| المستخلص: |
The present paper tackles a very intricate subject related to the difference between two types of people who take a stand against community: deviants (khawaarij) and rebels. - The majority of jurists differentiate between rebels and deviants as concerns the technical meaning, as concerns valid and invalid interpretation of the term and as concerns acceptance of statements or the other way round. However, they consider them equal as to rulings. It should be noted that equality between these two categories of people with regard to rulings is contrary to the doctrine held by Ahl As-Sunnah wal Jamaa ah because they differentiate between fighting the one and not fighting the other. It is also contrary to the actual practice with regard to the issues subject of difference. Many jurists differentiate between the two categories in rulings in a number of issues. Moreover, they differentiate between the two categories as regards qualities and conditions. - Authentic and explicit texts state that every Muslim should keep united with the Muslim community and not deviate or revolt against it in any way whatsoever. - Authentic and explicit texts have condemned deviants and agree that they are mischievous. - The majority of jurists opt that deviants are the same as rebels with regard to interpretation of texts although they agree that their interpretations are invalid. - According to jurists, rebellion has three meanings: 1) rebels who have justifiable reasons, like the reasons given by the companions of the Prophet who took part in the battles of The Camel and Siffeen, 2) the rebels who present no justifiable reasons for rebelling against the Muslim ruler and 3) the deviants. According to jurists, the basic meaning of rebels is the first on. The second and third meanings are attached to the original meaning as regard ruling although they agree that there is a difference between the three categories with regard to some rulings. - Jurists agree that rebels and deviants share some qualities like rebellion, deviation, justified rebellion, armed fighting and refusing the orders of the ruler. - Rebels have two special qualities; 1) they claim for a right and the reason for rebellion is worldly. - Deviants have some special qualities: 1) They are devout worshippers, 2) they are extremists, 3) they are juveniles, 4) they are unreasonable, 5) they permit for themselves the lives and property of Muslims, 6) they regenerate, 7) they label others as disbelievers, 8) they deviate against religion and 10) they incite others to deviate. - Common conditions for both rebels and deviants which should be met to permit fighting them include the following: 1) they rebel within the land of Islam, 2) they are powerful either in number of force. However, the Maalikites opine that there is no difference between many and few. According to the majority of jurists, the lack of this condition make them as warriors and this is the preponderant opinion, 3) they are uncontrolled by the ruler. Some of the Shaafi’ites believe that they should resort to a town that demonstrates power. However, the majority of jurists believe that the power can be achieved without resorting to a town, 4) they have some reasons for rebelling against the ruler. Jurists differ as to discourse with rebels before fighting them. The majority of jurists believe that this a condition. If they are called to return to obedience and they refuse, they can be fought. - The deviants should meet two conditions which rebels are not required to meet. These are: 1) They believe in the deviant ideology which labels others as disbelievers for the mere commitment of a sin publicly and 2) they consider the lives and property of Muslims as permissible for them. However, they differ as to calling them to return to the right path before fighting them. The preponderant opinion is that it is not a condition and that they can be fought initially. - Jurists agree that they can be fought if they begin it or if they are no longer controlled by the ruler. - The majority of jurists believe that deviants are not disbelievers and this is the preponderant opinion. - Jurists agree that rebels should return the property they usurp and that their adversaries are not required to do so or even required to pa for any lives or property they have damaged. The preponderant opinion is that rebels may not be held liable for anything they damaged during the war. - The preponderant opinion is that deviants are held liable for anything they have damaged. - Terrorist cells and armed groups are two types: The first type are the ones who advocate deviation and rebellion and indirectly support it. These are the sitting deviants and they should be deterred as is the case with rebellion. The second type are the ones who fight Muslims, kill some people and damage property. These are similar to deviants as regards their qualities but they are rebels as regards fighting because the condition of power is not met according to the majority of jurists. - Public demonstrations and sit-ins are acts of rebellion both linguistically and technically. These acts are not supported by any Sharee’ah rules. They rely on very weak reasoning proofs.
|
