The Jihaad of the Tongue vs. the Jihaad of the Belly and the Pocket
“…So those who wish to interpret and change Jihaad so that Jihaad becomes that one sits with one leg on the other and writes a few words on a paper, or that he speaks a few words on the pulpit, and at the end of the month its dirhams are more than its words…then this is not Jihaad. Jihaad of the tongue is considered Jihaad only if there is a danger to one’s self or family. If there is a danger upon you, and you speak, then this is Jihaad. As for you not speaking except with that which pleases the ruler, and if it doesn’t please the ruler then you do not speak with it, then this is not Jihaad, ever. This is the Jihaad of the belly; the Jihaad of the pocket.
As for the greatest Jihaad being a word of truth in front of an tyrannical ruler, then this is true! The leader of the martyrs is Hamzah, and a man who stood up to a tyrannical ruler and prevented him (from his tyranny) and was killed because of this (as in the hadeeth of the Prophet (saws))! As for speaking about the Nusayriyya (a heretical sect in Syria) in Jordan because the Jordanians hate Haafidh al-Assad, and to consider this Jihaad? This is not Jihaad. There is no problem with this, you can call it knowledge or what you like, but this is not Jihaad. You speak about the Shee’ah when the rulers want you to speak about them, but when they make peace with Iraan you stop speaking about the Shee’ah? No, this is not Jihaad, this is not Jihaad. And we fear that this is not repented for, because it contains showing off (riyaa’); it is not sincerely for Allaah.
That you speak at the time that you are obliged to speak the truth whether or not your ruler is pleased, then this is Jihaad!
As for speaking against and attacking the Communists during the time of Sadat because he differed with the Communists and expelled them from Egypt, but during the days of ‘Abdin-Naasir before him Communism was the Religion of Allaah, then in the days of Sadat after him Communism became atheism and disbelief? And both (rulings) are from whom? The scholars (of the government). The University of al-Azhar used to come out everyday with the program called ‘Socialism and Life’ and say that Socialism is the Religion of Allaah. So when ‘Abdin-Naasir died and Sadat came and expelled ‘Ali Sabri and the Communists and expelled the Russians, then (only) Communism became atheism and disbelief. A fatwaa was issued around 1958 or after it that peace with the Jews was disbelief, then a fatwaa was issued when Sadat went (to Jerusalem to make peace) that “if they lean towards peace, then lean towards it.” How is this? Is this how we make Jihaad for the sake of Allaah? Or (instead) is it Jihaad for the sake of our pockets and our bellies?
Al-Qaddhaafi has altered the Sunnah since ten years ago, and nobody spoke about this or made takfeer of him. However, when he spoke some words that were hurtful to some people, that is when the fataawaa began pouring forth against al-Qaddhaafi that he was a disbeliever because he rejected the Sunnah and the rejecter of the Sunnah is a disbeliever. This fatwaa is not for Allaah. It is for who? The ruler. Not for Allaah.
If there is a conflict between one country and another, you find the scholars of those countries waiting to speak about the belief of the other country, or about it’s evils, or its treachery, or its misguidance, or its dealings with the Jews or other than this… no, no, no. This is not the best Jihaad; neither is it the best Jihaad nor the least Jihaad. This is eating rice. Eating stew! This is the Jihaad of stew! This is licking the pots and pans!"
(from a lecture entitled ‘as-Sabr ‘alar-Ribaat’)