Muslim

Hadith Commentary:
Vocabulary of the Hadith:
(1)
Hanāt wa hanāt:
This is the plural of hanah.
It applies to every disliked and reprehensible act.
(2)
Kā’ina man kān:
No matter how much status, rank, or fame someone possesses,
he should be eliminated.

Benefits and Issues:
From this hadith, it is understood that the matter of the unity and oneness of the Ummah is extremely important.
In order to preserve it, even an oppressive and sinful ruler will be tolerated, and causing division within the Ummah is such a grave and unforgivable crime that even if someone of great status and position violates this,
then to prevent him, if it becomes necessary to kill him, one should not refrain from doing so.

Hadith Commentary:
Vocabulary of the Hadith:
(1)
AMRUKUM JAMĪ‘UN:
Remain united and unanimous under one leader (amir).
(2)
YASHUQQU ‘ASĀKUM:
Your unity, which is like a staff and is a symbol of your strength and power—if someone tries to break it like a staff, seeking to destroy your strength and dignity, do not tolerate it.

Benefits and Issues:
This tribulation was first instigated by those very people who rebelled against Hazrat Uthman (radi Allahu anhu), who was a unanimously agreed-upon rightly guided Caliph.
Later, these same people revolted (rebelled) against Hazrat Ali (radi Allahu anhu).

(1) This hadith is among the signs of prophethood. Just as the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) foretold, exactly in that manner, trials and corruption have appeared, and this chain of evil continues to this day. May Allah protect us from it.

(2) This hadith is a clear proof that anyone who causes division within the Muslim Ummah is liable to be killed, whoever he may be. The words of the noble hadith are: [فَاقْتُلُوْہُ ] meaning, “Kill the one who causes division among the Ummah of Muhammad.” These words are in the imperative form, and unless there is an external indicator, an imperative denotes obligation. Since there is no such indicator here, this command is obligatory. Therefore, it is necessary for the head of the Islamic government that if such a criminal does not desist from his mischief, he should be given the death penalty. It should be remembered that the enforcement of Islamic legal punishments is the responsibility of the head of every Muslim country.

(3) From this hadith, the attribute of “Yad” (hand) of Allah, Glorious is He, is affirmed, meaning Allah has a hand. It should be remembered that Allah’s hand is as befits His exalted and sublime essence. Allah’s hand is neither similar to the hand of the creation, nor are any other meanings such as “power” etc. intended, as the interpreters (mu’awwileen) claim. The Divine statement is: ﴿لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ﴾ (“There is nothing like unto Him”). The affirmation of Allah’s hand is also found in the Noble Qur’an. The Divine statement is: ﴿تَبَارَكَ الَّذِي بِيَدِهِ الْمُلْكُ﴾ (Al-Mulk: 67:1) “Blessed is He in whose hand is all dominion.”

(4) From this hadith, the virtue of the congregation (jama‘ah) is known, because Allah’s hand is upon the congregation, and His help and support never separate from the congregation. By “congregation” is not meant factions, groups, or parties, but rather the group of Muslims united under one caliph. Also, from this noble hadith, the harm and condemnation of division, discord, and harmful disagreement within the Muslim Ummah is made clear. Since Allah’s hand and His help are specific to the congregation, when the congregation falls into division and discord, then Allah’s hand will be lifted from that congregation, and Satan will gain dominance over it, and he will become their hand. And whoever’s companion is Satan, then he is a very evil companion. ﴿وَمَنْ يَكُنْ الشَّيْطَانُ لَهُ قَرِينًا فَسَاءَ قَرِينًا﴾ (An-Nisa: 4:38) And Allah knows best.

(5) The person referred to here is either an apostate (murtadd) or a rebel (baghi). An apostate is one who, after being Muslim, leaves Islam. Such a person becomes an enemy of Islam and will assist the disbelievers against the Muslims. Experience shows this, therefore, if he does not repent, he should be killed. And by “rebel” is meant one who, after the Muslims have united under one leader, forms a separate faction. Since such a person is also an enemy of the Muslim Ummah and seeks to destroy and ruin them by causing them to fight among themselves, he too is liable to be killed so that the Muslim Ummah may be protected from his evil. Similarly, whoever leaves the Muslim Ummah and joins the disbelievers is also a rebel and an apostate, and he should also be killed, even if he continues to call himself a Muslim.

(6) Regarding the punishment of the rebel, the entire world is agreed that, to protect from his mischief, he may be given the death penalty. However, regarding the death penalty for the apostate, some so-called “enlightened” individuals object, claiming that this is narrow-mindedness and a restriction on freedom of thought. But it is astonishing that giving the death penalty to a rebel against the state is not considered narrow-mindedness, nor is it seen as a restriction on freedom of thought, but giving the death penalty to a rebel against religion is considered narrow-mindedness and extremism. Is this enlightenment? Is this justice? Either everyone should be given absolute freedom to do as they please regarding religion and country—whether he goes about killing people or committing robberies, he should not be stopped, because that would be narrow-mindedness and a restriction on freedom of thought. Clearly, this is not possible. Therefore, necessarily, every person who adopts a religion or the citizenship of a country must be bound by some code of conduct. In this lies peace, tranquility, honor, safety, and indeed the survival of humanity.

(1) The unity and consensus of the Ummah is more important than anything else. Causing division within the Ummah over trivial matters, creating discord among them, and making such issues the criterion of truth and falsehood is a grave crime. If the Ummah is united upon a single leader (amir), then raising unnecessary objections against the amir and thereby causing disorder within the Ummah falls under the category of rebellion. After all, the amir is a human being, not an angel; he can have shortcomings, he can make mistakes, but shortcomings and mistakes do not justify rebellion and disorder. Is it possible for any amir to be free from all shortcomings and mistakes? Therefore, as long as the amir does not commit clear (explicit) disbelief (kufr), rebellion against him is not permissible. However, legitimate criticism of him is allowed, but sabotage is not permissible.