al-Muzanī, while al-Muzanī followed the model of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan’s abridgment, even if only in some aspects of its chapter divisions and arrangement.

Those who write on legal rulings discuss fighting rebels and Kharijites together. Yet there is no hadith from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, concerning “fighting rebels” except the report transmitted by Kawthar ibn Hakīm from Nāfi‘, which is fabricated.

As for hadith collections such as Sahīh al-Bukhārī and the Sunan collections, they discuss only fighting apostates and the Kharijites, who are adherents of deviant doctrines. The same applies to books on the Sunnah transmitting the statements of Imam Ahmad and others like him. Likewise—as far as I believe—the books of Mālik and his companions contain no chapter on fighting rebels; they mention only apostates and adherents of deviant doctrines.

This is the principle established by the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger: the distinction between fighting those who depart from the revealed law and the Sunnah—which is what the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, commanded—and fighting those whose only departure is from obedience to a particular ruler. The scriptural texts contain no command to engage in the latter. Thus, the jurists mentioned earlier fell into three objectionable errors:

The first: fighting someone who withdraws from obedience to a particular king, even if he is close to that king and comparable to him—with regard to the Sunnah and the revealed law—because division has occurred. Yet division itself is civil strife.