A prophet says: Don't kill a Muslim for killing a disbeliever!

[فداء الرسول]

A prophet says: Don't kill a Muslim for killing a disbeliever!

They said: The prophet of Islam calls for racism….his followers have a special standing than all other people even in people's souls; if a Muslim kills a disbeliever, he won't be punished!! The proof for this is the speech mentioned in The Correct Bukhari, book of (blood money), chapter (a Muslim shouldn't be killed for a disbeliever, no. 6404. Al Shaabi said:
I heard Abu Juhaifa saying, "I asked Ali: "Have you got any Divine literature apart from the Quran?" (Once he said...apart from what the people have?) Ali replied: "By Him Who made the grain split (germinate) and created the soul, we have nothing except what is in the Quran and the ability (gift) of understanding Allah's Book which He may endow a man with and we have what is written in this paper". I asked: "What is written in this paper?". He replied: "Mind, the ransom of captives, and the Judgment that a Muslim should not be killed for killing a disbeliever".
The reply to this misunderstanding:
First: The objectors attacked certain words in the speech "a Muslim should not be killed for killing a disbeliever". I will start with quoting the words mentioned in Ibn Majah's Interpretation:
The words: "a Muslim should not be killed for killing a disbeliever" means: when a Muslim faces a disbeliever (in general or an entrusted warrior), but a Jew or a Christian isn't categorized in this speech, because the prophet (PBUH) says in another speech: "they (the Jews and the Christians) have the same rights that we (Muslims) have".
The prophet (PBUH) said in another narration: "nor a confederate within the term of confederation with him", which means: an entrusted disbeliever, and the prophet (PBUH) mentioned him to assure the prohibition of killing him.
I say: What appear to me from the speech are two sides:
The first side: The disbeliever meant in the speech is a warrior disbeliever only, as the disbeliever is classified into four classifications:
1 – A warrior disbeliever: is against our religion and announces his fight against Islam.
2 – A promised disbeliever: has a covenant with Muslims, and is considered as the tourist who should be safe when he/she enters Muslims' land.
1 – From people of the Book (Jew or Christian) disbeliever: has a covenant with Allah, the Almighty, and His messenger (PBUH), and has the same rights that a Muslim has.
2 - An entrusted disbeliever: asks Muslims to be safe, Allah, the Almighty, says in the Quran describing this type of disbelievers: {And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know} (The Repentance:6).
Therefore, the meaning of this speech is: a Muslim shouldn't be killed for killing a warrior disbeliever, wherever he is. Omar Ibn Abdelaziz (one of the well known Muslim leaders) knew that a Muslim killed a Christian, so he ordered to take the Muslim to the killed person's master, so that he has two options, either to kill the Muslim as a punishment or to forgive him. The Muslim was taken to the killed person's master, and was killed, because he didn't forgive him. (Reference: Abdulrazzak's Mussanaf, chapter 10, page 101).
The second side: by collecting the two narrations together "a Muslim shouldn't be killed for a disbeliever" and "nor a confederate within the term of confederation with him", it appears to me that the disbeliever (a Jew or a Christian) has the same order of a Muslim, so that the prohibition of killing him is exactly as same as the prohibition of killing a Muslim. Thus, the speech means: "a Muslim or (a Jew or a Christian) shouldn't be killed for killing a warrior disbeliever. This meaning is fortified by the following:
1 – Al Tahawy said: the speech means that an entrusted disbeliever shouldn't be killed for killing a disbeliever, and if someone kills an entrusted disbeliever, he should be killed as a punishment.
2 – Omar Ibn Al Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) used to ask the delegation coming from different districts about the state of the Jews and the Christians, fearing that any of Muslims has harmed them. The delegation used to reply: "We don't see but loyalty". (Reference: Al Tabari's History, chapter 4, page 218).
3 – Ali Ibn Abu Taleb (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "The Jews and the Christians were asked to pay the Jizia (capitation), so that their money and blood become like those of Muslims".(Reference: Al Mughny, chapter 8, page 445, and AL Badaea, chapter 7, page 111).
Thus, it's clear now that the blood of the entrusted, the promised, and the people of the book disbelievers are as same as the blood of Muslims, and have the same rights of safety and prohibition…
Second: There are some important questions here:
1 – Does the American authority treat the American citizen same as the resident and give him the same rights and duties?
The answer: The citizen has more rights than the resident, and this is well known in many countries. So, is this discrimination considered as oppression and racism, or is it the country's right?
The answer: It's the countries right, because the citizen that was born and lives in the country differs from the resident.
2 – Are Muslims alike? Or Did Allah, the Almighty, differentiate between them?
The answer: Muslims aren't alike, and this is proved by the following:
a ) Allah, the Almighty, says in the Quran: {Not equal are those believers remaining [at home] - other than the disabled - and the mujahideen, [who strive and fight] in the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred the mujahideen through their wealth and their lives over those who remain [behind], by degrees. And to both Allah has promised the best [reward]. But Allah has preferred the mujahideen over those who remain [behind] with a great reward} (The Women:95).
B ) Allah, the Almighty, also says: {Have you made the providing of water for the pilgrim and the maintenance of al-Masjid al-Haram (the masjed in Makkah) equal to [the deeds of] one who believes in Allah and the Last Day and strives in the cause of Allah? They are not equal in the sight of Allah. And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people} (The Repentance:19).
I ask: Is this racism or oppression?
The answer: No.
3 – Are the prophet's (PBUH) companions alike? Or some of them are better than the others?
The answer: Allah, the Almighty, made some of them better than the others. The best of them was Abu Bakr Al Seddiq, then Omar Ibn Al Khattab, then Othman Ibn Affan, then Ali Ibn Abu Taleb (may Allah be pleased with them). Allah, the Almighty, said about the prophet's (PBUH) companions: {And why do you not spend in the cause of Allah while to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens and the earth? Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah, with what you do, is Acquainted} (The Iron:10).
4 – If a Jewish or a Christian mother gives her children rights that are not given to others, is this racism and oppression?
The answer: This is neither racism nor oppression, same with Islam, it differentiated between a Muslim and others, Allah the Almighty, says: {Not equal are the companions of the Fire and the companions of Paradise. The companions of Paradise - they are the attainers [of success]} (The Gathering:20).
Third: The prophet's (PBUH) words: "a Muslim shouldn't be killed for killing a disbeliever" don't mean that it's permissible to kill a disbeliever, rather it's prohibited to kill the entrusted, the promised disbeliever, and the people of the book (Jews and Christians). As for the warrior disbeliever, it's permissible to kill him, and this is proved by the following:
1 – Allah, the Almighty, says in the Quran: {Say, "Come, I will recite what your Lord has prohibited to you. [He commands] that you not associate anything with Him, and to parents, good treatment, and do not kill your children out of poverty; We will provide for you and them. And do not approach immoralities - what is apparent of them and what is concealed. And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed] except by [legal] right. This has He instructed you that you may use reason"} (The Cattle:151).
2 – The speech mentioned in The Correct Bukhari, no, book of (Al Jezia "Capitation"), chapter (the prohibition of killing an entrusted disbeliever without committing a crime), no.2930. Abdullah Ibn Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated that the prophet (PBUH) said: "Whoever killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims, shall not smell the smell of paradise though its smell is perceived from a distance of forty years".
3 – The speech mentioned in Kanz Al Omaal, no. 10909, Soliman Ibn Sard narrated that the prophet (PBUH) said: "If a man trust you for his blood, don't kill him".
Besides, the speech "a Muslim shouldn't be killed for killing a disbeliever" is as same as the speech narrated by Ibn Majah that the prophet (PBUH) said: "A father shouldn't be killed for killing his son".
Now I have a question: Does this mean that it's permissible for a father to kill his son?
The answer: Of course not; Allah, the Almighty, says: {and do not kill your children} (The Cattle:151).
Besides, the prophet's (PBUH) words "a Muslim shouldn't be killed for killing a disbeliever" don't mean that when a Muslim kills a disbeliever (a Jew or a Christian), he shouldn't be punished. Some scholars said that a Muslim who kills a disbeliever by betrayal should be punished by being killed, and by betrayal means a gouger who kills people and steals their money. Al Zuhari narrated from Salem, who narrated from his father that a Muslim killed a man from the people of the book, and was sent to Othman Ibn Affan, who didn't order killing him, but ordered him to pay a huge blood money.
Malek and Al Laith said: If a Muslim kills a disbeliever (a Jew or a Christian), he must be killed in return. (Reference: Nayl Al Awtar, chapter 7, page 154).
This is exactly what Abban Ibn Affan did when he was the leader of Madina. He ordered to kill a Muslim who was accused of killing a Christian by betrayal. It's worth mentioning that Abban was one of Madina's well known scholars. (Reference: Al Jawhar Al Naqi Maa Al Sunan Al Kubra, chapter 8, Page 34).
Many other scholars like Al Shaabi, Al Nakhei, Ibn Abu Layla, Othman Al Batty, Abu Hanifa and his friends said that the Muslim who kills a disbeliever (a Jew or a Christian) must be killed. They referred to the verses of the Quran and the prophet's (PBUH) speeches that prohibit killing Jews and Christians. In addition to that, When the prophet (PBUH) ordered to kill a Muslim who killed a promised disbeliever, he (PBUH) said: "I must be gracious with he who entrusted be on his soul". (Narrated by Abdulrazek and Al Baihaqi).
It's narrated that Ali killed a Muslim who was accused of killing a man from the people of the book. The killed man's brother went to Ali and said:

[فداء الرسول]

It shall be clearer through this example: if there's a Muslim walking on a (crowded pavement), then a Jew and a Christian came in front of him, shall the Muslim descend from the (pavement)?
The answer: The Muslim shouldn't descend from the pavement, but the Jew and the Christian should do; so that the Muslim shows his pride, and because the Jews and the Christians are disbelievers. But if the (pavement) isn't crowded, the Muslim shouldn't force them to go to the narrowest part of it, because this is considered oppression for them, and Allah, the Almighty, says in the Quran: {Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly} (The Woman to be examined:8).
Fifth: this speech shows the utmost mercy for them, as by this way they don't find pride in their disbelief, but they find humiliation, so they search for pride in Islam and enter it, and then be saved from hellfire.
Important notice: Some scholars said that this speech was said to some people in particular (the Jews), who were in a war against the prophet (PBUH). So, he (PBUH) ordered his companions not to start greeting them, and that wasn't in general, but was for a certain period of time. Dr. Yusuf Al Qaradawi and others said so, and this is clarified through the other narrations of the speech. It's mentioned in Ibn Majah's Sunan, book of (politeness), chapter (answering the people of the book's greeting), no. 3689, Abu Abdelrahman Al Jahny narrated that the prophet (PBUH) said: "Tomorrow I'm going to the Jews, so don't start greeting them, and if they greet you, say: and on you".
Sixth: The Bible mentions that Jesus, the Christ (PBUH) ordered his followers not to greet others who weren't from his followers, same with prophet John (PBUH). The Bible mentions that the Lord recommends doing so, this is in the following:
1 – Luke 10:3-4:
3 Go your way; behold, I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves. 4 Carry no moneybag, no knapsack, no sandals, and greet no one on the road.
2 – 2 John 1:10-11:
10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, 11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
3 – Isaiah 48:22:
“There is no peace,” says the LORD, “for the wicked.”
I have a question here: after presenting the previous Bible verses, can anyone of the objectors attack the prophet's (PBUH) speech: "Don't start greeting the Jews and the Christians…."?!
Besides, what's their comment on the Bible verses previously mentioned…?
Did they attack those verses same as what they did with the prophet's (PBUH) speech they misunderstood?!

Written by Akram Hassan Morsi
Translation: Professor Islamic translation