What is meant by discretionary responsibility?

The Muslim Brotherhood and attitudes towards non-Muslims


Do the Muslim Brotherhood believe in freedom of belief and the right of non-Muslims to practice their religion and to build houses of worship that do justice to their own activities ?!


How does the brotherhood deal with the concept of "no coercion in religion" and how do you see the issue of apostasy ?!


What is the concept of the evangelization of the brotherhood and do you describe it in its contextual framework, which is closely related to the colonial phenomenon ?!

When the Muslim Brotherhood comes to power in Egypt - and that is its political ambition - what will be the situation of non-Muslims under its rule?

The answer to the previous questions can be found in many of the statements and statements made by the leaders of the group, and many of these answers are ambiguous tricks that do not cure grudges, for it is a mixture of political and religious, and some degree of balance. But the Al-Daawa magazine fatwas seems clearer and more transparent, and it is a clear ideological explanation of the group's vision from an intellectual perspective, does not take into account political calculations, and the most serious of these opinions is that the jurisprudence of the Brotherhood as the only true Islamic opinion is presented. Most of those issuing extremist fatwas individually expressed their shortcomings, lack of knowledge of religion and awareness of the variables of the world, but these individuals do not belong to any Islamic political group, the Has sought power for a quarter of a century since its inception, hence the seriousness and specificity of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is illogical to classify its arguments as "endeavor" because they are in fact the expression of a program that is activated when domination is achieved is.



The reign of the isolated Egyptian President Morsi (June 2012 - June 2013) came to find a practical application of hatred and intolerance in it. Many observers report that the time of the rule of Morsi was the bitterest in the hearts of the Copts, struck by a clear distinction between Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood- enough to mention in this context, the incident of the attack on the Cathedral of St. . Mark (April 2013). The crime unprecedented since the entry of Islam in Egypt. A number of incitement letters were formed directly against the Copts. As a demonstration against the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood began, Brotherhood deputy leader Dr. Khairat al-Shater, and Dr. Mohamed El-Beltagy immediately said that these were demonstrations by Christians who oppose Islamic rule!


The legal judgment on the establishment of churches under Islamic rule


Issue No. "56", issued in December 1980, contains three questions about Islamic opinion on a range of issues related to non-Muslims, all of which were written by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah Al-Khatib *, member of the senior political body (Management Office), answered on legitimate and political questions. "A.H.M .. Monoufia" on the rule of building churches in the houses of Islam, the Mufti of the Muslim Brotherhood replies that the rule of building churches in the houses of Islam is divided into three sections:


The first section: countries established and maintained by Muslims ... like the Maadi, Alaasher of Ramadan and Helwan .. In these countries and its like, it is not allowed to create or sell a church.

And the second section: What was forcibly conquered by the Muslims, such as Alexandria in Egypt and Constantinople in Turkey, the construction of these things is not allowed there either (1). Some scholars said they could be demolished because they belong to Muslims.

And the third section: What was conquered through a reconciliation between the Muslims and their inhabitants: It is advisable to leave what was found in the churches and places of worship on the basis of what was there at the time of the conquest and the Shafi'i and Ahmad see it as preventing construction or the return of the demolition. Unless they have written it down in the contract of reconciliation with the Imam. It is clear that in Dar al-Islam it is not allowed to found a church. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "In Islam no church is built. Neither is what has been destroyed is renewed." AL-Maghni G8. (2)


The concept of the fatwa is clear that the countries created by Muslims and established by them cannot accept non-Muslims. The first misconception that the Egyptian designated neighborhoods were built by all Egyptians, Muslims and Christians, and that the rights of citizenship are governed by the Egyptian constitution, regardless of his location, social status, economic circumstances and the nature of his work. As a result, the Egyptian Christians living in Maadi, the tenth of Ramadan and Helwan, have the right to practice their religion in full freedom, but this right seems to be impossible under the sheikh's prohibition. Which means - a ghetto for Christians, where they are locked up, limited to a certain place. You are not allowed to leave it or look for another place.

How and where should Christians conduct their worship?

The question becomes more difficult when we go to the second section of the fatwa, where the Sheikh states that it is not allowed to build non-Muslim places of worship in the countries opened by Muslims, but what existed before the conquest.

A simple question has to be asked here, and of course we want a convincing answer from the Muslim Brotherhood: Where and how can the resident Egyptian Christian worship in Alexandria, for example ?! According to the group, it is a country where Christians do not have the right to build churches, but must demolish the existing ones. Where should they go? The logical result is that they leave all of Alexandria and find refuge in places where the Muslim Brotherhood allows churches to be built.

So do we find such churches in the third section of the fatwa, namely the places opened by reconciliation between Muslims and their residents? The only concession made by the Muslim Brotherhood is to preserve what existed in the non-Muslim houses of worship, but they make that concession a mirage that prevents the building of what was destroyed, and time must eliminate what existed when it was opened. Which building will withstand the centuries and not collapse ?!

The end result of the Brotherhood fatwa is the inevitability of the absence of churches in the lands of Islam, and it logically follows that there is no place for non-Muslims in Egypt! As if the Grand Mufti was afraid of missing his message, he ended his fatwa and emphasized clearly that it is not allowed to found a church in the Islamic homeland.

Isn't the practical translation of his words that the presence of non-Muslims in the Islamic homeland has no meaning?

Is that what the Muslim Brotherhood is striving for, or is it the conclusion of their right-hand side? We leave the answer to the reader's conscience!

Is that the Islamic program they want to use when they come to power through democratic forms that believe them, and in their reality they hate the unbelievers?

If the conclusion we have made is incorrect, the fraternity must do two things:





Is to discredit, ridicule and deny what was published by the official of their magazine, and the refusal to come on the lips of high-ranking leaders and at the head of Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah Al-Khatib, may God extend his age because of it the owner of the fatwa and responsible. There must be a refusal accompanied by an apology, all for insistence, there is no doubt that such anomalies were used by young boys as views that threaten the national unity of the Egyptians and the concern of our brothers at home and our fate Churches attack and break into the houses of worship for Christians in the nineties of the last century, shooting at the worshipers of the back because they - like the sheiks - believe that after the sheiks these things are not allowed in the homeland of the Muslims .

The second thing is that the Brotherhood reaffirms their adherence to what has been published in Al Dawa magazine and that they have the courage to insist that this is their true opinion, which they do not like. It is here that their true, unyielding rhetoric, contrary to Islamic teachings and the spirit of the true religion and contrary to other enlightened jurisprudence, is demonstrated by a large number of modern Muslim scholars who are aware of the nature and the changes of time.

There is no third alternative: there is no room for excuses!

v Question: How do non-Muslims adhere to the Islamic system?

Before we wake up to the effects of the first fatwa on rule over the building of churches in the lands of Islam, Sheikh Al-Khatib speaks of a different opinion, which is more violent than the previous one.

The question came from the reader "M.H.T .. Cairo" in which he says:

I read a fatwa that said: It is the right of the people of scripture to drink alcohol in the Islamic State and to show it publicly. And Islamic law gave them the right. What do you think of this speech? The sheikh replied:


· The people of the scriptures must be citizens of the Muslim state and live on its land and its people must adhere to the Islamic system. And the aspect of that obligation in matters that do not affect their religious beliefs or freedom. For example, they are not required to offer prayers, pay zakah, perform Hajj or Jihad, and all acts of a religious nature. In these matters it is necessary to fall back on the rules of Islamic law. Whoever commits theft, fornication, or a crime, be it Muslim or not Muslim, must be punished. For example, the judges in Egypt held the cases of the Muslims in the mosque at that time and then those of the people of the scriptures, or they were given a day where they can go to the judge's home to judge their affairs there.

· This and the customs and traditions of the Islamic community must be upheld by all who are incorrect and cannot be mixed, but their personal status that allows them the religion, such as marriage, divorce, eating pork and drinking wine. Islam is not subject to them in this prohibition or its invalidity. These things are excluded from many scientists and determined that no one can brag about them. But usury is haram for them, in their religion and in all heavenly scriptures. It is not correct to deal with her in the Islamic State. And so every evil that is forbidden by Islam. In doing so, they violate the dignity of the Islamic nation that cares for and cares for them. They offer them the security and peace of mind. All the things that Islam forbids and warns, but for people of the scriptures that are permissible, must not be listed with contempt. Perhaps the fatwa I read from modern advocates and victims of intellectual invasion who seek to tone down this right to keep up with the era and the supposed advancement of patient imagination and understanding, the Islamic community is a clean human society, with which there are no night clubs. And there is no tourism at the expense of morality and morality, and Muslims fear God alone before they fear people .. (4)


There must be a careful pause before the vocabulary in the fatwa, it highlights the dangerous content:

* Citizens with the citizenship of the Muslim state *

* Acting with Sharia *

* Freedom of movement is prohibited, as well as mixing women and men *

* No self-confession of personal trading *

* A correct community *

Why does the Muslim Brotherhood deny its intention to apply Islamic law to non-Muslims? Sheikh al-Khatib states that a non-Muslim has the nationality of the Muslim state and must descend from the rule of Sharia. He is not entitled to conduct behavior that contradicts the principles of the Islamic legitimacy of the Sheikh. So as not to finish!

The Sheikh seems to offer a concession that reflects flexibility and tolerance in deciding that Christians do not need to pray, zakat and hajj! They will soon reach the real catastrophe by exempting them from jihad, as honored.


The last word is very dangerous, it means - in the language of the age and its applicable laws - that Egyptian Christians do not have to do military service, it is limited to Muslims alone! Everyone understands that "national" military service is a right and a duty for every Egyptian, and there is no room for exemption from it except in accordance with the conditions established by law for many nonreligious reasons. The Muslim Brotherhood turns "national" military service into a religious "jihadist" duty that Christians are not allowed to fulfill. If this dangerous view is not to be played with fire, then what is it? (5)

The Egyptians, Muslims and Christians fought side by side in 1948, 1956 and 1973, and the "Christian" brigade, Fuad Aziz Ghali, was one of the heroes of the prestigious October and previous wars. They all mixed the blood of the Egyptians to liberate this land, but the Muslim Brotherhood does not recognize the homeland and the people and does not treat the other religious as Egyptian citizens, has the rights of the Egyptians and their duties. It is the right to plant churches that are restricted in clothing, food and drink and prevented from defending one's homeland!

It is a curiosity of the fatwa that "defamation" is a waste of the dignity of the Islamic community and how many crimes are committed in the name of big words that are far from plain and clear, and how many abuses of the Islamic religion if they do reduced and petty-minded and dependent on their fate through partial behavior, mean nothing. Is the dignity of Islam influenced by individual behavior harming anyone?


Egypt is a citizen state owned by all Egyptians, but Sheikh al-Khatib imposes restrictions at no cost and resorts at the end of his fatwa Bau Alzaakh and Broadcast, in which a serious opinion, it criminalizes tourism and deprives them of Islam: It is not tourism outrageous at the expense of symptoms and morals .. Sheikh believes that all tourists are non-Muslims, and their deviation is the origin, and discipline is the rule. Is it possible to then believe the Muslim Brotherhood in its condemnation of acts of terrorism that affected tourism and tourists in Luxor, Taba and Sharm el-Sheikh?!. The perpetrators of these despicable acts of terrorism are based on the statements of the Muslim Brotherhood embodied in the fatwa. Tourism is forbidden, and this belief must lead to "doing" to stop what God has forbidden.

The Muslim Brotherhood is called to respond to its elders or to support their ideas. Do you agree that the exercise of military service "jihad" is a duty of the Muslims alone? Because they cannot necessarily deny what is an integral part of their ideas, nothing less than being armed with courage and publicly declaring that they regard the Egyptian Christian as a second class citizen with no rights or duties.


Are non-Muslims allowed to be buried in the graves of Muslims?

In the same context, there is the third fatwa on the same question, which relates to the question of the burial of non-Muslims in the graves of Muslims.

Sheikh Al-Khatib gives his fatwa:

“It is legitimate for non-Muslims to be buried in Muslim cemeteries in order not to see how they are being punished in the grave. the predecessor's scholar in biblical women who saw pregnant with a Muslim die and said that they are buried alone is not in Muslim cemeteries and in the graves of others, according to Bayhaqi. Weahla Ibn Aksa relates: I buried a Christian woman, pregnant with a Muslim child, not in a cemetery for Christians or Muslims. She was a Christian, so she was not allowed to go to the Muslims and her son was a Muslim, so he should not be in a non-Muslim cemetery.Such is the choice of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, he said, because she is an infidel and is not buried in Muslim cemeteries. Therefore it is necessary to distinguish between the graves of Muslims and others. (6)

The question is questionable and illogical, and it was a duty to exclude it from the absence of a serious element. Everyone knows that Muslims have their graves and Christians have their graves and Jews have their graves too. The short answer is that burial is not allowed, but the Sheikh does not want to avoid the possibility of offending Christians. In his answer, the Sheikh confirms the inevitability of torture of non-Muslims in their graves: the language of reconciliation and humiliation is dominant: the Christian woman is an unbeliever and the Muslim fetus in her womb is tormented by its mother and those who support her share in kufr, harmed!


Scholars agree that the deceased is subject to bliss and torment in his grave, but they also agree that the whole matter is in the hands of God alone and no one else has the right to demand knowledge from those who Knowing bliss or prolonging the torment.

Why not torture one of the dead Muslims? Will Muslims be tormented by the torment of Muslims in their graves, or will the harm only be achieved when the torment for non-Muslims becomes a reality?

Is it a topic that deserves attention? How is it in the burning plain, the sunken ship and the destroyed building? Don't these humanitarian disasters combine between Muslims, Christians and Jews?

The Sheikh clings to a question that does not deserve the effort to respond because it gives him the opportunity to atone for Christians and to dispel their faith. Does the Brotherhood deny that they are unbelieving Christians? Do they believe in coexistence with them in a society tolerated by tolerance? They cannot retreat after documenting and publicly publishing their ideas, and those ideas are confirmed in yet another fatwa that goes beyond what the predecessor said on the arbitrator of the download.


* The hostility and the affection *

In the issue no. 35 of the magazine "Dawa", published in April 1979, the brother "MTS ... Tanta" asks about the meaning of the verse:


“You will most certainly find that the people who show the most violent enmity to the believers are the Jews and those who associate (with Allah) something. And you will most certainly find that those who are closest to the believers in friendship are those who say: "We are Christians." This is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave arrogantly. " (Sura 5, Verse 82)


Shaykh Muhammad 'Abd al-Khatib gives his fatwa in the meaning of the verse and says:

This verse and the verses that follow in Surah Al-Maaida reveal facts that the Muslim should know:


1. The Jews and those involved are the enemies of Islam and this hostility is not hidden from anyone because wars, conspiracies and conspiracies about this religion have not ceased for a moment until today. Muslims should lift the veil over their eyes and respect their Quran and religion and not repeat words or actions that contradict their beliefs and the great sincerity of God. Oh, those who believe do not take the Jews and Christians as guardians, some parents of some of those who take them from you.

2. The second truth in this verse is "and find the greatest affection for those who believe that we are Christians." We take the initiative to say that this part of the verse and the following verses resolve the position that the verse does not include everyone who said, "I am a Christian". And attributes in the remaining verses after. This race responded to God and believed in Islam and embraced this religion. He is a practicing Muslim. Imam al-Qurtubi said at the bottom of the revelation of these verses: "Najashi and his companions, when they heard the Surat Maryam of our Master Ja'far, were touched by him and weeping until I got tears from them." Al-Bayhaqi said that a delegation came to the Prophet, found him in the Vlkmoh mosque and asked him. He called them to Islam and recited the Quran to them, and when they heard him, their eyes were full of tears and then they replied to him and believed in him and believed him.


Qatada said: "I came into the people of the people of the book came upon the law of justice from what was brought to Jesus, peace be upon him, when God sent Muhammad peace be upon him believed by the feminine God upon them", and took the son of Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatem on the Sadi said: The Messenger of Allah, twelve men, seven priests and five monks, look at him and ask him when they met him and read what came down, wept and believed and about him Prophets descended so that their eyes shed tears at what they knew of the truth .. Verses.

That's right. As for the twisting of the word in its place to fulfill this right, it is denied and it is Makar that it be removed, and Allaah knows best. (7)

The most important thing in Sheikh Al-Khatib's fatwa is that it begins with the manifestation of hostility and defiance of the idea of ​​tolerance and coexistence that Muslims neglect and ignore deception and bluff about their eyes. The Sheikh quickly invokes another verse that forbids Jews and Christians from caring for their parents, he is not engaged in fully explaining the two verses, the causes of ancestry and the interpretations of the righteous and contemporary scholars too know.

The ultimate "truth" is that the first verse he asked about does not include all Christians; The Sheikh makes no sense of logic and neglects that the Qur'anic verse speaks of Christians who have not given up their religion.This is confirmed by the clear and explicit reference to the priests and monks who are not arrogant, even if the meaning of the verse is from those who converted to Islam. ?!


What Sheikh Al-Ikhwani wants is to emphasize that affection is not just for those who have become Muslims, and that rule does not extend to others: those who cling to their religion and do not make Islam famous are not worthy of love, affection and respect.

The true Muslim, according to the Brotherhood's vision of the earlier fatwa, should be an original victim of non-Muslims, and amazingly, they are now talking about obvious opportunism for citizenship, coexistence, tolerance, democracy and the full rights of non-Muslims. Which ones fill the noise of the world and try to cheat everyone?!.

Authorized published opinions confirm that they distance people from tolerance and renounce intolerance. This is borne out by their intransigence when it comes to the concept of religious freedom.


* No compulsion in religion *

Question: "A. SH. Great Britain": A question about what is rumored in the countries of Europe that Islam was spread by the sword and terrorism, which affects the view of part of Islam.

The answer is as follows:

“Those who see the map of the world prove with certainty that Islam has spread, not by the sword and oppression, as they claim, but because it is nowhere near all of the Sultan's pressure, repression and terrorism Peoples Islam was dissolved authoritarian regime unfairly dismissive, then let go between the peoples and between what you want full freedom and his will no coercion in religion .. it is the principle of Muslims in all parts of the world, and history despite Prejudice has not been proven so far that the Muslim conquerors forced a person to enter it, and most of the land scarce where war is the land where now more Muslims in the world is located. Like Indonesia, India, China, etc. Salmon morality, conduct and honesty and respect for human rights ...

This is the testimony of the great Orientalists, and most of the Islamic conquest was due to trade, peaceful advocacy, wise conviction, and example. If these nations entered the flock of Islam under the authority of the sword, they would emerge from it as the swords came into their sheaths. . Then he says: "But Islam, as Heraclius said, is the king of the Romans in the age of prophecy." When you touched his heart, nobody blamed him. "You have to prove the tolerance and greatness of this religion to the world. .. (8)

It is worth noting that there is a difference between the two subjects: there is no compulsion in the religion to force people to convert to Islam, but rather the views of the Muslim Brotherhood give compulsion without a doubt.

What does a non-Muslim do when he is deprived of all of his rights in the state ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood, including the right to build houses of worship but leave his homeland or believe in Islam? It is not true that Islam was spread by the sword, but the Muslim Brotherhood's ideas provide an extremely practical example of oppression, terrorism and coercion, and there is no way for them to fall back on loosely structured terms. Sheikh confuses the absence of coercion at the time of conquest and conquest and the practical coercion on the stability of the state and its practices expressed in previous fatwas.

In order not to prolong the charges against the Muslim Brotherhood, we must stand before what was mentioned in Issue 31, published in December 1978, which opened the title "People of the Book and Faith":

"Some questions came to the Dawa magazine about what is going on between some people, about the people of the book and the faith, and seeing the call to put the matter in the right balance of Sharia and jurisprudence, I presented the matter to Sheikh Muhammad Najib Mutai'i, who said:

He said, "O people of the Scriptures, why do you cover up the truth with falsehood and knowingly hide the truth?" And a portion of the people of the Scriptures say, “Believe in what has been revealed (as revelation) on those who believe at the beginning of the day and deny it (again) at the end, that they may repent! "Indeed, those who say:" Certainly, Allah is al-Masīḥ, the son of Maryam "are unbelieving, whereas al-Masīḥ (himself) said:" O children of Isrāʾīl, serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord! " Whoever associates (something) with Allah, surely Allah forbids Paradise, and its refuge will be the (hell) fire. The unrighteous will have no helpers .. "

Among those belonging to Judaism, some twist the meaning of the words and say, “We hear, but we oppose” and, “Hear!” As if you did not hear “rāʿinā”, twisting their tongues and the Revile religion. If they had said: “We hear and obey” and: “Hear!” And: “unẓurnā”, it would truly be better and more correct for them. But Allah cursed them for their unbelief. That's why they believe little ..., little like Ben Sallul.

Would one want more quick-witted evidence of apostasy from those who do not believe in Muhammad's message, peace be upon him, than the words of Allah:

O people of the Scriptures, Our Messenger has now come to you to give you clarity after a period of interruption (in the series) of the Messengers, so that you (not) say: "No messenger has come to us." Well a messenger of joy and a warner have come to you. And Allah has power over everything.


The Almighty said: "

O people, the Messenger has now come to you with the truth from your Lord, therefore believe (in him), that is better for you. But if you disbelieve, surely, then belongs to Allah (everything) that is in the heavens and that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Knowing and All-Wise.


The Almighty said: “Say: O people of the Scriptures, you only resent us because we believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us (as revelation) and what has been revealed before, and that most of you are wicked? Say: Shall I tell you what is worse than a reward from Allah? - Those whom Allah has cursed and whom He is angry with and of whom He has made monkeys and pigs and served false gods. These are in a (even) worse situation and have (still) strayed further from the right path. When they come to you, they say: "We believe", where they already enter (afflicted) with unbelief and also go out with it (afflicted again). But Allah knows very well what they are hiding. "

The Almighty said: "And the Jews say:" Allah's hand is tied. "Their hands are tied and they are cursed for what they say. No! Rather, His hands are stretched out (wide); He gives out, as He wills. What has been revealed to you (as revelation) from your Lord will surely increase rebellion and unbelief in many of them.

The Almighty said: "

O people of the Scriptures, you do not rely on anything until you keep the Torah and the Gospel and what has been revealed to you (as revelation) from your Lord. What has been revealed to you (as revelation) from your Lord will most certainly increase the rebellion and unbelief of many of them. So do not be saddened by the unbelieving people!


Sheikh Nasif al-Yazji, one of the most learned Lebanese writers for half a century:

We are the Christians Al - 'Issa, the end of the religion of the Virgin Mary

He is God, the Son of God, and his spirit is three in one and he is not divided

For the father the divinity of his son as well as for his son and so on and the spirit under idolatry

How the sun shows its offense with its splendor, its sea and all the sun knows. (9)


On what matter is Al-Mutiee making his fatwa?

The truth is that there is no specific question that the fatwa requires. It is known that the people of the book have what they believe in and are responsible for when they meet God. A Muslim must hold fast to his religion and believe in it, and others should - before God alone - bear the responsibility of their beliefs without attempting to impose it on Muslims.

What's the problem here? The concept of belief is different, of course, and the generous verses cited by Sheikh Mutai require dozens of pages of commentary and analysis to provide fully integrated lighting. A sincere Muslim knows the verses and believes them and believes in them, and the non-Muslim is not required to acknowledge or believe them because he is not a Muslim, it should not be an argument against him.

To prove his culture and knowledge, the Sheikh from the Lebanese Naseef al-Yazji conveys poems that explain the doctrine of the people of the book! English: www.db-artmag.de/2003/10/e/1/85-2.php Any scientific approach, and how will such words be relied on to summarize a teaching while neglecting thousands of other books? Does Sheikh Muhammad Najeeb agree that one of the non-Muslims should resort to the poems of Muhi al-Din bin Arabi or Al-Hallaj or Amr ibn al-Fardar, which makes them a dispute over Islamic belief? Of course he won't, but it's different when it comes to others!

The religious difference is based on what Allah wills, and the wisdom taught by God and the religious debate among the different faiths leads nowhere. "In the holy Qur'an, many verses call for the promotion of free will and the right to choose:" There is no compulsion in religion, "He who will let him believe, and whoever will will be forgiven." Why did the Holy Sheikh not have recourse to these verses so that the picture of the picture is complete and to achieve the balance sought by Islam?

Life expands for all and religion is a powerful active human activity, but it is not alone in the arena. Issue No. 54, published in October 1980, demonstrates the Muslim Brotherhood's unyielding view of transcendent non-Muslims on the one hand and those who profess Islam.

Muslim reader asks:

Some people are famous for their Islam and are supposed to show the effects of that Islam in their behavior and behavior, but it is hard to believe that a team of them does not reflect the ethics of that religion.


So comes Sheikh Al-Khateeb's answer:

• My brother .. The policy of Islam is explained by the one who received it from him on the basis of the rule "We look outside and only Allah sees the inside". We were not commanded to analyze people's hearts.Faith is an affair of the heart and how souls give themselves to Allah. But the ancestors say, may they be blessed that those who are not to be neglected, those who convert to Islam. They will be watched with compassion and love how Islam affects them and their behavior. They said that those with whom Islam does not show itself in terms of behavior and interactions, has not accepted Islam well. If rules or rituals of religion are denied or ridiculed, it will be revealed on condition of anonymity.

And we do not say to those who have given us peace, I am not a believer - God forbid we hurt something for him - but whoever wants to be among us should not lose sight of his actions. Muslims don't complain about the lack of numbers. Religion, whether from his old people or from those who come to him. (10)

In the Muslim reader's question and the sheikh's answer, they overlook the fact of a task that should be avoided: why are these people doing Islam and not adhering to Islamic behavior? The answer to the search for their motives to make Islam known: Is it religious conviction or family and social circumstances that relate to the desire to marry a Muslim or divorce a Christian woman ?! If belief is the motive for righteous behavior and conforms to the teachings of Islam, the contradiction will be lost and the truth will be revealed, even if the paradoxes of life are the cause.

Aside from deliberately ignoring the roots and motives that illuminate the problem of the fluid, the answer depends on the predecessor to express the weapon of repression, condemnation and indictment. The irony is that the Sheikh recognizes that Muslims do not complain about the lack of numbers, it is true, but it does deal with the few people who enter or leave Islam, which leads to a serious problem: the problem of Waste.


* The apostasy in Islam *

Does the Muslim Brotherhood believe in freedom of religion? The answer is no, and her position on "apostasy" confirms this.

It is necessary to point out here that the so-called limit of apostasy creates a great difference between Muslim scholars, and a majority of them that Islam does not know this limit. There is no place here to review the various opinions and interpretations on the subject of apostasy because what concerns us is standing on the fatwas of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In the April issue of Daawa, issue No. 23, Ahmed Barakat asks:

A girl whose Islam is famous after a conflict with her family. But they did not leave until they were made up with them and stopped visiting. Is Islam Trash? What is the decision in such a case?

The sheikh replied:

To come out of the religion of Islam after falling into the trash for being ruthless and defiant of the Islamic nation. Islam does not hate anyone to enter, but it refuses to manipulate it. Give God says to him: "Whoever changes his religion kills him". Those who are allowed to be killed include (apostate and abandoners of the group). As for the girl, if she lives with her parents and is forced and can not find a way to let them, and her heart still reassuringly believing it is still a Muslim, and she should try as much as possible to get rid of sedition and survive their religion, but when reconciled with them and enraptured with the people the infidelity ended with her and became a counter and stipulated that the jurists before judging them to repent and showing them Islam to be properly judged again in order . And that is Islam's tolerance towards outsiders too - and God knows best. (11)

The question does not reveal the reasons that led the girl to Islam and does not bother to explain the conflict she had with her people and how and why they reconciled with them, and it is all fuller Secrets and secrets.

The answer is no different in its ambiguity from the question: How does a girl get rid of the turmoil and survive her religion? Who has the right to check the level of belief or disbelief? Most importantly, who executes and kills the "Islamic" rule when it refuses to repent and return to Islam but is offered to seek the original?

This is the tolerance of Islam towards those who carry it out in the Muslim Brotherhood: ignoring the causes and roots and the initiative of brutality and death threats and the suspicious ambiguity of establishing who is doing what they consider the rule of God.

The position of the Muslim Brotherhood is more pronounced in a more general fatwa: It is not about a specific individual situation as in the previous fatwa, but about the "apostate rule in Islam" and the position of their sons!

In Issue No. 23 published in April 1978, Ryad Abdul Qader of the Kashmir region of India asks:

What is the ruling on the apostate in Islam? Does he bring his son too?

Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah al-Khatib replied: