When can a Muslim use violence?

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon him after whom there will be no other prophet. Violence is not required or desired in Islam. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “The Muslim is the one from whose hand and tongue Muslims are safe.” Reported by al-Bukhary (10) and Muslim (40) on the authority of Abdullah ibn `Amr (may Allah be pleased with them). He also said (peace and blessings be upon him), “The Muslim is the one from whose hand and tongue Muslims are safe; and the believer is the one with whom people feel secure with regards to their blood and properties.” [Reported by al-Nasa’I (4995) al-Termidhi (2627) and others on the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him)]
Thus, the culture of Islam is the culture of peace, not the culture of violence and aggression. Nevertheless, violence could be used. When there is aggression, one can fight back. Almighty Allah said “And whoever avenges himself after having been wronged – those have not upon them any cause [for blame]. The cause is only against the ones who wrong the people and tyrannize upon the earth without right. Those will have a painful punishment. And whoever is patient and forgives – indeed, that is of the matters [requiring] determination. [42:41-43] Violence is permissible only within the limits of resisting aggression. But if one remains patient when hurt and does not repay it back, he is described by Almighty Allah as complying with one of the foremost commandments of Allah that must be kept with diligent resolve.
Violence is not the basic principle in this religion. The basic principle is to call to the religion with fair means “Call to the path of your Lord with wisdom and fair admonition. And argue with them in the fairest manner. Indeed, it is your Lord who knows best those who have strayed from His path; and He knows best those who are guided aright.” [16:125] One more point I want to draw attention to is to ask the questioner: Violence with whom? Against whom? And in which context? These are very important points. It is necessary to balance between the possible benefits and harm when using violence. How many a case of violence led to more violence, and thus the reaction goes on endlessly! This violence then will be sinful and the others will have their share also in the sin of this violence; particularly violence directed to the ruler.

In Saheeh Muslim (1847) the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is reported to have said to Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman (may Allah have mercy with him) “You shall listen and obey the commander. Even if he beats your back and takes your properties, you have to listen and obey.” This is because such kind of violence leads to more violence and chaos. Thus, violence is permitted only in certain and regulated cases in Islam and is not the basic principle in Islam. Rather, the culture of tolerance is the basic principle.

Is it permissible for the ruler to give the non-Muslims a covenant of security to be under the protection of the Muslims, though they came to our countries to kill other Muslims? May Allah reward you.

All praise is due to Allah alone. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. This question needs delineation:
First, if we are to be sincere to the Muslims, we should lay emphasis on some points: the ruler is authorized to give security pledges and covenants to all or some of the non-muslims, because he is responsible for considering any benefits or harm, facilitating the first and keeping away the latter. This point is beyond any controversy. In this regard one can refer to books such as al-Mughny by Ibn Qudamah, the explanation of the Quran by al-Qurtuby, and others.
It is not a condition that the one who rules over the Muslims be observant of the night Prayer or voluntary fasting. It is enough that he gains power through people’s swearing alliance and obedience to him (bay`ah), being the crown prince (wilayat al-`ahd), or taking power by force. This is the juristic position of ahl al-Sunnah (those who adhere to the Sunnah). Such a ruler can give a security pledge without any time limit based on his consideration of the interests of the public. This is the first point I wanted to make clear.

The second point is that when the ruler gives a pledge of security, we should assume that he intends to achieve some benefit; because people should be considered to be basically peaceful and honest, not aggressive. Thus, we should believe that they made any pledge for some benefit that the people may have been unaware of; namely, it could have been unavailable or unclear to the people, either to achieve a benefit or to avoid some harm. So let us construe their deeds this way.
The third point is that if we presume the truthfulness of the questioner’s words who said that they (the unbelievers) had the intention to kill the Muslims, such a covenant would not be permissible. But at the same time this does not give permission for the questioner to rebel against the ruler and launch a war against both the Muslims and the non-Muslims.
Therefore, we ask: What is the result of this covenant of security? Is it to prevent killing and fighting? We advice the questioner to be occupied only about his own concerns and to busy himself with worshiping Almighty Allah and amending his religious and worldly affairs, and not to drive himself or others into a whirlwind that will bring nothing but the destruction of his religious and worldly affairs, and the loss of this world and the Hereafter.
We give this sincere advice for the sake of Almighty Allah who said, “So fear Allah as much as you can” And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever among you sees an evil practice ought to change it with his hand. If he cannot, let it be with his tongue….” [Reported by Muslim (49)] What does “If he cannot” mean? It means: If changing the evil with your hand will lead to disastrous consequences, change it with your tongue.
Moreover, if your tongue will lead to corruption and enormous losses, you may change it with your heart, particularly with regard to matters that you cannot be fully aware of. You said that they had the intention to kill Muslims. Who told you that they had this intention?
We advice our young men, as well as all the Muslims, to be wise and not to become hardheaded. They should not entertain ill thoughts or become engaged in a series of violence and a whirlwind of destruction that destroys the homes of the Muslims’ themselves and may not cause any great harm to the non-muslims. For Muslims will then kill one another and will kill those under the pledge of security whose killing Allah has prohibited and whom Allah has protected their blood from the Muslims. This is our advice.
Almighty Allah knows best

We want to migrate to a Muslim country. How can we get out of a non-Muslim country to a Muslim one while the Muslim country does not accept us? The worst thing is that they prefer non-Muslims to work for them, though we have better qualifications. We want to stop paying taxes to them, because they use this money to strike the Muslims and also store it up for themselves. We want somebody to help us to migrate to a Muslim country.

All praise is due to Allah alone. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. This question has various aspects:
First, the questioner asks about how to get out of a non-Muslim country to travel to a Muslim one. It is known that this “how” is governed by systems, laws and customs. One needs a visa, job and other things that this site (Islamtoday) may not be able to provide for every Muslim who wants to leave a non-Muslim country to go to a Muslim one; because Muslim countries have their systems and authorities in this regard.
The other thing is that the questioner says that he does not want to reside in a non-Muslim country, which is a good feeling. However, we say to him, “Allah never tasks a soul beyond its capacity.” [2:286] If he can fulfill the rites of his religion and is able to worship Almighty Allah in such a non-Muslim country, he does not have to leave. Ibn Hibban reported (4861) with a trustworthy chain of narrations that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to Fudayk, “O Fudayk! Duly establish the Prayer and shun evil, and you may dwell wherever you like in the land of your people.” One of the narrators thought that he said, “then you will be an émigré.” The tribe of Fudyk were non-Muslims and he dwelled with them. He came to ask about immigration. Therefore, therefore according to three imams and in mostly the three fiqh schools; namely, the Shafi`tes, the Hanilites and the Hanfites, if one is able to fulfill the rites of his religion, migration is not obligatory. Malik (may Allah have mercy with him) together with the Zahirites have different opinions. Thus the issue is broad. “Allah never tasks a soul beyond its capacity.” If he can go to a country where he can practice his religion better, this will be good. But if he cannot, he should know that the issue is broad. Some scholars, like al-Mawardy, maintained that if one can practice his religion, he should not even leave and should remain in the country; because if he leaves, the country will be void of Muslims. The issue is broad.
We ask Almighty Allah to grant success to us and to the questioner and to guide Muslim countries to receive Muslims instead of receiving others, and to hire them instead of hiring others, particularly those who are skilled and competent, as indicated in the question.
As for the issue of paying taxes to the non-Muslims, he ought to pay the taxes in order to protect himself and his property. There in no harm in this. Allah knows best

Your eminence Sheikh! We are students who were sent to study in a Western country. We are responsible for an Islamic society in the university where we study. A number of the Muslims in the city (who are already few) have clothes and other things to donate. But there is no Muslim in our town who deserves such donations. We called a number of other Islamic societies in other towns but they could not come to us. From previous experience, we know that sending these clothes and items to the towns with larger Muslim communities is very expensive, while their value is not worth it. The brothers here ask your eminence if it is permissible to donate these items to non-Muslim societies; particularly the cancer society in the city, owing to the inability to give them to the needy Muslims. Please give us a fatwa. May Allah reward you.

All praise is due to Allah alone. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. It is permissible to give these things to needful non-Muslims. In a hadith we read, “For giving any living creature, there is a reward” [Reported by al-Bukhary (2466) and Muslim (2244)] Thus, this reward is due for helping all the creatures of Almighty Allah. Almighty Allah says “Thus they feed with food – despite of their own desire for it – the indigent, the orphan and the captive of war.” [76:8] It is known that the prisoner of war in this verse refers to a non-Muslim.
Nevertheless, Almighty Allah praised these persons for feeding the prisoner of war, even though he is a non-Muslim. Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy with him) said that Zakah could be given to non-Muslims – of course, he means those who live under a security pledge with the Muslims. Giving voluntary charity to the needy and the sick among the non-Muslims is rewardable, by the grace of Allah, and there is nothing that disallows it. In an authentic report we read that the mother of Asma’, daughter of Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with her), who was an unbeliever, came to her. Asma’ said to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), “My mother came to me full of hope. Shall I keep ties with her?” He said, “Yes, keep ties with here.” [Reported by a-Bukhary (2620) and Muslim (1003)] He ordered her to keep ties with her although she was a non-Muslim. Being a non-Muslim does not make giving charity to them forbidden; particularly to the needy and the sick. Accordingly, if they truly cannot deliver these things and cannot sell them to transfer their value in money to the needy persons who deserve them, they may give them to these societies. This is something desirable and could help amend the relation between Muslims and others, manifest the tolerance and virtue of Islam, and show that Muslims aid all those in need, even if they are non-Muslims.
Allah knows best.

Peace and blessings be upon you. My question is about a doubt raised about the Quran that was contrived by Christians and spread among the people. I hope you give an answer concerning it before an overwhelming mischief takes place. This doubt goes as follow:
Almighty Allah said, “If it had been from other than Allah, they would, most surely, have found in it much discrepancy.” It is known among the Muslims that there are differences of opinion concerning many of the verses of the Quran, which constitutes evidence, according to those who propagate this doubt, that the Quran is from other than Almighty Allah. How can we respond to this?

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon his family and his companions. And upon you be peace, together with the mercy and blessings of Allah.
In the first place, this verse should be understood in a different way than the one adopted by such doubt-mongers. The issue has no relation with scholars’ difference of opinions concerning the indications of the verses of the Quran. It rather could be interpreted in either of three ways: first, discrepancy here stands for contradiction; for the Quran contains no contradiction. It enjoins absolute justice and excellence, and thus it includes no unfairness or injustice. Hence, the basic and major principles to which the Quran calls never differ, while if it were from other than Allah, whims would overcome man and he would enjoin good one time and evil another time. This is the first interpretation.
Second, had the Quran been from other than Allah, it would have differed from actual reality; that is, the information it gives would have differed from the reality of the matter it talks about. However, the Quran never has mentioned anything but it turned out to be so. It speaks to them about the disbelief and hypocrisy they harbor, and they know this for sure. They know that what the Quran warns them against is true. All that the Quran talks about is true, be it related to the conditions of the universe or to the actions of the people. Realities, experiences and the present always prove the truthfulness of the noble Quran. This has clearly manifested itself in the scientific miracles of the Quran and the Sunnah.
Third, had it been from other than Allah, you would have found it different from what it is. Since it is not different from what it is, we know that it is from Allah. This needs some reflection and subtle understanding. The meaning is that had this Book been from other than Allah, it would have been different from this noble Quran, as the Quran, like its Composer, is noble and excellent.
These are the three interpretations given by the exegetes to this verse, “If it had been from other than Allah, they would, most surely, have found in it much discrepancy.” [4:82] However, it is from Allah and thus there is no discrepancy in it. The issue, thus, has nothing to do with scholars’ difference of opinions over the verses of the Quran, the different indications of its words, or the different lengths of its chapters. All this is not intended by the noble verse. This is the answer to doubt raised about this verse. Allah knows best.