Saheh Muslim

[Al Sultan]

Assalamo Alikum


Today I was going through the Sahih Muslim book,then I came across this which confused me,and I want someone to explain this to me in a clear way,so this is what I got confused on,

Book 001,Hadith Number 0031.

Chapter : Command for fighting against the people so long as they do not profess that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.
It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) breathed his last and Abu Bakr was appointed as his successor (Caliph), those amongst the Arabs who wanted to become apostates became apostates. 'Umar b. Khattab said to Abu Bakr: Why would you fight against the people, when the Messenger of Allah declared: I have been directed to fight against people so long as they do not say: There is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was granted full protection of his property and life on my behalf except for a right? His (other) affairs rest with Allah. Upon this Abu Bakr said: By Allah, I would definitely fight against him who severed prayer from Zakat, for it is the obligation upon the rich. By Allah, I would fight against them even to secure the cord (used for hobbling the feet of a camel) which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (as Zakat) but now they have withheld it. Umar b. Khattab remarked: By Allah, I found nothing but the fact that Allah had opened the heart of Abu Bakr for (perceiving the justification of) fighting (against those who refused to pay Zakat) and I fully recognized that the (stand of Abu Bakr) was right.

So basically the questions started to roll in my mind,if prophet mohammed (pbuh) was sent as a mercy to the world,then why is this hadith showing that he was sent to fight the disbelievers until they become muslims? isn't it forcing them to become muslims,im really confused and I hope you guys can explain this to me.

Wa Assalamo Alikum Wa Rahtumallahi' wa barakato

[Al Sultan]

And also,if "There's no compulsion in religion" then why is this hadith contradicting the Quran's word? I do understand that,but I'm confused,one part its saying theres no compulsion in religion the other part says the prophet (pbuh) was sent to fight people until they become muslims? I don't understand it's confusing me,and to be honest,i don't know if I will continue reading Saheh Muslim,Al Bukhari,anymore because they say things which are opposite in the quran,i do know that there are fabricated hadiths,but I knew that,Prophet mohammed (PBUH) and Abu Baker Al Sideek (RA) all of them were peaceful people..but this hadith shows the opposite? so what now? are we meant to read the saheh muslim,al bukahri books? or no? because the way I see it,i've seen some hadiths that go against the quran..so I hope someone will be able to clear this up for me so I don't have wiswas or evil thoughts..


Salam

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I will post an explanation later on when I get a chance, In Shaa Allaah, but for now, let me say this:

1) Nothing in that Hadeeth contradicts the Qur'aan. Bukhaari and Muslim are the most authentic books after the Qur'aan itself. Everything is authentic.

2) What do you mean by "peaceful people"? If you mean people who don't fight, then you are greatly mistaken. All of the Sahaabah were involved in Jihaad. Some of the Sahaabah spent their entire lives in Jihaad. And that Jihaad was Iqdaami Jihaad (Offensive Jihaad), which was that they would go out and conquer lands for Islaam and thus spread the dominion of Islaam and the Khilaafah.

Was-Salaam.

[Serinity]

I will post an explanation later on when I get a chance, In Shaa Allaah, but for now, let me say this:

1) Nothing in that Hadeeth contradicts the Qur'aan. Bukhaari and Muslim are the most authentic books after the Qur'aan itself. Everything is authentic.

2) What do you mean by "peaceful people"? If you mean people who don't fight, then you are greatly mistaken. All of the Sahaabah were involved in Jihaad. Some of the Sahaabah spent their entire lives in Jihaad. And that Jihaad was Iqdaami Jihaad (Offensive Jihaad), which was that they would go out and conquer lands for Islaam and thus spread the dominion of Islaam and the Khilaafah.

Was-Salaam.

:salam:

Please correct me if I am wrong:

From what I've read about the life of The Prophet :saws1: from 1 book, The Prophet :saws1: said: "I will fight the people until they proclaim the Shahadah" And it was against a Jewish tribe(afaik) at Kaybah (I think) who refused and was stubborn in disbelief, and hostile at times, until Ali :ra: went in with the white flag of Tawheed, and they all submitted.

Are there any other incidents? From ^^ that one I find it completely justifiable for the Prophet :saws1: to do so, given the historic background. But in what other cases is it to be used?

I presume there are cases where only the threat of death can break their stubbornness? I see it as a Mercy tbh, that the Prophet :saws1: said that.

In the aforementioned case, the Jews knew Islam was the Truth, but they were stubborn.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Little_Lion]

After the death of the Prophet, three groups arose that were against Islam. The first group refused to pay zakat, as they had considered it to be a tribute to Muhammad (pbuh) rather than a pillar of Islam. The second group never believed in Islam but had joined the Muslims because they were on the winning side; now that the Prophet (pbuh) had passed away, they saw that those who did not want to pay zakat were the larger force, and these two combined forces set out to attack Medina. The third group were smaller groups who each claimed to have their own prophets from Allah, and they went on the attack as well.

So Abu Bakr was not saying "lets all go out and kill the non-Muslims", he was defending Medina and Islam against non-Muslim attackers. And, as stated in previous hadiths and the Qur'an, they would stop their attack when and if the attackers accepted Islam.

So there is no contradiction. :)

[Al Sultan]

No brother,of course I know that they had to fight to defend themselves,what I meant was,they were peaceful people as in they didn't start problems,they ended problems in a peaceful way.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

The Muhaddithoon (Hadeeth Masters) have explained that the Hadeeth means that it is Waajib (obligatory) upon a Khaleefah, the Waliyy-ul-Amr, to wage Jihaad (offensive Jihaad) so that the Deen of Allaah Ta`aalaa reigns supreme. It means to fight until one of two things happen:

1) The Kuffaar accept Islaam.

2) They pay Jizyah and keep their religions.

In this manner, the Law of Allaah becomes implemented in every land.

This Hadeeth does not contradict the Aayah, because the Kuffaar will not be forced to accept Islaam. If they accept Islaam, that will be excellent. However, they are given the option of paying Jizyah and keeping their religions.

That Hadeeth is understood by joining it with this Aayah, known as Aayat-us-Sayf (The Verse of the Sword):

قَاتِلُوا الَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَلَا بِالْيَوْمِ الْآَخِرِ وَلَا يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَلَا يَدِينُونَ دِينَ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حَتَّى يُعْطُوا الْجِزْيَةَ عَنْ يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ

"Fight against those who do not believe in Allaah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allaah and His Rasool, and those who acknowledge not the Deen of Haqq (i.e. Islaam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." [Soorah at-Tawbah, 9:29]

So the Hadeeth is saying, the Muslim ruler will give the order for Jihaad to be fought in order to spread the dominion of Islaam and bring all the lands of earth under the Sharee`ah (Divine Law) of Allaah Ta`aalaa.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

[Al Sultan]

But like ask the kufar to join in a peaceful way right? not forceful as you said,and this hadith is connected to 9:29? ohhhhh....I know 9:29 since every non muslim talks about...so its not any hadith its connected to 9:29 right brother? jumah Mubarak <3

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

What happens is that the Mujaahideen sent by a Khaleefah offer a country three choices:

1) Accept Islaam.

2) Surrender and pay the Jizyah. The land will then be ruled by the Sharee`ah of Allaah Ta`aalaa.

3) If you don't accept either of these options, get ready to fight.

That is how Sahaabah used to do.

I suggest reading the following Kitaabs:

Futooh-ush-Shaam, Futooh Misr, Futooh-ul-`Iraaq, Hayaat-us-Sahaabah, Hilyat-ul-Awliyaa wa Tabaqaat-ul-Asfiyaa.

English translations for all of those Kitaabs are available. Maulana Sulayman Kindi has translated all of the Futooh series of Imaam al-Waaqidi.

والسلام

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Listen to the following short clip, and you will gain a little bit of an understanding of what the mindset of Sahaabah was like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvt3jpUodDE

[Al Sultan]

Wait what? "If you don't accept either of these options,get ready to fight" isn't that "forcing" them to join islam? what if they were peaceful and not oppressive people? why fight them? why not just send the message and whoever wants,accept islam,and whoever doesn't want,reject islam,why is force and aggression instructed here? I don't understand really,yeah I understand that they HAVE to send the message of islam,but why "fight" if people reject it? why not just leave them if they don't want to believe? can you explain that please..

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

You see, they are not forcing the people to accept Islaam. The thing is this: Who does this Dunyaa belong to? Allaah Ta`aalaa of course. So, how should the Dunyaa be run? Not according to how we want, or how America wants, or how France or Britain wants, or anyone else. It must be run according to the Divine Law of Allaah Ta`aalaa. Is that correct? So then, what Allaah Ta`aalaa wants is that each and every country must be run according to the Sharee`ah, not man-made laws. The right of legislation belongs to Allaah Ta`aalaa Alone. He is the Lawgiver.

So what Sahaabah were doing is to bring more and more countries under the Sharee`ah of Islaam. The people in those countries were not forced to change their religion, ever. They kept their religions. They paid Jizyah to the Sahaabah, but Jizyah is extremely little. In return, they were protected and the countries had peace in them. So much so that later on, during the Crusades, when the Christians tried to take over the world, many of the Christians who had been living under the Muslims preferred to remain living under them and did not want the Crusaders to take the lands. What they had been experiencing under the Muslims was much better. Absolutely no Zhulm (oppression) was being done. The lands were being ruled according to the Divine Law of Allaah Ta`aalaa, so peace reigned.

So no: no coercion was taking place. Not a single person was forced to change his religion. What was forced to change was the law of the land. From man-made law to Divine Law.

Was-Salaam.

[Al Sultan]

Oh okay,thank you very much,no of course I know the Jizya thing,i learned about it,so this hadith is connected to 9:29 is that right? or am I understanding it wrong..

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Yes, the two are connected.

[500yardsoffo]

Yes, the two are connected.

What is your opinion on Daesh? Are they right in doing what they're doing?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I have no comment to make with regards to them. The best people to ask are those living in that area.

The Kuffaar media itself is filled with lies, and most of the information people have with regards to groups in other countries is what they have seen on the media. Now, how much of what the media says is true and how much are lies?

So again, ask the people who live there. SA is on the other side of the world from everything.

Was-Salaam.

[500yardsoffo]

I have no comment to make with regards to them. The best people to ask are those living in that area.

The Kuffaar media itself is filled with lies, and most of the information people have with regards to groups in other countries is what they have seen on the media. Now, how much of what the media says is true and how much are lies?

So again, ask the people who live there. SA is on the other side of the world from everything.

Was-Salaam.

Here is what media says: daesh is killing people who do not believe in Islam and do not want to convert.
If this is what an organization is doing then is it right thing to do?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

No. I don't think any Muslim who has any knowledge of Islaam would kill people simply for not converting to Islaam. Every Muslim who has studied even a little bit is aware of the ruling of Jizyah and how Sahaabah implemented it.

I think the media is blatantly lying in that regard. These are Arabs. Arabs are generally able to read and understand the (literal) meaning of the Qur'aan, because it is in Arabic. They would have come across the Aayaat speaking about Jizyah and the Aayah mentioning not forcing the Kuffaar to change their religions. Even children studying Maktab knows this.

It's like this lie the Kuffaar have invented that Muslims are afraid of being killed by women, because "if they get killed by a woman they won't go to paradise." Such a ridiculous joke. Someone should make fun of them. And also the lie that if they coat their bullets in pig fat, "Moslems won't go to heaven if they get shot by it."

Imbeciles.

A Muslim with the least amount of knowledge on Islaam knows that a Shaheed is a Shaheed regardless of how he is killed. Let alone pig fat, if they throw him in a den of pigs and have him eaten up by them, he is a Shaheed. If he gets killed by a woman, he is a Shaheed, regardless of whether she is wearing a bikini or even wearing nothing at all. Absolutely nothing affects the Shaheed. He is a Shaheed regardless of how he gets killed.

So, the Kuffaar media are always lying, and Muslims shouldn't be as stupid as to trip over every bit of excreta these Kuffaar vomit out.

Was-Salaam.

[500yardsoffo]

No. I don't think any Muslim who has any knowledge of Islaam would kill people simply for not converting to Islaam. Every Muslim who has studied even a little bit is aware of the ruling of Jizyah and how Sahaabah implemented it.

I think the media is blatantly lying in that regard. These are Arabs. Arabs are generally able to read and understand the (literal) meaning of the Qur'aan, because it is in Arabic. They would have come across the Aayaat speaking about Jizyah and the Aayah mentioning not forcing the Kuffaar to change their religions. Even children studying Maktab knows this.

It's like this lie the Kuffaar have invented that Muslims are afraid of being killed by women, because "if they get killed by a woman they won't go to paradise." Such a ridiculous joke. Someone should make fun of them. And also the lie that if they coat their bullets in pig fat, "Moslems won't go to heaven if they get shot by it."

Imbeciles.

A Muslim with the least amount of knowledge on Islaam knows that a Shaheed is a Shaheed regardless of how he is killed. Let alone pig fat, if they throw him in a den of pigs and have him eaten up by them, he is a Shaheed. If he gets killed by a woman, he is a Shaheed, regardless of whether she is wearing a bikini or even wearing nothing at all. Absolutely nothing affects the Shaheed. He is a Shaheed regardless of how he gets killed.

So, the Kuffaar media are always lying, and Muslims shouldn't be as stupid as to trip over every bit of excreta these Kuffaar vomit out.

Was-Salaam.

Brother let me state clearly what i'm trying to ask: if there is a group of people in 2016 and they call themselves muslims. And they start invading land and killing people who are not muslims and who dont give jizyah too. Then are these people truly following islam?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Things aren't done at random. There needs to be a Khilaafah, and a Khaleefah, and this Khaleefah will send out the armies to the various lands, and when arriving in those lands they will invite the people to Islaam for three days and give them three options:

1) Accept Islaam.

2) Surrender, pay Jizyah, and keep your religions. You will then be under the protection of the Muslimeen.

3) If you reject either of the two, then we fight.

`Ulamaa are needed in such a Khilaafah to ensure that everything that gets done is done according to Qur'aan and Sunnah, and not simply the desires of people.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

[Al Sultan]

Sorry Huzaifa..but I have another question..this is regarding saheh muslim aswell...I found this and I hope you can explain it to me because I don't understand it at all...

Chapter 138:Greeting the non muslims and Prohibtion of taking an Initiative

866.Abu Huraira (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:The messenger of Allah (PBUH) said,"Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you,and when you meet any one of them on the road,force him to go to the narrowest part of it." What does this mean exactly?? "Force him to go to the narrowest part of it" I'm kind of confused...

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

لا تبدؤوا اليهود ولا النصارى بالسلام فإذا لقيتم أحدهم في طريق فاضطروه إلى أضيقه

"Do not initiate the greeting to the Jews and Christians, and if you encounter any of them in the road, force them to the narrowest part." [Narrated in Saheeh Muslim]

The `Ulamaa have explained:

1) This Hadeeth shows that it is not permissible to initiate the greeting to the Kuffaar. Rather, the Muslim should wait until they greet. And if they do greet, then reply with "Wa `Alaykum". Meaning, it is not permissible to use the greeting of the Muslimeen, i.e. "Wa `Alaykumus Salaam wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuh" for them. Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

إذا سلم عليكم أهل الكتاب فقولوا: وعليكم

"When the Ahl-ul-Kitaab give Salaam to you, then say, "Wa `Alaykum." [Narrated in Saheeh Muslim]

2) On the issue of pushing them to the narrowest part of the road, the `Ulamaa like Imaam an-Nawawi رحمة الله عليه and others have explained:

وقد بين النووي رحمه الله: أن معنى قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم: فإذا لقيتم أحدهم في الطريق فاضطروه إلى أضيقه فقال: قال أصحابنا: لا يترك للذمي صدر الطريق، بل يضطر إلى أضيقه إذا كان المسلمون يطرقون، فإن خلت الطريق من الزحمة فلا حرج

"Our companions have said: "The center of the road is not left open for the Dhimmi (Kaafir under the protection of the Muslims); rather, he is forced to use the narrowest part of the road when the Muslimeen are walking. However, if the road is free from congestion, then there is no harm (in him using the center)."


So what it means is that when the Muslims are walking, they must not move out of the way so that the Dhimmi can pass. They must continue walking as they are. They will not move.


The `Ulamaa have explained that this is to show the `Izzah (honour) of Islaam and its people.


Remember that in whatever Allaah Ta`aalaa has legislated, and in whatever Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم has commanded us to do, there is the greatest of benefits, even if some people do not understand. It is upon us simply to hear and obey (the Commands of Allaah Ta`aalaa and the commands of His Rasool صلى الله عليه وسلم).


Was-Salaam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

You can also read the following:

https://islamqa.info/en/42235

[Al Sultan]

Ohhh...so let me just give an example to show if I understand or not (and I'm sorry if don't) so lets say its a busy, crowded Friday,my and 2 muslim friends are walking in a street which has walls,then there are Christians up front, (to give an example)

Christians
|
|
|
Muslims

So at this point,i FORCE them to go to the side while we go front? and also,i want your opinion if you will,what do you think is the main point or lesson here that the Companions are telling us here?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

You won't be forcing them; rather, you yourself and your friends just continue walking. If you don't move, they will be forced to give way so that you can pass.

This is not a ruling that has been created by me or even by Sahaabah-e-Kiraam themselves; rather, this is the ruling of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم, as you have seen from the Hadeeth mentioned earlier. He has not told us of the reason behind it. We are simply to obey. Later `Ulamaa have given reasons. Some, like Imaam an-Nawawi, said it is to show that Islaam and the Muslims are uppermost and Allaah Ta`aalaa has honoured them, and to show that Kufr and its people are disgraced.

والله تعالى أعلم

[Al Sultan]

Ok,now I get it,thanks so much brother jazak allah khair :D

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

آمين يا رب العالمين

[Al Sultan]

wait a second..."kufr and its people are disgraced" but aren't Christians,jews are the people of the book?....