The is rough translation or summary with some additions of Sheikh Abu Yazn's explanation of Hadith of Dhul Khwaisara available here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0uXsk9ib9Y
Its long but every bit of it is worth reading and listening. I can't expect IS fanboys to understand this because they fit the mentality of DhulKhwaisara who wasblinded to the Maqasid, Maslahah and deeper explanation behind Quran. But Allah guide whom he wills.
The issue of khwarij is not an issue which is unknown. Rather Rasul(sa) warned about this and also told us that they will keep appearing till last of them are along Dajjal. In our times, this issue has reoccurred from Aljazair to Iraq. So every experience of Jihad in our times needs thinking and how problems of these experiences won't be repeated. And we cannot look at Aljazair and other cases in isolated way. Instead we have to tackle the Root cause. Relate the Islamic background of Khwarij and history with what is happening today and also learn from the mistakes.
The hadith most famous hadith about khwarij is of DhulKhwaisara which is in Bukhari. It also is more than prophecy. Rather it is a warning. And the people who are well-grounded in knowledge will always look at minute details and reasons.
So what are the signs of khwarij.
- They make takfir on major sins.
- They separate out from the just-Imam chosen by the Muslimeen.
These are the basic 2 characteristics that are generally known.
Today people of knowledge see in Syria some people who are as extreme as khwarij and some worse but they don't exactly fit these 2 characteristics and this makes them confused. Like there is no Imam to begin with against whom are khurooj is being made an neither do some of these people make typical takfir of Zani etc.
This is typical definition of FITNAH. Where the Batil is not apparent. In this case as well, the khwarijism is not apparent however it is very well present and we shall see how.
So the matter has to be returned to the people of knowledge who have careful insight as it is said in Quran
"يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ"
Here OolulAmr also refers to the people of knowledge.
and
فسئلوا اھل الذکر ان کنتم لا تعلمون
"Ask the people of knowledge if you no not".
I say that the Fitnah is when general criterion does'nt apply and one has to look deeper. Lets take a look at two ahadith both from Bukhari.
Hadith#1
1)Narrated Sad (bin Abi Waqqas) : Allah's Apostle distributed something (from the resources of Zakat) amongst a group of people while I was sitting amongst them, but he left a man whom I considered the best of the lot. So, I went up to Allah's Apostle and asked him secretly, "Why have you left that person? By Allah! I consider him a believer." The Prophet said, "Or merely a Muslim (Who surrender to Allah)." I remained quiet for a while but could not help repeating my question because of what I knew about him. I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Why have you left that person? By Allah! I consider him a believer. " The Prophet said, "Or merely a Muslim." I remained quiet for a while but could not help repeating my question because of what I knew about him. I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Why have you left that person? By Allah! I consider him a believer." The Prophet said, "Or merely a Muslim." Then Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) said, "I give to a person while another is dearer to me, for fear that he may be thrown in the Hell-fire on his face (by renegating from Islam)."
Hadith#2
2)Volume 9, Book 84, Number 67:
Narrated Abu Sa'id:While the Prophet was distributing (something, 'Abdullah bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said, "Be just, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said, "Woe to you ! Who would be just if I were not?" 'Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "Allow me to cut off his neck ! " The Prophet said, " Leave him, for he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with theirs, you will look down upon your prayers and fasting, in comparison to theirs. Yet they will go out of the religion as an arrow darts through the game's body in which case, if the Qudhadh of the arrow is examined, nothing will be found on it, and when its Nasl is examined, nothing will be found on it; and then its Nadiyi is examined, nothing will be found on it. The arrow has been too fast to be smeared by dung and blood. The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand (or breast) will be like the breast of a woman (or like a moving piece of flesh). These people will appear when there will be differences among the people (Muslims)." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person (i.e., 'Abdullah bin Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tarnimi): 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.' (9.58)
The difference
And the second Hadith is the one which is the reference for Masaalah of Khwarij. Just like whenever the ruling of spies is discussed, the hadith of Hatib(ra) comes.
Now the two hadith are similar, Rasulullah(sa) gave precedence in distribution of Ghanima. The situation is similar. But in one case the RahmatulilAalimeen said "Woe to DhulKhwaysara". What made Rasulullah(sa) differentiate between the two cases that might apparently look similar.
The answer is
Saad issue is an issue of explaination or confusion in his mind which he wanted to clear or the case of a question when he asked "I see him to be a Muslim/Momin".
The Masalah of Dhulkhwaysara is not an issue of a question rather he made a judgement based on his own Aql upon the Dhahir(apparent) and did not understand the deeper ruling. This relates to what Rasulullah(sa) said about them that "Quran would not go beyond their throats" Look at the response of Rasulullah(sa) he took Dhul Khwayasara by the Dhahir instead of what the explaination given to Saad. This is because the mind of DhulKhwaisara was unable to comprehend anything other then Dhahir and the Dhahir was "If I don't do 'adl who would(Meaning if a Prophet won't do then who would). So the difference in two cases.
1. Saad(ra) was like a question.............................. DhulKhwaisara made a judgement based on his apparent understanding.
2. To Saad(ra), Rasulullah(sa) explained Maqsad behind................To DhulKhwaisara he(sa) said "Woe" and relied with Dhahir
THIS THINKING IS THE (BASIC) OF KHWARIJI MENTALITY. It does'nt mean that everyone who has Dhahiri tendencies in thinking would be a khariji. And by Dhahiri understanding we clearly do not mean the Dhahiri Fiqh but understanding of Mutashabihaat of Quran and Quran itself with Dhahir and without looking at Tafsir/Maqasid etc.
Imam Shaatibi's explanation
Imam Shatibi said about khwarij who was a major Aalim of the sciences of Maqasid and his understanding looks at the picture of Maqasid. When he discusses khwarij he describes 2 characteristics.
He does'nt discuss these 2 typical signs i.e (Takfir on Kabair and Khurooj against Imam) . Rather he says
"First sign is following of Dhawahir of Quran without the Maqasid . This derives from the hadith that Quran would not go beyond their throats."
WE are not talking about the Dhahiri Madhab but the Dhahiri in thinking. This is what gives rise to the thinking of khwarij Saad(ra) saw something that require explaination but then his misunderstanding was cleared after going to MAQASID.
However these MAQASID were beyond the mind of DhulKhwaysara. This is what the Raasikhun fil Ilm(الراسخون فلی العلم) look at. Some khwarij could be reciting Quran for years but Raasikhun fil Ilm have the ability to look at Muhkamaat and Mutashabihat.
هُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ
(3:7)
"It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding."
Mutashabihat are the ones whose Dhahir meaning is more than one. Those who have disease in their hearts take the Mutashabihaat and don't take guidance with Muhkamaat like Khwarij. This gives rise to Fitnah. As for Raasikhun they believe in both but while interpreting Mutashabihaat, they do it in light of Muhkamat.
The Dhahiri thinking is opposite to Rasikhun who don't connect the Mutashabihat to Muhkamat. And this is how Shatibi said that is their first characteristic
"First Alamah(sign) is following of Dhawahir(apparent) of Quran without the diving deep into Maqasid".
We look at Salafia of today, not referring to the Salaf of the post but what is considered Salafi movement of this age .It is dominated by Dhahir understanding. Look at the people who followed this path(of Kharijism) from Algeria to Iraq, they are offshoots of "Salafis". Because the thinking of Salafism is dominated by looking at Dhahir. Why did'nt this fitnah take root in Afghanistan ?They are Ahnaf..
We don't charge Salafism with khwarijism or take away the good among its goals or followers but that Khwarijism today everywhere risen from Salafia. The MANIFESTATIOIN of this thinking could turn into Salook(Behaviour) like "Killing of AhlulIslam and leaving the idol-worshippers" or leaving obedience of Imam.
Second sign that Shatibi discusses is this Manifestation " leave the kuffar and kill the Muslims ".
The blind won't look at the reason of the Salook(Actions) rather the belief itself.
This is the beauty of Shariah that there is an aspect for the Awaam(ordinary) to look at which is the Salook i.e killing Muslims and leaving idol worshippers. But there is an aspect to look at for the Khawaas(knowledgeable) which is the Reason . In this case, it happens to be this part of the Hadith
"They will recite the Quran but it won't go beyond their throats."
AhluShaam recognizes them as Khwarij because of their Salook with AhlulShaam and they preceeded many people of knowledge in identifying this Fikr. This is the Qadr of people of Alshaam as Rasulullah(sa) said about them that
"Imaan in the time of trials is in Alshaam"
Also
"If AhluShaam are corrupted then there is no good in you."
Now people call them Sahawaat and Murtadin.
Ibn Tamiyyah about Khwarij
Now look at IbnTamiyyah when he talks about Khwarij.
"Leaving the Sunnah and making what is Sin a good deed and a good deed into a Sin." Ibn Tamiyyah looks at it from the point of view of results of thinking. This connects to the kalam of Shatibi because a person interprets a sin into good deed and a good deed into a sin when he fails to look at the Maqasid.
The Kalaam of IbnTamiyyah completes the kalaam of Shatibi because looking at Dhahir makes khwarij unable to look at the picture which considers Maqasid as a whole and thus they fail to look at reality and misinterpret sins and good deeds.
There is an opposite extreme who are the Batiniyyyah who think that Shariah is always never dhahir like the fikr of Ismaliyah, Rawafidh and some would deny Kawthar or existence of Angels . Denying the apparent of Shariah always also leads to Zandaqah.
That is why Quran says "Return it to people with insight".
It is said "The most firm people against Qiyaas are khwarij." Because the approach of looking at Maslaha/Mafsada destroys their Madhab.
Second sign that IbnTamiyyah discusses is "They Kill believers and leave idol-worshippers ". So if you understand the first point, the second becomes easy.
Shariah addresses both the Awaam and the Khaas.
Do Kharijis have to make takfir on Kabair or make khurooj against Khilafah?
Abdul latif aal shaykh
The khwarij against Ali(ra) did not make takfir on kabair in the start. They entered kharijism when they made takfir on the matter of Tahkeem between Ali and Muawiya.
Rebelling against Imam is definitely a sign but if we look deeper then it is a rebellion against Ummah itself, rebellion against Millah, Shariah.
Khwarij goes out like an arrow from whom ; The Shariah and AhlulShariah(Ummah itself)
Man Kharaja Ala Ummati hadith also refers to Khwarij.
Ruling about killing of Khwarij ?
So you look at how the AhlulIlm look at the issue of Khwarij. When Umar(ra) asked can I strike his neck. Rasulullah(sa) said first refused to strike the neck of Dhulkhwaysara but later said "if I meet them, I would kill them like Aad".
The reason is that the MAQASID that make killing them like Aad a requirement was not present in DhulKhwaysara as an individual at that time which required killing him. Which is that it is not required to kill khwarij until their fikr(thought) evolves into actions. Same is the case with Ali(ra) who knew before hand who carried the fikr(thought) of khwarij but he left them then advised them and finally killed them when they had become a threat.
So lets discuss the discussion with Ibn Abbas, khwarij said " There is no Hukm except for Allah" and their understanding of Dhahir became apparent when they objected and said "Is'nt Ali(ra) the Amir of believers then why don't you write AmirulMumineen on the agreement". They did'nt understand that Rasulullah(sa) even erased his Nabuwah title on a paper.
Now we come to Hadith that you will find your Salah as inferior compared to them. Now Nabi(sa) gives another aspect of their Sulook which is HUGE emphasis on Dhahir of Ibadah. And Ghuloo is again part of the same Sulook.
Ghuloo in Deen
Shariah has laid some Marahil(procedure) for us and hadith says
"No one goes to Ghuloo except it overtakes them".
So Deen is moderation. Over-emphasis on one part i.e Ghuloo in Salook destroys a person. For example an example of moderation is hadith where Rasulullah(sa) said
"I pray, I fast, I go to my wives, I eat."
What happens if people only do Ibadah and Ibadah and stop marrying or eating ? It will destroy them.
So Ghuloo always destroys its carrier. If a person carries it, he is destroyed by it . Similarly, If Ghuloo comes into Jihad, Jihad itself is destroyed. No need of Mukhabaraat. This is what Rasulullah(sa) himself said. This Mashroo' of Ghuloo is self-destructive.
So Nabi(sa) warned us from this Ghuloo in Sulook. Which is also not the way of his companions A khariji with us in Shaam whose name is famous, in the start of declarion of state came for some negotiations I prayed behind him. When he recited Fatiha, in the very start he cried.
Did'nt even recite anything. Nothing occured to me except this hadith.
Cure
The biggest way to cure the disease of khwariji thought is
- Tadabbur of Quran.
- Its Maqasid and Mafasid.
- Qiyas.
Even there is explaination behind the analogy of the arrow. It starts, strikes the meat and leaves. Just like the khwarij start with crimes against Muslims and go to extreme and extreme until they leave the Ummah itself.
Maliki says they are kuffar. Hanabilah see them as Maariqah.
So in one hadith we discussed.
Reasons, Alamaat, Sulook, Qitaal against them and Cure of Kharijism.
COMMENTS FROM TRANSLATOR
1st Sign
So Sheikh Abu Yazn gives the root of khariji thought that also fits perfectly with the description of Hadith of DhulKhwaisara and is also the view of Imam Shaatibi which is "ONLY looking at Dhahir of Quran and misapplying it without looking into details or Maqasid of it." and this also relates to how khwarij interpreted the issue of "Ruling by what Allah has revealed". So what have IS done the same ?
This also fits with what Ali(ra) said "They cite the right thing but interpret it wrongly. Kalimatu Haqqin Ureedu biha baatil".
Among the many example of them copying this principle is the example of their misinterpretation of the issue of "Allying with disbelievers against Muslim." While this issue is deeper and has different cases, the khwarij take simple apparent Batil understanding that if
FSA takes US aid.
JabhatulIslamiyah operated together with FSA.
JabhatalNusrah operated together with JabhatulIslamiyah
then they all are Murtadin. First they lie then they do wrong chain takfir then they also can't comprehend the difference between coincidence in fighting an enemy and having Wala to it. Also the difference between cases of co-operating with kuffar against Kuffar or kuffar against khwarij or kuffar against Muslim.
2nd sign
This is separating from the Ummah. The basic sign of which is declaring a Khilafah without Shoorah. Scholars of AhluSunnah wal jamah agreed that there can be no Khilafah without Majority of AhlulHalwalAqd endorsing it. The Manhaj of IS is that they declare one area to be DarulIslam, consult its AhlulhalwalAqd and declare khilafah upon Ummah.
Which means that anyone can enforce Hudood in a village, consult its people and declare Khilafah upon Ummah ?
This is exactly the way upon which GIA in Algeria and JamatulMuslimeen acted by declaring their Khilafah with their own AhlulHalwalAqd.
3rd sign
As Ibn Tamiyyah said "They interpret good deeds as sins and sins as good deeds". To detail this matter, there is another tape of Sh Abu Yazn and also a testimony of Sh Abu Firas al Suri(haf) of JN on following stances of IS.
-Taking bayah from FSA(whom they considered Murtadin) was haram.
This is what AbuFiras testified about Abu Ali al Anbari. Strangely enough, they themselves took bayah from some of the most corrupt FSA brigades. On the other hand if FSA or criminals gave bayah to JN or IslamicFront, it was actually a good deed because of leading FSA elements to Hasanaat.
-Sitting with Kuffar or Munafiqeen in any case was Kufr or haram.
On this issue as well, there is whole discussion with Abu Yazn al Shami(rh). To Summarize, Ahrar's leader(some of them) went to Egypt and sat with some scholars among whom were what are considered palace scholars to convince them to declare Jihad against Bashar. Any Muslim with sound understanding would call have no problem with it. AbuYazn then also cited the meeting of Zarqawi's security chief with Assef Shawkat who used to be Assad's trusted men. It is not surprising that AbuYazn knows about that as Ahrar leader like Abu Aiman al Hamawi was close to Zarqawi(rh).
Some common misconceptions ?
Khwarij always have to make takfir on Major Sins.
No, it is a sign of them but one does'nt have to do it to become a khariji. This is clear as the basic reason for those who became khariji during Ali's(ra) time was misapplication of Tahkeem issue. Takfeer on Major sins was when they became even more extreme.
Do they have to rebel against an Imam ?
Yes, it is a sign but Imam represents whom ? He represents Ummah. So if Imam is not there or if there is no Khilafah then we can take the rebellion of a group against Ummah or separating out from it a legitimate sign of kharijism as was done by GIA.
If they fight kuffar. Does that mean they can't be khwarij ?
Again, in general, leaving the Akuffar and fighting the believer is a sign of khwarij. But we cannot say that anyone who fought kuffar cannot be a khariji. For example.
- Khwarij in North Africa during the time of Ubaidis fought Ubaidi Rawafidh and even Maliki AhlSunnah joined them. This did not stop them from being khwarij. Even though khwarij betrayed AhluSunnah as for them both sides were "Murtadin". Just like today IS would advise its soldiers to not celebrate Wadi al Dayf as "it just exchanged hands from one Murtadin to another". And just like in terms of action, they would rather not fire a single shot on their frontline with Nusayriah in Halab to support JN, IF or FSA as for them they are same as Bashar.
One IS guy is on video saying "Wallah, Bashar is more honorable than FSA guys(whom they alleged to have raped Muhajiraat)".
-GIA, JamatulMuslimeen also took their part in fight against Kuffar.
Finally I advise the brothers to take guidance from Scholars as they are the ones who can grab the issue from its root. I ask Allah to guide me and Muslims and forgive me if I have been incorrect.