise, of those who worship righteous people, deviate from the tawhid of Allah to shirk, and replace the Sunnah of His Messenger SAWS with innovations, then he is a kafir just like them, even if he hates their religion, despises them, and loves Islam and the Muslims. For the one who does not make takfir of the mushrikin has not affirmed the Quran, and the Quran has made takfir of the mushrikin and ordered making takfir of them, taking them as enemies, and fighting against them.” (Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah (9/291).)

It is a duty of those who give da’wah and those who seek knowledge inside the Islamic State to warn the people against shirk and falling into it and to warn them against refraining from making takfir of the mushrikin. As part of their duty to warn and convey the message, they must also expose the doubts of those who quarrel in defense of the mushrikin. This is the religion of the Prophets AS and by this the religion becomes manifest.

Shaykh ‘Abdul-Latif Al ash-Shaykh RA said, “Exposing ignorant people to the fundamentals of Islam, the fundamentals of iman, decisive texts, and agreed upon issues by the people of knowledge is a hujjah (established argument) according to the scholars, and by it the proof is made, rulings are put in order, whether the rulings are on apostasy or otherwise; and the Messenger SAWS ordered conveying his message and encouraged it to be done. Regarding establishing proof and giving warning, Allah said in His Book, ‘that by it I might warn you and whomever it reaches’ (Al-An’am 19),” until he (‘Abdul-Latif) RA said, “In total, the argument in every time is made by the people of knowledge, the inheritors of the prophets.” (Misbah adh-Dhalam fir-Radd ‘ala Man Kadhdhab ash-Shaykh al-Imam (1/207).)

The issue of making takfir of the mushrikin being manifest is the default, and we are in a state that rules by the Shari’ah of Allah. It is therefore a compulsory duty upon those who give da’wah therein to warn, convey, employ the legal rulings, and remove whatever became suspended thereof due to doubts. Amongst these rulings is making takfir of whoever refrains from making takfir of the mushrikin who ascribe themselves to Islam. It is not that they should base their actions and da’wah upon the doubts of those who deceptively raise them, making such doubts the foundation, by which they would annul the agreed upon legal ruling, and refuge is with Allah.

We remind our sons, the soldiers of the Islamic State, of the order from Allah and His Messenger SAWS regarding the obligation of listening and obeying those whom Allah has appointed over them, as well as the obligation of uniting and avoiding division, hating one another, and disputation. Allah  said, “And obey Allah and His Messenger and do not dispute lest you fail and your might depart, and have patience. Verily Allah is with the patient” (Al-Anfal 46). And He said, “Verily those who divided their religion and became factions, you have nothing to do with them. Their matter is only up to Allah. Then He will inform them about what they used to do” (Al-An’am 159). And Allah’s Messenger SAWS said, “Shall I tell you about what is better in degree than fasting, prayer, and charity?” They said, “Indeed!” He said, “Rectifying the bond of unity, for verily, ruining the bond of unity is the cutter.” (Reported by at-Tirmidhi, who graded it “hasan sahih.”) In another version, “I do not mean that it cuts hair, but it cuts the religion.” May Allah send blessings upon our prophet Muhammad and upon his family and all of his companions.

Announcement from the Islamic State regarding the organisation of Al-Qaida in Syria and the Sahawat factions along with them


The Official translation of the Announcement of the Central Office Overseeing Shar’i Dawawin of the Islamic State, regarding the organisation of Al-Qaida in Syria “Jabhat an-Nusrah” and the Sahawat factions along with them

Download Link:

1 COOSD 175

Number: 175

Date: 25 / 8 / 1437 ( 1 / 6 / 2016 )


All praise is due to Allah. May blessings and peace be upon Allah’s Messenger. To proceed:

Allah SWT said, “And as such We detail the signs, and to make clear the way of the criminals” (Al-An’am 55).

The Organization of al-Qa’idah in Syria (“Jabhat an-Nusrah”) and those with it of militant factions who fight the Islamic State are tawaif mumtani’ah bi-shawkah ‘an tahkim shar’ Allah (groups forcefully resisting the implementation of the Shari’ah of Allah) who have assisted the apostates who aim at establishing a “democratic civic” state of kufr. They fight together in one trench against an Islamic state, which no one doubts rules by the Shari’ah, instigate others to fight against it by all means, and strive to displace its authority from the land, in order to replace the Shari’ah of Allah, which it upholds, with Jahili laws and man-made rulings. All of this is under the cover of the Crusader campaign against the Islamic Khilafah. These nawaqid (nullifiers of Islam) and others have been committed by all of the factions who attribute themselves to the Shari’ah and jihad, while remaining in the camp of the apostates who fight the army of the Khilafah. They did not withdraw and declare their disassociation from them and from their kufr, rather, they entered into their alliances and supported them.

Leaving no room for any doubts, the Islamic State has made the ruling of the Shari’ah regarding these factions clear, that they are apostate groups who have openly committed kufr and whose condition has become apparent, in a way that establishes hujjah (proof) and severs any doubt an ignorant person might have. This includes what is found in the public announcement released by the Delegated Committee as N7-21 on the 8th of Rabi’ Awwal, 1437. As such, it will not be accepted that any of our troops desist from making takfir of these individuals whom we fight and who fight us for the Shari’ah of Allah. Any of them – of the troops of the State – who does not make takfir of these factions and whose case is raised to the emir of his division will be summoned and what is alleged against him will be confirmed, and the condition of these factions will be explained to him if he is ignorant thereof; then, if he abstains (from takfir) after clarification, he will be transferred to the court for istitabah (for the court to demand the soldier’s repentance or otherwise – if he refuses to repent – for him to be punished for apostasy).

On the Kufr of the Soldiers of Jabhat al-Jawlani

Straight Talk

On the Kufr of the Soldiers of Jabhat al-Jawlani


By Ibn ‘Ata’ al-Muhajir

The Prophet (s’ws) said, “I am only human and litigants come to me. It might be that some of you are more eloquent than others, so I consider him to be truthful and rule in his favor. So if I rule in someone’s favor and he takes what rightfully belongs to a Muslim, then it is truly only a piece of fire. Let him take it or leave it.” (Al-Bukhārī, Muslim)

This is the Messenger of Allah, the one about whom Allah (t) said, {He does not speak from desire. It is only revelation inspired.} (An-Najm: 3-4) This is the Prophet of Allah, who said of himself, “There is no prophet after me,” (Al-Bukhārī, Muslim) which is understood by consensus to mean that revelation ceased to be inspired to mankind after the death of Muhammad ibn ‘Abdillah (s’ws).

This is the one to whom Allah revealed the most magnificent miracle mankind has ever known, the noble Qur’an. Yet he was “only human,” who attested for himself the inability to read the hearts of men. Rather, he affirmed that all people are to be taken at face value, judged according to their apparent situation, as their hidden secrets and intentions are left to be judged by Allah alone.

If this is the case with Allah’s Messenger (s’ws), then how about those who came after him, those who neither received revelation nor perfected their collection and authentication of all the recorded narrations from the prophetic era?! No matter how knowledgeable of the religion one may be, he will never reach the level of the Prophet. Despite that and the clear fact based on the above evidences that the Prophet (s’ws) judged people at face value, we find people today giving excuses to those who commit blatant kufr! An important example of this is that some Muslims invalidly excuse the soldiers of Jabhat al-Jawlani for the kufr they collectively commit. Even if their existed for them some hidden excuse—meaning ikrah, which is extremely unlikely, if not impossible, of armed men—we must follow the prophetic example and judge them in this life according to their apparent actions, leaving their secrets for Allah to reveal on the Day of Judgment.

‘A’ishah i narrated that Allah’s Messenger (s’ws) said, “An army will raid the Ka’bah. When they reach an open desert, the first of them and the last of them will be consumed by the earth.” At this, the Mother of the Believers asked, “O Messenger of Allah, how could the first of them and the last of them be consumed by the earth, while in their midst there are their common people and those who are not actually part of them?” He replied, “The first of them and the last of them will be consumed by the earth, then they will be resurrected and judged based on their intentions.” (Al-Bukhārī, Muslim)

It is thus the sunnah of Allah to punish groups of criminals along with those who are with them, as the innocent among them are not distinguished in this life, but will be dealt with on an individual basis when they are resurrected.

Jabhat al-Jawlani is a criminal gang of riddah, having claimed Islam while committing blatant kufr. They control land yet do not rule by what Allah revealed; they enter into alliances with the disbelievers against the believers; and they fight against the Islamic State in order to replace the Shari’ah with human law, whether by merely setting Allah’s law to the side and ruling by their whims, or by allowing their democratic allies to rule instead. Despite this, they deceive many Muslims into believing that they are an organization of mujahidin fighting for the cause of Allah. Their banner is black and bears the kalimah of tawhid; their men grow beards; their women wear niqab; and their scholars speak with the language of jihad, announcing their support for the Shari’ah and their goal of its establishment. However, the reality is far from that stated goal.

In the areas they control, they have established a court system to give the impression of law and order. However, that law is not the law of Islam, but rather varies from one qadi’s whim to anothers. Lands held by Jawlani’s troops remain void of Allah’s law, intentionally and proudly not upholding the hudud, even though they once faced virtually no local opposition to their presence. Effectively, their judges are tawaghit, pushing aside the Shari’ah of Allah and thus taking for themselves the right to rule, which belongs only to Allah, and for their cause is exactly what the soldiers of Jabhat al-Jawlani fight, {and those who disbelieve fight for the cause of taghut.} (An-Nisā: 76)

When confronted with the issue of upholding the hudud, the shar’iyyin of the Jabhah erroneously claim that the hudud are not applied in Dar al-Harb. This statement is a self-proclamation of kufr! How could “mujahidin for the cause of Allah” who have captured some land, having removed the taghut’s control over it, still consider that area Dar al-Harb, which is synonymous with Dar al-Kufr?!

They have allied with the Free Syrian Army, under which other organized militant groups have united with the publicly stated goal of establishing a secular democratic state. This alliance is for no reason but to fight against their common enemy, the soldiers of the Khilafah. Allah said, {Believers must not take disbelievers as allies against believers. Whoever does that has nothing to do with Allah.} (Āl ‘Imrān: 28) At-Tabari said, commenting on this ayah, “He is free of Allah and Allah is free of him, due to his apostasy from His religion and his entrance into kufr.” (At-Tafsīr) Allah also said, {Inform the munafiqin that theirs is a painful torment, those who take disbelievers as allies against believers. Do they seek honor with them? For verily, all honor belongs to Allah,} (An-Nisā: 139) and similarly, {O you who believe, do not take disbelievers as allies against believers! Do you want to make for Allah a clear case against yourselves? Verily the munafiqin are in the lowest level of the Fire, and you will never find a supporter for them.} (An-Nisā: 144) Indeed, as today they support and are supported, the munafiqin known as Jabhat al-Jawlani will have no support tomorrow as they burn, as Allah wills, in the lowest level of the Fire.

Another blatant display of their kufr is that they fight the only government on earth implementing the hukm of Allah in order to replace it with manmade, whimsical law. Fighting against the Islamic State is not in and of itself kufr, as it could happen that incorrect ijtihad might lead to an internal conflict between Muslims. But even in a case like that (called baghy), both sides establish the Shari’ah when given the opportunity. Allah said, {And if two factions of believers engage in combat, then reconcile between them. Then if one of them transgresses against the other, then fight those who transgress until they return to the command of Allah.} (Al-Ḥujurāt: 76) Jabhat al-Jawlani, on the other hand, has repeatedly shown their unwillingness to implement the hukm of Allah. So their war against the Islamic State is not an effort to simply right a perceived wrong, but to remove the currently implemented Shari’ah and replace it with human law. This is even clearer when one looks to those with whom al-Jawlani has allied, who very openly and without shame declare their democratic intentions to establish a secular state.

Every soldier in the American military is a kafir, even if there are among them Muhammads of Palestinian origin. Likewise, every soldier in the Saudi military is a kafir, even if some of them have blood brothers in the Islamic State. With absolutely no difference, as all are fighting for the cause of taghut, every soldier in Jabhat al-Jawlani is a kafir, no matter his outward appearance or professed love for Islam. How different the soldiers of Allah are from the soldiers of Shaytan, for truly {those who believe fight for the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight for the cause of taghut.} (An-Nisā: 76)

Those who stubbornly remain in the ranks of al-Jawlani’s front almost always do so because of taqlid, which is to follow human opinion over divine revelation. When presented with Allah’s clear proofs against His enemies, including Jabhat al-Jawlani, the deluded Jawlanites respond, “The shaykh said […],” quite often referring to al-Qa’idah “scholars” living comfortably in Dar al-Kufr. Allah said, {Follow what was revealed to you from your Lord and do not follow besides Him any awliyā,} (Al-A‘rāf: 3) i.e. anyone, no matter how close they are to you. How can they follow any modern scholars after knowing that Allah’s Messenger (s’ws) said, “Verily Allah does not seize knowledge by stripping it from His slaves, but He seizes knowledge by seizing scholars, until when He leaves no scholar, the people will take ignorant heads. They will be asked and give fatwas without knowledge, so they will be misguided and will misguide others.” (Al-Bukhārī, Muslim) “Knowledge” does not mean mere information, nor the ability to sit in a classroom for a few years. Knowledge consists of evidences from the Qur’an and Sunnah. This is clear in the oft-misinterpreted ayah, {So ask the people of the dhikr if you do not know,} (An-Naḥl: 43) i.e. ask the people of the Qur’an and Sunnah; and you do not ask a people for something other than what they are known to have. So the people of the dhikr should be asked for the dhikr itself, not their personal opinions.

These mindless muqallidin question Allah’s intent while remaining silent to the contradictory claims of their shar’iyyin, while Allah said, {He is not asked about what He does, but they are asked.} (Al-Anbiyā’: 23) Indeed, {they took their scribes and ascetics as lords beside Allah.} (Barā‘ah: 31) Do they presume they will be not be questioned about their blind adherence to these shar’iyyin, and that they alone will bear the responsibility of anyone who follows them? Certainly not, as {no bearer bears the burden of another.} (Al-Anām: 164) But, indeed, these shar’iyyin shall receive their punishment, along with the punishment of those they led astray. {He said, “For each will get double (the punishment).”} (Al-A‘rāf: 38).

A muqallid uses taqlid when he considers himself too ignorant to base his own opinion on evidence, doubting his own ability to understand a topic. As such, making taqlid in matters of tawhid is to affirm oneself as being ignorant of Allah’s tawhid and as having doubts on how to understand the most basic principle of the religion. Since tawhid is the foundational principle of the din, ignorance of tawhid necessitates the absence of din. Therefore, taqlid due to ignorance in matters of asl ad-din is never an excuse for a person who slips thereby into kufr.

Regarding those who made taqlid in matters of tawhid, following their beloved leaders and elders to the point of committing kufr, Allah said, {Verily Allah cursed the disbelievers and prepared for them an inferno, eternally therein forever. They will not find any ally or supporter; on a day their faces are turned over in the Fire, saying, “O, if only we obeyed Allah and the Messenger! Our Lord, verily we obeyed our leaders and elders, so they misled us from the path!”} (Al-Aḥzāb: 64-67) How close the modern muqallidin are to those who disbelieved afore, {And when it is said to them, “Follow what Allah revealed,” they say, “Rather, we follow what we found our fathers thereon.”} (Al-Baqarah: 170)

Some brothers and sisters have assumed that the official stance of the Islamic State on this matter is one of refrain, in that the condition of these JN soldiers is doubtful, so they are neither deemed Muslims nor kuffar. Others think the Islamic State considers only the leaders of Jawlani’s front as apostates and that the soldiers are not accountable for their commanders’ kufr. Still others think it is a matter of actively fighting against the Islamic State, and that as long as a member of JN refrains from the physical fight, he is excused and retains his status as a Muslim. They base these misunderstandings on ambiguous “sources”, whether via the words of a supposed soldier of the Khilafah or those of a “munasir” outside the lands of Islam.

No statement from any munasir, soldier, administrator, or even emir is deemed official unless it is conveyed through one of the Islamic State’s official media channels including, but not necessarily limited to, Dābiq and النبأ.

The apostasy of Jabhat al-Jawlani, from its top leaders to its lowest elements, has been dealt with repeatedly through official Islamic State literature. For example, in Dābiq, one can find this matter dealt with in

  • Issue 2, “The Flood of the Mubāhalah;”
  • Issue 6, “The Qā’idah of adh-Dhawāhirī;”
  • Issue 7, “Dozens of ‘Nusrah’ and ‘Ahrār’ Fighters Repent and Join the Islamic State;”
  • Issue 8, “The Allies of al-Qā’idah in Shām” and “Irjā’ – The Most Dangerous Bid’ah;”
  • Issue 9, “The Allies of al-Qā’idah in Shām: Part II,” “Harvesting the Sahwah,” and “In the Words of the Enemy;”
  • Issue 10, “The Allies of al-Qā’idah in Shām: Part III,” “They Are Not Lawful Spouses for One Another,” “The Laws of Allah or the Laws of Men,” “In the Words of the Enemy,” and “Interview with Abū Samīr al-Urdunī;”
  • Issue 11, “The Allies of al-Qā’idah in Shām: Part 4” and “From the Battle of al-Ahzāb to the War of Coalitions;” and
  • Issue 12, “The Allies of al-Qā’idah in Yemen,” “The Allies of al-Qā’idah in Shām: The End,” and “In the Words of the Enemy.”
  • Issue 14, “The Murtadd Brotherhood.”

If there is still some doubt on this matter, then know that each member of Jabhat al-Jawlani, whether or not he fought against the Islamic State, is required to undergo an istitābah course, which means he must repent from the kufr in which he was engaged. Part of that course is his personal admission that he was indeed an apostate.

The soldiers of Jabhat al-Jawlani are kuffar. They are munafiqin who have blatantly committed kufr, so their ruling is that of the murtaddin. They cause mischief on the earth and should be shown no mercy unless they repent before they are apprehended. Their dead are fuel for Jahannam. As a matter of iman, Muslims who are aware of this clear ruling (of their kufr) must make takfir of them and thus establish their bara’ah from them. They are not to be taken as friends, and they are certainly not brothers, as {only believers are brothers.} (Al-Ḥujurāt: 10)

{And Allah prevails over His affair, but most people do not know.}

Original article published at:



Penned by: Abū Maysarah Ash-Shāmi

This article was published on 31st March 2014 by ‘Ubwa Laseqa. The author who is a well known writter on these topics and an expert in them covers the topic in great detail. This is what he had to say about this article in a recently published article in which he was adressing Al Shabaab.

NB: I had a good perception of Hani sibai when I wrote this old article(reffering to this bay’ah article), I was uniformed about his reality. It became clear to me later that he is one of the heads of Tajahhum and misguidance who don’t support except for his prestige and thoughts.

In The Name of Allah The Beneficent The Merciful

All praise is due to Allah the Greatest and the Most High, and may the peace and blessings be upon the cheerful avid fighter (Rasūli Allah) and upon his noble and pure household.

To proceed:

The respected shaykh Hāni Sibā’i the director of Al-Maqreze center for historical studies talked about the disagreement between the Islamic State and Jabhat Al-Nusrah. So the brother thought that the basis of this problem lies in the misconceptions (surrounding) the Bay’ah and the organizational relationship between the Islamic State and Tanthīm Al-Qā’idah. And this is far from the reality because the disagreement – after being only methodological, extended to a battle between truth and falsehood, that’s why it is important to understand some issues:

Firstly, Verily the Islamic State has an establishment on the ground, implemented and judged (between people and itself) with Shari’ah. Its governance stretches from Raqqa to Al-Barakah and large and complete pieces of land in Halab, Hims, Al-Anbār, Ninawah, Salāhuddīn, Diyāla, Kirkūk and other places. They established the prayers in this places and Hududs (prescribed punishments) and courthouses and Hisbah (commanding the good and forbidding the evil) agencies. We see the opposite if we look at the governance of the sahawāt and their ally Jawlāni. Their joint Sharī’ah board has neither knowledge nor power, it is corrupt and it corrupts because they included in the legislations the extreme Sūfis, Murji’ah, the Ikhwānis and the criminals (even the ex-regime tāghūt judges). Their slogan is: “No Sharī’ah during war” and they misinterpret with their desires the sentence: “No punishments (Hudūd) in Dār Al-Harb (the land of war. i.e lands ruled by manmade laws)”. For two years, they controlled some large and stable “liberated” areas, but we didn’t see any Hisbah or Hudud (punishments), except on the imprisoned soldiers of the Islamic State. And then we see the Jahiliyah statements like the one made by “Jaysh Al-Mujāhidīn” allies of Jawlāni saying that Hijāb is a personal freedom.

Secondly, Jawlāni’s group made its first priority fighting the IS, so they put in first, fighting the IS instead of fighting Hay’at Al-Arkān (General Staff Command Building of the Syrian armed forces) and the bandits, so they truly became: Murji’ah with the pagan coalition (SNC) and Aāl Salūl (Saudi), and Khawārij with the Islamic State.

Thirdly, Abū Abdūllāh Ash-Shāmi issued a fatwa based on lies, and he immediately made fighting the Islamic State compulsory because it’s a Tā’efah Muntani’ah (a refraining sect) from Hākimiyah (seeking judgement in Qurān & Sunnah) and labeled them as more extremist than the khawārij (while he contradicted in the description of the Hākimiyah which they refrained from), so he was similar to Ibrahīm Al-Salqīni and Adnān Al-‘Ar’oor.

So now the disagreement developed into an ongoing war between the Islamic State who have empowerment on earth (in one front) and the groups in the Jarba and Aāl Saud coalitions and the followers of Jawlāni (in the other front), so they lined up in one rank in order to achieve their goal by coordinating it on all levels. All praise is due to Allah who guided the defectors from Jawlāni to give their testimonies about the conspiracies. 

Thus, the misconceptions surrounding the Bay’ah have no traces on the ground, because the defectors from Jawlāni front preform Hijra in dozens to The Islamic State territory even if the misconceptions (surrounding Bay’ah) weren’t clarified. It is because they saw the deviation in manhaj in this group (Jabhat An-Nusrah). Also the threats by Jawlāni, the Fatwa of As-Shāmi and their denial of the favors and the goodness they, in the past used to acknowledge, encouraged them (the defectors) to pledge allegiance to the Islamic State.

So the reality is different from what was imagined by the brother, because the muhājirīn and ansār do not obey someone who commands them to join a coalition with the secularists, salūli’s, Jahmī’s and criminals, nor do they obey the one who deviated in his manhaj, disobeyed his amīr (Abū Bakr Al- Baghdādi) and helped against him those whom there is no dispute in their kufr, even if the order(of obedience) was to come from all the ‘wise men’ of the world.

In order to refute the “Bay’ah” misconception by Allah’s Will, I shall convey the words of Dr. Aymān Al-Zawāhiri himself, with a short commentary, and from Allah we seek assistance.

Firstly, the minister (of war) Abū Hamzah Al-Muhājir may Allah have mercy on him dissolved the Al-Qāeda branch in the land of the two rivers (Iraq) without consulting his amīr Shaykh Usāma ibn Lāden (may Allah have mercy on him) in Khurassān. And this is something which cannot be denied by Dr. Ayman. So the minister (Abū Hamza) hastened with the declaration because the matter couldn’t be delayed neither according to the Shari’ah nor the situation, and shaykh Usāma recognized the legitimacy of the State because it is not permissible to postpone its establishment.

Appointing the Imām becomes an immediate duty upon ability,

Dr. Ayman said:

“The establishment of the Islamic state or emirate is a religious duty and a realistic necessity. This cannot be delayed for the lack of the best circumstances for electing the ruler. Otherwise, those who spread mischief and the enemies of Islam will seize the country, security will be lost, sanctities will be violated, and tumults will take place. The fruits of jihad in Afghanistan would have been lost had the Islamic Emirate not been established. This could also lead to the loss of these fruits in Iraq, especially since all the internal and external atmospheres in the two countries are prepared and are available for igniting infighting unless a legal and enabled authority was established to foil these conspiracies.”

“[In Iraq] previously the brothers made successive efforts to unify the ranks of the mujahidin first in the Mujahidin Shura Council then the Hilf (Alliance of) Al-Mutayyibin (the honourables), and then in the pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State of Iraq by most of the jihadist groups, which pursue the right methodology and the mujahid and steadfast tribes, the brothers mentioned this in detail. Therefore, it would be unnecessary to repeat it. The best proof of this is the heroic steadfastness of the blessed state on whose rock the military campaigns, seditions, and conspiracies founder.” [‘Second Round of The Open Interview’ (Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh ) with al-Zawahiri, 2008]

So the establishment of an Islamic State is obligatory, that’s why Dr. Zawāhiri explained in his answers in Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh:

“The need for the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) and the religious and practical (shar’iyah) justifications for its establishment, particularly as such a need is to a great extent connected with a practical view of the field of struggle (battlefield). Our brothers in the Islamic State of Iraq are pioneers in that field. The brothers in Afghanistan have known a number of ISI’s notables at close hand, and they contacted them in various cases. They found in them nobility, a generosity of spirit, and a perspicuous view of the changing reality and storming events which they experienced and which hardened them. The best proof of their perspicuous vision is the enormous achievement they accomplished with Allah’s help, whereby they foiled the US and Iranian plans in the region, an achievement they began by digging their nails into the rock, in circumstances shrouded in defeat, despair, and being overwhelmed by the US invasion and Iranian coalition. They undoubtedly know their field better than anyone else. As for their fairness and truthfulness, all my brothers who lived with them testify to their truthfulness, honesty, renouncement of worldly pleasures, sound views, and good morals.”  [‘Second Round of The Open Interview’ (Al-Liqā Al- Maftūh ) with al-Zawahiri, 2008]

So Abū Hamzah dissolved Tanthīm Al-Qāeda in the land of the two rivers (Iraq) while saying:

“I tell the venerable Shaykh, the brave hero, the Qurayshi Hashemite, who is of a Husayni origin, the commander of the faithful, Abu Umar al‐ Baghdadi: I pledge allegiance to you, to hear and obey, during difficulty and ease, wether in pleasant or unpleasant situations, and even against our preference and this is a promise not to dispute for power with the leader, and to say the truth wherever we are, and not to fear the criticism of anyone in the cause of Allah. And I announce the integration of all the formations that we have established, including the Mujahideen Shura Council, on behalf of my brothers in the council, under the authority of the Islamic State of Iraq.” [“There is no judgment but that of Allah” speech]

And this was confirmed by Dr. Ayman with his saying:

“There is nothing in Iraq today called al-Qaida, for al-Qaida organization in Mesopotamia (Iraq) has merged by the blessing of Allah with the other groups and Jihadi factions in the Islamic State of Iraq, may Allah protect it, and it is a Shar’i (legal) Emirate upon the correct manhaj, and it was established with Shurah and got the pledged of allegiance of majority of the Mujahideen and tribes of Iraq” [Fourth meeting with As-Sahāb Media]

And the Islamic State is truly established not just imaginary, Dr. Ayman said:

“And not that long ago, the Mujahideen established a government in Peshawar – outside Afghanistan, and everyone was happy about it, supported it and blessed it, and nobody condemned it, and many of those who are now condemning the Islamic State in Iraq, with their claim that “it doesn’t have enough power” actually supported the government of Peshawar at the time. And today, the Islamic State in Iraq is established in Iraq, and the Mujahideen are celebrating it in the streets, people are demonstrating to show their support in many cities and villages in Iraq, and mosques in Baghdad are openly showing allegiance to it. And even with all that, those people still say it doesn’t have enough power! The reason is that at the time, the circumstances were pleasing to Washington – but today Washington’s interest is at stake.” [Nasīhatu Mushfaq]
And he also said:

“I send my greetings and those of my brothers to our brothers, the Mujahideen in Iraq. And I congratulate them on the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq, and encourage the Islamic Ummah to back this young, fledgling state, for it – Allah permitting – is the gateway to the liberation of Palestine and the restoration of the Islamic Caliphate. And I also encourage all my Mujahid brothers in Iraq to join this blessed caravan to rescue Iraq of the Caliphate from the schemes of the Crusaders and their agents, the traitorous religion-traders, and to ruin what the beggar Abdul Aziz al-Hakim conspired about in Washington with his master, the defender of the defeated cross.” [The Realities of the Conflict between Islam and Kufr]

And he also said:

“The ISI’s banner and creed are one of the purest banners and creeds in Iraq. It has established an Islamic state that resorts to shari’ah only. It also declares that affiliation with Islam and loyalty to faith are above all other affiliations and loyalties, something in whose mud many movements that are affiliated with Islam are drowned in. It is a state that advocates and seeks and spares no effort to restore the awaited caliphate state. It also incites Muslims on this issue [‘Second Round of Open Interview’]

And major empowerment isn’t a condition for establishing an Islamic State, Dr. Ayman said:

“The so-called Hamas government in Gaza and Ramallah has been established and we didn’t hear those who condemn the Islamic State in Iraq, nobody said it’s not legitimate or lacks power. The half government in Ramallah and the other half in Gaza can’t even meet with each other! And the prime minister can only move if the Israeli army gives him permission! And many of their ministers and deputies have been arrested and imprisoned by Israel, but did we hear anyone say they aren’t legitimate or they lack power? Hamas even had to let down two thirds of its seats and abandon four fifths of Palestine and give authority to Mahmud Abbas to negotiate in the name of the Palestinians, but we didn’t hear those people condemning it or saying it lacks power!

And the Islamic State in Iraq – with the blessing and permission of Allah – has much more territorial control, soldiers and supporters than the so-called government of Hamas, its leaders can move freely, they threaten America, and America recognizes its danger. They defend every Muslim cause, from Grozny to Sebta and Melillia, they promised to free the Muslim prisoners, especially the symbol of Daawa and Jihad, Sh. Omar Abdurrahman, and they even launch campaigns against America in his name! And even with all that you consider it lacking power?

And on the other side, you have the Hamas leaders who declare themselves innocent from the Mujahideen, they even said in Moscow in a visit, that the Chechnya conflict is a “Russian interior problem”! And every day Hamas and Fatah fight and kill each other, and they justify it, then Arab regimes come to mediate between them! While the Islamic State in Iraq announced it only fights the spies and the traitors, and it declared itself innocent from those who spill unlawful blood, its leaders are ready to be judged and punished if they fall into any legal (Shar’i) crime, and even with all that, there are still media campaigns filled with lies against them, and you still believe them? What is this contradiction?

The reality is, the Hamas game where it goes concession after concession, is something the Zionists and Crusaders want, and the Arab regimes provide everything for it, while the establishment of the Islamic State in Iraq is an Islamic project of Jihad, being fought by the Zionists and the Crusaders – and hence by the Arab regimes as well.” [Nasīhatu Mushfaq]

And also it’s not a condition for the state to be free from mistakes, Dr. Ayman said:

“The Islamic Emirate is declared once it applies Islamic Law (Sharia) in the territories under its control, even if it makes mistakes, and Allah knows best” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

And retreating from some areas into the desert doesn’t mean they became a fighting organization after being a legitimate State. Also when the Arabian Peninsula fell out of the governance of As- Siddīq (Abū Bakr ra), that didn’t mean his State wasn’t legitimate. Likewise according to him, The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, their Statehood didn’t end because they retreated into the mountains.

Dr. Ayman said:

“Ask those who cast doubt on the enablement of the ISI and its control of land: Can anyone deny that the blessed state controls, at least, one square kilometer of the land of Iraq? If the answer is yes, and it is so, praise be to Allah, then why do you deny it the right to establish an Islamic state on the land it controls? What area did the state in Madina al Munawarah control before the raid of the confederates (ghazwatul Ahzāb)? And how was the situation in it during the raid of the confederates? The Qur’ān describes this and says:
“Behold! They came on you from above you and from below you, and behold, the eyes became dim and the hearts gaped up to the throats, and you imagined various (vain) thoughts about Allah. In that situation were the Believers tried: they were shaken as by a tremendous shaking. And behold! The Hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease (even) say: “(Allah) and His Messenger promised us nothing but delusion!” Behold! A party among them said: “You men of Yathrib! you cannot stand (the attack)! Therefore go back!” And a band of them ask for leave of the Prophet, saying, “Truly our houses are bare and exposed,” though they were not exposed they intended nothing but to run away.” [Al-Ahzab 33 verses 10-13] Almighty Allah then says: “You have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah. When the Believers saw the Confederate forces, they said: “This is what Allah and his Messenger had promised us, and Allah and His Messenger told us what was true.” And it only added to their faith and their zeal in obedience. Among the Believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah. Of them some have completed their vow (to the extreme), and some (still) wait: but they have never changed (their determination) in the least: That Allah may reward the men of Truth for their Truth, and punish the Hypocrites if that be His Will, or turn to them in Mercy: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And Allah turned back the Unbelievers for (all) their fury: no advantage did they gain; and enough is Allah for the believers in their fight. And Allah is full of Strength, able to enforce His Will. And those of the People of the Book who aided them – Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror into their hearts, (So that) some you slew, and some you made prisoners. And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which you had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things.” [ Al-Ahzab 33 verses 21-27]  Are these not Qur’ānic facts?” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

And he also said:

“About those who object to the Islamic State by saying that it is not fully consolidated, Sh. Usama says about them: “Whoever ponders upon how the first state of Islam has been during Uhud and Al-Ahzab when everyone was terrified, and when the Arabian Peninsula almost turned apostate after the death of the messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, would know that absolute consolidation is not a precondition for vowing allegiance to the imam or the establishment of the Islamic State.” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

And Shaykh Usāma ibn Lāden said:

“The fall of the State doesn’t mean everything has ended, and doesn’t mean that the Jama’a of the Muslims and their Imam has ended” [As-Sabīl li ihbāt Al-Mū’āmarāt]

Also Abū Bakr Al-Husainī Al-Baghdādi received the Bay’ah as an Amīr of the believers in the Islamic State of Irāq, he didn’t receive the Bay’ah as amīr of an organization. We can read the following in a statement by Shūrah council of the Islamic State in Irāq:

“The Shura Council has taken its time for all the past period, meeting the ministers of the State, its amirs, Ahl al-Hal wa al-Aqd, people of authority and opinion, and we can send glad tidings to the Islamic Ummah, especially its Mujahidin vanguard, especially the shaykhs of the ummah and the leaders of jihad everwhere that the opinions have all agreed upon the allegiance to the Shaykh, the Mujahid, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi al-Hussayni al-Qurashi as Commander of the Faithful (Amir al- Mumineen) in the Islamic State in Iraq, and appointing the Shaykh Mujahid Abu Abdullah al- Hussayni al-Qurashi as his minister and second in command. Those two respectable Shuyukh are people of abundant knowledge and pioneers in da’wah and Jihad for the sake of Allah, we consider them such and Allah will be their judge” [Bayān Majlis Shūra Dawlat Al-‘Irāq Al-Islāmiyyah]

This was also confirmed by the official spokesman of the Islamic State Abū Muhammad Al-‘Adnāni As-Shāmi in Ramadan 1434 H when he said:

“And when we lost our Amir Abu Umar al-Baghdadi, Allah blessed us with better than him insha’Allah – we consider him such and Allah will be his judge – our Emir Abu Bakr al-Husayni al-Qurashi al-Baghdadi, Amir al-Mumineen may Allah protect him and guide his footsteps. Likewise is his deputy Abi Abdillah Al-hasany Al-Qurashy Al-Baghdadi hafidahullah. And if we lost our minister of war, the lion Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, he had raised men and left behind him crashing jungle lions, then here is Abu Sulayman An-Nasir Li Dinillah in the battle field, so gald tidings and don’t worry, the Islamic State is staying by the permission of Allah, despite the anger of the hateful” [The Islamic State will stay – inna Dawlat Al-Islām Bāqiyah]

Instead of opposing this description (Amīr of the believers in the Islamic State) he (Dr. Ayman) confirmed it by reciting this poem:

In the land of two rivers (Iraq), It (JN) is supported by batallions***

And by an Islamic State that assaults and roars***

To her, daily in Iraq are new incidents (fightings) ***

In the sea of deaths, the deaths being like valley openings [i.e. many] ***

The soldiers of Abubakr have confronted apostasy***

Triggered by the dollar, inciting and gathering it***

So it’s a duty upon the Islamic State to expand and to destroy the borders drawn by Sykes-Picot, not to isolate itself within it. And it is upon the Muslims to support it not to wage war against it. And from the most important forms of support is pledging allegiance to it.

Dr. Ayman said:

“I also plead to the Muslim Nation to support the mujahideen in Iraq and especially the Islamic State of Iraq, as this is the shortest way to change the bitter situation in the heart of the Islamic World, and heading towards Bayt al-Maqdis and breaking the boundaries and borders the corrupt tyrants had placed between us and our brothers everywhere.” 

“And, we will [always] be incapable of stopping the crimes in Palestine, and in others besides it in the Islamic places, if we don’t break these boundaries… or else, we will just be satisfied with protesting, shouting, giving speeches and lectures every time the Crusader Zionist enemy stands against us and our brothers with a new massacre, and just return to our homes broken, miserable and incapable.”

“And today, Allah granted us this rare opportunity that, in the beloved Iraq, jihad has risen free of governments and regime chains, and a united Mujahid Islamic state was founded. It destroyed the American crusader plan in the heart of the Islamic World, and is burning to head towards al-Aqsa Mosque and Palestine.” So, let us support this blessed jihad in the Iraq of the Caliphate, and let us support this patient young country and to not back away from this obligation and that responsibility as Allah will bring down on us His punishment and discontent…”  [6 Years after the Aggression on Iraq]

He also said:

“I remind the brothers of what Sh. Usama – may Allah protect him – said in his latest speech:

“If [America] and its agents are defeated in Iraq with the permission of Allah, there won’t be much before the caravan of the Mujahideen starts its road, in successive convoys going from Baghdad to Anbar, Mosul, Diyala and Salaheddin, until Hittin (a historic battle) comes back to us with the permission of Allah” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

He also said:

“The Islamic State in Iraq and our Mujahideen brothers will not feel at ease until they destroy the borders between them and Bayt al-Maqdis, and unite with their brothers there and fight the Zionist Jews, and save the Aqsa Mosque with the permission of Allah.” [6 Years after the Aggression on Iraq]

He also said:

“And I remind them of the enlightening words of the martyr of Islam as we consider him, Shaykh Abdullah Azzam, when he said: “Truth doesn’t care about geographical borders, and doesn’t limit itself to limits delimited by geographers. Truth transcends untainted human mind, telling it; how can you say that so and so issue is true on this side of the mountain and false on the other, or true on one border of the river, and false on the other” [Arba’ūna ‘āman ‘ala suqūt Al-Qūds]

He also said:

“and I ask Allah subhanah that He gives victory to the Islamic State in Iraq and firmness to its leader Abu Umar al-Baghdadi may Allah protect him, and to give ground to this State so that it gathers all the Mujahideen and Muslim brothers in Iraq, so that an Jihadi Islamic State emerges in the Iraq of Khilafah that sets its eyes towards Jerusalem and move forth to establish the Caliphate State that was fallen by the crusaders and allies” [Duroos wa ‘ibar wa ahdāth ‘ithām]

He also said:

“This Islamic Emirate which is waging Jihad and performing Ribat, and also the Islamic State in Iraq, must be supported by fighting in its ranks, and supporting it with money, experience and information. The Muslims should first repent from their betrayal of Taliban before and should know that Allah will ask them about their betrayal” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

He also said:

“The ISI has now developed from the level of the Mujahidin’s Shurah at the time of the martyrdom of Abu-Mus’ab al-Zarqawi Rahimahullah, and that is because of Allah’s guidance. The ISI today is waging a ferocious war on several fronts against the Crusaders, apostates, and Iran’s agents. Therefore the Muslim ummah bears a great responsibility in supporting them so that they will foil the plans of the Americans and the Iranians, and consolidate the state of Islam in the heart of the Muslim World, and so as to support the move of the mujahidin in Iraqi toward the environs of Jerusalem, so that the mujahidin will meet there, both those from outside of the blessed Palestine and those from inside it, to herald the elimination of Israel, Allah willing” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]
So it’s not appropriate to say; The Islamic State is legitimate in Iraq but not in Shām, because the land of Shām is a neighbouring country.

Dr. Ayman said:

“So why don’t you, O people of Pakistan, join with the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan? It is a Shar’i (legal) Emirate governing Most of Afghanistan, and it’s fighting a Crusader enemy of Islam, it rules with Sharia over its lands, so why don’t you unite with it and support it? […] Unite with the Islamic Emirate that Muslims have pledged allegiance to in the East and the West!” [Tawhīd Al-Kalimah Hawla Kalimat At-Tawhīd]

This is a State and not an army, and it’s not allowed according to the Shari’ah to appoint two Imāms in two neighbouring countries. So the one who affirms to the legitimacy of the State in Irāq and also sees the legitimacy of a neighbouring upcoming state which hasn’t been established, giving away its matter to “the people of Syria”, making a difference between the 2 states because of fabricated borders, has indeed acknowledged the borders drawn by Sykes-Picot even if it was partial. And there is no one infallible other than Rasūli Allah ,ﷺ

Dr. Ayman said:

“And the third difference (between the Islamic state and the nationalist state) is that the Islamic state sees itself responsible for all Islamic lands, as scholars have said: Muslim lands are considered one single entity, while the nationalist state only sees itself within its borders” [Tawhīd Al-Kalimah Hawla Kalimat At-Tawhīd]

And he also said:

“The sixth goal: Working to establish a Caliphate that doesn’t recognize nationalist states nor the borders that the invaders have established, but implements a Caliphate upon the Prophetic methodology, believes in the unity of all Muslim lands and the brotherhood between all Muslims, erases the borders, and strives to propagate justice and Shura and liberation of all Muslim lands” [Wathīqat Nusrat Al-Islām]

So the organizations are obliged to give Bay’ah to the State, not the opposite. So whoever demands the State to exit (Shām) is actually demanding its partial dissolution.

Dr. Ayman said:

“The State is a step in establishing the Caliphate, which is more superior than organizations. So the organizations should pledge allegiance to the States, and not the opposite. And the Amir al- Mumineen Abu Umar al-Baghdadi – may Allah protect him – is among the leaders of the Muslims and the Mujahideen today, we ask Allah to give him firmness and victory.” [2nd meeting with Sahab Media]

And he also said:

“And I tell them (the other Mujahideen in Iraq): The Islamic State in Iraq is your State, your Emirate and your government, who are you going to unite with if you don’t unite with them? Rush towards goodness with them and heal our hearts and give us the glad tiding that we’ve been waiting for.” [4th meeting with As-Sahāb Media]

Dr. Ayman was never Amīrul Mu’minīn for Islamic State of Iraq neither was Shaykh Usāma ibn Lāden may Allah have mercy on him, rather they had a bay’ah to Imām Mullah Muhammad ‘Umar, the amīr of the Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan. Mullah ‘Umar has never been Amīrul Mu’minīn of the Islamic State in Iraq, so how can someone say that Dr. Ayman has the same power (might/abilities) as the amīr of the believers?

Dr. Ayman said:

“The ISI(Islamic State of Iraq) and the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and add to them the Islamic Emirate in Caucasus, are Islamic emirates that are not under the control of one ruler. We hope that the caliphate state will be established soon to unite them with all Muslims. Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin, may Allah watch over him, is just a soldiers of the leader of the faithful, Mulla Muhammad Omar, may God watch over him. All those you have mentioned support each other and cooperate with each other in support of Islam and jihad. [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

And he also said:

“Mulla Muhammad Omar – may Allah protect him – is the Amir/Leader of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and the Mujahideen that joined it, and Sh. Usama bin Laden – may Allah protect him – is one of his soldiers” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

And he also said:

“We renew the pledge of allegiance to Amir al-Mumineen Mulla Muhammad Omar Mujahid – may Allah protect him – obedience and hearing, in matters we like and dislike, to wage Jihad in the path of Allah, and establish Sharia, and protect the oppressed.” [Watarrajala Al-Fāris Al-Nabīl]

And he also said:

“And those who claim that we claim for ourselves the Caliphate over all Muslims, how can he forget that we pledged allegiance to Mulla Muhammad Omar Mujahid – may Allah protect him – the Amir of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan?” [Al-Imān Yasra’ Al-Istikbār]

As for the Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan, it is not working for expanding outside its current borders, it assured the nations of the world and its neighboring countries they won’t intervene in their affairs and not be any form of danger to them (except for those who fight them in Afghanistan). This was also acknowledged by their official and famous announcements, which were refuted by some scholars and students of Islamic knowledge. Among them:

“The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) wants good relations and mutual interactions with the world, particularly, with the Islamic world and the neighbors in the light of Islamic rules, national interests, mutual respect and joint cooperation. The Islamic Emirate does not intend to interfere in the internal affairs of others nor allows others to interfere in its internal affairs. The Islamic Emirate assures the entire world that it will not allow anyone to use the soil of Afghanistan against any one and makes it clear that it respects all international laws and principles in the light of its Islamic rules and national interests. […]

The media of the enemy portrays us as if we wanted war with our neighbors, but the reality is that International laws don’t permit such actions. The ongoing Imperialist war against so-called terror is actually a war against human values, justice and peace […] I urge Islamic countries, powerful neighboring countries and world organizations to play a positive role” [1433H Eid Message from the IEA, and you find the same things in other statements]

It is not possible to expand outside the borders drawn by Sykes-Picot except by fighting the brown and the black(i.e. all people)

And Dr. Ayman did not name himself an Imām for a State or organization, so how can someone say that he has power over the amīr of the believers in the Islamic State in Irāq?

Dr. Ayman said:

“We want an Islamic Caliphate in which the Ummah freely chooses its leader, and pledges allegiance to him upon Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet peace be upon him, and obey him as long as he obeys Allah. If that happens, then we are with him. If Muslims on any part of earth establish the rule of Islam and choose an Imam, then that choice will be also our choice, because we aren’t here for power.

That’s why we tell the people of Sham: we are not here to take away your right to choose who will rule over you. Rather, if you establish the rule of Islam and choose someone to rule over you with Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet peace be upon him, then your choice is our choice.” [Al-Imān Yasra’ Al-Istikbār]

The specific pledge of fighting – suppose it happened, and was legally valid with such innovated manner- it isn’t higher in authority or more committed to the ruling than the pledge of allegiance made by the Shūra council, the commanders, leaders and judges to Abū Bakr Al-Baghdādi as an amīr for the believers in the Islamic State. So it cannot reduce his powers in the State politics, then how can they avoid him from doing the obliged? And from the greatest of obligations is the expansion of the Islamic State to the entire world.

Dr. Ayman said:

“The martyr of Islam, Sh. Abdullah Azzam may Allah have mercy on him said: “The allegiance is always upon goodness, because we always pledge to do good, and it is not permissible to pledge allegiance for bad actions and filth, like those who pledge allegiance then are asked to do actions that anger Allah like spying on people or uncover the ‘awra (hidden defects) of people.” until he said: “And it is not permissible for someone to use his allegiance to force him to not do good that is prescribed in the quran and sunnah, like waging Jihad in the path of Allah – because in that case it becomes an allegiance in bad actions, and there is no obedience to the creation in disobedience to the Creator.” [Nasīhatu Mushfiq]

That’s why they (IS) concluded that implementing what came in the letter would be disobedience to the Creator, like it can be heard in “Bāqiya wa Tatamadad” by Amīr of the believers and the audio message: “Fadharhum wama Yaftarūn” by the official spokesman, even if the writer perceived it as an order or ruling, especially since the risāla is directed to a State Amīr from an Amīr of an organization who acknowledged the legitimacy of this State for 7 years before Jawlāni defected and split the ranks. So the risāla surprised them by rulings which indicate that Dr. Ayman doesn’t see the legitimacy of the state, and the relationship between them wasn’t built on this foundation. I copied some of his sayings that contradict what it stated, that’s why there was so much gossip and increase in questions and assumptions that they were almost sure he will reject the bay’ah of the disobedient ones, rather Jawlāni and his friends were surprised when their Bay’ah was accepted!

I ask the reader to give a moment so I can narrate some events;

When the Islamic State in Irāq & Shām was announced, and Jawlāni came out openly splitting (the ranks) and disobeying the command (when he himself used to consider Abū Bakr Al-Baghdādi an Imām for a legitimate State, and he presented himself as his representative in Shām). The soldiers defected from him and the Jabhah didn’t have any traces left in most of the wilāyat, jawlani asked to meet the Shūra council of the Islamic State. The meeting took place in the end of (Islamic month) Jumada II and Jawlāni offered to return back to the obedience of his amīr, with some conditions attached:

The name “Jabhat Al-Nosrah” has to stay as a representative of the islamic State in Shām, adding a phrase that shows they really follow the State.

■ The rāyah (flag) of “Jabhat Al-Nosrah” has to stay on the centers on its side, the rāyah of the Islamic State.

■ He must have the command and the opinion in matters concerning wilāyāt of Ash-Shām.

The Islamic State rejected his requests, so he accepted to return to obedience without conditions – due to the collapse of his front -, so he promised to visit the centers and the fronts by himself in order to tell the leaders and soldiers that he returned to the obedience and that he’s a soldier of the Islamic State until the misconceptions are finished and the fitnah between the soldiers is stopped. Before doing this he asked to delay the matter for a couple of days so that he could meet with all the close ones who approved of his defection and he can give them the news (out of respect for one another because they were used to doing that). He went but he disappeared because of the intense pressure that he encountered from those, so he sat in Al-Qalamoun region desperately, until the letter reached him from the Dr. through a media person who accompanies him. He read the letter and couldn’t believe it saying: “I was so surprised by the content that I forgot to make sujood thanking Allah”

When Jawlāni showed the letter to those who were close to him, they doubted the authenticity because they knew about the sayings of Dr. Ayman concerning the State’s legitimacy and its obliged expansion before the events of Shām happened. Also they knew he praised ‘al-nusra’ front and since it was part of the dawla and not vice versa. So Jawlāni was forced to add footnotes to the letter with the phrase; “Markaz Al-Fajr” and he spread it on the internet and leaked a copy to Al-Jazīrah media channel. This was the first time in the history of Jihād that a personal letter directed to the leaders of Jihād was spread on satellite TV; he did all this in order to refute those who doubted the authenticity of the letter. Note that “Markaz Al-Fajr” has nothing to do with the private writings and letters of Dr. Ayman, and he started spreading passages from the letter to his private circle (of friends) and his soldiers through the mobile phone.

And these events were witnessed by some members of the State’s Shūra council and some of the people close to Jawlāni (members of ‘JN’ Shūra). One of them even left them when he saw the hypocrisy. The facts of the “return of Jawlāni to the Islamic State” meeting were restricted in detail in the notebook Mahdat Ijtimā’. But Jawlāni took away the notebook after the end of the meeting saying that he wanted a copy, before he went hiding with the mentioned notebook. And for this event there are witnesses, all of them are alive all praise due to Allah.

So the reality which was hidden from many and in Allah we seek refuge is, this letter published on 13th of Rajab (Risālat Al-Hukm mina Al-Zawāhiri) was the cause for splitting the ranks and gave live to the name Jabhat Al-Nusrah after it was ended and collapsed after Shaykh Al-Baghdādi revoked its authority.

So let’s go back to the misconception(s) surrounding Bay’ah….
Those who disagree with the Islamic State aren’t infallible even if they were pioneers in knowledge and Jihād, Dr. Ayman said:

“Sh. Hamid al-Ali, and Sh. Abu Baseer al-Tartusi, they have all our respect and consideration, and we saw in them firm and strong stances in supporting the jihad and the Mujahideen, we ask Allah to reward them for it. As for their opposition to the Islamic State in Iraq, nobody is exempt from mistakes, and when there’s disagreement we solve it with evidence and research, until we find the truth and give victory to Islam” [First interview with Sahab Media]

And the Islamic State according to Dr. Ayman was legal and Bāqiya (remaining) just before the announcement of expansion to Bilād As-Shām. Dr. Ayman said:

“Those who defended Islam, Jihad and Ahl al-Sunna in Iraq are the noble Mujahideen, the Islamic State in Iraq being the foremost of them, and it is still, with Allah’s blessing, firm and did not change its aqeeda and did not retract still clinging to the foundations of Islam despite the filthy war against it.
The noble Mujahideen, and the Islamic State of Iraq at the foremost, are owed debts by every free honorable Muslim in Iraq. If it wasn’t for them, the destiny of Sunnis in Iraq would be like the one of the Sunnis in Iran, at the hands of Ismail the Safavid.

The noble Mujahideen, and the Islamic State of Iraq at the foremost, are owed debts by every free honorable Muslim, as they are the solid rock on which the American agenda in the region was crushed, the project to divide Iraq then Saudi Arabia and Egypt. And those who saved the Ummah from this devilish American plot are the Mujahidin of Iraq, and at the forefront, the Islamic State of Iraq, may Allah reward them.

Those noble Mujahidin, and the Islamic Stat of Iraq at the foremost, have presented a lot of sacrifices, so many that you can’t even count them: thousands of martyrs, much more in injured, prisoners, handicapped, widows, orphans, refugees, exiled for the sake of Allah, they presented all that despite the huge media campaign was against them, from America and from Arab regimes – and everybody knows from where they are sponsored.  And even with the misguiding campaign by many of the head-covered bearded guys (shekhs) especially in the gulf countries  , the noble Mujahideen and the ISI at the foremost, never abandoned their mission and kept protecting the sanctity of the Muslims, not because they wanted a worldly benefit but because they wanted the pleasure  of Allah. And here they are today, firm and proud like a mountain, going from victory to victory and from conquest to conquest.” [Tawhīd Al-Kalimah Hawla Kalimat At-Tawhīd]

Destroying the State and undermining it will only be in the benefit of the tawāgīt, Dr. Ayman said:

“And so, I ask those who doubt the Islamic State in Iraq, in whose interest is the destruction of the Islamic State that was established after all this time spent waiting for it?” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

Therefore, it is a sign of ungratefulness for the blessings and not fulfiling the debts; the removal of the Islamic State from shām, to accept the pledge of the rebellious and the disobedient ones, to ignore the islamic State’s virtues and blowing up their mistakes, and threatening them with a war in Iraq, describing the State as Hurūriyah (khawarij), extremist and comparing it with the morals of the rawāfidh, or ruling on the state that it is a Tā’efatu Mumtan’iah (refraining sect) with force from seeking Judgement in Quran and Sunnah with more extremism than the early khawārij, and that the individual ruling on every single individual among the Islamic state is that of the group.

Both Imāms Abū Umar Al-Husayni Al-Baghdādi and Abū Hamzah Al-Muhājir promised that the state will remain and expand until it infiltrates the borders and conquers (back) Bayt Al-Maqdis, the Arabian Peninsula, Indonesia, the Philippines, Andalusia and Rome. And they took an oath on this.  

I swear on The One who took them as shuhada , we will not rest until we honor their oath and fulfill their promise with Allah’s Help and Power, as a gratitude for them and for their blood, and Allah is a witness for what we say. We will never bring to realization the dream of the Jews & Christians who want to see the State’s dissolution, even if it will only be a single centimeter of earth.

In conclusion, Dr Ayman said:

“I ask the dear brother to review the speech of Sh. Usama completely, he responded to many of the allegations and rumors about the Islamic State of Iraq, may Allah give it victory.” [Al-Liqā Al- Maftūh 2nd episode]

And he also said:

“I ask the dear brother to review the speech of Sh. Usama in which he talked positively about the Islamic State in Iraq, and about those who pledged allegiance to it, and asked the Muslims of Iraq to unite around it.” [Al-Liqā Al-Maftūh 2nd episode]

Link to speech entitled: “The Way to Foil the Conspiracies” by Mujaddid Shaykh Usāma ibn Lāden Allah accept him:  



After all this I say: If there was a consultation and supportive relationship – even if supposedly some called it (this relationship) ‘Allegiance’ out of humbleness and mistakenly – And there is no one infallible other than the messenger of Allah ﷺ they didn’t meant to bring down the Islamic State as a Legit State, and Dr. Ayman didn’t mean to claim the position of amīr of the believers for it [Dawlah], and this is clear and abundant in the official speeches, statements and the official releases of the dawlah and the Dr. [and I quoted some of his words]. So Dawla still remains a State, and its amīr remains the amīr of the believers, and Dr. Ayman remains the amīr of an organization. And he distances himself from being an amīr of a State usually emphasizing the Bay’ah he has on his neck for Mullah Umar the amīr of the Emirate of Afghanistan.

So how can the relationship between the State and the organization affect the power of the amīr of the believers in the Islamic State?, even if some supposedly called it ‘bay’ah’ whoever he may be especially when we witnessed the dangerous methodological disagreements, and the leadership of the tanthīm (alqaeda) followed the media magicians in every turn they made, and they commanded them (IS) to withdraw  from the frontlines in Shām, and the Islamic State was  fought together with everyone it from Muhājirīn to Ansār, while the kūfār, murtadīn and their tawagīt enjoyed it, and from Allah we seek help.

As for the claim of seeking judgment with Dr. Ayman, this misconception was refuted by Shaykh Al-Adnāni and asked the opponents for a mubāhala (envying the curse of Allah upon the liar).

I say: How can Dr. Ayman judge between the State, and some one, two or three men while he will benefit from accepting Jawlāni’s pledge? among the conditions of a judge is, that his senses should be fine so he can distinguish between the liar and the truthful by seeing the face of the individual and hearing his voice. It also needs repeating the same questions two or three times for the prosecutor, the defendant and the witnesses for him to compare their answers. 

So how is it possible for Dr. Ayman to see the face of the leaders and the disobedient and hear their voices so he can accept the testimony of the truthful one and reject the claims of the liar while he is in Khūrassān? And how is he going to ask them and compare their answers when most of the correspondence between Khūrassān and Shām needs two months in most cases?

The reason why the State wrote a letter to Dr. Ayman, was to hurry him in rejecting the Bay’ah from the disobedient, they didn’t do that because they sought judgement from him as a Judge.

So this issue and some others were the reason for Abū Abdullāh As-Shāmi to issue his verdict on the State; that the State is refraining from seeking judgment in Qurān & Sunnah with force.

Finally I say: For the one who wants to know how a jihadi group that fights for Allah’s Sake turns into a group that fights for the Sake of the taghūt (like some groups in Syria), let him read the history. Let him know that the love of the person for prestige, money and leadership will become pride, pride will become jealousy, jealousy will become arrogance, arrogance will become hatred, and hatred enmity, and enmity will become dispute with the opponent, and dispute happens by hiding tawhīd, and displaying shirk, avoiding the muwahidīn and flattering the mushrikīn in the first place. After that is the blatant kūfr and a war in the end, due to the following of desires/lusts and holding on to the misconceptions, unless Allah protects His servant due to His Mercy. 

From Allah we seek help, in Him we put our trust, there is no power and nor strength except with Him, Allah Alone is Sufficient for us, and He is the Best Disposer of affairs for us.

All praise due to Allah

Penned by: Abū Maysarah Ash-Shāmi May Allah forgive him

Does the Islamic State take slaves from the Sahawat Murtadeen (sahawat apostates in Iraq and Shaam)?

Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim

Some rumours and lies have been spread by the enemies of the Islamic State Khilafah that it takes slaves, especially female slaves, from amongst the relatives of the Sahawat Murtadeen (pro-West apostates) of Iraq and Syria. This is a lie and has no basis in reality. The Islamic State Khilafah does not take slaves from amongst the relatives of the Murtadeen, and neither does it make Sabāyah (concubines) of their women. Here is a clarification of the Islamic States policy regarding the relatives of the Sahawat Murtadeen from Amir Ul-Mumineens latest speech, “March Forth Whether Light or Heavy“:

O Ahlus-Sunnah in Iraq, and specifically our people in al-Anbār, be certain that our hearts are broken on account of your leaving of your homes and your lands, and your seeking of shelter in the territory of the Rāfidah and the Kurdish atheists, and your being forced to wander the lands. And even if some of your relatives are apostates waging war against the religion of Allah and allied with the Rāfidah and the Crusaders, then we don’t hold you accountable for their crimes. So return to your lands, and remain in your homes, and seek shelter – after first seeking shelter with Allah – with your people in the Islamic State, for you will find therein, by Allah’s permission, a warm embrace and a safe refuge. For you are our people. We defend you, your honor, and your wealth. We want you to be mighty and noble, we want you to be safe and secure, and we want your salvation from Hellfire.

Full statement to be found here:

We ask Allah SWT to make the truth evident to the liars or to curse them if they remain unheedful.

Why I Left Jabhat An-Nusrah – Part 1

See also: Part 2,Part 3,Part 4,Part 5,Part 6


By Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (From the Islamic State video “Message Of A Mujaahid” released by Al I’itisām Media on 3rd October 2014 )

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Many times I have been asked about my story and the reasons why I left JN(Jabhat An-Nusrah), and contemplating over the reasons, I decided it was best I wrote an article detailing my reasons.

I left JN in April after joining them in January 2014. During this time period, I saw many things which clearly were not traits of a Mujaahid who fights for the return of the Sharia nor were they traits of a group I would wish to fight under.

There are a few reasons why I left JN, among them was their nifaq, their fear of being labelled as extremists, their cowardice in fighting batil, their illogical stances, the arrogance of some of their amirs, the ignorance from their top Amir and spokesman (“Shaykh” Sulayman AlMuhajir), their lack of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa, and the fact that they were not implementing the Shariah.

These are seven reasons which I can remember at this current time. There are many incidents which I can narrate, but they fit into these seven broad categories. Some incidents overlapping into more than one category.

As Muslims, we know that every claim is nothing more than empty words without weight, unless backed up by proof. So now I will go through each of these seven points giving evidence to back up my claims. And unlike majority of the Dawlah-haters, I will only narrate what I saw with my own eyes, or heard with my own ears.

1) Their Nifaaq:

Prior to coming to Sham, I was not aware of most of the political affairs happening inside Sham. This was due to me trying to keep a low profile away from the MI5. So once I arrived in Sham, I had a fresh mind, free of all external influences from second-hand sources. All my research was done while in Sham, speaking to people and seeing things with my own eyes.

During my stay with Jabhat An-Nusrah in Atmah, I had a questioning tongue, always enquiring into the in-fighting, trying to get to the bottom of things, questioning things which didn’t seem logical, and asking further questions over obscure matters.

One thing which really struck me was why Jabhat An-Nusrah was not coming to the aid of their brothers in Dawlah. I asked many brothers why they were not coming to the aid of Dawlah, and most of them responded by saying that the Amirs do not give permission for it. This was very ironical to hear from people who came sham to “help the oppressed”. Innamal muslimoon al-ikhwa, the Muslims are but brothers. And it was known by all, that Dawlah were fighting for nothing but the return of the Sharia and FSA were fighting for democracy. A battle of imaan vs kufr.

Because most of the brothers were giving the excuse of their Amirs not giving permission, I asked some of the Amirs this same question. And again, their response was the same, “Our top/higher Amirs are not giving permission.” A few even said how this was not their fight! A clear act of hypocrisy. So if FSA attack us, we will fight them, but if they attack our brothers from Dawlah, we will not fight them as “it’s not our fight”?! That doesn’t make sense, irrespective of how much “hikmah” you want to use. And where is the “fitnah” in a fight between iman and kufr? Is this not the reason why we came Sham? Is this not the reason jihad was justified? To fight off kufr and its supporters?

This caused me a lot of annoyance and quite a lot of brothers left JN due to this. Many fought alongside their brothers from Dawlah, defending them as a true Muslim should. Realising that our jihad is not for a banner or a group, but for Islam and the Muslims. Indeed those who’s niyyah was clean and had clear untainted foresight, left JN to defend Dawlah from FSA, a group fighting for the return of democracy.

And this hypocritical stance of JN was something we all knew was going to backfire on them. If they stood and watched as their brothers of tawheed were being ambushed and killed by FSA, then a day would come when FSA would also turn their backs on JN. And indeed such predictions occured only a few months down the line.

Finally, to add a word of justice, I would like to say that some JN safe-houses sheltered a few Dawlah fighters. Three were sheltered in the safe-house I was staying in. However, this act is not sufficient, nor does it justify staying out of the fight. A true brother comes to the aid, standing between you and the common enemy, not sitting far away in the back opening his back door letting you in if you survive the vicious onslaught.

Even if you wish to be arrogant and say this is sufficient, then i remind you that;

(A) this was only done by a few number of JN Amirs (I personally only know of one, who was an Egyptian Amir by the name of Abu Ja’far and heard of about 2 others),

(B) this was not the stance of Jawlani, the Amir of JN, and

(C), on occasions, these Dawlah brothers were only given a limited number of days to stay before they were asked to leave. Real friendly isnt it?

So this was one reason why I left JN, their nifaq. Refusing to fight FSA because it was “not our fight” even though it was a fight of the people of democracy vs the people of Shariah. Where is this in relation to the verse “The believing men and women are awliyaa’ of one another.” [9:71]?

Their actions contradicting the verses about brotherhood, and their excuses contradicting the verses which encourage one to fight jihad.

In part two I will explain my second reason for leaving JN, that being, their fear of being labelled extremists and their separation from Islamic courts and judging people with it.

Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (Kik: shaykh.anwar)

Al-Bab, Sham.

23/05/1436 (Corresponding to 14/03/15)

Why I Left Jabhat An-Nusrah – Part 2

See also: Part 1,Part 3,Part 4,Part 5,Part 6

Their Fear Of Being Labelled Extremists, And Their Eradication Of A Dawlah Shariah Court

By Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (From the Islamic State video “Message Of A Mujaahid” released by Al I’itisām Media on 3rd October 2014)

As I have explained in my articles on “niyyah”, our primary purpose for fighting jihad is to raise the Word of Allaah to the highest. The Word of Allaah being the Shariah. So if this is our intention, then we would have no issues with the law courts (Al-Mahkamah) that anyone establishes as long as they are in accordance to the Islamic teachings (i.e, that which judges purely on the Quran and Sunnah). This hold true when there are many groups fighting for its return.

During my time in Jabhat, I was stationed in Atmah, a small town where my battalion (Al-Kateebah) was based and where my training camp also was. Prior to joining the training camp, I used to always walk past a huge building painted black and white, with the testimony of faith (لا اله إلا الله) written in huge text on its gates and the verse about judging based on the laws of Allaah written around the building. A building that stood out with awe, that gave you a sense of honor whenever your eyes gazed upon it.

Enquiring into this building, I was told that it was the law court of Dawlah before they were driven out of Idlib by FSA(Free Syrian Army). And even though Dawlah had left, the remnants of tawheed still stood high in this town. Nobody saw it, but he would be stood in awe. Just its presence caused a sense of fear in one’s heart, increasing one’s Iman and showing you, that this is what we came here to establish.

As Sayyid Qutb mentioned in his book, “Fi Dhilaal Al-Quraan” while expounding upon Sūrah Anfaal, that we fight jihad in order to remove the tyrany and replace it with the Shariah. This being the essence of Jihaad. The equation is not complete if we only remove the tyrant, the system must be replaced with the Shariah.

So always seeing this building reminded me of my intentions and reasons for Jihaad; to establish the Law of Allaah on earth and to judge mankind with it, and nothing else.

After my training camp was completed (end of February/beginning of March), I walked down the path going back to the safe-house (Al-Maqar) where my battalion was based. As I walked near the law court that Dawlah had left behind, I realised it had been erased. The testimony of faith (لا اله إلا الله) had been painted over, the verses of the Quraan had been erased, and the building no longer had its purpose.

The symbol of Tawheed and the fruit of Jihaad had been eradicated from the town. This was very shocking to see. So being as I was, someone who always asked questions, I enquired about this, and I was told it was removed because it was no longer in use!

Jabhat had another Law court somewhere (which I never managed to find!) and they gave the option to the people of Syria to either be judged by the Shariah or to be left alone, judged based on the previous laws of the country.

Likewise, the Huhood of Allaah were not being carried out. Why? “Because the people have lived in jaahilihyah for over 50 years, and they are ignorant of the Shariah so we cannot impose it on them.”?!

So what is the solution, O Amirs of Jabhat? “We must teach the people the Deen first.” So when are we going to do this, O Amirs of Jabhat? And no answer.

No da’wah was given to the public and the remnants of the Shariah were erased. So me and a few brothers spoke to our Amir who was not so keen on the idea of giving Dawah (which was the solution of the problem according to Jabhat anyway). So then we decided to speak to Abu Sulayman Misri (the Amir of the town, who was hardly seen in the town!).

Again, a cold shoulder reply. They said that Dawah was needed to be given to the people before we could judge them according to the Shariah, yet they were not so keen to give Dawah. Strange indeed. Innovated principles with illogical stances.

So the fruits of Jabhat’s jihad and struggle was nothing more than removing the tyrant and leaving the local population to live like sheep, not judging them by the Shariah nor giving them the necessary knowledge or religious upbringing. The Shariah and the law courts was something that the locals saw as extreme, a far-fetched interpretation of the Quraan, not fit for the ‘modern’ world. As long as we believe in the existence of Allaah we are Muslims, and Salaah was something that just made a Muslim even more religious. This was the state of affairs that the Amirs of Jabhat were happy with.

Leave them be, as we need to win the hearts of the people. We are not like those ‘extremists’ in Dawlah who enforce the Shariah upon you and we will allow you to live like scattered sheep.

This is not the fruit of jihad, nor a group who understands the true purpose of Jihad.

So the second reason I left was because of this. The eradication of a Dawlah Law court for no reason other than the fear of being labelled extremists, and allowing the population to live as they pleased, without giving them the necessary Islamic upbringing through da’wah.

In part three I will expound upon the third reason why I left Jabhat, and it is linked very much to this point. That being, their total lack of concern for the Shariah and not prohibiting the evil they saw.

Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (Kik: shaykh.anwar)

Al-Bab, Sham.

29/05/1436 (Correspondong to 20/03/2015)

Why I Left Jabhat An-Nusrah – Part 3

See also: Part 1,Part 2,Part 4,Part 5,Part 6

Not implementing The Shariah, Nor Forbidding The Evil

By Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (From the Islamic State video “Message Of A Mujaahid” released by Al I’itisām Media on 3rd October 2014)

As mentioned in the end of part two of these series, the third reason I left Jabhat An-Nusrah was due to them not implementing the Shariah nor taking heed in prohibiting the evil that was rampant in the areas they controlled.

When I first arrived in Sham and walked the streets of Atmah, Dana, and its surrounding areas, I felt an immediate kick of excitement that I was in the land of jihad and carrying a gun gave me a sense of honor. However, as the weeks went by, the initial excitement faded away, I started realising that there was a lot of vice and munkar around me.

The womenfolk were not dressed according to the teachings of Islam (tight tops, jeans, tight long skirts, glamorous and glittering clothes with designs that attract the eye, etc.); men smoking openly without a shadow of fear or respect for JN when we walked past them; so many shops played music videos on their TV with taxi drivers also playing music as they drove around the streets; hardly anyone prayed salaah, as the adhaan was called, shops remained open, people walked past the masjids. I started feeling as if I was back in Edgeware Road in London. The only difference being, that I had a gun.

As this was a Dawlah town before, the population had been living under the Shariah for the year long period that Dawlah remained in control. So it seemed illogical and irrational for us not to continue on with where Dawlah left off (if we truly wished to rule by the Shariah).

When Dawlah was in town, all vice was prohibited. I asked many locals and they said how Dawlah was ‘extreme’ because music and smoking were prohibited, and how all shops had to be closed for salah and women had to be dressed in niqab and all in black.

This was the state of affairs. Yet JN’s fear of being labeled as extremists lead them to ‘free the people’ from the so-called shakles of Shariah.

Yes they need tarbiyah (religious upbringing), however the solution was not to let them go back to sin. The more sins a person does, the harder it is for naseehah to hit his heart.

You would walk out the masjid and have women dressed up all glamorous walking past you. You would enter the shops and the beardless chubby man would not notice who walked into his shop due to his eyes being fixed on the music channel hewould be watching on the  tv.

So many times I spoke to my amir about this, and he advised me not to forbid the evil I saw lest the locals start to hate us. This (us not forbidding the evil) had many negative impacts, among them was that we were indirectly telling the people that smoking, missing salah, wearing glamorous clothing for women, music, etc, that all these were fine and acceptable according to the Shariah.

We were saying we were an Islamic group, yet by us not prohibiting the evil that Dawlah was prohibiting, we were indirectly telling the locals that Dawlah were the extrmists by prohibiting these evils. We were indirectly telling them that smoking was halal, that music was halal, that a women dressing provocatively was halal.

Likewise, FSA were around the corner, so any indication that we want to have the Shariah in town would have caused them to suspect us to be Dawlah, and as I mentioned in part 1, JN never saw the fight between FSA (the people of democracy) and Dawlah (the people of tawheed) as ‘our fight’. A cowardice approach indeed. But more on the cowardice of JN in the upcoming articles.

My purpose of jihad was to raise the Word of Allaah the highest, i.e, to live under the Shariah. And I was unwilling to remain in a group who showed a lack of concern for the Shariah and making sure the people have an Islamic upbringing.

This may shock many readers, and many may doubt my words, however I only narrate what I saw and I have many brothers who were with me in Jabhat An-Nusrah who are in Dawlah now who can also confirm this. I saw with my own eyes the widespread evil and the laxity the Amirs of Jabhat An-Nusrah had for this.

I was not going to die while killing the Shiah to have no replacement of the  previous laws out in place. Why would I die for a land and then make the land a place where the Word of Allaah (the Shariah) is not raised high? This is not the foundation of jihad.

Likewise there was a refugee camp nearby and it was well known to everyone that prostitution was rampant. Yet what did Jabhat An-Nusra do to counter this problem? Nothing.

You couldn’t even tell someone to stop smoking even though we had a gun. Hardly anyone in the town had respect for Jabhat An-Nusrah and their approach to implementing the Shariah was weak and futile.

And before anyone claims this is all false and I should have spoken to someone higher up, I would like to mention that I am narrating what I saw with my own two eyes. And he who has seen is not like the one who has not.

Furthermore, I also spoke to their official English speaking spokesman, Abu Sulayman Al-Muhajir (the Australian), this was on the 14th of March 2014 in “Reef Muhandiseen” in his masjid / safe house. In this meeting which I attended with 3 other brothers, I asked him why we do not implement the Shariah in the areas we control.

His responses were very illogical and impractical, not to mention stemming from ignorance. But more on Abu Sulayman will be said in the next article.

The main points I wished to highlight as I end the third part of this series, is that evil was widespread in Jabhat An-Nusrah controlled areas, nothing was being done to forbid the evil nor were any steps being taken to teach the people the deen, and when me and a few friends voluneered for this, our proposal was brushed away.

So this is the reality of Jabhat An-Nusrah on this position, and actions speak louder than words. Nay even their words are a proof against them (as I shall show in the upcoming article).

In part four of this series of “why I left Jabhat An-Nusrah”, I will talk about the ignorance of their top Amir and official Spokesman, Abu Sulayman Al-Muhajir, and the discussion I had with him regarding implementing the Shariah, and his ignorant approaches.

Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (Kik: “shaykh.anwar”)

Al-Bab, Sham.

09/06/1436 (Corresponding to 29/03/2015)

Why I Left Jabhat An-Nusrah – Part 4

See also:Part 1, Part 2,Part 3,Part 5,Part 6

The Ignorance Of Their Top Amir, Abu Sulayman Al-Muhajir

By Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (From the Islamic State video “Message Of A Mujaahid” released by Al I’itisām Media on 3rd October 2014)

The forth reason why I left Jabhat was due to the unwavering ignorance of their top Amir and spokesman, Abu Sulayman Al-Muhajir (the Australian).

Before I begin to discuss this point, I would like to clarify that ignorance of an Amir is not necessarily a valid reason in and of itself to leave a group, as ignorance could be of varying degrees and in different branches of knowledge. For example, if a top Amir of a jihadi group is ignorant of the fiqh of inheritance, or ignorant of the fiqh of Hajj, or the fiqh of business transactions, then this does not necessarily render him invalid in his position nor is it a strong reason to leave the group. Likewise, if he is ignorant in matters not linked to jihad, then again, it’s not that big of an issue, and matters can be solved as long as he has a shoorah council around him of knowledgeable people.

However, when the Amir is ignorant of the fiqh of jihad and furthermore, when he is the one who pulls the strings, then this is problematic. And my meeting with ‘Shaykh’ Abu Sulayman Al-Muhajir (the Australian) showed his lack of knowledge in matters of Jihad.

I remember speaking to Abu Sulayman Al-Muhajir (who is their official English speaking spokesman), and this meeting was held on 14th of March, 2014 in “Reef Muhandiseen” in his masjid / safe house. In this meeting which I attended with 3 other brothers, I asked him why we do not implement the Shariah in the areas we control.

This self-proclaimed ‘scholar’ said it was not time to implement the Shariah and we first need to take over the whole of Sham before we can do such a thing. This did not make the slightest sense. So we leave the people alone, not raising the Word of Allaah the highest, not ruling by the Quraan and Sunnah, until the whole of Syria, as big as it is, is conquered?

This approach was not only illogical and impractical, but also contradicted the way of the Sahaabah and those who followed them from the righteous predecessors. Every battle Khalid Bin Waleed fought, and every town, city or village he conquered, he implemented the Shariah therein. The Prophet (saw) did not tell him to conquer the whole of Iraq before implementing the Shariah, nor did he tell Mu’aath Ibn Jabal to wait until the whole of Yemen was under Islamic control before applying the Shariah.

With every battle Khalid Bin Waleed took part in, he implemented the Shariah there, and as soon as a town was captured, the kufr laws were replaced with the Shariah. This is the way of the Sahaabah and those who followed them. We conquer a town, implement the Shariah and move on to the next town, until we take over the entire country, nay the entire world.

And here we had Jabhat An-Nusrah, in specific this unknown, self-proclaimed ‘scholar’, saying the opposite. Jabhat An-Nusrah like to ask the question of who our scholars are and who they studied with, yet they don’t apply these same principles on themselves (a hypocritical approach indeed). I have spoken to many Australian brothers here and all of them have stated how this individual by the kunya Abu Sulayman Al-Muhaajir is an unknown figure. He was not well known in Australia nor did anyone pay any attention to him. Yet when he came to the land of Sham, this unknown individual assumed a position not suitable for him, and from among the signs of the Hour is that unqualified people will take on roles of leadership.

And is it really practical that we first take over the whole of Sham before implementing the Shariah? And if so, how long will this take? Jabhat An-Nusrah have been losing ground ever since the Sahawaat which just proves there is no Barakah in their approach. Indeed the Help of Allaah is with those who uphold the Shariah and implement it when Allaah grants them authority in the land.

The youth of Sham were all calling for the Shariah in the spring of the Jihad, yet strange how even their top ‘scholar’ said this was not the time to implement the Shariah in the areas they controlled!
Abu Sulayman Al-Muhajir, you have lost all your honor and respect for taking up a position of leadership which you do not deserve and leading the masses based upon your ignorance. If you were a man with no authority then you would be a fly which I would brush away, but you call the shots and pull the strings, so your public exposure is needed.

And this is not to mention your clear cut lies you love to tell everyone about Dawlah. An ignorant man like you deserves no respect and no followers. And all praise is due to Allaah that He is causing many of those around you to leave you one by one.

So this was the fourth reason why I left Jabhat An-Nusrah, the ignorant approaches of their top Amirs. In part five of this series I will discuss their lack of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa.

Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (Kik: shaykh.anwar)

Al-Bab, Sham.

15/06/1436 (Corresponding to 04/04/2015)

Why I Left Jabhat An-Nusrah – Part 5

See also:Part 1, Part 2,Part 3,Part 4,Part 6

Their Lack Of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa

By Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (From the Islamic State video “Message Of A Mujaahid” released by Al I’itisām Media on 3rd October 2014)

In this article I will discuss the lack of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa Jabhat An-Nusrah had. As I explained in part one of this series, Jabhat An-Nusrah had a very hypocritical approach when it came to the fight between Dawlah and FSA. On the one side there was a group of pious brothers fighting for the return of the Shariah and on the other side there was a group of evil doers, smokers and alcoholics who were fighting for democracy.

Anyone with the slightest amount of knowledge will say this fight is anything but fitnah. It’s a fight of haqq vs. batil. However Jabhat An-Nusrah showed their hypocrisy when they stayed out of this fight.

Muhajireen Sisters In The Hands Of FSA.The Unbiased Facts

Another aspect of this which I would like to highlight is their approach in dealing with the sisters who were with Dawlah. It is well known that FSA were not only killing the brothers who were with Dawlah, but were also killing the sisters! Yes, the ‘mujahideen’ of FSA (as Jabhat An-Nusrah like to call them) were also attacking the wives and daughters of the brothers from Dawlah.
There have been countless incidents which have come to surface after the sahawat. I have personally heard of many incidents where FSA were killing our sisters. One is invited to read “Days Of Sahawaat, Episode 2” where Abu Saa’d Al-Sudani also reports an incident of this nature. There were cases where sisters were fighting back with guns, grenades and other cases where sisters got captured, raped, and also are still, until this day, imprisoned by FSA. About six months ago a large scale mission was underway in Halab to capture this prison where our sisters were held by FSA.

It’s a well-known fact, which only an arrogant person will deny. Sisters got killed and also killed many FSA in the process. Some sisters even had explosive belts which they used to kill FSA soldiers who were firing upon them and surrounding them.

Jabhat An-Nusrah’s Approach:

Anyone with an ounce of Iman and manhood in him will feel a sense of anger burning inside him. One would expect Jabhat An-Nusrah to at least fight off FSA when they attacked the sisters, but no! Nothing was done and this just showed their lack of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa.

How do they think? How do they judge? If my sister is being killed, raped, imprisoned, I would defend her, but if the sister of a brother from Dawlah is being killed, raped, imprisoned etc. then nothing is done? This shows nothing but a lack of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa stemming from a diseased heart. How can they stay silent and do nothing while this is going on? And furthermore, as I mentioned above, the imprisoned sisters were held by FSA for such a long time, and during this time Jabhat An-Nusrah was still siding with them to fight us! Where is the Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa?

Where is the gheerah for our sisters? Did we not come Sham to defend the weak and oppressed? Which man can ever stand by and do nothing when a Muhajirah is being attacked?! If any sister is raped or killed by any man, we would go and fight to defend her without question. Only a coward or a Munaafiq stays back and does nothing. How black have the hearts of some people come that they do nothing.

A letter was released by one of the sisters held in the FSA prison about 6 or 7 months ago where she said how 6 FSA men would all rape her one after the other! This is your sister. Your sister who left her homeland to go live in Sham. And here we have FSA gang raping her in prison! And this was going on while Jabhat An-Nusrah and FSA were united in their fight against us.

Jabhat An-Nusrah showed their true colors and their lack of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa was manifested for all to see. I was part of the attacks which we did about 7 months ago in our operation to release these sisters, and we managed to push FSA back about 30km within a few days. And what was Jabhat An-Nusrah doing? They had easy access inside FSA territory, I know this as in those days FSA were north-west of our ribat point and Jabhat An-Nusrah was south-west, and their ribat points were about 1 km away from each other and many times they used to attack us simultaneously, not to mention how they used to freely go to each other’s towns and their open peace agreements.

I can say much to prove this, but my main point I wish to stress is how Jabhat An-Nusrah did nothing for these sisters. All they had to do was to go to FSA and negotiate on our behalf, or at least reason with them, or even better, inform us of the exact location of this prison and let us do the fighting! It would have earned them huge rewards in the hereafter and prevented a lot of backlash on them.

Everyone wants to talk about (and magnify) when Dawlah kills someone from FSA or Jabhat AnNusrah (who, by the way, were unknown before we killed them, yet all of a sudden became ‘the respected’ so and so!), yet no one is talking about the cowardly attacks by FSA on our sisters! Is the life of a man more precious than the life of a sister? So why the silence when a sister from Dawlah is murdered and the cries of agony when someone from their side is killed? It’s like they have an open license to kill us, and when we retaliate we are called Khawarij!

Where are the men of reasoning? Where are the men of intellect? Where are the men of gheerah? Where are the men who possess Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa?
If this is not hypocrisy and partisanship then what is? If this is not a sign of a lack of Al-Walaa WalBaraa then what is? If FSA are not cowards then who are? If Jabhat An-Nusrah are not silent devils then who are?

O Jabhat An-Nusrah, you have no Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa, and I challenge anyone to bring me evidence from the actions of the Salaf which prove that the stance of Jabhat An-Nusrah was in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah.

In my next article I will discuss the sixth reason for me leaving Jabhat An-Nusrah, that being their cowardice.

Abu Sa’eed Al-Britani (Kik: shaykh.anwar)

Al-Bab, Sham.

26/06/1436 (Corresponding to 15/04/2015)