Samir Sadiq, Ruba Mansour:
Loyalty and disavowal is a jurisprudential term that obligates the believer to love God, His Messenger, and the believers, and to support them, while hating and opposing others, including the infidels and polytheists. Loyalty and disavowal is a pillar of the true religion. There is no fundamental difference between Shiite and Sunni loyalty and disavowal. Loyalty and disavowal is a condition of faith. This concept, like others, has been subject to a number of interpretations and explanations related to polytheism, faith, and the definition of true religion, etc., which do not touch upon its essence, which requires loyalty to the believer and disavowal of the polytheist or apostate.
Loyalty and disavowal explain many of the believers’ behaviors. Let us take some examples of the practices of loyalty and disavowal from reality, for example, the behavior of some who are coupled with praise for the awaited Caliph Erdogan, despite Turkey’s blatant and criminal treatment of Syrian refugees in Turkey. Then there is the continuous slander against the European Union, and the denial of what this Union has provided for refugees, even outside the European Union, such as Turkey and Lebanon, and the billions dolers that the European Union has provided to asylum countries, including Turkey, which blackmailed the European Union with the refugee card. Then there are the practices of the awaited Caliph Erdogan, who has fueled the Syrian war for 14 years and Turkey’s occupation of parts of Syria.
However, Caliph Erdogan has been a Sunni, so Turkey deserves loyalty and thus praise. As for the European Union, it deserves nothing but disavowal, because according to the classifications of believers, it is an infidel from which one must disavow all except for its material resources, aid, and sheltering of refugees!
Turkey occupied new parts of Syria, as it had previously occupied Alexandretta, Cilicia and others. Here, the position of some Syrians towards turkey was supportive of the Turkish occupation and participation in its implementation. We see in this an example of practicing loyalty and disavowal. The Syrian people of loyalty and disavowal welcomed the Turkish conqueror – Erdogan, on the basis that he was the awaited Caliph. What these people did was a betrayal of the homeland and their role was that of a fifth column. Therefore, the mujahedeen must be considered as usurpers of Syrian citizenship and patriotism, practicing cohabitation in Syria, meaning that they are strangers in Syria, but they want to rule it. Even the zeal of the homeland and patriotism could not stand in the face of the monster of loyalty and disavowal. The loyalty of these people was to the last of those who represented the pure religion politically, i.e. the Ottoman Caliphate, which the muslim Brotherhood considers a small solution to the problem of the greater Caliphate, and to which the branches return, which became part of it and its property after its conquest by the Ottomans. The Syrian branch or part was like spoils of war. the God says, “So eat of what you have taken as spoils of war, lawful and good,” meaning that the spoils of war, according to divine custom, are lawful and pure for whoever seizes them and transfers them to their rightful owner, practically like the disavowal of the Syrian homeland.
Regarding the spoils of war, a painful observation must be made here, which is that the Assad regime was able to score a formal moral victory over God. The Assad regime looted, as God’s soldiers of mujahideen in His cause have always done up until this moment. However, the Assad regime that looted verbally denounced the looting. This point distinguished the mujahideen in the cause of the Assad regime from the mujahideen in the cause of God. The looting is the spoils of war and belongs to the looter. Here we find a difference between the impudence of the God of the heavens who advises and legitimizes the spoils, and between Assad and his successor al-Julani, the god of the earth who loots and kills like his predecessor.
There are doubts about God’s story and his sayings, as it is not reasonable that God would allow the mujahideen in His cause to spoil Him in this way. Do the mujahideen lie for His sake? Do they deceive and deceive by saying on behalf of God, “Eat of what you have taken as spoils of war, lawful and good?” So did God want jihad for the sake of the spoils of war or for the sake of looting to be real? And is he really the one who said, “Eat of what you have taken as lawful and good spoils of war”? We doubt the authenticity of what is attributed to God, or transmitted on his authority. It is impossible to honor a god who advises looting Sweida, as appeared in the pictures of trucks transporting furniture from the homes of the people of Sweida, which were circulated by the media in the past few days
the position towards Erdogan is characterized by absolute loyalty, not only because he is Sunni and is permitted to do what is not permitted to others, but also because he is one who promised the (minor) caliphate and its revival, so some Sunnis are committed to loyalty to him and his will and administration, and disavowal even from the homeland, whose implications and meanings have become confusing to them, despite the nation being linked to the ruler in form and doctrine. The doctrine remains primary, and the homeland is secondary, and from it disavowal and for him disavowal and annihilation, and to Erdogan praise and loyalty.
According to the Gulanis’ statistics, Sunnis constitute at least 88% of the Syrians, while the remaining infidels and apostates constitute only 12%. These very precise calculations were the result of learning mathematics, i.e. addition and subtraction, in the memorization schools founded by Kaftaro andAl-Qubaisiyat, and others.
Loyalty and disavowal is a binding doctrine for disavowal of infidels and apostates, whoever and whoever they are, and loyalty to the Sunnis, whoever and whoever they are. It is not only disavowal, but also the application of the punishment of apostasy to apostates such as the Alawites, Druze, Kurds and others, and the imposition of the tribute and the provisions of the Covenant of Umar on the polytheists, as al-Julani stated in an interview on Al Jazeera. We consider all of that to be a moral distortion that has deprived the homeland of its significance and importance, and has turned it into a commodity for trading in the shop of religion. The concept, whatever its interpretations and practices, distorts human morals. He fought for his conscience and for the concept of participation in the homeland and citizenship. Loyalty and disavowal turned a section of Syrians into those who claim Syrian citizenship, into cheats, liars and practitioners of hypocrisy. They have not yet realized that the homeland is a political system that has no religion. There is no state in religion and no religion in the state!!!!