Translated by: www.asaala.com


Jihaad, in terms of importance, stands on the highest point in Islam; it is a muhkam (conclusive, not abrogated, perfect and entirely clear) obligation; and it is lasting until the very Day of Judgment. It is exerting one's efforts in pushing back what is unacceptable[1] . And it is also said that it is exerting one's efforts in defending against the enemy[2]; it is also said that it is a collective appellation for exerting the best one's ability[3] .

However, restricting the term Jihaad only to fighting in the Cause of Allah is no more than a technical branching in the books of Fiqh, because Jihaad, according to its meanings in the Book and the Sunnah, is more general than only denoting fighting.

The Qur'an has related Jihaad to one's self and money and properties in several positions; Allah, the Exalted, said:

"…and strove hard and fought with their property and their lives in the Cause of Allah…" (al-Anfaal: 72); He also said:

"March forth, whether you are being healthy, young and wealthy or being ill, old and poor, strive hard with your wealth and your lives in the Cause of Allah" (at-Tawbah: 41); He also said:

"Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home)" (an-Nisaa': 95); and He, the Exalted, said:

"Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them…" (at-Tawbah: 73, at-Tahreem: 9)

And the (Qur'an) interpreters have agreed that Jihaad against the Kuffaar means fighting them—but in conformity with its prescribed rulings—and that Jihaad against the hypocrites means arguing with them by means of speech like preaching and producing conclusive proofs against them; and it was not recorded that the Prophet—peace be upon him—killed a hypocrite or fought against him; rather he said:

"how would it be if the people say that Muhammad kills his Companions?!"[4]

And among the first commands of Jihaad that were laid down in Makkah was the Aayah:
"So obey not the disbelievers, but strive against them (by preaching) with the utmost endeavor, with it (the Qur'an)", and the majority of interpreters say that the pronoun in Bihi (with it) refers to the Qur'an and that Allah called the Jihaad with the Qur'an a great Jihaad (i.e. the utmost endeavor), because it includes all the types of Jihaad.

Rather, al-Aloosee in Rooh al-Ma'aanee said: "…and the aayah denotes, as reported, the greatness of the scholars' efforts against the enemies of the Religion with what they (i.e. the scholars) produce against them of proofs. And the best ones among them are those who make Jihaad with the Qur'an"[5] .

And it goes with conformity with this Aayah, -for the glorification of the scholars' efforts- what the Prophet—peace be upon him—said:

"The greatest type of Jihaad is that when someone says a word of Truth in the presence of an unjust ruler"[6]; and

"the head of the martyrs is Hamzah Ibn 'Abdilmutalib and a man who stands in the presence of an unjust ruler enjoins him (with Ma'roof), warns him (against Munkar), and then gets killed for that"[7].

However, the types of Jihaad and its mechanisms will be clearer when the Prophet—peace be upon him—says:

"there is not any Prophet laid down by Allah to any previous nation except that he had helpers and Companions who follow his Sunnah (way) and abide by his commands; then followed them some people who would say what they would not practice and practice what they had not been ordered (to do). So, who strove against those with his hand, then he was a believer; who strove against them with his tongue (by means of preaching), then he was a believer; and who strove against them with his heart (by denying what they do), then he was a believer; but beyond that, there is not the measure of a mustard seed of faith"[8]

Thus, Jihaad in Islam can be done with one's life, properties, words, and heart. And each type of these has its own mechanisms, branches, tactics, and rulings which favor one style over the other and one mechanism over the other. Hence, Jihaad, by all of its types, is everlasting until the Day of Judgment.

If one follows the development of the legislation of Jihaad during the time of revelation, he finds that it is the most gradually-established legislation among all, and that it is the most caring about the states of the Muslim Group regarding number and power. Moreover, the Muslims were not allowed to fight against the Kuffaar until they had an established state in Madinah where the rulings of Jihaad advanced step by step from the permission of fighting, an absolute command (to launch an offensive) against some people, and a restricted command (to launch an offensive) against others.

The development of the rulings of Jihaad in different courses was a key that enabled us to read the Muslims state of affairs during the first generation. These Qur'anic verses will remain through generations like bases for the general political movement of the Muslims in conformity with the surrounding circumstances.

The claim that the verse of Sword (i.e. at-Tawbah: 29) had abrogated all that was revealed before it - among the verses that ordain with patience, insight, evading the polytheists, and debating in a better way, and that it had abrogated all what preceded it among the verses on fighting—is a claim with which some interpreters exceeded the limits of knowledge until it turned to be as if it is a real sword against the rulings of the Qur'an.

Thus, the verse that reads:
"Have you not seen those who were told to hold back their hands (from fighting) and perform As-Salaat…" is Divine ruling that should be applied where it is appropriate on the basis of the understanding of the Muslim group for their state of affairs or the decision of the ruler.

And the verse:
"Invite (mankind, O Muhammad—peace be upon him--) to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom (i.e. with the Divine Inspiration and the Qur'an) and fair preaching" (an-Nahl:125)—is a muhkam verse that is not abrogated by the sword verse; rather it remains as one of the foundations of preaching in the religion.

And the verse:
"And argue not with the People of the Scripture except with the way which is better…" (al-'Ankaboot: 46)—is another muhkam verse that is not abrogated with the sword verse, because debating and discussions have their course and fighting and launching offensives has its course.

Thus, each era has its rulings of Jihaad that suit the Muslims' state of affairs and abilities, and thus the rulings of the end of the first generations could not be applied to the beginnings of any developing Islamic state during the times of power imbalance between the Muslims and their enemies, because this may perish the Islamic existence and root out the Muslims.

The scholars have conclusive says regarding this matter that one should not trespass. Thus, the Jihaad of the tongue (words) in all its forms is assigned to the scholars who know the facts of Sharee'ah and the courses of speech, and the scholars have always warned against the warning against some Munkar which leads to greater one or enjoining some Ma'roof that causes the loss of a bigger one.

As for the Jihaad of sword (launching an offensive), then it is restricted to the rulers—except for the defensive Jihaad--, and so none is permitted to initiate it, be it individual or a group, unless they have a prior permission.

And here are the says of the scholars:Ibn Qudaamah al-Hanbalee, in his book al-Mughnee, said: "and the matter of Jihaad is only related to the Imaam (i.e. ruler) and his Ijtihaad, and the citizens must obey him in what he sees better (for the nation)"[9] . He also said in another position of the same book: "and they should not go for it (i.e. Jihaad) without the ruler's permission; because the matter of war is assigned to him, and he is more knowledgeable about the enemies number, ambushes, and tricks; and thus he should be referred to, because this is better for the Muslims"[10].

Al-Qaraafee al-Maalikee, in his book al-Ihkaam, said: "…the Imaam (i.e. ruler) is the one who is assigned for the general policy of the citizens, having the control over benefits and evils, restraining the criminals, killing the tyrants, to let the citizens settle in the lands, and the like"[11] .

And it is mentioned in ash-Sharh As-Sagheer 'Alaa Aqrabil-Masaalik of ad-Dardeer—Maalikee also—:"Jihaad is to be obligatory upon the Imaam's assignment of a person for this purpose"[12] .

At-Tahaanawee, in Kash-shaafil Qinaa', said: "and the matter of Jihaad is assigned to the Imaam and his Ijtihaad, because he is the most knowledgeable about his people and his enemies; their tricks and nearness and remoteness."[13]

And it should be known why the matter of Jihaad was assigned to the Imaam or the one assigned by the Imaam like was mentioned in the previous texts; this is because he is the one able to estimate the balance of power and the outcomes of the battle. And it was not left for the citizens lest they precede the Imaam with something that the consequences of which will befall all the Muslims. And the piety and legitimacy of the ruler is not to be put under test herein, because the act of Jihaad is like the act of prayer which is valid with the pious and the wrongdoer. Rather, this thing is even more manifest in the case of launching an offensive.

And as for the defensive Jihaad, where the enemies invade the Muslim country, then there is no need for the Imaam's permission, and it is the right of each and every Muslim to defend his land, honor, and religion as possible as he can. Thus, this applies to men, women, and slaves, without prior permission.

Just like fighting the enemies outside the country is assigned to the Imaam (i.e. the ruler) originally, then it is with all the more reason that the establishment of Hudood and sentencing the evils; the people of innovations, suspicions, and hypocrisy cannot be the right of individuals or groups regardless of any circumstances.

Thus, the establishment of Hudood—as unanimously agreed upon by the scholars—is assigned to the Imaam, and even if he left doing them, then no one among the Muslims can establish them.

As for the hypocrites, regardless of their types and inclinations, they are to be strived against by means of proofs and having patience over their evil at times and treating them harshly at other times.
"O Prophet (Muhammad—peace be upon him--)! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them" (at-Tawbah: 73 and at-Tahreem: 9), and it is known that being harsh against someone is achieved by means of words at times and effective words at others:
"and speak to them an effective word (i.e. to believe in Allah, worship Him, obey Him, and be afraid of Him) to reach their inner selves" (an-Nissaa': 63).

Thus charging people with Kufr and judging them to be apostates or out of the fold of Islam is none of the individuals' business, and it is not their right; and thus issuing rulings on the basis of the aforementioned rulings and launching offensive of any form against them by those who issued the rulings on the plea of rejecting the evil (Munkar) or changing it by force—is none of Allah's religion at all; rather it is a cause of chaos and dividing the unity of the nation.

The prophet—peace be upon him—did not kill the hypocrites though he knew their true states of affairs lest the people say: "Muhammad kills his companions"[14] ; and thus how could an individual charge another with kufr and apostasy because of a word or an act the doer of which may have more than one interpretation.

Moreover, it is an incumbent upon the caller to increase the numbers of Muslims, and he should tie them with the fold of Islam, be it the measure of a hair, and he should not divide them.

"… fighting against the Muslims and preventing them from preaching but not the mere Kufr are the reasons behind launching Jihaad…"

Jihaad is launched against militants.
Islam decided that Jihaad is meant for deterring the aggression of the enemies who intend to harm Islam and the Muslims. Allah, the Exalted, says:
"And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors" (al-Baqarah: 190).

And thus transgression is fighting against the non-militants and those who can be among the militants like women, children, monks, workers, or farmers. Transgression is also exceeding the limits of fighting by committing mayhem, burning with fire, killing the animals, cutting the trees, or doing mischief on earth. And below are the details:

First: Allah, the Exalted, says:
"And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors"(al-Baqarah: 190).
this Aayah is muhkam and not abrogated.

Al-Qurtubee, in al-Jaami' li-Ahkaam al-Qur'aan, said: "Ibn 'Abaas, 'Umar Ibn 'Abdil-'Azeez, and Mujaahid said: it is muhkam "; this means that it is not abrogated. Then he (al-Qurtubee) said: "this means that you should fight those who are in the state of fighting against you, but do not transgress the limits by killing women, children, monks, and the like"; Abu Ja'far an-Nahhaas said: "this is the most correct among the two says in relation to the Sunnah and rationale"[15].

Now, reflect upon the saying of al-Qurtubee—may Allah have mercy on him—"those who are in the state of fighting against you", then you shall know that it means those who are fighting against you or preparing to fight against you by mobilizing their selves. And it seems that this is what seemed problematic for those who think that the sword verse abrogated this verse, because of the incident when the Prophet—peace be upon him—would launch an offensive against the dangerous centers which threatened the Muslims like what happened in the battle of Khaibar, the battle of Mu'tah, and his march towards Tabouk.

Al-Aloosee, in Rooh al-Ma'aanee, said " 'but transgress not the limits' means do not kill women, children, elderly, or whoever surrendered to you and ceased fire, and if you did (fight against them), then you would be transgressing the limits" (reported by Ibn Abu Haatim from Ibn 'Abbaas).

Or "do not transgress the limits by any means like initiating the fight, fighting against the covenanters, launching it all of a sudden and without making da'wah, or killing whom you have not been ordered to kill"[16].

Al-Baghawee said: " '…and fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits…' means do not initiate the offensive against them"[17].

And the majority of the Jurists would support the say that fighting is directed against militants. However, ash-Shafi'ee—may Allah have mercy on him—went against this say. As for the majority, the reason behind launching Jihaad is the ability to fight on the part of who awaits for the Muslims.

Ibn Taymiyyah, in as-Siyaasah ash-Shar'iyyah, said:
Because fighting is against who fights against us in case we wanted to make the Religion of Allah manifest as He, the Exalted, says: 'And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors', and so Allah legitimized the measure of killing that will be needed to rectify his creatures as He says: 'Truly, Fitnah (affliction) is worse than killing' (al-Baqarah: 217). This means that killing is lesser in evil than the fitnah caused by the disbelievers; that is who did not prevent the Muslims of preaching their religion will not harm other than himself in case he was a disbeliever. Thus the jurists said: 'the caller to innovations that contradicts the Book and the Sunnah should be punished more than the one who is not preaching his innovations'[18].

Some interpreters emphasized that killing and Jihaad is only against a militant and someone who prevents the Muslims to preach their religion, because fighting against the Muslims and preventing them from preaching but not the mere Kufr are the reasons behind launching Jihaad; this is because the mere kufr without these two things will only harm his/her adherent as Ibn Taymiyyah decided. The proponents of this say consider the Mufaa'lah (any act that requires at least two parties to be accomplished) in the terms Jaahada and Qaatala will only be in an act that requires the participation of two parties at least as the Arabic language requires.

At-Taahir Ibn 'Aashoor said about the aayah: "but strive against them (by preaching) with the utmost endeavor, with it (the Qur'an)" (al-Furqaan: 52) that "and the form of Mufaa'lah denotes meeting their efforts with counter-efforts, and thus he should not be lenient or weak; thus He described this Jihaad by saying Kabeeran (i.e. the utmost endeavor), which comprises all the types of Jihaad"[19].

In Ahkaam al-Qur'aan, after he reported from Ibn 'Abbaas, 'Umar bin 'Abdul-'Azeez, and Mujaahid that the aayah: "and fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you" is muhkam and non-abrogated—al-Qurtubee said:
…Abu Ja'far an-Nahhaas said: 'and this is the most correct say among the two says regarding the Sunnah and rationale';
As for the Sunnah, this is clear in the hadeeth of Ibn 'Umar where the Prophet—peace be upon him—saw a killed woman in one of his raids and he hated that and warned against killing women and children[20].

As for the rationale, then Faa'ala requires almost two parties like Muqaatalah (fighting), Mushaatamah (insulting), and Mukhaasamah (disputing with). Thus, killing can not be for women, children, and the like of monks, sever acute patients, the elderly, and the workers. And this is what Abu Bakr—may Allah be pleased with him—recommended when he sent Yazeed Ibn Abu Sufyaan to ash-Shaam[21].

Thus, the scholars successively said that the aayah: "and transgress not the limits" denotes the warning against killing the non-militants among the women, children, monks, farmers, workers, and whoever abstained from fighting against the Muslims.

Accordingly, the reasons behind launching Jihaad against the Kuffaar are fighting against the Muslims and/or preventing the Muslims from preaching Islam, but it is not the mere Kufr on their part which only harms them.

The main objective behind Jihaad is to grant the people a state of freedom by which there will be no fitnah. Fitnah, herein, is a term that comprises confusion in the human states and absence of mind due to danger and fear for one's self and/or money[22].

Thus, the main objective behind Jihaad is to protect the Muslims from any tangible or intangible fitnah which may keep him away from his religion or a ritual of the religion; it is also meant to protect the Kuffaar from such fitnah that may keep them away from embracing Islam in case he chose it. In this respect, Allah, the Exalted, says:
"And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone)" (al-Baqarah: 193), and He also says:

""And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and all and every kind of worship is for Allah (Alone)" (al-Anfaal: 39).

Muhammad Rasheed Ridha, in Tafseerul-Manaar, said:
'and fight them until there is no more fitnah' here (Allah) coupled this "fight" with the word "fight" in the previous aayah, and so the first one showed the commencement of fighting and the other showed its main objective, which is to clear away any sort of fitnah regarding the religion. And thus, it is said that fight them until they lose their power which they use to harm you, keep you away from religion, or prevent you from preaching it. As for the part where Allah says: "and all and every kind of worship is for Allah (Alone)", then it means that the religion of every person is for Allah Alone without any trace of it for others, and so the believer will not be kept away from his religion or harmed because of it, and he will not need to wheedle, hide, or appease in order to protect his religion[23].

At-Tabaree, in Jaami'ul-Bayaan, said: "others said with regard to the aayah:
'let there be no transgression except against adh-Dhaalimoon (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)' that one should only fight against the one who fights. Then at-Tabaree reports with a chain from Mujaahid that it means: 'do only fight those who fight against you'[24].

Thus, the main objective of Jihaad in Islam is to keep away the fitnah in all of its types and set free the human from all the tangible and intangible pressures which effects his choice regarding the way that he wants to tread upon in this life, but it is not as some claim to impose Islam on people. Allah, the Exalted, said: "There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path", and He also said: "Then whosoever wills, let him believe, and whosoever wills, let him disbelieve…", so these two verses are very clear that no one can trespass them.

Religion is a free individual choice, and Islam calls to remove any obstacle that stands between the people and the religion of Allah, and it also calls to remove any fitnah that may cause the believer to avert from his religion; Allah says:
"Verily, those who put into trial the believing men and believing women (by torturing them and burning them), and then do not turn in repentance (to Allah), will have the torment of Hell, and they will have the punishment of the burning Fire".

Indeed, providing the humans with a free choice for religion under the proper calling atmosphere and in an atmosphere of equal means and mechanisms of discourse shows how qualified this religion is, how harmonious it is with the natural disposition of the human beings and their rationale, and how superior it is over the other mixture of religions that the righteousness of which become mixed with lots of falsehood;
"It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad—peace be upon him--) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), to make it superior over all religions".

And it is not strange that this religion witnesses this wake of its adherents towards it and to be the most growing religion in the world where the falsehood gets worn out and the spirit of growth increases for this true religion in spite of the state of weakness that the Muslim live where its frame of backwardness, poverty, and ignorance form types of fitnah that keeps the people away from the religion of Allah. Is not this a starting point for the callers to struggle against the weakness factors in their communities lest they (the weakness factors) become fitnah that keeps the people away from the religion of Allah?

The division that the late jurists adopted, where they divided the world for abodes of Islam, abodes of war, and abodes of covenant, was a product of the then state of affairs which was governed by the then international customs and circumstances.

However, the development of the international systems and laws and the new covenants and accords that organized the lives of the nations in a way that serves the human causes and is in harmony with the spirit of Islam in rejecting the fitnah and launching spaces of freedom human-wise and call-wise—all of this requires that the Muslim jurists should reconsider the previous divisions which were realistic and circumstantial in the first place.

Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah asserted that this was only a substantial division related to the then era when he was asked about the city of Mardin (a city in southeastern Turkey.) which was a borderline city the inhabitants of which were Muslims and Christians and the administration of which was at times with the Muslims and at others with the Christians—thus Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about it; is it a war abode or an Islam abode? And he was also asked about the ruling upon its inhabitants who once become under the Muslim rule and then under the Christian rule, and so on. Below we will cite the question along with its answer although they are long, but they are very beneficial for sure.

He was asked—may Allah have mercy on him—about the city of Mardin; is it an abode of Islam or an abode of war? And is it an incumbent upon its Muslim inhabitants to make Hijrah to an Islamic state? And in case it was incumbent but they did not make it, but rather they helped the enemies with their money and lives, are they considered sinners then? And hence is he considered a sinner who charges them with hypocrisy?
He answered: Praised be Allah, the Muslim blood is inviolable whether in Mardin or elsewhere; aiding those who are non-Muslims (against the Muslims) is prohibited whether in Mardin or elsewhere; and its inhabitants are obliged to make Hijrah in case they are unable to offer their acts of worship, otherwise it is only commendable but not obligatory.

As for helping the enemy with their lives and money, then it is prohibited, and they should shun this by any means possible, and in case this was not possible except with making Hijrah, then this is obligatory.

As for calling them names or charging them at large with hypocrisy, then it is prohibited, and one should only apply what the Qur'an and the Sunnah specify regarding this matter, which some of the inhabitants of Mardin or elsewhere might fall under.

And as for its being an abode of Islam or an abode of war, then it comprises the two possibilities; so it is not a war abode where its inhabitants are Kuffaar, because there many Muslim inhabitants therein; and it is not also an Islam abode where its soldiers are Muslims. Rather, it is of a third type where the Muslim gets what he deserves and the Kaafir gets what he deserves[25].

This ruling asserts that such division of an abode of Islam and an abode of Kufr is substantial division of the then era and that any new international structure requires a new division on the part of the Islamic jurisprudence.

An abode of Islam as defined by the jurists is the one where the Muslim be safe regarding his religion, life, properties, and honor; and where he can (freely) perform the acts of his worship and where the ruling is with what Allah has revealed; while an abode of war or kufr is the one where the Muslim be not safe regarding his religion, life, properties, and honor, and where he cannot (freely) perform the acts of his worship and where the ruling is not with what Allah has revealed. Accordingly, an abode of Islam is not merely the one where the majority of the inhabitants are Muslims, and an abode of kufr is not merely the one where the majority of its inhabitants are Kaafir.

Thus, the historical division is based on two factors; safety and the type of the ruling regime regarding the performance of worships and the implementation of sharee'ah. Any reflection upon the present-day world and the international state of affairs will notice that a new state of affairs replaced the old one and that there are new divisions have took place like Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned in his talk on the city of Mardin.

Thus, could we consider a new division of the present-day world into an abode of Da'wah where the Muslim be safe regarding his religion, life, properties, and where there is a complete freedom to call to the religion of Allah, and an abode of fitnah where the Muslim faces different sorts of harm because of his religion and creed or his practice of the obligation of his Da'wah? And in case this was an accepted division, the Muslims are obliged to use wisdom against harm and fitnah or for spreading their Da'wah and guiding the people towards the religion of Allah.

Those who stick to the historical division of the international state of affairs, connecting between the historical and the religious ones, and ignoring the state of affairs and its new products, be them civic, political, or Da'wah-related, then they commit a strategic mistake and a great religious sin, whether they know or not.

Then, those who adopt the division of the world into Kufr and Islam abodes and classify many Muslim countries under the first one (i.e. the kufr abodes) in an attempt to deem lawful the Muslim blood and properties, they are committing a religious prohibition even if it was at the wrong, circumstantial level which they adopt, because when they enter what they call an abode of war or kufr, they enter it by an entry permit, which is considered a mutual covenant between them and the citizens of those countries, then after that they become deceptive; something which is not acceptable from a Muslim.

And here is what Ibn Qudaamah in al-Mughnee stated: it was mentioned in the al-Khiraqee al-Hanbalee text that "who enters the lands of the enemies should not betray them". Ibn Qudaamah commented on that by saying: "…and as for betraying them, then it is haram (prohibited), because they gave him the entry permit on the condition that he will not betray them or harm them, and even if this was not written therein as it is known contextually. Thus, whoever gained an entry permit into our countries and betrayed us, then it is as if he withdrew his covenant. And thus, if this was true, then it is prohibited to betray them, because our religion prohibits betrayal. In this respect, the Prophet—peace be upon him—said: "the Muslims must keep their covenants"[26] , and so in case one betrays them, steals from them, or borrows anything, then he should give back what he took[27].

Any one who enters into our countries, then he does this thru a permit given by the government, and as stated in the trustworthy hadeeth any Muslim has the right to grant a disbeliever a protection that must be respected by the Muslims, so how about those who gained an authority over them, be it a righteous authority or not? Thus who enters the non-Muslim countries does this by their permit and in accordance to their conditions, and thus he should keep his covenants and conditions; otherwise, then there is nothing other than betrayal.

Indeed, the ideological and political liberation that the present-day world witness provides a good space for the practicing Muslim to spread the words of Allah in the people's hearts, and a good word put in a good heart is better for one thousand time than some reckless bullets coming from here and there.

"He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad—peace be upon him--) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), that He may make it (Islam) superior over all religions".

Source: http://asaala.net/viewTopic.php?topicID=478


1-Roohul-Ma'aanee, of al-Aloosee (10/475)
2-At-Tafseerul-Kabeer, of ar-Raazee (17/269)
3-At-Tahreer wt-Tanweer, of Ibn 'Aashoor (9/53)
4-Reported by al-Bukhaaree (4624) and Muslim (2584) from Jaabir, and they have other routes and wording from Abu Huraira and others.
5-Roohul-Ma'aanee (19/45)
6-Saheeh, reported by Abu Dawood (4344) and at-Tirmidhee (2174) from abu Sa'eed al-Khudree; and an-Nasaa'ee (4209), and Ibn Maajah (4012) from Taariq Ibn Shihaab; and our Sheikh classified it Saheeh therein.
7-Saheeh; reported by al-Haakim (4884) from Jaabir Ibn 'Abdillaah; at-Tabaraanee in al-Kabeer (3/151/2958) from 'Alee bin Abu Taalib and in al-Awsat (4079) from Ibn 'Abaas; and our Sheikh classified it Saheeh in more than one position in his books. It is apparently Saheeh via its many routes (of narration), because none of those routes was completely safe from the narrators' criticisms, be it that a narrator therein is unknown, weak in terms of memory, or abandoned (due to his lying or fabrication)
8-Reported by Muslim (50) from 'Abdullaah Ibn Mas'ood.
9-Al-Mughnee, of Ibn Qudaamah. Ar-Riyadh library (8/352 and 364)
10-Ibid (10/383)
11-Al-Ihkaam fee tamyeezil-Fataawaa 'anil-Ahkaam, p. 24
12-Ash-sharhus-Sagheer, of ad-Dardeer (2/274)
13-Kashaaful-Qinaa', of at-Tahaanawee (3/41)
14-Reported by al-Bukhaaree (4624) and Muslim (2584) from Jaabir, and they have different routes and wording from Abu Huraira and others.
15-Al-Jaami' li Ahkaamil-Qur'aan, of al-Qurtubee (2/348)
16-Roohul-Ma'aanee, of al-Aloosee (2/75)
17-Ma'aalimut-Tanzeel, of al-Baghawee (1/161)
18-As-Siyaasah ash-Shar'iyah, of Ibn Taymiyyah. See it in Majmoo'ul Fataawaa (2/354-355)
19-At-Tahreer wat-Tanweer (9/53)
20-Reported by al-Bukhaaree (2851) and Muslim (1744) from Ibn 'Umar.
21-Al-Jaami' li ahkaam al-Qur'aan (2/348)
22-At-Tahreer wat-Tanweer, of at-Tahir Ibn 'Aashoor (1/643) with slight modifications.
23-Roohul-Ma'aanee (2/645)
24-Jaami'ul Bayaan, of at-Tabaree (2/232-233)
25-Majmoo'ul Fataawaa (28/240-241)
26-Hasan Saheeh; reported by Abu Dawood (3594) from Abu Huraira; at-Tirmidhee (1352) from 'Amr Ibn 'Awf al-Muzanee; and our sheikh classified Saheeh therein, while al-Bukhaaree reported it ta'leeqan (without a chain of narrators)
27-Al-Mughnee (10/507)