 
 

Page 1 
 
Brother ((„Abd-al-Hamid)), may God grant you success, these are 
questions from the Jaysh al-Islam brothers (in Gaza) along with 
responses to same from Shaykh Mahmud. For your reading, it may 
be of benefit. 
 
In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate 
 
Peace be upon you, and God‟s mercy and blessings. 
 
Praise be to God, and blessings and peace upon God‟s prophet, 
his family, companions, and those loyal to him…to wit:  
 
These are questions which we ask you, our brothers, to show to 
the people of knowledge (TN: i.e. scholars), the crowns atop our 
heads, so that they can furnish us with their opinions, God 
willing… 
 
First question: Is it permitted for funds to be taken from other 
organizations as support for us in jihad, as in the following 
examples: 
 
Al-Jihad al-Islami (TN: Islamic Jihad) movement: Receives vast 
sums from abroad (Iran, in particular), and some of their people 
have adopted Shi‟ite thought, God forbid. However, they have 
offered funding to us, in exchange for which we are to work with 
them and participate jointly in qualitative operations, as a 
sort of propaganda; the catch being that we would conduct the 
operation with funding through them, and afterwards it would be 
announced that we cooperated with them (TN: in the operation). 
 
- The Fatah organization has also offered us funds purportedly 
to (TN: support) jihad, but there is another reason, namely 
their fear of becoming the target of our swords. 
 
These funds would go directly towards the purchase and 
manufacture of weapons, and to support operations which we will 
conduct, God willing. When taking into consideration the 
suffocating siege against us, whether by the Jews, God‟s curses 
upon them, or by other organizations such as Hamas, who fear the 
growth of our influence and dominion… 
 
Second Question: Is it permitted to invest funds in the stock 
market, buying and selling shares, for the goal of supporting 
jihad, or investing some donation-derived funds in stock markets 
and shares? 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

 
Third Question: Is it permitted to strike drug traffickers, 
eliminate them, and kill them, or (TN: not)? The technicality of 
the issue: Is it permitted to take the funds which they have 
gained from drug trafficking, and is it permitted to make use of 
the drugs which we obtain from them in: 
 
1. Luring fallen addicts to serve as double agents against the 
Jews. 
 
2. Selling them to Jews in order to harm them and take their 
money. 
 
3. Bringing down Jewish soldiers, particularly border guards, by 
means of drugs. 
 
This, by God, the Lord of success 
 
Your brothers in Jaysh al-Islam 
 
Page 2 
 
In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate. Praise be 
to God, the Lord of all worlds. There is no power or strength 
save in God almighty. He is our Lord almighty and in Him we seek 
aid. We pray and wish peace upon the servant and messenger of 
God, our prophet Muhammad and all his family and companions and 
those who followed them in benevolence until Judgment Day. 
 
First question: Is it permitted for funds to be taken from other 
organizations, on the premise of supporting us in jihad, as in 
the following example: 
 
- Al-Jihad al-Islami (TN: Islamic Jihad) movement: Receives vast 
sums from abroad (Iran, in particular), and some of their people 
have adopted Shi‟ite thought, God forbid. However, they have 
offered funding to us, in exchange for which we are to work with 
them and participate jointly in qualitative operations, as a 
sort of propaganda; the catch being that we would conduct the 
operation with funding through them, and afterwards it would be 
announced that we cooperated with them (TN: in the operation). 
 
- The Fatah organization has also offered us funds purportedly 
to (TN: support) jihad, but there is another reason, namely 
their fear of becoming the target of our swords. 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

These funds would go directly towards the purchase and 
manufacture of weapons, and towards supporting operations that 
we will conduct, God willing. When taking into consideration the 
suffocating siege against us, whether by the Jews, God‟s curses 
upon them, or by other organizations such as Hamas, who fear the 
growth of our influence and dominion… 
 
Response:  
 
What I understood from the question is that the brothers are 
asking about the legitimacy of accepting funds from other 
organizations, if such is offered and given. 
 
Doubtless there are technicalities in this… based upon, first of 
all, the intrinsic nature of these funds, permissible or 
forbidden, and then what interest, legitimate or corrupt, comes 
as a consequence to taking these funds.  
 
So let us divide up the question on this basis, upon which I say 
the following, (TN: in knowledge that) success is (TN: only 
through) God: 
 
If the money is intrinsically permissible, meaning it is not 
forbidden money. In principle, accepting it is permitted, as 
long as there are no other factors that prohibit this, as will 
come (TN: later in this discussion). 
 
Permissible money is (TN: money) that which we have no knowledge 
of being forbidden; there are two types of impermissible money: 
 
One of the two being: Intrinsically forbidden, such as wine, 
pork, the meat of improperly slaughtered animals, and the like, 
all of which can only be considered permissible to one in 
exigent circumstances. 
 
The second one being: Forbidden by virtue of the means by which 
it was gained; there is much exposition and difference amongst 
scholars (TN: on this topic). 
 
If it is attested (meaning that it is something witnessed) that 
the one who earned it did so illicitly, then the proper thing is 
that it not be permitted to be taken, such as (TN: gains from) 
theft or robbery, just as gaining it through an imperfect 
transaction, such as profits from interest, and funds gotten 
from trafficking in wine, drugs, and the like. It can neither be 
eaten of, nor accepted… with exception of the “thuman” (TN: 1/8th 
sales tax) on wine and pork can be… 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

 
Page 3 
 
…taken from the people of the dhimma (TN: non-Muslim subjects of 
an Islamic state), as our lord „Umar said: “Let them sell it, 
and take the „thuman‟ from it.” This is a proper “athar” (TN: 
one of the utterances of Muhammad or his companions), and is the 
basis used by Islamic jurisprudents in this regard. 
 
If it is not attested, and it is a matter of the mixing of 
permissible and forbidden (TN: monies), then this is an issue in 
which there are many differences and expositions, and we will 
most probably mention these later. 
 
If it is (TN: money taken) from an infidel, does it differ from 
(TN: money taken) from a Muslim? Because the Prophet, God‟s 
blessing upon him, and his companions ate of the food and gifts 
of Jews and other infidels, and they did not ask them (TN: for 
the nature by which they were obtained). Likewise, in the story 
of our lord Ibrahim Khalil, which follows. This is also a source 
for dispute amongst scholars, and it requires exposition. 
 
This applied jurisprudence is within the realm of that which 
needs exposition, by which I mean knowledge of (TN: the nature 
of) the monies, what is permissible to take and accept and eat 
of it, what is not permissible, from Muslim or from infidel, in 
the event of attestation (TN: of its impermissible nature) or in 
the event of mixture (TN: of permitted and non-permitted funds). 
 
Jurisprudents speak of these issues in various chapters of books 
on jurisprudence and in fatwas. Among the passages which I point 
out to you to serve as a reference in this regard are as 
follows: 
 
- “Kitab al-Halal wal-Haram” (TN: “Book of the Permissible and 
the Forbidden”); this is the fourth book in the “al-„Adat” (TN: 
“Customs”) quarto within his “Kitab Ihya‟ „Alum al-Din” (TN: 
“The Book of Reviving the Sciences of Religion”) by imam Abi-
Hamid al-Ghazali, God‟s mercy upon him. It is the basis for this 
issue, and has no precedent of which I am aware. If (TN: he made 
some) comments and researches on his choices within areas of 
applied jurisprudence in this regard, he (TN: wrote at great 
length) on issues of piety and the consideration of 
suspicions...! 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

- A collection of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn-Taymiyah‟s fatwas, 
particularly the 29th volume, which contains a number of fatwas 
on this issue. It includes writing and gems found nowhere else. 
 
- “Jami‟ al-„Alum wal-Hukm” (TN: “Mosque of Sciences and 
Wisdom”) by Ibn-Rajab al-Hanbali, God‟s mercy upon him, in his 
explanation of the hadith “That which is permissible is clear, 
and that which is forbidden is clear.” 
 
- Applied jurisprudence texts of Ibn-Miflah al-Hanbali. 
 
- Al-Nawawi‟s collection regarding Sahib al-Mahdhab‟s statement 
“It is not permitted to swear allegiance to one whom it is known 
that all of his money is forbidden…” 
 
In short, if we know, (TN: based upon) what has been decided in 
this matter (the matter of monies), that the money being given 
is not permitted to be taken and eaten of, then the matter is 
clear… and if we do not know that it is forbidden, then either 
there is suspicion, and caution is advised, or if it seems most 
probable to us that it is permissible or if its permissibility 
is certain, then it too is clear. 
 
- If the money in and of itself is permitted to be taken, then 
it remains to us to consider what comes as a consequence to 
accepting and taking it, in which there are many scenarios which 
(TN: can be) envisioned, including: if doing so brings shame and 
degradation to a Muslim. 
 
And: If doing so causes a Muslim to become obligated to an 
infidel or a libertine, which draws him into affection and 
adulation for them, and the like. 
 
And: If dominion of the profligate or the infidel follows as a 
consequence (interference in affairs, dictation (TN: of orders), 
(TN: interference in) circumstances and the like). 
 
And: If, as a consequence, an infidel or a libertine becomes 
stronger, greater, and increases in influence, i.e. 
strengthening the infidel or the libertine and aiding them. 
 
Page 4 
 
It might not be something as this: The infidel or libertine may 
have some sort of benefit in giving it, which does not affect us 
much nor does it harm Muslims. The infidel may offer a Muslim 
money for the sake of kinship or the nation (for nationalist 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

motivations and the like) and none of the corrupt consequences 
considered above will result. These are some of the things which 
affect the issue. 
 
If it is taking (TN: money) from a just and proper Muslim, then 
this is clear. We will not discuss it and it is not a matter of 
question. 
 
If the question is taking (TN: money) from organizations accused 
by our religion of being either infidel or libertine clothed in 
“innovation” or iniquity, and has committed grave offenses or 
perhaps even blasphemy through corrupt interpretations (TN: of 
Islam), and our judgment upon that in Islam still remains (TN: 
the same)! 
 
Doubtless that some of these are damages in which the infidel 
and the libertine Muslim had some part in, and inevitably it is 
known that the libertine Muslim is not equivalent to the infidel 
in all aspects. For example: The internal ignominy brought upon 
us by a libertine Muslim is not equivalent to the internal 
ignominy brought upon us by the infidel. When a libertine Muslim 
obtains some form of dominion over us, it is not equivalent to 
dominion of the infidel over us, God forbid. All of these things 
are considered in their measure, based upon which there occurs a 
balance between the good and the bad. 
 
As for exigency: As you know, exigency bears its own rules, and 
those in exigency deem it necessary in order to strengthen God 
almighty, and confines it to that situation (exigency is 
evaluated by its own measure). 
 
Likewise, dire need, i.e., that which is close to but has not 
quite reached the threshold of exigency. In this event, the 
makruh (TN: acts/things discouraged but not forbidden) and the 
mushtabah (TN: acts/things of suspect permissibility) are 
allowed. The difference between exigency and dire need being 
that exigency justifies the prohibited (i.e. the forbidden), but 
need lifts away the “discouraged but not forbidden” status and 
the judgment of “suspect” (TN: from the thing) and brings 
leniency of judgment and so, we lift the sin/crisis from the 
individual in question whether or not a thing is “discouraged 
but not forbidden” or cause for suspicion, as we can bear the 
introduction of some ignominy in the interest of a greater good. 
As long as we are in need of taking money, then it is considered 
a “dire need”! God is all-knowing (TN: i.e. God knows better 
than I). 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

This response is my analysis, in brief, and the brothers know 
the circumstances, to which they (TN: can) apply what we have 
mentioned above… 
 
On to something of an exposition on what came about in the 
question: 
 
It is clear that you are in dire need and financial straits...! 
 
As the al-Jihad movement‟s funding comes primarily from support 
(TN: provided by) the Rafidite (TN: “refuser”; common euphemism 
for Shi‟ite) nation (Iran), which is not in and of itself 
harmful, by which I mean that it is permitted to eat of what is 
given of it and to accept it, God willing. It (TN: Iran) is to 
us an infidel state, and accepting monies from infidel states 
and kings is permitted, in and of itself, unless another 
prohibiting factor arises. 
 
The evidence for this being the hadith (TN: utterance) of 
Ibrahim Khalil, God‟s peace upon him, and his acceptance of a 
gift from an infidel king. In this story of Sarah, when the king 
attempted to interfere with her, he was forbidden by God‟s will. 
He then gave her money and made a gift to her of a female 
servant (this being Hagar, peace be upon her). Ibrahim accepted 
this, and benefited from it. This hadith is in the two “sahih” 
(TN: the two texts containing properly attested hadith) and in 
others. 
 
Al-Bukhari pronounced upon this: 
 
Page 5 
 
It was Abi-Hurayrah, may God be pleased with him, who said: 
 
“The prophet, God‟s peace upon him, said, „Ibrahim, God‟s peace 
upon him, was traveling with Sarah. The two of them entered a 
village, wherein was a king or a tyrant. It was said that 
Ibrahim entered with a woman of the finest sort. (TN: An 
emissary) was sent to him, who asked, “Who is this with you?” To 
which he replied, “My sister.” He returned to her and said, “Do 
not put the lie to my words, as I have told them that you are my 
sister. By God, there are no faithful on earth save for me and 
thee.” He sent her to him (TN: the king), and he came to her, 
and she began to perform ablution and pray. She said, “Oh God, 
as I have believed in you and in your Prophet, and kept my womb 
chaste to all save my husband, do not give the infidel dominion 
over me.” (TN: Upon which) he started and ran. Al-„Araj stated 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

that Abu-Salmah bin-„Abd-al-Rahman stated: “Abi-Hurayrah stated 
that she said, „Oh God, if he dies, it will be said that she 
killed him.‟ He sent (TN: for her again), and then came to her, 
and she began to perform ablution and pray. She said, “O God, as 
I have believed in you and in your Prophet, and kept my womb 
chaste to all save my husband, do not give the infidel dominion 
over me.” He started and ran. „Abd-al-Rahman said that Abu-
Salmah said that Abu-Hurayrah said that she said “O God, if he 
dies, it will be said „she killed him.‟ And he sent (TN: for 
her) a second or a third time, and he said, “By God, what you 
have sent me is naught but a devil. Send her back to Ibrahim and 
give her recompense. She returned to Ibrahim and she said, “I 
felt that God stayed the infidel and granted (TN: us) a servant 
girl.” 
 
Al-Hafiz Ibn-Hajar, God‟s mercy upon him, said: 
 
The (TN: morals contained in) this hadith are the legitimacy of 
the brothers of Islam, the authorization of (TN: acceptance of) 
offers, license to submit to the tyrant and the rapacious, and 
to accept the gift of an oppressive king, and to accept the gift 
of the polytheist, and response to a prayer of sincere intent, 
and the Lord‟s satisfaction with he who is sincere in prayer and 
proper in deed. The counterpoint to this can be seen in the 
story of Ashab al-Ghar (TN: “owners of the cave”) in which (TN: 
can be seen) the tribulation of the righteous in order to raise 
their qualities (TN: “degrees”). 
 
It is said that God revealed to Ibrahim, so that he could see 
the king with Sarah, and that he obtained naught from her, he 
mentioned this in “al-Tijan” (TN: “The Crowns”) and pronounced: 
“He ordered that Ibrahim and Sarah be brought in to him; he then 
bade Ibrahim outside the palace, and came to Sarah. God made the 
palace as clear as a flask to Ibrahim, and he saw them and heard 
their speech.” (TN: The moral of this being) that if one is 
beset by grief, he must take refuge in prayer. (TN: Another 
moral of this being) that ablution was practiced by peoples 
prior to our own, and is not limited to just our people, nor 
only to the prophets, so proved by Sarah, as the majority (TN: 
states that) she was not a prophet. So ends his words; I mention 
them in full for (TN: your) benefit.  
 
Such is also found in al-„Ayni‟s exposition. 
 
And this is the basis for this issue. There is more proof than 
this. 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

Including the prophet‟s companions‟, with the prophet‟s 
knowledge, acceptance in exigency of the gift of the infidel. 
And the Prophet accepted the gifts of infidels when no ignominy 
would result, and so accepted some of the gifts of infidels, as 
is found in many hadith, and he refused some of them, rejected 
them, and did not accept them, and said “I refused the dross of 
the polytheists,” as was relayed by Ahmad Abu-Dawud and al-
Tarmadhi. The meaning of “dross” being “their gift, present, and 
the like.” 
 
If you are not today capable of financing yourselves through 
legitimate means devoid of that which is objectionable, then 
accepting monies from other organizations, such as from some 
Islamic movements including Hamas or al-Jihad al-Islami 
movement, or even from nationalist movements who participate 
with you in striking the Jewish enemy, then (TN: accepting these 
monies) for the sake of using it to conduct jihad and to strike 
the Jews is better than abandoning the jihad due to paucity of 
funds. 
 
So take it, if there is no other way, and strike the Jews… 
 
Page 6 
 
Consider this further, and you best know your situation...! 
 
And aim well (TN: “aim and be close”)! 
 
Because those movements (Jihad or Hamas, or even Fatah) are 
exploiting these acts and adopting them as their own, it is less 
damaging than would be the damage of abandoning the fight 
against the Jews, and God is all-knowing. 
 
And if God opens the path for you, and you are able to fund 
yourselves and have no need for them, then abandon them, and 
work independently on your own path, granted to you by God. 
 
We ask God the almighty to open the path for you, guide you, and 
strengthen you (TN: and purge you) of weakness, and make you 
rightly guided guides…Amen. 
 
The second question: 
 
Is it permitted to invest funds in the stock market, buying and 
selling shares, for the goal of supporting jihad, or investing 
some donation-derived funds in stock markets and shares? 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

The response: 
 
The judgment upon this also depends upon the circumstances and 
regulations of these stock markets. I know nothing of the 
circumstance and regulations of these stock markets which would 
qualify me to speak about them. The methods of selling in (TN: 
the stock markets) have many complications, and are full of 
tricks, and I have no ability in this. May God strengthen us and 
you. 
 
It is advised to ask some scholars who are specialized in this 
area, after editing your question well, and explaining the 
circumstances and regulations of the stock markets at which you 
are able to trade. May God make you successful and aid you. 
 
Third question: 
 
Is it permitted to strike drug traffickers, eliminate them, and 
kill them, or (TN: not)? The technicality of the issue: Is it 
permitted to take the funds which they have gained from drug 
trafficking and is it permitted to make use of the drugs which 
we obtain from them in: 
 
1. Luring fallen addicts to serve as double agents against the 
Jews. 
 
2. Selling them to Jews in order to harm them and take their 
money. 
 
3. Bringing down Jewish soldiers, particularly border guards, by 
means of drugs 
 
The response: 
 
Praise God 
 
As far as striking drug traffickers, eliminating them, and 
killing them: Yes, there is a technicality (TN: to the issue), 
which is according to the capability and authority of the 
mujahidin. The guiding principle for this, which you must learn 
and adhere to in this issue, is as follows: This is an issue 
within the realm of “propagating virtue and preventing vice,” 
the guiding principle for its legitimacy being that it not lead 
to a greater vice. 
 
Page 7 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

This is the guiding principle; keep it, and may God bless you. 
 
And so: If the mujahidin in some area or region are capable of 
carrying out hudud (TN: prescribed punishments for specific 
offenses in Shari‟a law) and establishing Shari‟a law or more, 
meaning that if they apply it, then the resulting outcome is in 
accordance with Shari‟a law, and no greater harm or corruption 
is consequent, then this is up to them.  
 
But we may say that at such time, it is their duty, the basis 
for which is this: It is (TN: their) duty to set up hudud, and 
to propagate virtue and prevent vice, and to do so by deed. 
 
This is as the mujahidin today are doing in some sub-districts 
of Iraq, Afghanistan, Waziristan, and other places. For one in 
such as your case, it is obvious that you are not in this 
position, may God strengthen you and open the path for you. 
 
What I believe (TN: is best) for you is not to do this, as I 
fear that great corruptions may result, and you will open 
yourselves up to things which are not within your power (TN: to 
control), and you will be beset with problems while you are yet 
weak. These sinful ones (if they be Muslims): There are 
technicalities pertaining to the permissibility, or lack 
thereof, of killing them. They are basically protected within 
Islam, and it is not permitted to kill them, although it is 
permissible in specific circumstances. Doubtless there is 
another exposition on this aspect. 
 
However, if you are capable of taking their monies, in some 
cases, without there following any greater corruption, as we 
mentioned, then this is to you, and you may spend the monies for 
jihad in God‟s name. 
 
And, in my conjecture, these cases are quite limited, if they 
exist at all. Such as: You stumble upon their monies, or one of 
their (drug merchants‟) convoys fall into your hands, and you 
then take their monies (not the drugs themselves), and spend 
them for jihad in God‟s name. 
 
However, remember that the stipulation in this is always that it 
not lead to a greater corruption. God is all-knowing. 
 
The second portion of the question, by which you also mean: The 
question regarding acceptance of gifts, presents, or alms from 
drug traffickers who are Muslims. This is what I understood from 
your question. 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

 
If this was the intended meaning, then: A man takes for himself, 
and accepts from them for himself, as in accepting their gifts, 
and eating of their food, then there is an exposition on this, 
and there is a difference amongst scholars regarding (TN: this 
point of) jurisprudence, as previously noted. 
 
If their monies are solely derived from forbidden (TN: 
acts/items) i.e. all of it is from that which is forbidden (TN: 
acts/items) (such as drug traffickers), then most scholars (the 
mass of them) state that it is not permissible to take from 
them, or to eat of their monies (TN: sic)… some scholars choose 
(TN: the position that) it is permissible, saying: their sins 
are upon them, and nothing is upon he who takes of it. However, 
the former is most likely, God is all-knowing. 
 
If their monies are mixed, then it is permissible to eat of the 
monies, and to accept what they give. However, it must be 
restricted, so as not to exceed the portion of their monies 
which are of the permissible sort. 
 
Discourse on this issue is long, and (TN: you can) refer to some 
of the sources which we have indicated above. 
 
If these traffickers, however, who traffic in forbidden (TN: 
items), such as drugs, give their monies as alms for jihad in 
God‟s name, then it appears to me, and God is all-knowing, that 
it is permissible to spend these monies for jihad in God‟s name 
 
Page 8 
 
Because these monies were derived from forbidden (TN: items), 
then it is incumbent upon its owner to repent, and through 
repentance, relinquishment of these monies so that they are no 
longer in his possession. The way to do this being to place them 
in a “bayt al-mal” (TN: treasury), where they are used for the 
benefit of Muslims, including jihad and conquest in God‟s name, 
or to be given as alms. 
 
Some scholars state: They would destroy these funds, as they are 
derived from forbidden (TN: items/acts). 
 
This is quite weak, as God almighty has never ordered the 
destruction of monies, but proscribed the wasting of it. And in 
this case, destroying them would be a waste of the monies which 
contains no benefit, as there is no obligation to destroy it 
(nothing exists to indicate that this would be an obligation), 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

and the clear good stipulates that it be spent in the interests 
of Islam and Muslims, and so should enter a “bayt al-mal” and 
become part of the resources of the “bayt al-mal” such as monies 
taken (seizure) from the corrupt, a punishment we have condoned, 
and the like. 
 
This is what Shaykh al-Islam Ibn-Taymiyah, God‟s mercy upon him, 
chose, and expounded upon in sections of his fatwas (he 
expounded upon this issue in more than one fatwa in the 29th 
volume, and in others as well). 
 
If the (TN: original) owner of the funds has not repented, but 
rather continues to commit sin, in this case the trafficking of 
drugs, then it is the duty of Muslims to take him to task, and 
it is the duty of the “wali al-amr” (TN: chief, or senior 
member) of Muslims to take this in hand, in which case the 
seizure of his money is permitted, to according to the most 
proper statements of scholars, by the “wali al-amr”. 
 
In brief: If the trafficker in wine or drugs donates some of his 
monies for jihad in the name of God the almighty, it is 
permitted to accept this and spend it on jihad in God‟s name, 
along with the duty of continuing to preach to him and to all 
men to submit to God, and to repent by abandoning vices and 
turning away from the forbidden. This is (TN: in order to) be 
cautious of assisting his trafficking in the forbidden. God is 
all-knowing. 
 
If the mujahidin have no need of those (TN: funds), then perhaps 
it is best to leave them alone. 
 
As for your question: 
 
1. Luring fallen addicts to serve as double agents against the 
Jews. 
 
2. Selling them to Jews in order to harm them and take their 
money. 
 
3. Bringing down Jewish soldiers, particularly border guards, by 
means of drugs 
 
All of this is not permitted… 
 
The first is clear, as it is a proscribed means, the 
proscription against which is clear: Giving drugs or wine to 
people and contributing to and promoting this behavior to them… 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

all of this God has proscribed and forbidden, so by what 
evidence shall we permit it?! Just because those in question are 
“fallen addicts,” it is of no matter to the (TN: applicability 
of) the verdict, and God is all-knowing. If they are Muslim 
youths who have committed this grave offense (taking drugs), 
then this is quite clear… if they are infidels… 
 
Page 9 
 
…then it is also not permitted to use this means with infidels, 
according to all scholars… although some scholars have given 
license in other issues in this same vein which differ from the 
issue at hand, namely: 
 
Such as Abu-Hanifah, God‟s mercy upon him, and his sanctioning 
of transactions with ahl al-Harb (TN: “people of war”) (warring 
infidels) in dar al-Harb (TN: “house of war”, i.e. lands not 
under Islamic rule) with interest, as his companions mentioned 
in “Bada‟i‟ al-Sana‟i‟” and others, and the mass of scholars 
opposed him in this, and the statement of this mass is correct, 
which is that this is forbidden from being done with ahl al-
Harb, just as it is forbidden with a Muslim or with one not of 
ahl al-Harb, whether in Dar al-Harb or Dar al-Islam. 
 
Like Sahnun, of the Malikite imams, who sanctioned paying 
ransoms of wine or pork for Muslim prisoners of war, should the 
infidels so request: Ibn-Jizzi in “al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyah” (TN: 
“Jurisprudence Laws” stated: “Should the enemy request a ransom 
of a horse or a weapon, it is paid to him, unlike the case with 
wine or pork.” Sahnun sanctioned using these two (TN: forbidden) 
items to pay the ransom for prisoners of war, while Ibn-al-Qasim 
forbade it for being injurious to Muslims, and he who was 
ransomed with payment of wine or the like (TN: remains as one) 
who never returned. 
 
Like the statement of Shaykh al-Islam Taymiyah in his fatwas 
“Leaving the Tatars or others to drink wine and to become 
intoxicated is better than forbidding it to them, because wine 
does not prevent them from remembrance of God, nor from 
performing prayer, rather it prevents them from (TN: committing) 
depravity and sin, and should they become sober, they would 
become more corrupt,” as he mentioned in his “Kitab al-
Istiqamah”. This is a matter which pertains to the promotion of 
vice and prevention of virtue, meaning to refrain from 
discouraging them from this, if it is preferable (TN: to do so). 
God is all-knowing. 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

As for the second (number two): This is an issue of selling 
wine, drugs, and that which is forbidden in our Shari‟a to the 
infidels for the purpose of harming them… the proper answer is 
that it is not permitted. 
 
All of this is forbidden, encompassed in forbidding the sale of 
things there is no difference between selling to a Muslim or to 
an infidel, neither in war nor in peace. This is proper, as 
previously indicated. 
 
As for the third (number three): The verdict for this is clear 
from the preceding; it is also forbidden and not permitted, and 
this is the basis: The forbidding of selling wine and the like 
to infidels of the ahl al-Harb, and forbidding using them as 
gifts to ahl al-Harb for the purposes of espionage and plying 
them. All of these are forbidden means, and are not permitted. 
As evidence of this: 
 
The totality of evidence of forbidding the sale of wine and the 
like, and forbidding giving or presenting them, or giving them 
for the consumption to one who drinks it, or carrying it, etc… 
There is much well-known evidence for this, which includes both 
selling to an infidel and selling to a Muslim. 
 
- Because this is contribution to sin and wrongdoing… 
 
- Because it is a denigration to the image of Islam and its pure 
and noble message, and is an impediment to God‟s will. 
 
O God, unless there is exigency, and we have no other means by 
which to free a Muslim from their hands; if they ask for ransom 
of wine or drugs, for example, and Sahnun authorized it, as seen 
in the precedent of paying ransom of wine and pork for 
prisoners, then this may bear the semblance of exigency, as the 
(TN: of the image of Islam) is safe from the damage of 
denigration in this case, if the enemy requests this. God is 
all-knowing. 
 
Whereas if you have decided that there is exigent need for this, 
then you must weigh it, and limit it to exigent circumstances 
alone, and is not (TN: to be treated as) a permitted thing...! 
 
Page 10 
 
Care must be taken to (TN: treat the matter) with secrecy and 
discretion, for fear of the spread of corruption to those who 
were faithful and for fear of denigrating the image of Muslims, 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT 

and alienation (TN: of the congregation); we place our trust in 
God.  
 
God is all-knowing and all-wise. 
 
Praise be to God, first and last, and God‟s blessings upon our 
Prophet Muhammad, his family, and companions. 
 
Written by ((„Atiyatallah)) 
 
Shawwal 1427 (TN: corresponding to the period of time from 24 
October 2006 until 22 November 2006) 
 

 

SOCOM-2012-0000008-HT