A photo released by Iran's Supreme Leader's office in 2012 shows Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Ismail Haniyeh (left) during a meeting in Tehran
The relationship of the resistance with Iran and its allies is a permanent file, whether it is after a victory, or during one of its battles, or after any political or military alliance between the two parties, and putting it forward in a fair scientific manner, is a praise that is not problematic, but there are parties that do not raise it from this section, but rather as a matter of confusion on the resistance only, whether the confusion is political, or red-handed in the dress of religion and fatwa, or belief and preserving it.
What we are dealing with here is the religious aspect, as it is raised in an arbitrary way by many of those who deal with it, and we are not talking here about those who blame the resistance formulas of praise or praise for Iran and its allies when thanking for their positions towards the resistance, this is an acceptable context or hadith, and there is no problem with it, as its owners proceed out of their keenness on the resistance and its reputation.
You find the Holy Qur'an sometimes mentions the disbelievers by saying: (those who disbelieved), only without any description of their behavior, because it talks about their doctrinal position, while in other contexts when talking about their behavior it says: (those who disbelieve and were wronged), and again it says: (those who disbelieved and repelled from the path of Allah)
But our talk about those who confuse the mere alliance and the acceptance of the resistance, any helping hand extends from this alliance, under the pretext of sectarian disagreement between the resistance and Iran and its allies, raising fatwas that lead them to takfir, and that they are a category that affects the companions, so how can an Islamic resistance accept to extend its hand to the alliance or accept the contribution of those who carry such an ideology?
I am not here to discuss the validity or invalidity of what they attribute of religious ideas to Iran and its allies, this is another context, the article does not accommodate it, but we will assume the validity of what they went to, and we build the discussion on the assumption of its validity, is it really in the political and military field, Islam refuses to cooperate or ally with a group that bears this thought?
The truth is that this proposal is based on a fallacy, or ignorance of the nature of political alliances, and the position of Sharia on them, alliances are not built on a contractual basis, nor on agreement in belief or legislation, but always built on achieving interest, and preventing damage, and the meditator in the Holy Qur'an, will find the Qur'an when talking about the fate of its opponents in belief, that it is one otherworldly fate, but when talking about dealing with them, they are classified in terms of hostility and aggression, and its context and words differ in classification.
You find the Holy Qur'an sometimes mentions the disbelievers by saying: (those who disbelieve), only without any description of their behavior, because it talks about their doctrinal position, while in other contexts when talking about their behavior, you see the hadith in the Qur'an is contained with these descriptions: Sometimes it says: (those who disbelieve and wrong) Women: 168, and again it says: (Those who disbelieve and repel from the path of Allah) Women: 167, and a third says: (Those who disbelieved and repelled from the path of Allah and hardship the Prophet after what was shown to them guidance) Muhammad: 32.
These different descriptions if they were intended to indicate their doctrinal rule, the Qur'an would suffice talking about them with those who disbelieved, but adding behavioral descriptions to them, is intended from the Holy Qur'an, which does not contain the word in excess of the word except for wisdom and purpose, it is intended to indicate the degrees and level of personalities, so that they are dealt with according to this description, the mildest unjustly different treatment of oppression.
This is what we see in the laws of divine and man-made punishments, there are minor sins, there are major sins, there is crime and there is misdemeanor, although it is in the section of punishment, but the description differs, so that the treatment differs.
This is what the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) applied in his dealings with the disbelievers of Quraish, so he did not treat them all in the same way, despite all of them agreeing on one contractual ruling, some of them had previously interacted with him, such as Suhail bin Amr in the peace of Hudaybiyah, and some of them refused to meet him also in the same context, because he is not a man of dialogue, and some of them fought him, and some of them said about him: If he were alive and the prisoners of the Battle of Badr asked him, he would have given them to him, even though he died according to the same belief as those who fought him, because he was The owner of Menna on it, which is the restaurant Ben Adi.
Therefore, Islam allows a Muslim to marry a non-Muslim woman, although her religion is contrary to the true religion of the Muslim, whether in terms of her belief in God - Almighty - or in the Prophet in whom the Muslim believes, she does not believe in him, but considers him a liar - God forbid -, or not a prophet, or a pretender to the Prophethood, however, because it is a matter of social affairs, the origin of which is: that the woman be chaste, after being biblical, Islam excluded this provision, and other provisions in the same context.
This Quranic and Prophetic foundation is important in dealing with this issue and similar ones, because mixing it or exceeding it causes its owners to make a mistake or a lubricant, which may miss the interests of people, or cause them distress or damage, but those who deliberately confuse for other goals this is another context.
Accordingly, political and military alliances are based mainly on the closest, the fittest, and those behind whom the interest comes, or what the damage pays, which is what the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) himself applied, before the movement of polytheists from the Quraysh, they broke the siege that was imposed on him and his companions, in the people of Abu Talib, and did not search for their belief, or agreement in belief, because it is about injustice and justice, truth and falsehood, and to talk about belief is another matter and context.
As well as what happened from him from the shrouding of Abdullah bin Abi bin Salul, and he was the head of hypocrisy, and he was the mastermind of the incident of Al-Ifak on his pure wife, as his movements were all damage to the state, and damage to the reputation and presentation of the Prophet - may God's peace and blessings be upon him -, and when Ibn Salul died, the Prophet - may God's peace and blessings be upon him - shrouded him with his shirt, in response to a favor done by Ibn Salul.
It was narrated that Jabir ibn 'Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "When it was the day of Badr, he brought captives and brought 'Abbas without a garment on him, and the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) looked at a shirt and found the shirt of 'Abdullah bin Abi who could wear it, so the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) clothed it with it, so the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) took off his shirt that he had wore."
Some scholars have interpreted what the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) did with Ibn Salul in two ways: one: that he wanted to compose and honor his son, as he was a Muslim innocent of hypocrisy. The other side is that 'Abdullah ibn Abi had clothed al-'Abbas ibn 'Abd al-Muttalib with a shirt, so he wanted the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) to reward him for that, lest a hypocrite have a hand that he did not reward him for.
Political and military alliances depend on the unity of the goal in the existing battle, even if there is a radical disagreement in other issues or battles, and a senior imam of the Muslim imams has developed this precise criterion and understood it from the peace of Hudaybiyah, which is Imam Ibn al-Qayyim, where he talked about some of the provisions that are taken from them, he said:
(Including: that the polytheists, and the people of heresies and immorality, and prostitutes, and darkness, if they ask for something in which they magnify the sanctity of the sanctities of God - Almighty -, answer him, and give him, and help him, and if they prevent others, they help to what is in it to glorify the sanctities of God - Almighty -, not on their infidelity and prostitution, and prevent anything else, everyone who sought help on the beloved of God - Almighty - disease for him, I answer to that whoever he is, unless the result of his help on that beloved hated God greater than him, and this is one of the most accurate and difficult places and the hardest on souls).