Ibn Hajar says when the Prophet ﷺ said “I was commanded,” it means Allah gave him this command. This is because the Prophet only acts on Allah’s instructions.

The main pillars mentioned are:

  • Declaring belief in one God (Allah ﷻ)
  • Performing salah regularly

Paying Charity (zakah)

Important Interpretations of this are that salah and zakah are specifically mentioned because they are fundamental acts of worship – prayer being physical worship and charity being financial worship.

  • “Establishing prayer” means performing it regularly and properly, not just occasionally.

There’s an important distinction between fighting and killing: Scholars explain that fighting doesn’t automatically mean killing and fighting is a two-way conflict, while killing is one-sided.

When someone follows these pillars, their life and property become protected under Sharia. People are judged by their visible actions, not their hidden intentions. Their inner beliefs are a matter between them and Allah.

Those who follow the principles of Islam but may have some incorrect practices are still considered Muslims.

Non-Muslims who have peace treaties or pay jizyah are not fought against and this shows that the main objective is to peacefully coexist and spread the message of Islam through various means, not just through conflict.

Translation: The phrase “I was commanded” means: Allah commanded me, because the Messenger of Allah has no command except from Allah. Similarly, if a Companion says “I was commanded”, it means the Messenger of Allah commanded me.

It cannot mean that another Companion commanded them because, as they are mujtahids, they do not use the command of another mujtahid as proof. However, if a tabi’i says it, it can carry that meaning. In summary, when someone well-known for obeying a leader says this, it is understood that the command is from that leader.
The phrase “until they testify” means: making the goal of fighting the occurrence of what is mentioned. This means: whoever testifies, prays, and gives zakah, their life is protected, even if they deny other rulings. The response is: testifying to the Messenger includes believing in what he brought.
Moreover, the explicit wording of the hadith, which says “except by the rights of Islam”, includes everything else. If someone asks: why did it not suffice to mention this and instead specifically mention prayer and zakah? The answer is: because of their great importance and emphasis, as they are the foundation of physical and financial worship. The phrase “and establish prayer” means: they continuously perform it with its conditions, similar to the phrase “the market stood” meaning it flourished, or “the war stood” meaning the fighting became intense.
It could also mean performing, referring to the act by mentioning a part of it, as standing is part of prayer. The prayer here refers to the obligatory prayers, not all prayers. Thus, prostration for recitation is not included, even though it can be called prayer.
An Nawawi (d. 676 AH) said: this hadith shows that someone who intentionally abandons prayer is to be killed. He then mentioned the differences in the madhhahib on this issue. Al-Kirmani (d. 786 AH) was asked here about the ruling for someone who abandons zakah and responded that the rulings are the same in fighting, but not in execution.
The difference is that someone who refuses to give zakah can have it taken by force, unlike prayer. However, if it escalates to fighting to prevent zakah, then they are fought. This is how Abu Bakr fought those who withheld zakah, but it was not reported that he executed anyone deliberately. Thus, using this hadith to argue for executing someone who abandons prayer is questionable because there is a difference between fighting and killing.
Ibn Daqiq al-‘Id (d. 702 AH) was against using this hadith as evidence for such a ruling in Sharh al-‘Umda. He said: fighting does not necessarily mean killing, as fighting is mutual and involves both sides, unlike killing. Al-Bayhaqi reported that al-Shafi’i (d. 204 AH) said: fighting is not the same as killing; one may be permitted to fight someone but not to kill them.
The phrase “if they do this” expresses actions, though some of it is speech. This is either generalised or to emphasise the broader meaning, as speech is an action of the tongue. The phrase “they are protected” means: they are safe. The root of protection (‘ismah) is the word ‘isam, which refers to the string used to tie the opening of a water skin to prevent water from spilling.
The phrase “and their reckoning is with Allah” refers to their inner secrets. The word “with” (‘ala) suggests obligation, but its literal meaning is not intended here. It either means for or it compares the matter to something necessary, meaning it will definitely happen. This shows that outward actions are accepted and judged accordingly, and sincere belief is sufficient for accepting faith. This opposes those who require learning proofs for belief.
It is also understood from this that the people of bid’ah who affirm tawheed and follow the laws are not to be declared disbelievers. Similarly, a disbeliever’s repentance is accepted without distinction between apparent or hidden disbelief.
If someone asks: this hadith implies fighting anyone who refuses tawheed. So why are those who pay jizyah or have treaties not fought? The answer is in several points:
1. It could be claimed that this was abrogated, as permission for jizyah and treaties came later. This is proven by it being later than the verse “Kill the polytheists” (Surah al-Tawbah: 5).
2. It could be said this is general, with exceptions based on evidence. The aim of the command is achieving the goal. If some are exempt due to evidence, it does not harm the general rule.
3. It could be said this general rule intends something specific: the polytheists not of the People of the Book, as proven by al-Nasa’i’s narration, which says “I was commanded to fight the polytheists”.
4. If this applies to those who pay jizyah, it does not apply to those under treaties or those who withhold jizyah. It is answered that refraining from fighting them is a delay, not cancellation. Fighting those who refuse jizyah is proven by the verse.
5. It could mean that what is mentioned-testimony, etc.-refers to making Allah’s word supreme and compelling others to submit. This could be achieved by killing some, collecting jizyah from others, or treaties.
6. It could mean that the fighting or equivalent alternatives like jizyah achieve the intended purpose. The goal of jizyah is to push them toward Islam. Since the cause of the cause is a cause itself, it is as if the Prophet said: until they become Muslim or accept what leads them to Islam. This is the best interpretation, aligning with the third point.
Fath Al Bari By Ibn Hajar (1/144-146)

An Nawawi quotes Al-Khattabī on the Arabs who disbelieved after the Prophet ﷺ’s death and Abū Bakr’s leadership. The apostates fell into two main categories:

The first category completely renounced Islam. This included followers of false prophets Musaylamah and Al-Aswad al-‘Ansi, who denied The Prophet’s prophethood. Abū Bakr fought them until their leaders were killed and forces defeated.

The second category denied good deeds of action entirely, reverting to their jahiliyyah ways. Only three masajid remained active: in Makkah, Madinah and Juwatha.

The faithful in Juwatha persisted until Muslims subdued Yamāmah.

A third group accepted prayer but rejected zakat payment to the state. Though technically rebels, they were grouped with apostates due to supporting them.

Some tribes, like Yarbu, collected zakat but were prevented from sending it by leaders like Malik ibn Nuwayrah.

This led to debate between Umar رضي الله عنه and Abū Bakr رضي الله عنه. Umar quoted the Prophet’s hadith about protection through faith, while Abū Bakr argued zakat was inseparable from other duties. Umar eventually accepted this view.

Some Shia claimed Abu Bakr wrongly enslaved Muslims who withheld zakat, citing Qur’an 9:103 as applying only to the Prophet.

This claim was baseless, as the apostates had truly rejected faith.

The Quran is directed at three different groups: General to all believers, some are specific to the Prophet ﷺ and relate specifically to his role, actions, or unique responsibilities, and others may address the Prophet ﷺ but applying to the ummah aswell.

Today, denying zakat makes one a disbeliever, unlike in early Islam when some had valid excuses due to recent conversion and evolving rules.

Muslims universally understand zakat’s obligation, though new converts may still be excused for ignorance.

Al-Nawawi’s interpretation of Sahih Muslim

Al-Nawawi’s interpretation of Sahih Muslim
Translation: Al-Khattabi makes very valid comments on the Arabs who disbelieved after the Prophet had passed away and Abū Bakr was chosen as leader of the Muslim state. It is very useful to quote these here What needs to be mentioned at the outset is that the apostates were of two categories. The first included those who renounced the faith altogether and reverted to disbelief.
These were the ones Abu Hurayrah refers to when he says. ‘whoever disbelieved among the Arabs renounced Islam’. These were two groups: one comprised those who followed Musaylamah of the Hanifah tribe, believing his claim that he was a prophet, as well as those who followed Al-Aswad al-‘Ansi from among the people of Yemen and other areas. The whole of this category denied the prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and alleged that others were prophets. Abū Bakr fought them until Allah killed Musaylamah at Yamāmah and al-‘Ansi at Sanaa, while their hosts were defeated and dispersed, and most of them perished.
The other group included those who denied Islam altogether with all its laws and regulations, abandoning prayer, zakat and all other religious duties. They reverted to their pre-Islamic practices, so much so that there were only three mosques on earth where people prostrated themselves to Allah in worship. These were the mosques of Makkah, Madinah and the mosque of the ‘Abd al-Qays tribe in a village called Juwatha near Bahrain.
The other category included those who separated zakat from prayer, acknowledging the duty of prayer but denied that of zakat and that they must pay it to the ruler of the Muslim state. In fact, these were in rebellion, but they were not called as such at the time, because they were helping the apostates.
Hence, they were grouped together with them because apostasy was the more serious development Fighting those who rise in rebellion against the state was documented during the reign of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, when they were distinguished from the unbelievers. Among those who withheld the payment of zakat were some who acknowledged the duty of zakat, but their leaders prevented them from paying it.
The people of the tribe of Yarbu may be quoted as an example, and they collected their zakat and wanted to send it to Abu Bakr, but Malik ibn Nuwayrah prevented them and distributed their zakat among their own people. It is concerning these that the disagreement occurred, and hence Umar was unsure about the decision to fight.
Therefore, he raised the matter with Abū Bakr, putting his argument that relied on the Prophet’s statement ‘I am commanded to fight people unless they say “There is no deity other than Allah”, and whoever says, “There is no deity other than Allah” protects his property and his life’. Umar looked at the clearly apparent meaning of the Prophet’s hadith without looking at the end or considering its conditions.
Abū Bakr told him that the zakat is a duty related to money and property. He meant that it was an issue of protecting self and property, but this depended on the fulfilment of its conditions. A ruling that is conditional on the fulfilment of two duties does not apply when only one of the two conditions is fulfilled while the other is not Abū Bakr then drew the analogy with prayer and compared zakat to it.
The point he made here confirms that the Prophet’s companions were unanimous with regard to fighting anyone who denies the duty of prayer. Thus, the controversial issue was compared to one over which there was unanimity. In this disagreement we see that ‘Umar quotes in support of his view the general meaning of the text, while Abū Bakr supports his view with analogy.
This means that a general ruling may be made restricted on the basis of analogy. It also means that all the conditions and exceptions stated in relation to a single ruling must be fulfilled.
Therefore, when ‘Umar realized that Abū Bakr’s view was the correct one, he followed his lead to fight those people. This is the meaning of ‘Umar’s words: ‘When I realized that Allah had made Abu Bakr comfortable with fighting, I was certain that it is the right course to take’. He meant that he realised that Abu Bakr’s argument was the right one, supported by the evidence he provided in text and meaning.
Some of the extremist Shia alleged that Abu Bakr was the first ruler to enslave Muslims. They claimed that those who withheld zakat thought themselves right because they interpreted a verse of the Qur’an as applicable only to the Prophet and not to anyone else. This is the verse which says: “Take a portion of their money as charity, so that you may cleanse and purify them thereby, and pray for them: for your prayers are a source of comfort for them’ (9:103).
They claimed that the text of this verse is restricted by conditions that cannot be met by anyone other than the Prophet. No one can cleanse, purify and pray for a charitable person in the same way as the Prophet could.
Such a doubt is valid as an excuse for their attitude and they should never have been fought. They claimed that fighting them was an act of oppression. Those that made such claims were people who had no share of faith.
Their assets are nothing but falsehood and fabrication, and their motive is to undermine the early Muslims. As we have explained, the apostates were of different categories. Some of them renounced the faith altogether and believed that Musaylamah or others were prophets. Others stopped prayers and zakat and denied all Islamic duties.
It is such people that the Prophet’s companions called unbelievers. Therefore, Abū Bakr ruled that their families could be enslaved. The majority of the Prophet’s companions agreed with him. ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib took one of their women and she gave him his son known as Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah.
Before the generation of the Prophet’s companions was over, they became unanimous in their ruling that an apostate may not be enslaved. Those of them who stopped the payment of zakat but continued to believe in the religion were rebels. They were not, as individuals or groups, called unbelievers, but apostasy was given to them as a label because they shared with the apostates the refusal to abide by certain requirements of the religion.
Apostasy is a linguistic term. Whoever abandons something he has been engaged in, or committed to, is a revert from it. Those people s commandments and abandoned obedience of Allah withheld what was due from them. Therefore, the good praise of being religious and faithful was withheld from them and the ugly description of apostasy was attached to them because they shared certain things with the ones who were truly apostates.
They claimed that the above-quoted Qur’anic verse, starting with, Take a portion of their money as charity’, applied only to the :Prophet. In fact, the Qur’anic address is of three types
i. A general address, as in ‘Believers, when you are about to pray, wash your faces, and your hands and arms up to the elbows, and pass your wet hands lightly over your heads, and wash your feet up to the ankles’. (5: 6) ‘Believers, fasting is decreed for you as it was decreed for those before you, so that you may be Allah fearing.’ (2: 183)
ii. A special address to the Prophet unshared by anyone else. This is so distinguished from the other address by specific references, as in: ‘At night, rise from your sleep to recite it in prayer, as an additional offering from you’. (17:79) This applies to you alone and not to other believers.’ (33:50)
iii. An address directed at the Prophet but one that equally applies to everyone in his community, as in: ‘Keep up prayer when the sun is on its decline, in the darkness of the night, and recite the Qur’an at dawn’. (17: 78) ‘Whenever you read the Qur’an, seek refuge with Allah from Satan, the accursed.’ (16: 98) ‘When you are with the believers and about to lead them in prayer, let one group of them stand up with you’ (4: 102)
This third type is not specific to the Prophet, but the entire Muslim community shares in it. The same applies to the verse starting with, Take a portion of their money as charity’. Therefore, whoever is in charge of the Muslim community after the Prophet must follow his lead and take zakat from them.
The reason for making the address to the Prophet in the first instance is that he is the one who calls on people to believe in Allah and the one who explains what Allah wants of His servants. The Prophet’s name is made first in the address so that the practice of religious orders should be as he shows in practice. In the same vein is the verse that says: ‘Prophet! When you divorce women, divorce them with a view to their prescribed waiting period’. (65: 1).
The address starts with him personally as the Prophet, but the ruling is addressed to him and to all his community. An address may be made to him but applies to others only, as in: ‘If you are in doubt concerning what We have bestowed on you from on high, ask those who read the Scriptures [revealed) before you. It is surely the truth that has come to you from your Lord. Do not, then, be among the doubters’. (10: 94) .

It is not possible that the Prophet entertained even the slightest doubt concerning what was revealed to him.

As for the cleansing, purification and prayer by the ruler to ones who pay zakat and charity, it is perfectly possible that anyone may attain to this grade through obedience of Allah and His Messenger. Every reward promised for a good deed during the Prophet’s own lifetime remains valid and continues uninterrupted. It is recommended that the ruler and the zakat collector should pray to the zakat payer that Allah may grant him growth and blessing of his money and property. It is hoped that Allah will answer such prayer.

A question may be asked: On what basis do we consider those who have withheld zakat as rebels? Should a group of Muslims in the present day who deny that zakat is a binding duty and stop paying it be treated as people in rebellion? The answer is definitely in the negative. It is the unanimous verdict of all Muslims that whoever denies the duty of zakat in our own time is an unbeliever.
The difference is that those early people who withheld zakat had excuses and circumstances that cannot apply in our time. One of these is that they were close to the time when Islam was being revealed and rulings could change through abrogation.
Another reason is that they were unaware of Islam in full, particularly because they had only recently accepted Islam. Hence, they were confused and earned their excuse. Today, Islam is widely practised and all Muslims are aware of the binding duty of zakat. Indeed, this is known by all classes and the general public, and it is equally known to scholars and uneducated people. Therefore, no one may be excused on account of an interpretation he makes.
The same applies in the case of denying anything universally held by the Muslim community, provided that it is widely known, such as the five daily prayers, fasting during the month of Ramadan, taking a bath to remove the state of ceremonial impurity (janabah), the prohibition of adultery, intoxicants and incestuous marriage, etc. Only in the case of a newcomer to Islam, who does not know its details, denial may not mean disbelief.
The same verdict given to those early rebels applies to him, and he remains a Muslim. In other matters, the unanimous verdict may be known only to the elite. This is the case of the prohibition of marriage to a woman and her aunt, paternal or maternal, at the same time, or that a murderer may not inherit his relative whom he murdered, or that a grandmother inherits one-sixth of the deceased’s estate, etc. A person who denies any such ruling is not considered an unbeliever. He is excused on account that these rulings are not widely known to people.
The misunderstanding we have mentioned occurred because of the frequent omission in the way the case is reported by Abū Hurayrah. He did not intend to state the hadith in full or to explain how they became apostates.
All he intended was to relate what happened between Abū Bakr and ‘Umar in this case and why they initially disagreed about the legitimacy of fighting them. It appears that Abū Hurayrah was not concerned with relating the full story, as he realized that his audience were familiar with it.
Sharh Sahih Muslim By An Nawawi (1/202-205)

Shayk Al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله says: The statement of the Prophet (ﷺ ): “I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no diety worthy of worship except Allah ﷺ and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, applies only to those at war with Muslims, not those with treaties.

Prior to Surah At-Tawbah treaties with disbelievers did not require jizyah. After its revelation, treaties required either submission or jizyah payment, as commanded by Allah: When the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, then let them go their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Surah al-Tawbah: 5).

The People of the Book, though considered superior to polytheists, were required to pay jizyah. This requirement extended to polytheists as well after Surah Tawbah

This distinction of the People of the Book shows that treaties with polytheists must include submission or jizyah, unlike earlier agreements such as the Treaty of Hudaybiyah.

According to Buraydah’s hadith, the Prophet (ﷺ) instructed military leaders to: “Fight in the name of Allah, in the path of Allah. Fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal from the war booty, do not betray, do not mutilate, and do not kill children. If you meet your enemy from the polytheists, invite them to three options.”

Accept any option they choose and cease fighting.

  • First, invite them to Islam.
  • Second, if they accept Islam, ask them to migrate to the land of emigrants, gaining equal rights and duties. If they refuse to migrate, they become like Bedouin Muslims, receiving war spoils only when fighting alongside Muslims.
  • Third, if they reject Islam, request jizyah. Fight only if they refuse all options.

Majmu' fataw ibn tayymiyah pages 20-23

 

 

Translation: The statement of the Prophet (peace be upon him): “I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establish prayer, and give zakah,” means fighting those who are at war with the Muslims, as Allah has permitted fighting them.

It does not mean fighting those who have treaties, as Allah has commanded fulfilling their treaties. Before the revelation of Surah al-Tawbah (Bara’ah), the Prophet (peace be upon him) used to make treaties with disbelievers without requiring them to pay jizyah.

However, when Surah al-Tawbah was revealed and Allah commanded the annulment of open-ended treaties, the Prophet was no longer allowed to make treaties with them as he used to. Instead, he was commanded to fight all disbelievers, as Allah said: “When the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, then let them go their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Surah al-Tawbah: 5).

 

The religion of the People of the Book is better than the religion of the polytheists, yet they were commanded to be fought until they paid the jizyah while being humbled. If treaties without jizyah were no longer valid for the People of the Book after the revelation of Surah al-Tawbah, then it is even more fitting that treaties without submission or jizyah are not valid for the polytheists. It has been said that mentioning the People of the Book specifically in this context serves as a stronger indication that treaties with the polytheists without submission or jizyah are not acceptable. This was different before the revelation of Surah al-Tawbah, such as during the Treaty of Hudaybiyah and similar agreements

It has also been authentically reported in a hadith narrated by Buraydah that when the Prophet (peace be upon him) appointed a leader over an army or expedition, he would advise him specifically to fear Allah and to treat the Muslims with goodness.

He would say: “Fight in the name of Allah, in the path of Allah. Fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal from the war booty, do not betray, do not mutilate, and do not kill children. If you meet your enemy from the polytheists, invite them to three options.”

So whichever of these options they agree to, accept it from them and cease hostilities. Invite them to Islam, and if they accept, then agree with them and stop fighting them. Then call them to move from their homeland to the land of the emigrants (al-muhajirin). Inform them that if they do so, they will have the same rights and duties as the emigrants.

But if they refuse to move, tell them they will be like the Bedouin Muslims, subject to the same rulings from Allah as other believers, but they will not receive a share of the war booty or spoils unless they fight alongside the Muslims.

If they refuse this, then demand the jizyah. If they agree, accept it and refrain from further fighting. If they refuse, seek Allah’s help and fight them. If you lay siege to a fortress and they ask you to grant them the protection of Allah and His Prophet, do not give them the guarantee of Allah or His Prophet. Instead, grant them your own protection and that of your companions.

It is less serious for you to violate your own protection than to violate the protection of Allah and His Prophet. If you besiege a fortress and they ask to surrender under Allah’s judgment, do not agree to judge them by Allah’s decree. Instead, let them surrender under your own judgment, for you do not know whether you will correctly apply Allah’s decree regarding them or not.

 

Majmu Fatawa By Ibn Taymiyyah (19/20-22)

 


 

Ibn Rajab says that: Imam Muslim also narrated this from Jābir with the same wording as Abū Hurayrah, adding: “Then he recited, So remind, you are only a reminder; you are not over them as a controller” [Surah al-Ghāshiyah: 21].

The statement about protecting blood and wealth shows that the Prophet (ﷺ) accepted reverts through the two testimonies of faith alone. He would accept anyone who proclaimed Islam, without requiring immediate commitment to prayer or zakah. He even rebuked Usāmah ibn Zayd for killing someone who had said Lā ilāha illā Allāh

The Prophet ﷺ accepted people into Islam even with conditions – some stipulated they would not pay zakah, while others agreed to only pray certain prayers. As narrated from Jābir, when Thaqif made conditions about charity and fighting, the Prophet said: They will soon give charity and fight.

Imām Ahmad concluded that Islam is valid even with invalid conditions, though full compliance would eventually be required. He quoted examples like Hakim Ibn Hizam’s conditional pledge about prostration.

While some narrations suggest the Prophet required commitment to prayer and zakah for conversion, these are either weak or indicate these were subsequent obligations. When sending Muʿadh to Yemen, he instructed him to first call people to the testimonies, then teach about prayer and zakah afterward.

The core principle is that the testimonies alone protect one’s life and property. Additional obligations would follow, but were not prerequisites for entering Islam.

Some misunderstood this to mean non-Muslims must fulfill all obligations before being protected, but this contradicts what the Prophet ﷺ meant.

 

Jami' al 'ulum wal hikam volume 1 pages 226-227

Jami' al 'ulum wal hikam volume 1 pages 229-230

 

Translation: Imam Muslim also narrated this from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him), from the Prophet (peace be upon him), in the same wording as Abū Hurayrah’s first narration. He added at the end: “Then he recited, So remind, you are only a reminder; you are not over them as a controller” [Sūrat al-Ghashiyah: 21].

The statement “they have protected their blood and wealth from me” shows that at the time of this statement, he was commanded to fight and to kill those who rejected Islam. All of this occurred after the Prophet migrated to Madinah. It is well known that the Prophet (peace be upon him) would accept anyone who came to him desiring to enter Islam with the two testimonies of faith alone. By doing so, their blood was protected, and they were considered Muslim. He even rebuked Usāmah ibn Zayd for killing someone who had said La ilaha illa Allah when the sword was raised against him, and the Prophet strongly disapproved of this.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not require someone wanting to become Muslim to commit to prayer and zakah immediately. It was reported that he accepted Islam from people who conditioned that they would not pay zakah.

In the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, it is narrated from Jabir that Thaqif made a condition with the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) not to give charity (zakah) and not to fight, and the Prophet said: They will soon give charity and fight. It is also reported that a man from the tribe of Layth came to the Prophet, accepted Islam on the condition that he would only pray two prayers, and the Prophet accepted that from him.

Imam Ahmad relied on these narrations and stated that Islam is valid even if it is conditional on something invalid, but the person must eventually follow all of the teachings of Islam. He also quoted that Hakim ibn Hizām said: I pledged allegiance to the Prophet on the condition that I would only bow and not prostrate. Ahmad interpreted this to mean that he agreed to prostrate without bowing.

Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazi recorded, through a very weak chain, from Anas that the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not accept anyone’s conversion to Islam unless they agreed to establish prayer and give zakah. These two acts were obligatory upon anyone who affirmed the Prophet and Islam, as stated in the verse: So if you do not do so, and Allah has forgiven you, establish prayer and give zakah [Sūrat al-Mujadilah: 13].

However, this narration is not established. Even if it were authentic, it would mean that anyone who entered Islam was eventually required to uphold prayer and zakah. This is true since the Prophet instructed Mu’adh, when sending him to Yemen, to first call the people to the two testimonies of faith. If they accepted, he was then to teach them about prayer and zakah. Thus, whoever became Muslim was subsequently commanded to perform prayer and pay zakah.

When asked about Islam, the Prophet would mention the other pillars of Islam along with the two testimonies, as he did when Jibril asked him about Islam, or when the desert Arab approached him disheveled and asked about Islam. Based on these points, it becomes clear that all the narrations on this topic are consistent and accurate. The two testimonies alone protect a person’s blood and wealth, making them Muslim.

If a person who entered Islam performed prayer, gave zakah, and followed the teachings of Islam, they would have the same rights and responsibilities as other Muslims. If they neglected some of these duties and belonged to a group with collective strength, they could be fought.

Some people misunderstood the hadith, thinking it meant a disbeliever must perform all these actions-testifying, praying, and paying zakah-before fighting them is permissible. They used this as evidence that non-Muslims are obligated to follow Islamic practices, but this view is not accurate. The Prophet’s practice in dealing with non-Muslims shows the opposite.

 

Jaami’ Al Uloom Wal Hikam Fi Sharh 50 Hadith By Ibn Rajab Pg 227-230

 


Author

Discover more from ATHARI ARCHIVE

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading