Afghanistan is not a Dar-ul-Harb (House of War), but Taliban continue killing Afghans

Despite the Taliban and religious scholars insist that under Islamic law Afghanistan is not a Dar-ul-Harb (house of war), Taliban continue fighting Afghan government and killing civilians. They vehemently reject as baseless claims that the country is a Dar-ul-Harb. Simultaneously, the Taliban also say: “No one has announced that Afghanistan is a Dar-ul Harb.”

However, some religious clerics who are not based in Afghanistan claim that Afghanistan is Dar-ul Harb because Christians and Jews from western countries came to Afghanistan and control the country.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said he did not want to discuss the position of Afghanistan from the point of view of jurisprudence whether the country is a Dar-ul-Harb or not. He argued it was not his job as a spokesman for the movement to talk about these issues.

Mujahid added: “This is clear that no one has announced Afghanistan as a Dar-ul-Harb. A Dar-ul-Harb has its own conditions. However, without doubt, the position of Afghanistan as Dar-ul-Harb and the current Jihad are two different issues, the ongoing Jihad is to free the country from occupation and the aim is to make an Islamic state. It is not needed to first call Afghanistan a Dar-ul-Harb and then move forward with Jihad.”

Even though Taliban did not announce Afghanistan a Dar-ul Harb, they continue killing Muslims in Afghanistan in contrary to what the Islamic teachings order. Deputy of Afghanistan People’s Will Party, Khalil Ahmad Shankar pointing to Mujahid statement told Pajhwok Afghan News that Taliban had signed a ceasefire agreement with foreign forces and no one has announced Afghanistan a Dar-ul Harb, thus far, the current war cannot be justified and shall stop immediately.

He said: “Taliban used to fought in the past because of the presence of the foreign forces, but Taliban signed peace agreement with them and continue fighting with Afghans Muslims and citizen of this country which has no justification in Sharia Law and continuation of fight against Afghan forces, killing of civilians, suicide and blasts would add nothing but hatred of public towards them and shall cease immediately”. He went on saying that Taliban are part of this land and shall not kill Afghans to achieve goals of others and shall not present irrational justification for their killings and war.

In accordance with the Islamic political jurisprudence, the world has been divided into five categories — Dar-ul-Islam, where Muslims live and concur), Dar-ul-Kufar, where atheists, Christian and Jwes live and concur, Dar-ul-Harb, where Muslims are oppressed in their land, and Dar-ul-Had, where an agreement is made and lastly Dar-ul Aman where Muslim can live in peace in a non-Muslim country with peace.

This categorisation has been made on the basis of definition and narrations by various sources. By definition, Dar-ul-Islam is considered an area controlled by Muslims and where Islamic teachings are enforced.

But according to an article by Qazi Abu Yousaf, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi and Imam Ahmad (Fiqh leaders in early Islam) believe that a Dar-ul-Islam can be converted into a Dar-ul-Harb. This can happen at a time when the orders of polytheism are implemented, because the manifestation of Islam takes place when the provisions of this faith are practiced, or else the place is considered Dar-ul-Harb.

The source adds that Imam Abu Hanifa differentiated Dar-ul Harb and Dar-ul Islam in three conditions: a) Manifestation and influence of atheist provisions, b) the region is linked with atheist areas and fighting is ongoing there and c) in the area where there is no safety for Muslims and those whose protection is guaranteed by Muslims in their area.

Based on the aforementioned conditions, there are some contradictions between Imam Abu Hanifa and his two students Abu Yousaf and Mohammad Bin Hassan Shaibani. Imam Abu Hanifa considers the fulfillment of all three conditions to consider a location changing from Dar-ul-Islam to Dar-ul-Harb. But both of his students think one of the conditions is sufficient for the conversion of a place from Dar-ul-Islam to Dar-ul-Harb.

The source says Imam Shafi also views Dar-ul-Had — in addition to Dar-ul-Harb and Dar-ul-Islam — as an area where Muslims have an agreement and reconciliation with atheists on a business or a levy.

The article states: “It is not clear whether the city where Muslims and atheists live together is a Dar-ul-Islam or Dar-ul-Harb. Some considered that a Dar-ul-Islam can never be scrapped even if its atheists rule the city, they consider it Dar-ul-Islam and the Muslims must re-occupy it from atheists.

“Some others believe that in areas where Islamic provisions are enforced and atheists are limited and are as guaranteed, then the place is Dar-ul-Islam, while the opposite where atheists have power, then the area is considered Dar-ul-Harb”

In an essay by Maulvi Jamaluddin Taib, the aforementioned details have been cited. With reference to some books, Dar-ul-Harb is an enemy country which is at war with Muslims.

The Fatwa Department of the Academic Forum Directorate at the Ministry of Hajj and Religious Affairs, when asked to define Dar-ul-Harb and whether or not Afghanistan is a Dar-ul-Harb, gave Pajhwok Afghan New a detailed response, the response of the ministry can be seen here.

The source writes: “The famous scholar of the Hanafi Jurisprudence, Badi u Sanai Sahib says about the definition of Dar-ul-Islam and Dar-ul-Harb that a country can be known for the reasons due to which it can be a Dar-ul-Islam or a Dar-ul-Harb.”

Asked which country is called Dar-ul-Harb, the ministry replied a state that met the three conditions set out by Imam Abu Hanifa. It referred to the well-known Hanfi jurisprudence book Radul Mukhtar, volume 3, page 349, which reads: “A Dar-ul-Islam cannot be a Dar-ul-Harb, but with the three conditions. One, the provisions of polytheism are applied. Two, the country is connected with Dar-ul-Harb. Three, there is no guarantee of Muslim safety in the country as before.”

According to the source, “Al Mosya al-Fiqha Al-Kiwinia”, volume 20, page 206, a Dar-ul-Harb is defined as a land where the atheist’ provisions rule openly”.

The Fatwa Department added that the authors of Badayee Sahibain had provided a justification for designation of a place as Dar-ul Islam and Dar-ul Harb based on what emerges there. If the orders are Islamic in an area, the place is called Dar-ul Islam and the place where atheism emerges is called Dar-ul-Harb.

The source, referring Badi u Sanayee, volume 7, page 131, writes quotes from Imam Abu Hanifa are justifiable and the attribution of Islam and Harb to a place is not merely Islam or atheism, but the objective is peace and fear.

In other words, in a country where Muslims are fully safe (enjoying legal, political and social support) and atheists are fully in fear is called Dar-ul-Islam. On the contrary, a country where atheists are fully safe (enjoying legal, political and social support) and Muslims are in a state of fear is called Dar-ul Harb.

Commands of Dar-ul-Harb:

Maulvi Jamaluddin Taib writes the war scene and the opportunity for Jihad (holy war) against it, obligations of migration from Dar-ul-Harb, the absence of murder and retribution (Qisas) are among Dar-ul-Harb’s commands.

But the Ministry of Hajj and Religious Affairs cuted the following provisions of Dar-ul-Harb:

According to the Hanafi jurisprudence, Dharia punishments, (hudud) are not executed in Dar-ul-Harb. However, according to Imam Malik and Imam Shafi, these punishments are applicable in Dar-ul-Harb,. (Al Mosya al-Feqeha, volume 20, page 209).
If one of the spouses migrates from Dar-ul Harb to Dar-ul-Salam and the other stays in Dar-ul-Harb, they are separated under the Hanafi jurisprudence. But most of jurists believe this kind of,migration does not lead to divorce.
Sanctions on sales of weapons to Dar-ul-Harb.
If Dar-ul-Harb is in a situation where a Muslim cannot comply with his/jer religious duties publicly and has the ability to migrate from Dar-ul-Harb, then migration becomes obligatory. (Al Mosa, same volume, page 207).
Lack of financial and physical safety of those living in Dar-ul-Harb. (Al Mosa, same volume, page 214).

Is Afghanistan a Dar-ul-Harb?

As previously mentioned, Afghanistan is not a Dar-ul Harb. According to reports, at a conference in Turkey religious scholars in 2013, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Philistine, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and India issued a communiqué at which reads: “Afghanistan is an Islamic country. We cannot call it Dar-ul Harb and its people dead”

Reports also quote the Afghanistan Ulema Council as saying that Afghanistan is not a Dar-ul-Harb.

One scholar told Pajhwok on condition of anonymity that Afghanistan was not A Dar-ul Harb. According his to him, despite the presence of brutality, voidance and chaos, the conditions of Dar-ul-Harb do not apply and Muslims can go to mosques, fast and preach besides performing Hajj.

The scholar said: “Even European countries, where Muslims are not at risk and can freely practice their religious teachings, cannot be characterised as Dar-ul-Harb.”

The religious scholar added where the life of a Muslim is under threat and Muslims cannot discharge their religious obligations openly, Jihad is permissible to prevent brutalities and defend that place.

Taliban spokesman Mujahid said: “The current Jihad and fatwas of Afghan scholars started 20 years ago after the US invaded and occupied our country and we can still see signs of occupation, A real Islamic government was ousted by the force of B52, artillery, so that the system is not established. As long as Afghans do not feel independent, Jihad will remain our obligations and we shall continue it.

“There is no need to announce or not to announce that Afghanistan is a Dar-ul-Harb. Therefore, there is no doubt that the current jihad is the right of Afghans to defend the values of our country … Jihad will continue until the eradication of corruption and restoration of the Islamic system in Afghanistan.”

The Fatwa Department of the Academic Forum Directorate at the Ministry of Hajj and Religious Affairs, about whether Afghanistan is Dar-ul-Harb or Dar-ul—Islam, wrote that the country had long been Dar-ul-Islam, Even now, it remains Dar-ul-Islam, not Dar-ul-Harb, because the definition of latter does not apply to it.

The source, answering the question, explained: “The provisions of atheism are not applicable to Afghanistan, where they are even are banned officially. Additionally, a Muslim fully enjoys legal, political and social security and even we can say that from the legal perspective, on whose basis \systems are established, Afghanistan is comparatively better positioned in terms of Islamic principles.”

Article 3 of the Constitution stipulates: “In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam”

Meanwhile, Peshawar-based Zubiara Seminary Principal Rahimullah, who is q resident of the Pachiragam district of Nangarhar province, shared a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glRDjmEdBKson his youtube page on October 21, 2020.

In the video, he called Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and security forces the “soldiers of Dajaal, someone similar to Antichrist”. He said: “If they are police, security personnel, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Ling Salman or Trump, they damage Muslims more than an atheist.

Atheists do not know about mosques, seminaries and the house of Muslims, A question was once raised about the provision for the Muslims supporting an atheist who comes to their country, the order is this is Dar-ul-Harb.

“For the Afghans who help (US President) Trump, the provision is Dar-ul-Harb, Their murder is compulsory. The killing of Ashraf Ghani and Afghan soldiers is obligatory, because they protect churches. Their murder is as obligatory as that of Americans”

But a lower house member from Kapisa province, Maulvi Mohiuddin Munsif, remarked: “Unfortunately, the position taken by officials of Pakistani seminaries shows they are not religious scholars. They deal with intelligence issues while masquerading as scholars.

“Afghans are Muslims and the presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan is based on an agreement, which Sharia has also permitted — if a country needs support from other states, this has happened in early Islam.”

Another MP in the lower house from Samangan province, Makhdoom Abdullah Mohammad, said: “The scholar, who says Afghanistan is Dar-ul-Harb, does not have any Islamic knowledge. His or her Islam is in doubt. No law can be contrary to the Islamic Sharia in Afghanistan, while in some other Islamic countries, there are non-Islamic laws.

“Whoever issues a fatwa that Afghanistan is Dar-ul Harb, he/she is not a religious scholar. Some of Pakistani scholars, who issued such fatwas, have links with the intelligence community of that country.”

A Wolesi Jirga member from Kabul province and lecturer at a private university’s Sharia Law Faculty, Irfanullah Irfan, said: “Leaders in Afghanistan are Muslims and most laws in Afghanistan stem from religious and jurisprudence provisions. If someone calls Afghanistan a Dar-ul-Harb, such statements are tendentious and have no basis in Islam and Sharia”