Chapter 31

The inhabitants of that city were forced under the weight of torture and terror to bring their human excrement—which the state collected from the citizens daily to use as fertilizer—and cast it upon the Muslim leader in his pit. This process continued for three days while the man suffocated in the pit in a manner unparalleled in history. Their intention was to alienate people from anything related to Islam. ¶

After transitioning to Communism, Yugoslavia followed the path of Russia; Tito exterminated nearly a million Muslims. However, it is strange—though nothing is strange in this era—that the butchers in Russia and Yugoslavia are received with great warmth and honor in some Islamic countries, as if nothing had happened. There is no power or strength except with Allah, the Most High, the Almighty. If we were to look at what happened and continues to happen to Muslims at the hands of Hindu polytheists, we would find it no less heinous than what transpired at the hands of others. When the separation of Pakistan from India was announced, eight million Muslims fled as refugees to Pakistan, terrified by the savage and barbaric attacks of the cow-worshippers. Yet they did not let them leave in peace; rather, the criminal Indian government surrounded their caravans and slaughtered them, wiping out a great number of them. Only three million reached Pakistan, while the remaining five million perished. Then, the government announced a new ruse, claiming it would transport Muslim employees who wished to move to Pakistan via trains. They loaded the first batch of fifty thousand, and when the train approached the border between India and Pakistan and entered a tunnel, it emerged on the other side containing nothing but torn body parts, the result of sabotage planned and orchestrated for that purpose. ¶

So, who is the fanatic and who is the tolerant one? The positions we have mentioned... ¶

The treatment by the enemies of Islam and Muslims once they gain power over the people of Islam is merely a drop in the ocean, a sample of what is to come. This is all a confirmation of the words of the Almighty: 'O you who have believed, do not take as intimates those outside yourselves [i.e., those of other religions], for they will not spare you [any] ruin. They wish you would have distress. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater. We have certainly made clear to you the signs, if you will use reason.' (1) ¶

Among the manifestations of the Muslims' tolerance toward the Ahl al-Dhimma (protected non-Muslim subjects) and the Musta'minun (those granted safe passage) is that they are permitted to engage in certain practices within the lands of Islam that are prohibited in the Islamic religion, provided they do so secretly and privately, limiting such acts to themselves, such as drinking alcohol or eating pork. Furthermore, in matters of personal status—such as marriage, divorce, dowry, children, and maintenance—they are judged according to the personal law derived from their own creed. ¶

Conversely, we find that for Muslims residing in the lands of the West and the non-Muslim East, the Islamic personal status law is not applied. Instead, the local laws of those states and lands govern them. If a Muslim man is married to more than one wife, his marriage is considered void under their man-made laws, and he may even be prosecuted as a criminal. Yet, if they were to commit adultery by mutual consent, there would be no legal penalty for them. Similarly, if a wife seeks maintenance, housing, or divorce from her Muslim husband, these infidel man-made courts cannot secure these rights for her. (2) ¶

In America, if a Muslim woman wishes to marry a Christian man while she is still in the marriage bond of her Muslim husband, American laws permit this and do not even allow the first Muslim husband to assert his right to his wife or to object to the second marriage contract. (3) ¶

(1) Surah Al-Imran, Ayah 118. (2) See: 'Nazariyat al-Islam wa Hadyuhu' (The Theory of Islam and its Guidance) by Abu al-A'la al-Mawdudi, pp. 186-188. (3) See: 'Al-Alaqat al-Dawliyya fi al-Islam' (International Relations in Islam) by Dr. Kamil al-Daqs, pp. 316-317. ¶

[blank page] ¶

[blank page] ¶

How can this be achieved? It is achieved when servants emerge from the servitude of other servants to the servitude of Allah; when they emerge from the oppression of infidel systems to the justice of Islam; and when people drink from the pure fountain of Islam instead of the turbidity of Jahiliyyah (ignorance). To be more precise, it is when the entire religion belongs to Allah. However, it is a contradiction for systems of disbelief and misguidance to become rooted in the earth, for their banners to rise in the east and west, and for the danger to reach a point where Muslims are attacked in their own homes, their sanctities violated, their wealth and lands seized, and disbelief spread among them through media outlets and educational curricula—and yet, we see and hear those who call for abandoning jihad and making peace with the enemies of Allah; this is contrary to the methodology of Islam. Islam is not merely a collection of theological texts or a set of devotional rituals and worship, as most people understand it nowadays; when they hear the word 'religion,' it occurs to them that it is confined solely to prayer, fasting, zakat, and Hajj. ¶

In truth, the Islamic religion is a complete system that governs the life of the individual, the community, the state, and the entire world. The apex of its summit is jihad in the way of Allah. Jihad in Islam means the eradication of all invalid and tyrannical systems in the world, cutting off their roots, erasing their traces from existence, and replacing these Jahili systems for people with a righteous, reformative system for life—one that it deems better for all of humanity than any other system. Practical application throughout history has proven that Islam is the righteous and reformative system for life that protects humanity from the diseases of evil and tyranny, and that in it lies the happiness of humanity in this world and the hereafter (1), at a time when the shallowness of capitalist and communist systems has become apparent in their extremes. The Ummah of Islam is an Ummah of Da'wah (invitation) and Jihad, so that there may be no tribulation and the entire religion may be for Allah. ¶

As for what some understand or argue—referencing the existence of Quranic texts that call for making peace with the disbelievers, not fighting those who do not fight against the Muslims, and the command to pardon and forgive the disbelievers. ¶

(1) See: Fi Zilal al-Qur'an, Sayyid Qutb, Vol. 3, Part 9, pp. 756-759. ¶

We state that regarding these texts, there have come verses that specified them or abrogated their rulings. Read, if you wish, from the beginning of Surat at-Tawbah to the end of its twenty-eighth verse; you will find a precise determination of the nature of the relationship with the disbelievers. This passage from that Surah is among the last parts of the Holy Qur'an to be revealed, as those verses were sent down at the end of the ninth year of the Hijra. ¶

As for refraining from combat in Makkah, it was merely a stage in a long-term plan. ¶

There is another reason: the freedom of dawah (invitation to Islam) and the freedom to communicate it to people were guaranteed by the protection of Banu Hashim. Abu Talib used to protect the back of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ from the evil of his enemies. Thus, the Messenger ﷺ would proclaim the message openly, addressing the ears, minds, and hearts of people. There was no organized political authority or police apparatus to obstruct the dawah or prevent individuals from hearing it. Therefore, it is not permissible to take that period as an argument for abandoning jihad or making peace with the disbelievers, because drawing an analogy between the reality of Muslims in later eras and that period, in this aspect, does not fulfill the conditions of a valid analogy (qiyas). ¶

It is one of the self-evident truths that every Muslim must realize: that the disbelievers have never made peace with the Muslims, nor will they ever do so. If anything of that nature is found, it is rare and does not stem from a genuine desire for peace with Islam or truce with the Muslims, but is rather the result of a temporary, realistic necessity. Otherwise, whenever the forces of disbelief and misguidance feel that the Islamic camp is in a crisis that threatens its existence, or at the very least that attacking it carries no adverse consequences for them, they pounce upon it and tear it to shreds. This is what happened to the Muslims in Andalusia; for Al-Maqqari narrated that in Rabi' al-Awwal in the year 897 AH... ¶

The Christians made peace with the Muslims, and the Muslims agreed with them upon conditions of truce, which numbered sixty-seven, among which were the following: ¶

1. Granting security to the lives of all Muslim individuals and leaving them in their places of residence. 2. No encroachment upon movable or immovable property. 3. Maintaining mosques in their current state, and no Jew or Christian shall enter the house of a Muslim. 4. No Christian or Jew shall be appointed in authority over Muslims, and all Muslim prisoners shall be released. 5. No person shall be held accountable for the crime of another. 6. No one who has embraced Islam shall be forced to return to kufr (disbelief) through physical or psychological coercion. 7. Ensuring the protection of the Muslim's life, property, and honor. ¶

And other such conditions: ¶

Al-Maqqari (1) subsequently commented on this, saying: 'But the Spaniards broke the covenant, betrayed the promise and the agreement, and violated all the conditions' (2). End quote. ¶

They launched an onslaught on the remaining Muslims, forcing them to flee to North Africa. Some of them converted to Christianity, and the majority were killed in the 'search and inspection' campaigns carried out by the Christians to exterminate the Muslims. Thus, by the year 904 AH... ¶

(1) He is Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Yahya bin Abd al-Rahman bin Abi al-Aish ibn Muhammad al-Maliki, al-Ash'ari, al-Tilimsani. He resided in Fez and then Cairo. Known as al-Maqqari (Abu al-Abbas, Shihab al-Din), he was a historian and man of letters. He was born in Tlemcen in 992 AH and died in Cairo in the month of Jumada al-Akhira, 1041 AH. Among his many works are 'Nafh al-Tib min Ghusn al-Andalus al-Ratib', 'Fath al-Muta'al fi Wasf al-Thi'al' (on the sandals of the Prophet ﷺ), 'Azhar al-Riyad fi Akhbar 'Iyad', 'Rawd al-As al-Atir al-Anfas fi Dhikr man Laqituhum min A'lam Marrakush wa Fas', and 'al-Abda'ah wal-Nash'ah fi al-Nazm wal-Adab'. See: 'Mu'jam al-Mu'allifin' by Umar Rida Kahhala, Vol. 2, p. 78. (2) See: 'Nafh al-Tib min Ghusn al-Andalus al-Ratib', Vol. 4, pp. 525-528. ¶

The traces of Muslims in Andalusia were erased and the ravages of time passed over them after eight centuries of stability. The Spanish historian Ballester states: 'The Christians began to oppress the defeated Muslims, harassing them in their religion through means of violence and cruelty, until many of them were forced to emigrate from Spain. None remained in Andalusia except Arabs who had converted to Christianity nominally, described as Christians in appearance but not in conviction; later, the remainder were forced into exile or conversion.' ¶

This is a truth that everyone who identifies with Islam must understand: there is neither peace nor reconciliation between disbelief (kufr) and Islam. Allah Almighty said: 'And they will continue to fight you until they turn you back from your religion if they are able.' We see the truth of this before us today. Although Islamic conquests have effectively ceased for nearly ten centuries or more, the enemies of Islam have been warring against Islam and Muslims throughout this entire period, starting from the Crusades, followed by colonialism and occupation. Muslim lands continue to suffer from the fire of the disbelievers directly, as is the case in Palestine, Afghanistan, the Philippines, and Eritrea, and indirectly, as is the case in most Islamic countries. Here, the brokers of the Jews and Christians, and the slaves of Marx the Jew and Michel Aflaq the Crusader, serve the people of disbelief in all their forms by tracking the vanguards of the believing Party of Allah (Hizbullah) and exterminating them everywhere in the world, despite the fact that the state of Muslims in the present era does not pose a significant threat to the existence or lives of the disbelievers. ¶

However, it is the deeply rooted enmity that will not be satisfied except by the annihilation of Islam and the Muslims. Allah Almighty said: 'And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion.' ¶

The trait of hostility is intrinsic to them, starting from their hatred of Islam itself, passing through their efforts to divert people from it, and ending with them standing in its way and conspiring against the believers. When they gain power over the Muslims, they strike them without pity or mercy, for mercy finds no path to their hearts. Neither a covenant nor a promise restrains them, and they feel no shame in breaking ties or violating obligations. Allah the Almighty says: 'They observe toward a believer neither pact nor covenant. And it is they who are the transgressors.' (Surah At-Tawbah: 10). ¶

Therefore, Allah commanded fighting them in His saying: 'Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth [i.e., Islam] from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.' (Surah At-Tawbah: 29). However, most of those who write about international relations in Islam are alarmed and overwhelmed by the fact that the divine command is as such, and that these are the final rulings in Islam. Thus, they have exhausted themselves seeking to impose restrictions upon the absolute and final texts through some transitional texts that were revealed at the beginning of the Call. ¶

Those who attempt to dilute the position of Islam regarding Jihad do so because they are facing an organized, despicable, cunning, and malicious Crusader attack that tells them: 'The Islamic creed was spread by the sword, and Jihad was intended to force people to enter the Islamic faith and to violate the sanctity of freedom of belief for others.' ¶

This issue, according to that concept, is unacceptable. If the matter were so, it would be different, but the truth is that Islam is based on the principle: 'There is no compulsion in religion; the right course has become clear from the wrong.' (Surah Al-Baqarah: 256). Therefore, it embarked with the sword in Jihad to provide people with the real guarantee for freedom of belief, and to demolish the systems that force people into falsehood and prevent the truth from reaching them, so that people may remain free to choose the creed they want, if they so wish. ¶

Those who entered Islam were granted the same rights as Muslims and were bound by the same obligations. They became brothers in faith to those who belonged to Islam. If they wished, they could remain upon their beliefs and pay the Jizya, which served as a declaration of their submission to the spread of the Islamic call without resistance, and as a contribution to the expenses of the Muslim state that protects them from the aggression of their enemies and guarantees them general rights under the banner of the Islamic system. ¶

Islam did not compel any individual to change their belief, as the Crusaders did throughout history in Andalusia and recently in Zanzibar, where they forced people to convert to Christianity, and sometimes even refused to accept their conversion, exterminating them simply because they were Muslims (1). ¶

The Islamic call for kindness in dealing with the People of the Book, maintaining ties with them, acting justly towards them, and showing them benevolence is a requirement for a Muslim; however, this is distinct from the 'wala' (allegiance) which belongs only to Allah, His Messenger, and the Muslim community. A Muslim gives his pure love, affection, and support to Allah, then to His Messenger, and then to those who believe in this religion. No disbeliever can ascend to the level of these believers or compete with them in these attributes. As for dealing with disbelievers, a Muslim treats them according to one of two categories: ¶

First: Belligerent disbelievers (kuffar muharibun). It is not permissible to show them any form of kindness, maintenance of ties, or benevolence as long as they declare a state of war against Allah, His Messenger, and the believers (2), unless a Muslim individual or group perceives that kindness, maintaining ties, and benevolence towards them would be a powerful means of inviting them to Islam and winning them over; this is an exceptional case to be assessed according to its necessity. ¶

(1) See: Fi Zilal al-Qur'an / Sayyid Qutb, pp. 81-112, 115, 135, 149-152, and 169-185, Vol. 3, Part 10. (2) See the fatwa of Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz on this subject in Al-Da'wah Magazine (Saudi Arabia), Issue (823), dated 11/2/1402 AH, p. 19. ¶

Second: Peaceful non-Muslims (Kuffar), and these are those who are granted security (Musta'man), those from the Dhimmi (protected) class, and neutral parties. For these individuals, it is permissible for us to offer acts of kindness, maintaining ties, and benevolence in a way that is not permissible with other combatants (Muharibun). We will discuss the detailed treatment of these various groups in a subsequent chapter, God willing. It suffices for us to point to the Almighty’s saying: 'Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly' (Surah Al-Mumtahanah: 8). Sheikh Abd al-Latif bin Abd al-Rahman bin Hasan was asked about this verse and replied: 'This is a notification from Allah, the Majestic, to His believing servants that He does not forbid them from righteousness, justice, and fairness in dealing with any disbeliever from any faith, provided they have not fought the Muslims regarding religion and have not expelled them from their homes. Indeed, justice, benevolence, and fairness are religiously desired and beloved; therefore, He justified the ruling by saying: 'Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.' As for the phrase 'from being righteous toward them' (an tabarruhum), it means He does not forbid you from showing kindness and maintaining ties with those who have not fought [you] in [matters of] religion.' (End quote). Scholars of Tafsir (exegesis) have differed over whether this verse is Muhkam (definitive/operative) or Mansukh (abrogated), holding several views: 1- Ibn Zayd, Qatadah, and it is reported from Ibn Shihab al-Khafaji that this verse... ¶

It is abrogated by the Verse of Combat in Surah Bara'ah, in His (the Exalted) saying: {Kill the polytheists wherever you find them}(1) and other verses of combat(2). ¶

2 - A group of scholars of Tafsir (exegesis) stated that the verse permits kindness toward women and children because they are among those who do not fight; thus, Allah permitted being kind to them. They argued that it is definitive (muhkama), citing that Asma bint Abi Bakr (may Allah be pleased with her) asked the Prophet (peace be upon him) whether she should maintain ties with her mother (Qutilah) when she visited her while still a polytheist. He said: "Yes." Reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim(3). ¶

3 - Mujahid said that the intent of this verse refers to those who believed in Makkah but did not migrate; thus, Allah permitted being kind and benevolent toward them(4). ¶

4 - A group of exegetes said: This verse is a dispensation (rukhsa) regarding maintaining ties with those who have not waged war against the Muslims, and it is evidence for the permissibility of treating them with kindness, even if allegiance (muwalat) toward them has been severed(5). ¶

Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari says: The most correct of these opinions is the statement of those who said... ¶

[blank page] ¶

Third Topic: The Conduct of Muslims with Ahl al-Dhimma and Ahl al-'Ahd in Dar al-Islam ¶

1 - Ahl al-Dhimma: Ahl al-Dhimma are the covenanted people from among the Christians, Jews, and others who reside in Dar al-Islam. As for the apostates, it is not permissible by ijma (consensus) to conclude a dhimma contract with them. Rather, there is no alternative but Islam or execution. It is stated in the noble hadith: 'The protection (dhimma) of the Muslims is one; whoever violates the protection of a Muslim, then upon him is the like thereof.' Scholars have interpreted 'their dhimma' to mean the security (aman) that they grant. The contract of dhimma is a contract by which a non-Muslim comes under the protection (dhimma) of the Muslims. ¶

Meaning, upon their covenant and security in perpetuity, and they have the right of residence in the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam) permanently (1). ¶

Others have stated: The dhimma contract is the acknowledgement of certain disbelievers in their disbelief on the condition of paying the jizya and adhering to the rulings of the [Islamic] community (2). ¶

The person authorized to conclude the dhimma contract with non-Muslims is the legitimate Imam or his deputy; according to the preponderant (rajih) opinion on this issue, it is not valid if concluded by anyone else (3). ¶

Among the objectives of the dhimma contract is that the Dhimmis mix with the Muslims and become acquainted with the virtues of Islam, which may motivate them to embrace Islam and enter it. The People of the Dhimma accepted this contract so that their wealth would be like our wealth and their blood like our blood. ¶

The general rule is that the People of the Dhimma are equal to Muslims in terms of rights and obligations. However, there are exceptions to this rule: the Islamic State stipulates for certain positions and rights that the person holding them or receiving them must hold the Islamic creed. It does not suffice for the individual to merely be a registered subject in the census. In reality, there is nothing strange about this, because all states differentiate between their citizens regarding rights and obligations based on the principles to which the person and the state are committed, as well as based on academic competence and productivity. The Islamic State is committed to Islam completely; therefore, it is natural for it to prioritize the sincere Muslim over others, because it is governed by Islam, and Islam has established the rules to be followed in this regard. The Islamic State has no choice but to implement them well; if it were to deviate from the rules and rulings of Islam in this issue or others, that would be considered kufr (disbelief) and apostasy from Islam (4). ¶

[blank page] ¶

The second opinion is that the 'subjugation' (sighar) mentioned in the verse refers to their commitment to the application of the laws of the [Islamic] community upon them and the payment of jizya, for the commitment to this is indeed the subjugation. This is the correct view in my opinion, and Allah knows best. ¶

Some scholars have specified the permissibility of active humiliation and degradation in the event of non-payment of jizya, as it is permissible to ta'zir (punish at the discretion of the judge) one who refuses to pay what is obligatory without an acceptable Shariah excuse. ¶

It has also been said that since it is generally understood that the hand of the giver is the upper hand and the hand of the taker is the lower hand, the Muslims were commanded to do the opposite—to collect it in such a way that the hand of the giver is the lower one and the hand of the taker is the upper one. This indicates that it is not permissible to place the Ahl al-Dhimma (protected people) and those in their legal category of musta'minin (those granted safety) in state positions where they can display arrogance and superiority over the Muslims. In such a case, the scenario is reversed: the disbelievers become the superior ones, and the Muslims fall into a position of humiliation and subjugation. This is what Allah warned us against in His saying: 'So do not weaken and do not grieve, and you will be superior if you are [true] believers.' Therefore, the jurists have said: If such a situation arises, the disbelievers who act in this manner have no sanctity for their blood or their wealth, because Allah the Almighty extended the period of combat to a specific limit, which is the payment of jizya along with subjugation. If the condition of the dhimmis in the Abode of Islam contradicts this, then there is no immunity for their wealth or their lives, and they have no covenant (dhimma). For Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) stipulated those conditions that included humiliation and subjugation for them; therefore, whenever they violate those conditions, they have no pact and no covenant. ¶

2 - Al-Musta'minun (The Protected) or Ahl al-'Ahd: Al-Musta'min: With a kasrah (i) under the 'meem', it refers to the seeker of security (aman). With a fathah (a) over the 'meem', it functions as a passive participle, meaning one who has become secure and protected. The basis for 'aman' is the Almighty’s saying: "And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know" (Surah At-Tawbah: 6). Also, the Prophet ﷺ said: "...The covenant of the Muslims is one; the lowliest of them strives to uphold it. Whoever violates a covenant of a Muslim, upon him is the curse of Allah, the angels, and all mankind. Neither obligatory nor supererogatory deeds will be accepted from him on the Day of Judgment." This security granted to the Musta'min is temporary, unlike the security granted to the Ahl al-Dhimmah, which is permanent as long as they adhere to the conditions of the contract. The security of a Musta'min must be limited to a specific duration. Security is established for the Musta'min by any word that conveys the meaning, whether explicit or written; it is also established through writing, messaging, gesturing, and similar means. It is permissible for the Harbi Musta'min to act according to the terms of this security, allowing him to enter the Dar al-Islam safely. It is not permissible for anyone to harm him, and all Muslims must respect this security and act according to it, provided it was granted under Shariah-compliant conditions. As for security granted by a ruler who is in rebellion against Islam, it holds no validity, and there is no security for those he protects among the disbelievers like himself. This is what some rulers who have imposed themselves upon the Muslims do, as they employ experts, advisors, and combatants from Russia, America, Cuba, and other nations of disbelief and misguidance to fight the Muslims in their own homelands. Such individuals have no covenant and no security, because the one who granted them this security lacks the legitimate Shariah right to do so. ¶

The security (aman) of a musta’min (one granted safe conduct) is invalidated if the security involves corruption or harm to the Muslims, as previously stated; likewise, the legitimate Imam has the authority to revoke the security if there is a fear of treachery or the like. ¶

People of the covenant (or musta’minun), upon entering the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam), are granted security for their lives and property. They may reside therein—excluding the Haram, the Hijaz, and, according to some opinions, the Arabian Peninsula—for a specified period determined by the Imam. If the period is less than four months, no jizya is required; if it reaches a year, the imposition of jizya upon them becomes obligatory. ¶

It is incumbent upon the musta’min to refrain from any speech or action that suggests disparagement of the Islamic religion or contempt for the creed of the Muslims. If they violate this, they are subject to the same penalties as other offenders, whether the offender is a Muslim, a dhimmi, or a mu’ahid (covenanter). ¶

The evidence for this is that a Jewish woman—who was a muwadi’ah (i.e., a musta’minah and not a dhimmi)—insulted the Messenger (peace be upon him), so he declared her life forfeit and did not punish her killer. ¶

Similarly, Anas ibn Zunaym of Banu Bakr satirized the Messenger (peace be upon him), so the Prophet (peace be upon him) declared his life forfeit, even though he was not a dhimmi but a muwadi’, thus placing him under the same ruling as a musta’min. ¶

Section Four: The Muslims' Interaction with Neutral Disbelievers ¶

We have previously addressed the position of the Islamic state regarding disbelievers in general, and while elucidating the concept of war and peace in Islam, we have stated that a true Islamic state is a state of Da'wah (call to Islam) and Jihad for the sake of Allah. It begins its call primarily through wisdom, good counsel, delivering the message with kind words, and gentle argumentation, as the Almighty says: 'Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best' (An-Nahl: 125). This act is not an interference in the affairs of others for the purpose of corruption, as the enemies of Islam depict it, but rather it is an intervention to reform their condition in this world and the Hereafter. If they refuse that and stand between the Muslims and the delivery of the word of truth, it becomes obligatory at that point to utilize the second method of Da'wah, which is Jihad. Muslims are compelled to resort to Jihad not out of a love for shedding blood, nor to coerce individuals into entering Islam, but rather they require it just as a physician requires the excision of corrupt organs from a body to preserve the integrity of the entire body. ¶