Diyaar we live in and its ruling

Diyaar

"The homeland of the Muslim, in which he lives and which he defends, is not a piece of land; the nationality of the Muslim, by which he is identified, is not the nationality determined by a government; the family of the Muslim, in which he finds solace and which he defends, is not blood relationships; the flag of the Muslim, which he honors and under which he is martyred, is not the flag of a country..."

First of all let’s take in hand the matter of ‘dar’. In sources there are many synonyms used for both dar ul Islam and daru ul harb. Some of them are as follows:

Daru’l-Islam:
Daruna (Sarahsi, Sharhil Siyar, IV, 1583; I, 339; V, 2273; al-Mabsut, XXX, 33; Hajjawi, Al-Iqna, IV, 306)
Darul Iman (Ibnul Arabi, Ahqamu’l-Quran, II, 338)
Daru’t-Tawhid (al-Mabsut, X, 82)
Daru’l-Muslimin (al-Umm, IV, 84; Tabari, al-ikhtilaaf, 238; Sharhu’s-Siyar al-Kaber, IV, 1519)
Daru Ahkam (al-Mabsut, XXX, 33; Sayyid Sharif, Sharhu’s-sirajiya, 82)
Biladulislam (İmam Qurtubi al Jami-u Li Ahkam'il Qur'an XVIII, 61-65),
Biladulmuslimin,
Ardu’l-Islam…

Daru’l-Harb:
Daruhum (Tabari, al-Ikhtilaaf, 46; Sharhus’siyar V, 1701)
Darush-shirk (al-Umm, IV, 84; V, 320; Tabari, al-Ikhtilaaf, 171; al Mabsut, XIV, 57)
Darul kuffar (Ramli, nihayatu’l-muhtaj, V, 454)
Daru’l-kufr (Imam Malik, al-Mudawwana, II, 300; al-Umm, IV, 5; Harashi, Sharhu muhtasari Halil, III, 112; Kasani, al Badaiu's Sanai fi Tartibi'sh-Sharai, VII, 130; Tabari, jami'ul Bayan fi Tafsir'il Qur'an; XXVIII, 44; Mardawi, al-Insaaf, IV, 122)
Daru’l-kahr (al-Mabsut, XXX, 33)
Daru’l-kahr wa ghalaba (Sayyid Sharif, Sharhu’s-sirajiya, 82)
daru’l-kahr wa Ibaha (Hajjawi, III, 144)
Daru’t-turk (Sharhu’s-siyar V, 1948)
Daru’l-hind (Qadihan, fatawa qadihan, I, 1573)
Daru’l-jahalat (Abdulkarim Zaydan, al Wajiz fi Usuli'l Fıqh, 80),
biladu’l-kufr (Saed Hawwa, Islam, 401)
Biladuladuww (Imam Qurtubi, al jamiu Li Ahqam'il Qur'an, XVIII, 61-65)
Biladis-shirk (Imam Qurtubi, al jamiu Li Ahqam'il Qur'an, XVIII, 61-65),
biladulmushrikin,
dar i jihaad (Himyari, Sifati Jaziratu’l-Andulus, 3)
ardu’l-harb,
ardu’l-kufr,
ardush-shirk…

The “dar” (pl. diyaar) in the Arabic language has numerous meanings such as the house, abode, residence and the land (balad) and the halting place (mahallu). Other than these dictionary meanings we have here more interest on the Islamic concept of the term, the Islamic terminology and it follows:

Dar: “A country under the administration of a Muslim or a non-muslim leader” (Ibn Abdi, Radd ul muhtar, III, 247) As understood from this explanation in order for a dar to be named Islam the administration needs to be in the hands of the Muslim and in order for it to be named dar ul kufr, the administration needs to be in the hands of the kuffar.

Radiyuddin as- Sarahsi stated: “For the reason that the establishment of the protecting administration and domination also the control of the state is in the hands of the nation, a country will be ascribed to its nation.” (Al- Muhit, 408) Dabusi states: “The factor which differentiates the Islamic state and the non Muslim state is based on the difference in administration and government.” (Al-Asrar) In the same meaning while Sarahsee stated: “A place will be ascribed to us or them in respect to strength and domination.” (Al-Mabsut, X, 114) Ibn Hazm stated: “the Dar is only attributed to the one who is in control of it, the one who rules it and the one who owns it.” (al-Muhalla, XI, 200)

When Dabusee describes the Islamic state he says “the place under the administration and domination of the Muslim" and Sarahsee states: "Dar ul Islam is the name of the place under Islamic haqimiyyah.” (Sharhu’s-Siyar al-Kaber, IV, 1253) In another statement Sarahsee says: “By dar ul islam we mean in respect to administration and domination.” (al-Mabsut X, 81) In Fatawa Hindiyya the measurement of reckoning a place dar ul Islam is stated to be: “the superimposition of the regulation.” (Al Fatawa Hindiyya, II, 232)

Kuhistani stated: “Dar ul Islam is the state which the authority and judgment of the Muslim head of state is valid; and dar ul harb is the state which the commands and administration belongs to the leader of the kuffar.” (Jamiuz Ramuz, II, 311) Hajjawee stated: “Dar ul harb is the state which kufur judgment and administration is dominant." (al-Iqna, II,7) Ibn Muflih said, “There are only two (camps), Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kufr. Any Dar (domain) where Islamic law is dominant is Dar al-Islam, and any domain where Kufr law is dominant is Dar al-Kufr, there are only these two camps.” (Al-Adaab al-Shari’ah, I, 190)

The base measurement for a state to be accepted as dar ul Islam is that the administration and operations are Islamic meaning it is administered according to the fundamentals of Islam and that the Islamic laws are regulated. (Abdulkarem Zaydan, Ahqamu’z-zimmiyyin wa’l-mustaminin fi daru’l-Islam, 18; Zuhayli, Asarul harb fi fiqhil islami, 171; Daqs, al alaqatu’d-dawliyya fil-islam, 127) According to this, dar ul Islam is the state which is under the domination of the Muslim and the Islamic laws are carried out and practiced regardless of the population being Muslim or non Muslim. (Tafsirul Manar, X, 371-372; Sayyid Qutb, Fi Dhilal, IV, 133; Udah, at-Tashriu’l-Jinai, 1-275-276; Abdulkarem Zaydan, Ahqamu’z-zimmiyyin wa’l-mustaminin fi daru’l-Islam, 18-19, 624; Zuhayli, Asarul harb fi fiqhil islami, 169; Ali Mansur, ash-shariatil islamiyya wal kanunud duwaliyyil amm, 94; Daqs, al alaqatu’d-dawliyya fil-islam, 126; Nawawi; al alaqatu’d-dawliyya wa’n-nuzumul qadaiyya fish’shariatil islamiyya, 59) Dar ul harb is the state left outside of the Islamic political administration, which the administration and laws are non Islamic. (Sayyid Qutb, Fi Dhilal, IV, 133; Udah, at-Tashriu’l-Jinai, 1-277; Zuhayli, Asarul harb fi fiqhil islami, 170, 176; Daqs, al alaqatu’d-dawliyya fil-islam, 126)

A conquered dar ul harb will become dar ul Islam with the application and performance of the Islamic laws. (Imām Ibn Al-Qayyim, Ahkām Ahl Ath-Thimmah”, 1/365-366; Dabusi, al-Asrar; Halwani, al-Mabsut, 313; Radiyuddin as-Sarahsi, al-Muhit, 408; Kasani, VII, 130; Fatawa’l-Kardari 391; al-Fatawal Bazzaziyya VI, 313; al-Fatawa’t-Tatarhaniyya, II, 113; al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya, II, 232; Maraghi, 27; Abdulkarem Zaydan, Ahqamu’z-zimmiyyin wa’l-mustaminin fi daru’l-Islam, 20; Zuhayli, Asarul harb fi fiqhil islami, 172) A conquered state will not be dar ul Islam unless the Islamic laws are applied. (Sarahsi, al-Mabsut, X, 23) When a Muslim army force (sarriyya) enters dar ul harb, the state they are in will not be reckoned as dar ul Islam untill they are capable of applying the Islamic laws. (Jassas, Sharhu Muhtasari’t-Tahawi, 163)

Imām As-Sarahsī said in his Sharh, “And the state becomes the Dār of the Muslims by the implementation of the rulings of Islām.” (Sharh As-Siyar Al-Kabīr, V, 2197) And for Al-Qādhī Abī Ya’lā Al-Hanbalī, “Every state in which the control is for the rulings of kufr instead of the rulings of Islām, then it is Dār Al-Kufr.” (Abū Ya’lā, Al-Mu’tamad Fī Usūl Ad-Dīn, 276) And ‘Abdul-Qāhir Al-Baghdādī has stated likewise (Usūl Ad-Dīn, 270) Shaykh Mansūr Al-Bahūtī said, “And Hijrah is obligatory upon whoever is unable to openly display his religion in Dār Al-Harb, and it is that in which the control is for the rulings of kufr.” (Mansūr Al-Bahūtī, Kash’shāf Al-Qinā, III, 43)

Ash-Shawkānī stated, “The consideration is for the dominance of the word. So if the commands and the forbiddances in the Dār are for the People of Islām, in that those who are in it from the kuffār are not able to openly display their kufr except due to them being given permission for that from the People of Islām, then this is Dār Islām. And the apparentness of the attributes of kufr in it does not harm (the ruling), because they were not apparent through the strength of the kuffār, nor with their power, as is seen with the People of Thimmah from the Jews and the Christians and the People of ‘Ahd who live in the Islāmic cities. And if the matter is opposite, then the Dār is opposite.” “As-Sayl Al-Jarrār”, Vol. 4/575

Imām Ibn Al-Qayyim, stated, “The majority, have stated that Dār Al-Islām is that which the Muslims have arrived in and upon which the rulings of Islām have been implemented. And that upon which the rulings of Islām have not been implemented is not Dār Al-Islām, even if it is attached to it. As this At-Tā’if was very close to Makkah, yet it did not become Dār Al-Islām with the Conquest of Makkah.” (Ahkām Ahl Ath-Thimmah”, 1/366)

‘Alā’ Ad-Dīn Al-Kāsānī, “Verily, every state is attributed, either to Islām or to kufr. And the state is only attributed to Islām if its rulings are implemented in it, and it is attributed to kufr if its rulings are implemented in it. Just as you say that Jannah is the abode of peace, and the Fire is the abode of ruin, due to the presence of flawlessness in Jannah and ruin in the Fire. And because the dominance of Islām or kufr is through the dominance of their rulings.” (Badā’i’ As-Sanā’i, IX, 4375) Imaam Mardawi accounts the darulharb same as darul kufr and explains the reason, “Dar al-Harb is Dar al-Kufr, where Kufr law is dominant.” (al-Insaaf, IV, 122)

A quote from Imam Sarahsi is as follows: “The concept of dar gains its nature according to administration and domination. Areas under the domination of the Muslim and which the Islamic laws are applied are dar ul Islam; it is the area under the power of the Imam of the Mu’minoon and the area which the Islamic laws are regulated. Dar ul harb is the area under the command and administration of the leader of the kuffar and the area which the laws of kufr are regulated. (Kuhistâni, Câmiû'r-Rumuz, II, 311.)

Sayyid Qutb (ra) explains the concept of dar ul harb as: “Dar ul harb includes all areas which the Islamic domination and Islamic shariah are not applied; whatever its inhabitants are. Even if they state to be Muslim, ahl kitab or kafir the outcome is still the same. In brief dar ul harb is the name of the area which the Islamic domination and Islamic shariah are not applied. An area as such is reckoned to be dar ul harb by the Muslim and the Muslim community. (Fi dhilal'il Qur'an II, 874)

While some scholars of fiqh try to provide evidance for different matters their attribute to Mecca before hijrah and open explanation is that it was dar ul harb which Islamic authority was not dominating. (Sahnûn, II, 22; Sarahsî, at-Mabsût, XIV, 57) Furthermore Sarahsi states: even Madinah was dar ul Islam at the begiining, only when The Prophet and the Muslim were present at the city, for certain reasons when they had to leave the city, this hukm was not considered. [al-Mabsût, X, 18; Sharhu's-Siyari'l-kaber, III, 1009, 1011). While Ibn Humam (ra) stated: “Before hijrah Macca was Dar us shirk.” (Feth'ul Kadir Lil Ajizil Fakir VI, 178) Allama Aloosee (ra) stated: “Before it was conquered Macca was dar ul harb.” (Ruhul Maani fi Tafsiril Qur'an'il Adhim wa's Sab-i Masani, XXI, 18.) Shamsul Aimma Imam-i Sarahsi stated: “Macca was dar ul shirk, because within Macca the Islamic laws were not applied. (Al- Mabsut, XIV, 57)

In classical Islamic sources dar ul harb has been explained to be “the state which is dominated bu the administration of kufr” (Hajjawee, II, 7), “the state which the kafir leader and administration is in force.” (Kuhistani, II, 311)

Now let’s try to understand the definition Abu Hanifah gives to dar, the approach of the ulama to this definition and what it means today. The pecularity that needs to be paid attention to here; is the fact that the definition Abu Hanifah gives of dar is it in ikhtilaf with other scholars as you claim or is it in the same direction as the ulama? If attention is paid to it will be seen that regarding the hukm which changes according to dar Abu Hanifah takes the dominating power as basis and accepts the opinion of the majority. He puts forth 3 conditions to determine the power of domination of a dar and he proclaims these 3 conditions determine the dominating power over the dar and with the change of these 3 conditions the dominating power over the dar alters.

Imām As-Sarahsī said, “According to Abū Hanīfah, may Allāh, Ta’ālā, have mercy on him, their state only becomes Dār Al-Harb with three conditions,

The first of them: That it is neighbouring the land of the Turks, (and) there is no state of the Muslims between it and Dār Al-Harb.

And the second: That no Muslim remains in it who is secure with his Īmān or any dhimmī secure with his Amān.

And the third: That they display the rulings of shirk within it.

And from Abū Yūsuf and Muhammad, may Allāh, Ta’ālā, be merciful to them both, if they show the rulings of shirk within it, then their state has become a Dār of Harb, because the area is only attributed to us or to them through consideration of strength and control, so every place in which the ruling of shirk is apparent, then the strength in that place is for the mushrikīn so it is a Dār of Harb. And every place in which what is apparent is the ruling of Islām, then the strength is for the Muslims.” (As-Sarahsī , Al-Mabsūt, X, 114 ; İbn-i Abidin, Raddü'l muhtar Ala'd Dürri'l Muhtar, VIII, 448; Molla Husraw, Durarû'l Hukkam fi sharhi Gurari'l Ahkam, I, 290, I, 434; al Fatawa Hindiyya, II, 232; Imam Kasani, al Badaiu's Sanai, VII, 130-131; İbn-i Humam, Fath'ul Kadir Lil Ajizil Fakir, V, 46; ) So the two companions (of Abū Hanīfah) made the cause (of the ruling) to be the control and the rulings.

The Hanafee scholars have interpreted Abu Hanifahs’ definition as follows: Husayn b Ali al-Lamishi says: “A state will have become dar ul Islam with these 3 conditions. As long as one of the conditions prevails it will not turn to dar ul harb.” (Waqiat) Sadrul-Islam Abu’l-Yusr stated: “Dar ul Islam will not become dar ul harb unless all of the conditions which made it dar ul Islam vanish.” (Imadi, Fusulu’l-Imadi; Ibn Ruzbihan, Suluku’l-Muluk, 457-461) Halwani states a state will only be attributed to them if the strength and force of its enemy is dominating and that this will not take place unless the 3 conditions under consideration take place. (Sarahsi, al-mabsut, X, 114)

The first condition: That it is neighbouring the land of the Turks, (and) there is no state of the Muslims between it and Dār Al-Harb.

“If the state does not border dar ul harb, their nation has been put under the domination of the Muslim because they are surrounded by them.” (Sarahsi, al-Mabsut, X, 114) “In that state because they will not be able to resist against the Muslim their occupation and domination is not valid. For the reason they are surrounded by the Islamic state the Muslim force is dominating.” (Jassas, Sharhu’t-Tahawi, 162b-163a) “There is always a possibility of taking them out of that state, for this reason they will be reckoned under the Muslim rule. However; if the state is neighbouring another dar ul harb or if they are interconnecting, it will be under the rule of the enemy.” (Radiyuddin Sarahsi, al-Muhit, 408b)

The second condition: That no Muslim remains in it that is secure with his Īmān nor any dhimmī secure with his Amān.

“A Muslim or a dhimmi being there is evidence that they have not established complete domination.” (Sarahsi, al-Mabsut, X, 114) “A Muslim or a dhimmi who is secure will show that as it was before a hukm of dar ul Islam is present. This will prevent it from becoming dar ul harb.” (Jassas, Sharhu’t-Tahawi, 162b-163a) (For similar hukm see Radiyuddin Sarahsi, al-Muhit, 408b; al-Fatawa’l-Walwajiyya, 155; ad-Dabusi, al-Asrar, 203b/145a)

Imam Kasanee while explaining the conditions Abu Hanifah presents, he states: “The intention of reckoning a dar to Islam or kufr is not Islam or kufr itself. Infact the intention is safety and fear. If in an area safety belongs absolutely to the Muslims and fear belongs to the kuffar that area is dar ul Islam. However, if the safety (for the reason of domination) belongs absolutely to the kuffar and fear belongs to the Muslim that area is dar ul kufur. The application of laws depends on safety and fear. Hense the laws being applied is pertaining to safety and fear.”… In the same sense safety/security will disappear if that area is neighbouring dar ul harb. For this reason for that area to become dar ul harb it depends on the existence of the considered 2 conditions. (İmam-ı Kasani, el-Bedaiû's Senai, VII, 131; al-Maraghi, 22; Zuhayli, 172)

“I beleive Abu Hanifah had made this statement leaning on the situation which occured during the Muslims jihaad with the ahl shirk in his era. It had seemed impossible to him that the nation of a state who made irtidat can remain there by protecting itsself in the midst of dar ul Islam without the citizens and sultan besieging. However if he had seen them in this era... He would have considered the view of Abu Yusuf and Muhammad.” (Sharhu’t-Tahawi, 163a)

In conclusion we will state; the aman (safety/security) of the Muslim and dhimmi in dar ul Islam depends on the force and haqimiyyah of the Muslim in that area. If this security is present in the invaded area this situation will show us that the Islamic ruling had not been completely lifted in that area. Because the area under the invasion of the enemy which is surrounded by dar ul Islam would still be under the haqimiyyah of the Muslim with an invasion and occupation it will not be considered to have fallen out of the Islamic haqimiyyah. Consequently as the majority has stated the hukm of an area will be given according to the haqimiyyah of the Muslim not the fact that it is neighbouring dar ul harb or the presence of the Muslim or dhimmi there in security. It is a great crime to lean on the views of Abu Hanifah and state there is ikhtilaf regarding the matter of dar and to give the hukm of dar ul Islam to the so called Islamic states of today’s world.

Ibn Qudāmah refuted the conditions of Abū Hanīfah, as he said, “And whenever the people of a country apostatize and their rulings are implemented in it, then they become a Dār of Harb concerning taking their wealth as Ghanīmah and taking their offspring which were born after the apostasy, as slaves. And it is upon the Imām to fight them, as Abū Bakr As-Siddīq, may Allāh be pleased with him, fought the people of apostasy with the Jamā’ah of the Sahābah. And because Allāh, Ta’ālā, ordered the fighting of the disbelievers in (many) places in His Book, and those ones are the most deserving of them to be fought. Because leaving them might tempt the likes of them to imitate them and apostatize with them, then the harm will become great through them. And if he fights them, then whoever is captured is killed, those of them who flee are pursued, their injured are finished off, and their wealth is taken as Ghanīmah, and this was the opinion of Ash-Shāfi’ī. And Abū Hanīfah said, ‘It does not become a Dār of Harb until three things are joined in it: That it neighbours Dār Al-Harb (and) there is nothing between them both from Dār Al-Islām. The second: That no Muslim or dhimmī remains secure in it. The third: That their rulings are implemented in it.’” Ibn Qudāmah said, “And with us, that it is the Dār of kuffār in which there are their rulings, so it is a Dār of Harb.” (Al-Mughnī Wash-Sharh Al-Kabīr, X, 95)

The Abode of Disbelief is whatever land is ruled by the disbelievers, in which the laws of the disbelievers are supreme and political power is in their hands. These lands may be of two types. One which is at war with the Muslims and one which enjoys a truce with them. The determining factor is that it is ruled by the laws of the disbelievers; for it is the "Abode of Disbelief' or "Dar ul-Kufr", even if a large majority of Muslims live there. The Abode of Islam is any land that is ruled by the Muslims, where the Shari'ah is the supreme law and the Muslims hold political power. It is Dar ul-Islam, even if the majority of the population are disbelievers, so long as the Muslims rule it according to the Shari'ah. (Abdur Rahman Ibn Sa’dee, Al-Fatawee as-Sa’diyya, I, 92)

And Abul-Qāsim Ar-Rāfi’ī Ash-Shāfi’ī said, “And it is not from the conditions of Dār Al-Islām that there be Muslims within it, rather it is sufficient that it is in the hand of the Imām, and his Islām.” (Fat’h Al-’Azīz Sharh Al-Wajīz”, VIII, 14; Ibn Hajar al-Haythami Tuhfatu’l-Muhtaj bi sharhil-Minhaj, IX, 269; Abdulkarem Zaydan, Ahqamu’z-zimmiyyin wa’l-mustaminin fi daru’l-Islam, 19)

The areas which are under the haqimiyyah of the Muslim and the Islamic laws are applied are called dar ul Islam. Imam Sarahsi mentions the following hukm: “The reason we call them dar ul Islam is because of the declaration of administration and haqimiyyah.” (İmam-ı Sarahsi, al Mabsut, X, 114) The Hanafee fuquhaa agree in the following hukm: “Dar ul Islam is the area which the administration and hukm of the ulu’l amr of the Mu’min is valid and where the Islamic shariah is applied.” (Dabûsi, Tasisu'n-Nadhir, 158; al Kuhistani, jamiû'r Rumuz, 2, 311)

In reality there is no ikhtilaf regarding this matter between the ahl Sunnah wa’l jamaah scholars. “Dar ul Islam will only become dar ul harb with the execution of the kufur laws.” (ibn-i Qudama al Hanbali, al Mughni, X, 103; Imam-ı Shar'ani, al-Mizanu’l-Kubra, II, 153; ash-Sharhu’l-Kaber, X, 95; Hajjawi, IV, 305; Dimashqi, Rahmatu’l-Umma, II, 129)

The following is an explanation of the Shaafee madhab regarding the acceptance of dar ul Islam not becoming dar ul harb.

According to the Shaafee madhab Dar ul Islam will not be transformed to dar ul harb. If a dar ul Islam occupied by the Muslim becomes invaded by the non Muslim even if a long time passes over the invasion the state will remain dar ul Islam.” (Nawawi, Rawdatu’t-Talibin, V, 433; Ibn Hajar, Tuhfatu’t-Muhtaj, VI, 350; IX, 269; Ramli, Nihayatu’l-Muhtaj, V, 454; Ibn Ruzbihan, 459)

The view of the Shaafee madhab could be understood in many ways:

While some Shaafee scholar’s state “If within the invaded area if they do not restrict the Muslim from there it will remain dar ul Islam, otherwise it will become dar ul kufr.” (Nawawi, Rawdatu’t-Talibin, V, 433; Ibn Hajar, Tuhfatu’t-Muhtaj, VI, 350; IX, 269; Ramli, Nihayatu’l-Muhtaj, V, 454; Ibn Ruzbihan, 459) Subki clarifies this by saying: “the area will be dar ul kufr according to appearance (zahir) not hukm wise” (Nawawi, Rawdatu’t-Talibin, V, 433; Ibn Hajar, Tuhfatu’t-Muhtaj, VI, 350; IX, 269; Ramli, Nihayatu’l-Muhtaj, V, 454; Ibn Ruzbihan, 459)

When we take a look at the view of the Shaafee madhab an area which is dar ul Islam even if it becomes invaded by the kuffar even if the hukm of shirk begins to be applied it is still dar ul Islam. The Shaafee madhab do not reckon the existance of the harbi and do not account them for anything. They invite their muntasib (partisans) to a merciless war because dar ul Islam can not become dar ul harb. When Himyeri from among the Shaafee mentions Andulus (h.IX) in is work about geography he uses the expression “dar i jihaad” (Sifati Jaziratu’l-Andulus, 3)

Ibn Hajar explains why an area of dar ul Islam can not become dar ul harb in the following: “If it is accepted that an area of dar ul Islam can become dar ul harb with the invasion of the enemy, after the invasion of dar ul Islam if it is conquered once more they will become owners of the estates which belongs to its original owners and this contradicts the hukm the Shaafee had assimilated to.” (Ibn Hajar, Tuhfatu’t-Muhtaj, IX, 269; Ali Mansur, ash-shariatil islamiyya wal qanunu’d-duwaliyyil amm, 130; Daqs, al alaqatu’d-dawliyya fil-islam 128)

As openly seen here, regarding an era which the haqimiyyah of the Islamic state was present, the soil which was left under the invasion of the kuffar, the Shaafee do not pass the dar ul kufr hukm without the total loss of Islamic haqimiyyah in those areas, they see these areas as areas of jihaad and do not recognize the kafir authority. Another matter is not regarding the estate which the kuffar had invaded to belong to the kuffar on the contrary they reckon it to still belong to its first owners the Muslim.

Dar ul Islam becoming dar ul harb means that the authority of the state has been turned from Islam to an authority under the governing of the kuffar. In the war which is faught for saving an area invaded by the enemy, normally the Islamic law on war would be applied. If the area is not invaded by the kuffar on the contrary if it has been invaded by the murtad through a raid, although within the scholars there are a few changes in their status as a result, that area has become dar ul harb. The reason behind this is; in that area the kufur hukm are applied and not the Islamic, also that the Islamic hukm are not given the chance to be applied. (Mawardi, Ahkamu’s-Sultaniyya. 63…)

Finally in the views of the ahl Sunnah scholars above regarding the definitions of dar we see that they had no ikhtilaf among them. We come across the assertion of there being ikhtilaf regarding the matter of dar not as an Islamic problem on the contrary as a symbol of nifaq present in the hearts and understanding in the disabled minds. The scholars of ahl Sunnah had given these fatawa while under the Islamic rule. It is incorrect to take some of the fatawa which seem difficult and apply it to today’s areas. As there is no Islamic state or Islamic political haqimiyyah present today other than the era of Muhammad b. Abdulwahhab and the Najd scholars under his leadership this situation still continues today. In the situation that we accept the Saljuks to be the last Islamic state (the Ottoman Empire is dar ul harb a state of shirk and kufr) the seriousness of the situation becomes much visible. The claim of the Shaafee not accepting an area of being dar ul harb does not explain today’s situation. Niether a prolonging jihad from that era has extended untill today, nor are the Muslim whose estate had been taken by the kuffar alive today.

Takfir according to the 'dar = land' is another manipulated area of Islam. Today seems like a dark era for the Muslim. Tawhid which is the basis of knowledge has almost diminished, jahiliyyah and shirk have surrounded us all over. We have entered an era which the callers of kufr and shirk have hidden themselves behind dividers. On the soil which once belonged to the Islamic government the emblems of nationalists and secular governments are waved. Paralel to the strangeness of Islam fitnah has surrounded us, and those who embrace tawhid are considered to be a takfiree and those who embrace the sunnah are considered to be bidah doers. The greatest danger is; today the callers of shaytan are in our form, they use our statements and call the individuals to their path of deviation.

We have entered such an era that without even the knowledge of its meaning those who utter qalimat shahadah are considered to be Muslim. Again today individuals have emurged, who have spent their entire lives believing that those who have beards, wear hijab or perform salah are Muslim and when they see for the first time the kufr of those individuals they accept them to be murtad. Whereas these individuals have never completed the neccessities of tawhid and never have become muwahhid; they have lived their entire lives as mushriks.

There is general hukm that; whoever lives in Dar al-Islam will be counted with Muslims unless, there is proof provided that he is not a Muslim. Simply the opposite is, whoever lives in Dar al-Harb is kafir unless proof has been provided that he is Muslim. On this issue there is no ikhtilaaf. Only Shaikh al-Islam Ibni Taymiyyah (ra) gave a fatawa regarding the city Mardin, which brings a third position. But Mardin had a special condition and the fatawa was published for that condition only. For the individuals who live in darul harb if their iman is not known and if any Muslim does not have any proof or clue about their iman they should be considered as kuffar. A simple example for such action is an individual who lives in Japan, what will the hukm be, about those people who live in Japan? The answer will surely be kafirs & mushriks. This is the general hukm about all the lands. This hukm will not erase the reality that there may be some Muslims.

At this point, the importance of looking for alamat-i fariqa appears. We should keep in mind that the alamat (sign) of Islam is only the actions and performances which belong only to the Muslim. Once again, those who live in the land of kufr, will be counted as kafir, unless, otherwise proof is provided that they are Muslim. In Darul Harb the verification of Islam before considering anyone to be Muslim is a must and all inhabitants of Darul Harb are to be Kafir unless their Islam is verified by a Muslim.

This following quotation will help understand this issue: “If a dead body has been found and if it is not known if the person was Muslim or a Non-Muslim the signs (of Islam) such as circumcision, clothing, hidab (die) will be examined. If no sign is present than: If the deceased is in darul Islam it will be washed and the funeral prayer will take place. However if the deceased is in darul Kufr the corps will not be washed nor will the funeral prayer take place."

Regarding this Imam Ahmad states: “It is like this because, when a person lives in a state (dar) he is a part (ahliha) of that state (dar). This is why the hukm of a person of the dar is practiced, until a means of evidence is found proving otherwise.” (Mugni, 1638)

It must not be forgotten that hukm can only be given according to the outer actions of an individual. The unknown aspects are left for Allah; hence He is the only to know the unknown. The Qur’an, sunnah and the ijma of the ummah guides us to this.

In darul kufr, all is kafir until an individual is proven to be from the ahl tawhid. The greatest slander is to give the hukm of Muslim to those which have not been proven to be muwahhid.

The hukm of an individual, which has been given as the hukm of kafir according to ‘dar’ is not absolute and not irrevocable. While we give the hukm of takfir we do not state this individual is 100% kafir, and that if he is to die he will go to jahannam because his hukm is kafir. Those who have been given the hukm of Islam because they live in darul Islam is the same, otherwise there is the possibility of being kafir and being of ahl jahannam.

The wisdom behind this ruling is that; the hukm applied to the person will change according to his deen. Some of these rulings which are listed below will be affected by the five rulings of fiqh (Wājib-obligatory, Mandūb-preferred, Mubāh-neutral, Makrūh-disliked, Harām-forbidden) according to the situation they are in.

- Munākahah: The marriages
- Muwārathah:inheritance from each other
- Mahabbah: Love
- Muwālāh: Befriending
- Nusrah: Helping
- Mu’ādāh: Hostility towards
- Barā’ah: Disavowal from
- Salāt Khalfahu: Praying behind
- Salāt ‘Alayhi: Praying Janāzah over
- Musākanah: Staying and/or residing with
- Du’ā Lahu: Making Du’ā for
- Du’ā ‘Alayhi: Making Du’ā against
- Sabb: Insultulting
- La’n: Cursing
- Qatl: Killing
- Qitāl: Fighting against
- Ta’thīb: Punishing
- Hillu Nisā’ihim: The permissibility of their women
- Hillu Thabā’ihihim: The permissibility of eating from their slaughtering
- Dafn Wa Maqābir: Burial

(for more information refer back to the books of the fiqh.)

Ibn Taymiyyah states: “However, most of the Muslim before any seen action of iman, have been given the hukm Muslim because they had been born to a Muslim mother and father. Later on when they grow up they either show actions of iman; in this means sincerely perform the actions of fard or some of them continue to perform these actions only because it has become a culture, their relatives do it and the people of the area they live in do it.

For example, he will pay zakah. Hence it is a tradition, for the higher authority to collect a portion of the earnings. This individual who pays can not comprehend the genuineness or the detailed reason for the necessity of this action. Within this state of mind, to him there is not much difference between a made up tax and zakah. Or he will go up to Arafa with the people of Mecca every year because it has become a custom. Without acknowledging in summary or in details that this is an act of ibadah to Allah. Or he will fight with the kuffar because his tribe is fighting with them; he will fight because he is subjected to his tribe, etc. Here, there is doubt that the actions (ibadah) of this individual are invalid. On the contrary the Qur’an, sunnah and the ijma of the ummah all state that these actions will not take the place of the fard. In other words with actions as such the fard will not be aborted.

In the same manner the Islam of most is only a hukm of Islam (according to appearance, seen actions; not absolute and not irrevocable).

This will only enter their hearts when they have been ordered, that is if it does (enter their hearts). Besides without being forced they will not have this intention. Indeed very quickly they will empty their hearts out and walk away. Consequently become munafiq (hypocrite). According to this they take their actions only as a custom and tradition. In reality this is a settled fact.” (Fatawa, 26/30-32)

The principle of Islam concerning this matter can be summarized as: "The Muslim are only supposed to judge according to the zaheer (the outward appearance / apparent / external); as for the Bateen (hidden / internal), then that is not known to anyone except Allah (awj) alone." ‘Umar (ra) explained this issue, “Indeed the people used to be judged according to the revelation during the time of Muhammad (saw) and indeed the revelation has come to an end. So now we only judge you according to whatever the zaheer (external appearance) of your actions is. So whosoever appears to be righteous (Muslim), then we will give him safety and befriend him - and we have no obligation regarding the affairs of his heart (such as love, hatred, Istihlaal), and only Allah (swt) will judge his heart. And whosoever appears to be evil (kafir, murtadd), then we will not give him safety, nor will we trust him - even if he says [verbally] that his heart is righteous (Muslim).” (Bukhari)

Allah (swt) states: “And it is He Who has restrained their hands from you and your hands from them in the midst of Mecca, after that He gave you the victory over them. And Allah sees well all that ye do. They are the ones who denied revelation and hindered you from the Sacred Mosque and the sacrificial animals, detained from reaching their place of sacrifice. Had there not been believing men and believing women whom ye did not know that ye were trampling down and on whose account a crime would have accrued to you without (your) knowledge, (Allah would have allowed you to force your way, but He held back your hands) that He may admit to His Mercy whom He will. If they had been apart, We should certainly have punished the Unbelievers among them with a grievous Punishment.” (Al Qur’an, Al Fath 24-25)

In this ayah Allah (awj) describes that He had blessed the Mu’min by stopping the war of Hudaibiyyah. During that time the Muslim who lived in Mecca and hid their iman, because their iman was not known they were given the hukm kafir; according to appearance and may have even been killed; if the war had taken place.

In the ayah it is mentioned that “Had there not been believing men and believing women whom ye did not know that ye were trampling down and on whose account a crime would have accrued to you without (your) knowledge, (Allah would have allowed you to force your way, but He held back your hands)”. Therefore the Companions had treated those Muslim who lived in darul harb as kafir because they did not show any sign of Islam and were going to kill them without ever knowing.

The reason Allah (swt) had stopped this from happening was not because the Companions would without knowledge kill the Muslim, it was because once they found out that the individuals they had killed believing to be kafir the Companions would feel sorrow. For this reason Allah states: “Had there not been believing men and believing women whom ye did not know that ye were trampling down and on whose account a crime would have accrued to you without (your) knowledge, (Allah would have allowed you to force your way, but He held back your hands) that He may admit to His Mercy whom He will.” With this ayah Allah reminds the blessing of stopping the war against the Mu’min.

Even with the possibility that there may be Muslims among them, the hukm the Companions had given about everyone who lived in darul harb (which they had no knowledge of and until the opposite was proven), was a correct hukm. Allah (swt) confirms this action in the ayah. Besides Allah (swt) does not hold the Muslims in fault for this. If the Companions had not given this hukm than they would have been in fault. When the sarriya and war, RasulAllah (saw) and his Companions attended are analyzed, it is seen that even if there had been Muslims who hid their iman among the kafir, other than those they had knowledge of; they had seen every one of them as kafir and declared war against them. This is the general hukm for the “dar” land and its people.

Regarding the irtidat movement in his era Abu Bakr (ra) stated: “truly the world has become kafir.” (Ibni Kathir - Bidaya wa'n-nihaya) This statement explains today’s situation in its full meaning.

May Salam be upon those who are distant from the Shirk, kufr, the kuffar and the meaningless things the kuffar idolize in a world of kuffar, which all its areas are dar ul harb, and all its states and nations are kuffar.

Is this the same Tawhid1 from ummah forums?
http://ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217112

Yep same person.