PDF Archive

Easily share your PDF documents with your contacts, on the Web and Social Networks.

Share a file Manage my documents Convert Recover PDF Search Help Contact

The mongol tatars .pdf

Original filename: The mongol tatars.pdf
Author: Michael

This PDF 1.5 document has been generated by Microsoft® Word 2013, and has been sent on pdf-archive.com on 17/07/2017 at 18:02, from IP address 106.192.x.x. The current document download page has been viewed 436 times.
File size: 352 KB (7 pages).
Privacy: public file

Download original PDF file

Document preview

The mongol tatars! Why they were apostates, who should be fought against and modern day
so-called Muslim governments and armies.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Gracious & Merciful
All praise is due to Allah, the most high, the most supreme authority, the only superpower of
unimaginable magnitude, for which mankind and creation cannot fully comprehend. We seek help,
guidance and forgiveness from him and we seek refuge inhim from the evil of our souls, and from
the evil of our misdeeds. Whoever Allahguides there is no deviator for him, whoever He causes to
be misguided;there is no guide for him. I bear witness with the utmost conviction that there is
noone or Deity worthy of worship other than Allah alone, And I witness theprophet-hood of
Muhammad bin Abdillah his slave and messenger. And after that;I will get straight to the point of
the matter, as I am not an eloquent writer, nor ascholar, but only a humble servant of Allaah , who
seeks to enlighten thereader on what the great scholars have said about the issue at hand. And
that is thetatars, why they were called apostates, and for what reason fighting against them
became obligatory. These fatwas are of utmost importance to us, in the 14th century
(Hijri),because we, as the great 14th century scholars (such as Muhaddith AhmedShakir and
former Mufti of Saudi Arabia Muhammad bin Ibrahim Al-sheikh have said, ‘’the new Yaasiq” has
caused much destruction and deviance in our present day times. So indeed, many great , truthful
scholars have identified somesimilarities between the situation in the times of ibn taymiyyah ()
and ourtimes, in order for them to make this analogy (Qiyas) to derive the correct ruling andmove
forward with the correct action. For verily we live in a time where Islaam only exists upon the
tongues of certain claimers of guidance, and only in study circles and books.This treatise is also a
decisive refutation of the modern day “Jews of the ummah”, the Murjiah of our time, who are
better known and called as “Salafis”, whose callers insist that these Fatawas are not concerning
our time and cannot be referred to at allto judge our situation. Evil indeed are the distortions they
make, and most evil aretheir ultimate goal of total inaction and pacification of the Muslim youth,
who arereturning to Islam, by the grace of Allaah .
Direct Translation of Ibn Taymiyas Fatwa on the Tatars.

Majmoo Al Fatawaa - Ibn Taymiyyah , Volume 28 , page 576.

What do the great Fuqahaa Scholars of this Ummah say, concerning theseTatars(Mongol Tatars),
who emerged in the year 699H(Hijri). And they did what they became famous for, the killing of the
Muslims, and taking captives from the women and children, and plundering anyone of the Muslims

they could find. And they also disgraced the honor of the religion by humiliating the Muslims and
damaging the mosques, especially “Baytul Maqdis (al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem)and debased it
by committing evil inside it. And they took from the wealth of the Muslims, and took from the
treasure (baytul Maal) a huge amount, and they made prisoners from a very large number of
Muslim men, and removed them from their homeland. And with all of these acts, they claim to
cling on to the Shahada, and they claim that it is prohibited to fight against their fighters because
of their claims to Islaam, and their following of the fundamentals of Islaam, and because of this,
their extermination of the Muslims will be forgiven. So therefore, is it allowed to fight against
them, or is it obligatory to fight against them? And whichever is the answer,from which
perspective (proofs from the Quran and Sunnah) is the permissibility to fight them? Or (what are
the proofs) of the obligation (Waajib) to fight them?

Answer by Sheikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah :
All praise is to Allaah . Every group of people that completely stops complying with any law from
the laws of the Shari’ah, which is apparent and agreed upon, whether it is from this group of
people (tatars) or other than them ; then it is obligatory to fight them until they comply to all of
the Shari’ah, even though they may utter the Shahaadataayn and comply with some of its laws,
just as Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq(the truthful and the Sahaabah(companions) fought those who
stopped giving Zakaah. And on this note,the scholars agreed upon this (Ijma) after the debate
between Umar and Abu Bakr(r.a). So the Sahaabah, all of them agreed upon fighting for the sake
of Islaam, acting according to the Quraan and Sunnah .So it has been proven from the
Messenger(saw) from tens of different Hadith concerning the Khawaarij, he informed us that they
were the worst of creation even though he said (concerning their worship): “You (muslim
Sahaabaa) will belittle your own Salaat after comparing with their Salaat, and your fasting
compared to their fasting” . So it became known that merely clinging on to Islaam without fully
complying and obligating oneself with all of the Shari’ah, without this, it is not sufficient grounds
to stop the fighting. For verily, the fighting is obligatory until the whole of religion is for Allaah
alone and until there is no more fitnah. So whenever the religion is for other than the sake of
Allaah , then fighting is obligatory. So any group of people that stops from some of the obligatory
prayers(stops praying)or stops fasting or hajj or rejects the prohibition of blood(spilling muslim
blood) or wealth(taking unlawfully) or drinking intoxicants, or the prohibition of adultery or
gambling or prohibition of marrying the mahram(those whom one cannot marry), or rejects
(complying to the command of Allaah in Surah Tawbah) with fighting against the disbelievers
(jihad), or imposing Jizya upon the people of the book , from these and other obligations from the
religion - for which there is no excuse in rejecting it and leaving it- and where the rejecter is the
one who disbelieves in the obligations; verily the group that completely stops is fought against due
to its abandonment (of action) even though the group believes in the obligation. And concerning
this, I do not know any difference of opinion amongst the Ulamaa.But indeed when they differed
(Ulema), they differed about the group that abandons some of the sunnah, such as the two rak’ah

sunnah before salaat –al-fajr, and the azaan and iqaamat (with those people who do not agree to
their obligation) and other things like these from the religion. Can one fight a group who abandons
things like these, or can we not? As for the obligations and prohibitions mentioned (above), and
things like these, there is no dispute concerning fighting to uphold these. And these people (tatars
and other groups that abandons some of the Shari’ah); the researchers from the Ulamaa does not
take them to the level of the rebels who rebel against an imam(ruler) or those that leave his
obedience; such as the people of Shaam vis-à-vis Ali bin Abu Taalib(r.a). Verily, they (people of
sham) were leaving the obedience of following a particular Ameer (leader), or rebelling against the
Ameer to remove him from authority. But as for the mentioned group, then they are outside the
fold of Islaam, in the same degree as those who stopped the Zakaah,and the same level as the
Khawaarij whom Ali (r.a)fought against. And in this way; Ali (r.a) differed in his way of fighting,
concerning fighting against the people of Basraa and Shaam and the way he fought against the
people of Nahrawaan. And his fighting against the people of Basraa and Shaam, was fighting of
brothers against brothers . And with the Khawaarij, his fighting them was different . And the texts
from the Messenger (saw) has been authenticated which also agrees with the Sahaabaas
consensus(ijmaa’) concerning the fighting of ‘Siddeeq’ and the fighting against the khawaarij (i.e.
as Abu Bakr fought the people who stopped the Zakaah and as Ali fought the khawaarij); which is
different from the trials and tribulations the people of Shaam and Basraa fell into. Verily, the text
(Hadeeth) proves that which has been proved, and the Sahaabaas and the Taabi’een differed
concerning these (the understanding).There are some Fuqahaa from the Imaams (Shaafi’ee,
Maalikee, Hanafee, Awzaaee,Hanbali etc) who saw that the people of rebellion are those who
rebel against the ruler, having with them an acceptable ta’weel (interpretation), not those who
rebel to leave his authority. And other scholars say that both of the groups are also from the
‘Bughaath’’ (people of rebellion), and between the people of rebellion and the Tatars, there is
indeed a manifest clear difference . As for those who do not accept or obligate themselves with
the ways and Shari’ah of Islaam which is clear, apparent and narrated from many sources
(Mutawaatir), then I do not know any difference of opinion concerning the obligation of fighting
them .So, if you agree with this principle, then these people whom the questions are being asked
about (tatars), their military includes people from the disbelievers such as Christians and
polytheists (mushriks), also there are people who claim to be muslims and these type of people
are the majority of their army personnel - narrating the Shahaadatayn when it is required from
them, and holding high esteem for the Prophet (saw), and most of them pray only a little. And
those who fast in Ramadaan are more than those who pray the regular salaats, and they consider
the Muslim greater in status compared to others, and to the righteous and pious people from the
muslims, they have respect for them. And they have some of the parts of Islaam, and among
themselves they differ concerning their adherence.But those that which the people are generally
upon; for which they are fought against, consists of leaving (or abandoning) many of the laws of
the Shari’ah or most of it. For verily, they first of all, obligate themselves with Islaam, but do not
fight those who leave it, yet those who fight for the sake of the Mongol nation, they elevate their
status and leave them alone, even if he is a Kaafir enemy to Allaah and His Messenger (). And
everyone that rebels against the state (nation of Mongols), they allow fighting against them even

though the rebels are from the best of the Muslim people. And they (the mongol army) do not
fight the Kuffar, and do not impose upon the Christians and Jews the Jizya and lowliness . And their
military does not forbid its personnel from worshipping whatever they want, whether it is the sun
or the moon or other than that, but what is apparent is that the status of the Muslims with them
are the degree of a just person or a righteous pious person, or one who does a lot of voluntary
deeds from Islaam, and the Kaafir, they consider him the same degree as a Faasiq from the
Muslims or someone who leaves the voluntary deeds from Islaam. And in the same way also, the
general people of them, do not prohibit the blood and wealth of the Muslims, except when their
sultan prohibits it, that is, they do not comply with leaving it alone (wealth and blood of the
Muslims). And when they are ordered not to take the wealth and blood or other than that, they
obey because of their sultan, not because of their religion. Their people in general do not obligate
themselves on performing the obligatory, neither from the salaat nor from the zakaat, and not
from the hajj and other than that. And they do not obligate themselves to judge between them by
the judgments of Allaah(the Shari’ah); but nay! They judge according to what has been placed for
them, agreeing with Islaam sometimes, and disagreeing with Islaam other times . But indeed AsSheezbiroon is the one who showed adherence to Islamic Shariah outwardly, and he is the one
who practiced from among Islamic Shari’ah what was common among the people. And as for these
people, then they have entered it but they do not comply with its laws. And fighting against these
types of people is obligatory by the ijmaa’ (consensus) of the Muslims and no one who knows the
religion of Islaam and knows its reality,doubts this fact , for verily this peace which they are upon
(between the Kuffaar apostates and Muslims) and the religion of Islaam, will never, ever be in
conformity . And hence, if the kurds and the Bedouin Arabs and other than these people from the
desert, who do not adhere to the Islaamic Shari’ah; if it is waajib to fight them, even if they do not
pose a danger to the people in the cities; what about these people (that does pose a danger to
everyone)? Yes, it is compulsory to adhere to the Islamic “Shar’ee” way when fighting, such as
inviting them (calling to them) to comply with all of the Shari’ah if the call to it has not reached
them, just as the disbelievers are called to Islaam, first of all (before fighting), if the Da’wah has
not reached them.
So if it is agreed upon that whoever fights them will do so in the complete way ,then it is to fight
them for the pleasing of Allaah , and making supreme His word, and establishing His religion, and
in obedience to His messenger(saw); even if among them (mujahideen); there are those who are
sinners; and those with bad intentions, such that they fight for the sake of leadership, or they
transgress in some matters.And it was that the evil of not fighting against them is greater in danger
to the religion;than fighting them in this context (with transgressors and sinners within the
mujahideen); as this wajib was also fighting them to prevent the greater evil from the two evils,
by complying with the lesser of the evil. And indeed, this is from the
‘Usool’ (principles) of Islaam, that which it is necessary to review and understand. And in this
regard it is from the fundamentals of the Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, to go on military expeditions
with every pious, righteous person and with sinful transgressors (as well). And verily, Allah helps
this religion with even the sinful man, and with nations who are oppressive, as informed by the

Messenger (saw). That is because if there is no agreement in fighting alongside sinful rulers, or
under armies which consists mostly of sinful people, then verily it is one of the two matters: either
refusing to fight alongside sinful rulers, and this necessitates that the other party will be victorious,
who are a great danger and evil to the religionand the worldly affairs; or fighting alongside the
sinful muslims, and thereby preventing the more evil people and establishing the Shari’ah of Islaam
as much as possible; even if it is not established in a complete sense (such as KhilaafahRaashidah).
And this is the obligation within this situation and every situationsimilar to this. But nay! Many of
the military expeditions that were achieved after thefour rightly guided khaleefahs did not take
place except in this way. And it has been authenticated from the Messenger that he said: “there
will be goodness and blessings tied to the forelocks of horses (used in jihad) until the day of
Judgment: reward and war booty” (narrated in Bukhaari 2750, Muslim 1783). And so, this Saheeh
Hadhith proves the meaning of the hadhith narrated by Abu Dawudin his Sunan; the Messenger
“Military expeditions will remain since the day Allaah sent me until the last of my Ummah fights
the ‘Dajjaal’; it will not be annulled due to the tyranny of a tyrant,or the justice of a just ruler” .And
what has been detailed concerning the matter is that the Messenger said: “there will not cease
from my Ummah, the existence of a group upon the truth, they will not be harmed by those who
oppose them; until the day of Judgment” .And other texts such as these elaborating in the matter,
which the Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah are agreed upon, from all of the groups; to act upon this
for fighting (jihad) against those who deserve to be fought, with the leaders who arerighteous, and
even sinful; contrary to the Rawaafidh and the Khawaarij (who do not believe in fighting with sinful
rulers), (and they) who are out of the fold of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.
This is the case; even with what has been informed by the Messenger: “there will follow (come)
leaders who are oppressive, treacherous, and sinful. So whoever concurs with them (to make it
appear as the truth) with their lies; and helps them;then surely he is not from me and I am not
from him, and he will not be returned to me at the ‘hawdh’ . And whoever does not concur and
justify their lies, and does not help them in their aggression, then surely he is from me, and I am
for him, and he will be returned to me at the ‘hawdh’” .So if a man comprehends what has been
commanded by the Prophet - by making Jihaad which is established under leaders, which will
continue until the day of Judgment, even with the Messenger prohibiting the helping in tyranny,
it is known that the correct middle path, which is the religion of Islaam, consists of fighting those
who deserve to be fought, such as these people, whom the questions are being asked about, under
every group of Muslims who are better in Islaam, than these people (tatars), if fighting them is not
possible except in this way (under sinful Muslims). And refraining from helping the fighting group;
it consists of disobedience to Allaah , but nay! Helping them (the fighting group) is from the
obedienceto Allaah , but there is no obedience to them in disobeying Allah as there is no obedience
at all to any creation in committing disobedience to the Creator (Allaah ).
And this is the best path of the ummah, before our time and after. And it is an obligation upon
everyone who is able to do so. And this path is the middle path between the “Hurooriyyah” and

their likes, those who adhere and cling onto chaos and destruction due to lack of knowledge , and
between the way of the murjiah and their likes who obey the rulers completely , even though the
rulers are not righteous or just. And we ask that Allaah enables us and our brothers leading to
what He loves and is pleased with, from the sayings and actions. And Allaah knows best. And may
peace and blessings be upon our Messenger Muhammad (), hisfamily and his companions.END OF FATAWA

Conclusions from the Fatwa
1. The Mongol-Tatars are apostates even if they claim to be Muslims, even if they say the
Shahadatayn, pray sometimes, fast sometimes and pay zakah. That is becausethey claim to believe
in the book of Allah but completely stops adhering to andestablishing some of its commandments.
So they completely stopped, Jizya, jihadagainst Kuffar (except for the Mongol nation and its
priorities), and they consideredthe Muslims as pious and good people while considering the
people of the book ascitizens of the mongol nation, deserving merit according to their allegiance
to theircode and way of life. They, also completely stopped judging according to the Shariah, but
that was among them. As for the Muslim subjects, who were the original citizensof the towns and
regions they conquered, they allowed them to rule according to the Shariah and Quran and
Sunnah.(So can you imagine what the ruling is concerningthese people of today, who obligate all
Muslims in their countries, to obey and rule by the laws they have set up, even if they contradict
the Quran!).The Mongols were alsocalled apostates due to this action of theirs , that they judged
between themselves according to a book called Yaasiq.
2. Their military consisted of Mushriks, christians, atheists and other religions. But,most of the
people in their army, especially low ranking foot soldiers, were people claiming to be Muslims and
those taken from conquered regions, who were claiming to be Muslims. Vast majority of them
were Shia, but there were enough of them claiming to be Sunnis. Ibn taymiyyah Classified all of
them along with theMongol tatars as Apostates.

3. Ibn Taymiyyah categorically said these type of people, whether they aremongol tatars or not,
they are not classified as rebellious Muslims, or sinful transgressing Muslims such as highway
bandits and robbers. Rather, these types of people (named as the refraining group “Taaifatul
Mumtania’a”), they are apostates, who are asked to repent if they do so(if they repent they are
left alone), and are killed if they do not. Their blood and wealth are lawful, once they have been
asked to repent and they refuse. These people fall into the category of those who refused to pay
Zakat to the righteous Khalifah , slave of Allaah, Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him).
4. Ibn Taymiyyah categorically repeats that fighting against such people, those who completely
stops any known commandment of Allaah, or any of the prohibitions of Allaah, then such people
are fought against as an obligation of the religion of Islaam. Please note, that here, he is talking

about two groups of people and they are: A. Those who reject or refuses an obligation. Such
people will say, by way of example,I do not believe that prayer is waajib (obligatory) or Zakat is
obligatory after the death of the messenger, or wine other than wine of grapes, is allowed in Islam,
orthings such as these.B. The second category, that is the one which the Murjiah, both modern
day Murjia and the past murjiah, are confused about, those who accept the obligations but refuse
or rejects`completely to act upon it. They are those who say, I believe prayer is compulsory and
waajib (obligatory) and Allaah has made it compulsory, but I don’t want to pray, or will not pray.
This is the Kufr of Inaad (stubbornness) and also arrogance (Kibr).Just as “Iblees” knows and
accepts there is only one Supreme Allaah, and pharaoh knew Moses (peace be upon him) was a
messenger of Allaah, they did not accept it publicly and they refused toobey him after knowing
the truth. This is not be confused with those who do notfollow Islaam due to carelessness or
following of whims and desires.Such people areonly sinful Faasiq, but Muslims nevertheless. But
these rejecters of action, they stopcompletely one or many obligations of Islaam by saying so, or
by way of action or by passing a law which is contradictory to the Quran and Sunnah. When they
are askedto repent, they do not do so, and they continue upon refusal.
5. Ibn Taymiyyah cites more than once that there is an Ijma (consensus) fromthe time of the
Sahabaas up until his time that fighting against such people is wajib(obligatory).
6. Refraining from fighting against such people will lead to greater corruption than the
consequences of fighting these people (except in rare and exceptional cases).
7. Those who fight these apostates are Mujahideen and they should fight to raise the word of
Allaah and establish his religion on this earth and to establish justice to seek his pleasure and
8. Refraining from fighting these apostates , due to the existence of sinful leaders within the
Mujahideen or the sinful people within the Mujahideen, is contrary to the creed of Ahlusunnah,
and it will lead to greater corruption of the earth if theapostates are left empowered.
9. Jihad will remain until the last of the righteous people fights the Dajjal.Jihad will not be stopped
due to the righteousness of a just ruler, nor will it be stopped due tothe tyranny of a tyrant,
according to the hadith. And there will always be from theIslamic nation those who are upon
righteousness and those who will make jihad forthe sake of Allaah.
10. Those who make jihad against the apostates must be helped and this is from the obedience of
Allah. Those who do not help them are sinful.
11. Fighting the apostates, even if they claim the Shahaadathayn, it is from the path of Ahlusunnah
wal Jama , and it is only the Khawarij and Rawaafid Shia, who refuse to fight alongside sinful
Muslims. And Ibn Taymiyaah says categorically, it is the Murjiah who leave the apostates and
Kufaar, while obeying the rulers in all the matters even if the rulers are sinful.

Related documents

the mongol tatars modernday armies
the mongol tatars
muslim weddings
paul chehade summaries of world religions

Related keywords