Posted by Abu Iyaad
Translated
May 2002
Filed under Miscellaneous
AMONG THE SCHOLARS are those who consider instituting secular laws (legislating), or replacing parts of the Sharīʿah with secular laws (istbdāl), or referring judgement to the secular laws (taḥkīm, taḥākum) to come under the tafṣīl that if he does so believing those laws to be equal or better than the Sharīʿah, or permissible to judge to them, or that the Sharīʿah laws are not applicable to these times and the likes, then that is major kufr, and if not, then it is the kufr that does not expel from the fold of Islām.
From the scholars who have clear statements in this respect are Shaykh al-Albānī, Shaykh Ibn Bāz, Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn and Shaykh ʿAbd al-Muḥsin al-ʿAbbād. The Takfīrī Khārijites consider all of these scholars to be upon Irjāʾ despite the fact that these scholars hold that action are from īmān, that īmān increases and decrease and that kufr occurs through belief, speech and action, and that from the action are those by a person leaves Islām, without required istiḥlāl, juḥūd, takdhīb and the likes, such as kicking the Qurʾān, or prostrating to an idol and so on. However, on this issue of ruling by other than what Allāh revealed, they have a particular view regarding some of its forms. See: On Ruling by Secular Laws, Altering the Religion and Those Who Accuse Shaykh Al-Albānī, Shaykh Ibn Bāz and Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn of Irjāʾ.
This accusation was first levelled against Shaykh al-Albānī, and then extended and expanded to all the other major Salafī scholars of the era in whose speech can be found such tafṣīl not to the liking of the Takfīrī Khārijites who call to blanket takfīr and speak with the individual obligation (farḍ ʿayn) of revolting against governments and rulers, and presenting this as the binding methodology of reform for the ummah in this time.
Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Rājiḥī was asked:
This person asks about the Sharīʿah ruling concerning the ruler who rules by the French secular laws alongside the knowledge that he claims Islām, prays, fasts and makes hajj. So what is to be said about him?
The Answer:
When he believes in [their] permissiblity, when he believes that judgement by the French [secular] laws is permissible, then he is a kāfir. When he believes that it is permissible for him [to do that].
As for when he does not believe this, or he has a doubt (shubhah), then it is necessary for the proof to be established against him.
And some of the people of knowledge have held that when he alters the religion (ghayyara al-dīn) in all of the affairs of the state, then he is a kāfir, because he has changed (baddala) the religion, and al-Ḥāfiḍh Ibn Kathīr (رحمه الله) has gone to this [view] in his tafsīr, and also Shaykh Muḥammad bin Ibrāhīm (رحمه الله) in his treatise “Taḥkīm ul-Qawānīn”. So when he changes the religion, the whole of it, from head to heel (i.e. top to bottom), in all of the affairs of the state, in everything—not in part of it—then he is a kāfir, because he has altered the religion.
And then some others have said that it is necessary for the proof to be established against him, for he could be ignorant, or have some doubt (shubhah). Our respected Shaykh, ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz bin Bāz (may Allāh's mercy upon him), chose this view.
Audio recording:
[audio]lilhek[/audio]
And the Shaykh was also asked:
What is the saying of the respected Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz bin Bāz (رحمه الله) concerning takfir on account of abandonment of judging by what Allāh has revealed, and is his saying, and the saying of al-Albāni, and Muḥammad Ibn ʿUthaymeen (رحمهم الله) the saying of “the Murjiʾah of the Era”?
So the Shaykh replied:
No. It is not the saying of “the Murjiʾah of the Era”. Ruling by other than what Allāh has revealed has tafṣīl (detail) to it.
[The first situation], if he rules by other than what Allāh has revealed, believing that it [what Allāh revealed] does not suit the times then this is the greatest of people in disbelief. This is great disbelief, when he judges by other than what Allāh revealed, believing that judging by the Sharīʿah does not suit the times, and that judging by the secular laws is suited to these times. So this is disbelief without doubt.
The second situation is that he rules by other than what Allāh has revealed, believing that he has a choice between judging by the secular laws and judging by what Allāh has revealed, and that they are both the same. This is disbelief by agreement.
The third situation is that he rules by other than what Allāh has revealed and he believes that ruling by what Allāh has revealed is better than ruling by the secular laws, but that it is permissible to rule by the secular laws. This is disbelief by agreement also, since he declared ruling by other than what Allāh revealed to be permissible, and ruling by other than what Allāh revealed is harām (unlawful), which is known in the religion by necessity, such as the one who declared fornication (zinā) to be permissible, and said “I am not committing zinā” or the one who declared usury (ribā) to be permissible, and said “I am not consuming interest”. Then likewise, the one who declared ruling by the secular laws to be permissible and then said “ruling by the Sharīʿah is superior”, then he disbelieves by agreement.
So these are three manifestations. Three situations.
The fourth situation is that he rules by the customs, habits, such as the bedouin, who judges by the (ancestral) customs, habits. This is major disbelief.
The fifth situation is that he changes the Sharīʿah, in that he judges, from head to heel, in that he changes the whole of the Sharīʿah, in all of the affairs of the state, all of them, from their first to the last of them, from head to heel. So some of the scholars have tended to this (view), in that he disbelieves because he changed the (whole) dīn, and al-Hāfiḍh Ibn Kathīr (رحمه الله) has tended to this, this is what has been said, (i.e. about Ibn Katheer). And this was also chosen by Shaykh Muḥammad Ibn Ibrāhīm (رحمه الله) in his risālah “Taḥkīm al-Qawānīn”.
However, others have said, that it is necessary for it to be explained to the ruler, because he could be ignorant, and could have some doubt (shubhah) with him, and this has been chosen by the respected Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Ibn Bāz (رحمه الله) and likewise, Shaykh Muḥammad bin ʿUthaymīn chose this also.
And this is in relation to the fifth situation, meaning, the one who said that he disbelieves because he changed the whole dīn, from head to heel. This is when it is in all of the affairs of the state, and as for when it is partial, and in partial matters, then no. And then amongst them (who hold takfir of the one who changed all of the dīn), are those who say that it is necessary for the proof to be established upon him.
Then the Shaykh was asked:
May Allāh be benevolent to you, what is the advice to those foolish ones and those groups of pretenders (to knowledge) who accuse those scholars of being Murjiʿah?
The Shaykh replied:
The advice to them is that they repent to Allāh the Mighty and Majestic, and that they learn knowledge before they speak, and that upon them is to learn knowledge before they speak.
And upon them is to repent to Allāh, the Mighty and Majestic for that in which they have been neglectful in their words, and that they hold back their tongues from speaking without knowledge, and speaking about Allāh without knowledge is from the greatest of major sins, and Allāh put it above shirk with Allāh. “Say: '(But) the things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are shameful deeds whether committed openly or secretly, sins (of all kinds), unrighteous oppression, joining partners (in worship) with Allâh for which He has given no authority, and saying things about Allâh of which you have no knowledge.'” (7:33-)
Meaning, that it includes shirk and also other than shirk, he also made it to be from the desire of Shaytān (i.e. to make them speak without knowledge) in His saying: “O mankind! Eat of that which is lawful and good on the earth, and follow not the footsteps of Satan. Verily, he is to you an open enemy, he commands you only what is evil and shameless, and that you should say against Allâh what you know not.” (2:168-169).
Audio recording:
[audio]dunzfe[/audio]
