And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers.
But nowadays there are many people who say that the Kufr mentioned in this ayah is not the Kufr that takes you out of religion. They say it is "kufr duna kufr". Plus they attribute this saying to ibn abas (r.). Is there any refutation? Evidences from the Salaf us Salih that whoever does not judge by what He sent down is a kafir. It does not have to be only this verse. But it can be also tafsir to a verses too, that say, when a "muslim" put the Sharia aside, he is kafir and so on.
Re: And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - need Help!
Even if it means that one is literally a disbeliever it would refer to those that abandon Islamic law not those who rule afterwords.
Also if one assumes that means the literal meaning then he who leaves salat is also a kaafir and he who does not love for his brother what he loves for his self is also a kaafir. (which was never a majority opinion)
O my Lord,
if I worship you
from fear of hell, burn me in hell.
If I worship you
from hope of Paradise, bar me from its gates.
But if I worship you
for yourself alone, grant me then the beauty of your Face.
Re: And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - need Help!
Akh Muhammad, I mean, if a muslim becomes a ruler, so according to Quran and sunnah it is an obligation on him to implement the Sharia, huh? If not, then he becomes a kafir murtad for puting the sharia aside and implement man made laws. Correct me if I am wrong. Is there any treatise that deals with this topic?
Re: And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - need Help!
Abdul Rahman ibn Salih Mahmoud has a book on it entitled, "al Hukm bi Ghayri ma Anzal'Allah"
This issue has a lot of debate because it has so many different types and as ibn al Qayyim stated, it depends on the situation of the ruler. I won't get into the specifics because like the other threads, it causes mass confusion and just arguing.
As for the ayat in Surah Ma'idah ayat 44, "whoever does not rule by other than Allah's law", then the athar of Abdullah ibn Abbas is saheeh and ibn Kathir mentions it in his tafseer
Imam Ahmad recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, "Allah sent down the Ayat,
(And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers,)
[فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الظَّـلِمُونَ]
(Such are the unjust,) and,
[فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْفَـسِقُونَ]
(Such are the rebellious.) about two groups among the Jews. During the time of Jahiliyyah, one of them had defeated the other. As a result, they made a treaty that they would pay blood money totaling fifty Wasaq [of gold] (each Wasaq approx. 3 kg) for every dead person from the defeated group killed by the victors, and a hundred Wasaq for every dead person the defeated group killed from the victors. This treaty remained in effect until the Prophet came to Al-Madinah and both of these groups became subservient under the Prophet . Yet, when the mighty group once suffered a casualty at the hands of the weaker group, the mighty group sent a delegation demanding the hundred Wasaq. The weaker group said, `How can two groups who have the same religion, one ancestral lineage and a common land, have a Diyah that for some of them is half of that of the others We only agreed to this because you oppressed us and because we feared you. Now that Muhammad has come, we will not give you what you asked.' So war was almost rekindled between them, but they agreed to seek Muhammad's judgement in their dispute. The mighty group among them said [among themselves], `By Allah! Muhammad will never give you double the Diyah that you pay to them compared to what they pay to you. They have said the truth anyway, for they only gave us this amount because we oppressed and overpowered them. Therefore, send someone to Muhammad who will sense what his judgement will be. If he agrees to give you what you demand, accept his judgment, and if he does not give you what you seek, do not refer to him for judgement.' So they sent some hypocrites to the Messenger of Allah to try and find out the Messenger's judgement. When they came to the Messenger , Allah informed him of their matter and of their plot. Allah sent down,
(O Messenger! Let not those who hurry to fall into disbelief grieve you,) until,
[الْفَـسِقُونَ]
(Such are the rebellious.) By Allah! It is because of their problem that Allah sent down these verses and it is they whom Allah meant.'' Abu Dawud collected a similar narration for this Hadith. Abu Ja`far Ibn Jarir recorded that Ibn `Abbas said that the Ayah in Surat Al-Ma'idah,
[فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ أَوْ أَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ]
(either judge between them, or turn away from them...) until,
[الْمُقْسِطِينَ]
(Those who act justly.) was revealed concerning the problem of blood money between Bani An-Nadir and Bani Qurayzah. The dead of Bani An-Nadir were being honored more and they received the full amount of Diyah, while Qurayzah received half the Diyah for their dead. So they referred to the Messenger of Allah for judgement and Allah sent down these verses about them. The Messenger of Allah compelled them to adhere to the true judgement in this matter and made the Diyah the same for both groups and Allah knows best about that matter.'' Ahmad, Abu Dawud and An-Nasa'i also recorded this Hadith from Abu Ishaq. Al-`Awfi and `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas said that these Ayat were revealed about the two Jews who committed adultery, and we mentioned the Hadiths about this story before. It appears that both of these were the reasons behind revealing these Ayat, and Allah knows best. This is why Allah said afterwards,
(And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye) until the end of the Ayah, which strengthens the opinion that the story of the Diyah was behind revealing the Ayat as we explained above. Allah knows best. Allah said,
(And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers.) Al-Bara' bin `Azib, Hudhayfah bin Al-Yaman, Ibn `Abbas, Abu Mijlaz, Abu Raja' Al-`Utaridi, `Ikrimah, `Ubaydullah bin `Abdullah, Al-Hasan Al-Basri and others said that this Ayah was revealed about the People of the Book. Al-Hasan Al-Basri added that this Ayah also applies to us. `Abdur-Razzaq said that Ath-Thawri said that Mansur said that Ibrahim said that these Ayat, "Were revealed about the Children of Israel, and Allah accepted them for this Ummah.'' Ibn Jarir recorded this statement. `Ali bin Abi Talhah also stated that Ibn `Abbas commented on Allah's statement,
(And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers,) "Whoever rejects what Allah has revealed, will have committed Kufr, and whoever accepts what Allah has revealed, but did not rule by it, is a Zalim (unjust) and a Fasiq (rebellious) and a sinner.'' Ibn Jarir recorded this statement. `Abdur-Razzaq said, "Ma`mar narrated to us that Tawus said that Ibn `Abbas was asked about Allah's statement,
[وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم]
(And whosoever does not judge...) He said, `It is an act of Kufr.' Ibn Tawus added, `It is not like those who disbelieve in Allah, His angels, His Books and His Messengers.' Ath-Thawri narrated that Ibn Jurayj said that `Ata' said, `There is Kufr and Kufr less than Kufr, Zulm and Zulm less than Zulm, Fisq and Fisq less than Fisq.''' Waki` said that Sa`id Al-Makki said that Tawus said that,
Re: And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - need Help!
According to my understanding, when reading your statements mentioned above, it is Kufr duna Kufr when the foundation is the Sharia. For example, let's assume at the time of ibn abas (r.) and let's live there for some minutes: A muslim judge judges on a matter according to his desires - so this would be kufr duna kufr and that is what ibn abas (r.) says. and note at the time of ibn abas (r.) the law was sharaia. But how can one be a muslim if he puts His laws aside and says man-made laws are better :S He is not a muslim, even if he prays, fasts and so on!! I really do not understand. and if ibn abas (r) lived during our time, would he consider the ones who do this as muslims? I do not think so!! but I need scholarly evidences
Re: And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - need Help!
format_quote Originally Posted by Brasco
According to my understanding, when reading your statements mentioned above, it is Kufr duna Kufr when the foundation is the Sharia. For example, let's assume at the time of ibn abas (r.) and let's live there for some minutes: A muslim judge judges on a matter according to his desires - so this would be kufr duna kufr and that is what ibn abas (r.) says. and note at the time of ibn abas (r.) the law was sharaia. But how can one be a muslim if he puts His laws aside and says man-made laws are better :S He is not a muslim, even if he prays, fasts and so on!! I really do not understand. and if ibn abas (r) lived during our time, would he consider the ones who do this as muslims? I do not think so!! but I need scholarly evidences
You've brought up a good point and this is where the differing occurs in our time. Its an issue of fiqh ul waqi (contemporary issues). Muhammad ibn Ibraheem ali Shaykh has a book on the matter entitled "Tahkeem al Qawaneen" where he speaks about kufr law. Many refer to the issue that Shaykh al Islaam ibn Taymiyyah had with the Tartar gov't but its important to mention that Shaykh al Islaam considered the Tartars to have BELIEVED in the kufr law.
These questions are deep into emaan and kufr and to be honest, it takes years to study them. I definitely recommend to continuously study the matter because it does help with your own understanding of Tawheed in relation to Ruboobeeyah and Hakimiyyah.
Here is a brief discussion that Yassir Qadhi had on the issue where he compares the position of Shaykh al Islaam, ibn Kathir, Muhammad ibn Ibraheem, Sh. Albanee, ibn Uthaymeen and ibn Baz; he also mentions some statements of Ahmad Shakir. Definitely worth a listen.
You should also get the book that I mentioned before by Abdul Rahman ibn Saalih Mahmoud.
While studying this issue, its important to NOT fall into the fitnah of takfeer, remember the 'asl that a general takfeer does not necessitate a specific takfeer so because we may read this or that we shouldn't fall into what many of the youth have fallen into today and state that this ruler is kafir or that ruler is kafir. We must first understand the issue and the situation before falling into that.
I'll try to find a copy of ibn Ibraheem's al Qawaneen inshaAllah. Hope this helps
Is there any refutation? Evidences from the Salaf us Salih that whoever does not judge by what He sent down is a kafir. It does not have to be only this verse. But it can be also tafsir to a verses too, that say, when a "muslim" put the Sharia aside, he is kafir and so on.
You seem to have decided before-hand that the answer to the question is that it is Kufr-Akbar. It is better not to bias our understanding of the Quran and Sunnah this way, and better to objectively look at what scholars have said about the issue. This would prevent our own desires from affecting our understanding of Deen.
Re: And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - need Help!
My noble Brother.
I did not decide this according to my understanding or desires. I really read through this topic and nearly all the great scholars had the opinion that whoever puts the Sharia aside is a Kafir (kufr akbar) but when quoting to people these honorable scholars, they just do not accept and reject these opinions, due to it is not a saying of the righteous predecessors. Therefore I was saying, that I needed a refutation. Allahu Musta'an! Just to note, I really do not want to make Takfir, and say "such and such is a kafir!" The world is full of Kufar, and we do not need more. It was just for the sake of the right understanding (of consequences of putting the Sharia aside). May Allah (t) reward you with the Best! (Amin)
Re: And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - need Help!
asalmau wa alaykum
ruling by other then what Allah has reveled is
1 thinking that the man made law is better this is kufr
2 thinking that it is equal this is kufr
3 thinking that it is not better but permissable this is kufr
4 knowing it is non of the above but do it of desire this is kufr dun kufr
Ruling by Other than the Law of Allaah
by Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-Uthaymeen
Taken from ‘al-Qawl al-Mufeed `alaa
Kitaab at-Tawheed’ [2/263-269]
Translation by Abu Rumaysah [Triod Publications]
The following is taken from the Shaykh’s concluding remarks to the hadeeth of `Adee bin Haatim that he heard the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) reciting the verse,
"They (the Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and monks to be their lords besides Allaah."
[at-Tawbah (9): 31]
Upon which I said, "indeed we did not worship them." [The Prophet (SAW)] said, "did they not make unlawful that which Allaah made lawful and so you too did the same? [Did they not] make lawful what Allaah made unlawful and so you too did the same?" I replied, "verily." He said, "this then was the worship of them." Reported by Ahmad and at-Tirmidhee who declared it hasan.
[The following points] are derived from the hadeeth:
That obedience with the meaning of worship is a specific type of uboodiyyah.
Obedience in that which contradicts the Law of Allaah constitutes worship of the one obeyed. As for [obedience] in the worship of Allaah then this is [truly] worship of Allaah.
That following the scholars and servants in that which contradicts the Law of Allaah constitutes taking them as lords [besides Allaah].
Know that following the scholars or leaders in their making lawful what Allaah has made unlawful or the opposite [causes that person] to fall into one of three categories:
That he follows them while being pleased with their opinion and giving it precedence and being displeased with the ruling of Allaah - such a person is a kaafir because he has disliked what Allaah has revealed and as a result Allaah made his actions to be of no avail. No one but a kaafir has his actions rendered futile.
That he follows them while being pleased with the ruling of Allaah, knowing that it is the most ideal and best suited for the servants and the lands. However due to his following his desires he chooses this [other ruling] for example due to his [being offered] a position of responsibility. Such a person is not declared to be a kaafir, rather he is a faasiq.
That he does not know and neither is it possible for him to learn, so he blindly follows them thinking [that what he follows] is the truth. Such a person incurs no blame for he merely follows what he has been commanded and he is excused for this. This is why there occurs from the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) that he said, "indeed whosoever is given a verdict not based upon knowledge then his sin is upon the one who gave him the verdict." If we were to say that this person is sinful due to the error of someone else then this necessarily leads to oppression and difficulty, and no person would trust any other due to the possibility of bearing responsibility for that persons error.
{The hadeeth is reported by Ahmad (2/321, 365), Abu Daawood (4/66), ibn Maajah (1/20), ad-Daarimee (1/53) and al-Haakim (1/126) who said, "saheeh, meeting the conditions of the Two Shaykhs, I know of no defect [in it]." Adh-Dhahabee agreed.}
If it is asked: why are not the second category [of people] declared to be kaafir? I would reply: if we were to say that they are kaafir then this would necessitate the disbelief of every person who commits a sin while knowing that he has disobeyed Allaah and knows that [what he has contradicted] is the ruling of Allaah.
A Benefit:
Allaah has described those who do not rule by what Allaah has revealed with three descriptions:
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the disbelievers [kaafiroon]."
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the oppressors [dhaalimoon]"
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the sinners [faasiqoon]."
The People of Knowledge have differed concerning this. So it is opined that these descriptions in fact describe one and the same thing because the kaafir is a dhaalim due to the saying of Allaah,
"And the disbelievers are the oppressors." [al-Baqarah (2): 254]
[Similarly the kaafir] is a faasiq due to the saying of Allaah,
"As for the sinners then their abode will be the Fire…" [as-Sajdah (32): 20]
It is also opined that these are distinct descriptions and that they are [applied] in accordance to the situation:
So [one] becomes a kaafir in three circumstances
When he believes that it is permissible to rule by other than what Allaah has revealed. The evidence for this lies in the saying of Allaah,
"So is it the rule of Jaahiliyyah (ignorance) that they seek?" [al-Maa`idah 5: 50]
Everything that opposes the rule of Allaah constitutes the rule of Jaahiliyyah. [Also the evidence for this] is the definitive consensus that it is not allowed to rule by other then what Allaah has revealed. Therefore the one who considers it lawful and permissible to rule by other then what Allaah has revealed has contradicted this definitive consensus and such a person is a kaafir and an apostate. This [is similar to the case of one] who considers fornication or alcohol to be permissible or considers bread or milk to be unlawful.
When he believes that ruling by other then what Allaah revealed is equivalent to ruling by the rule of Allaah.
When he believes that ruling by other then what Allaah revealed is better than ruling by what Allaah has revealed. The evidence for this lies in the saying of Allaah,
"And who is better than Allaah in judgement for a people who have certainty?" [al-Maa`idah 5: 50]
So this verse states that the ruling of Allaah is the best of rulings as is further proven by the saying of Allaah, endorsing this,
"Is Allaah not the best of judges?" [at-Teen 95: 8]
So when Allaah is the best of the judges in ruling and He is the most just of the rulers then whosoever claims that the rule of other than Allaah is equivalent or better than the rule of Allaah is a kaafir because he has denied the Qur`aan.
[One] becomes a dhaalim
When he believes that ruling by what Allaah has revealed is the best of judgements and the most beneficial for the servants and the lands and that it is obligatory to apply it. However hatred and jealousy lead him to rule by other than what Allaah revealed over his subjects - such a person is a dhaalim.
[One] becomes a faasiq
When he follows his own desires. For example he rules in favour of a person due to being bribed by him, or due to his being a close relative or friend, or [because the ruler] seeks the fulfillment of a need from his comrades or the likes. This along with the belief that the rule of Allaah is the ideal and it is obligatory to follow it - such a person is a faasiq. Even though he is also a dhaalim, describing him as a faasiq is more befitting.
The strongest opinion is the second that these descriptions are distinct and that they are [applied] in accordance to the situation.
As regards the one who lays down legislative laws, despite his knowing the judgement of Allaah and that these laws are contrary to Allaah’s judgement - then this person has substituted these laws in place of the Sharee`ah. Therefore he is a kaafir - this because he does not choose these laws and turn away from Allaah’s Sharee`ah except due to his belief that they are better for the people and the land than the law of Allaah. But when we say that he is a kaafir, then the meaning of this is that this action leads to disbelief.
However the one who [legislates these rules] may have an excuse - for example he may be one who has been deluded: such that it has been said to him that this does not conflict with Islaam, or that it is something allowable as a case of benefiting the people (masaalih al-mursala), or that it is something that Islaam has left up to the [custom of] the people.
So there are some scholars - even though they are in error - who say that social transaction (mu`aamalaat) is something not dealt with by Islaam, and that rather it is referred to whatever is found to benefit the economy in each particular time. So if the situation requires us to establish usury banks or to tax the people then there is no problem with this.
There is no doubt concerning the error of [such a claim]. So if these people performed ijtihaad then may Allaah forgive them. Otherwise they are in a situation of very great danger and it is befitting that they are entitled ‘scholars of the state’ and not ‘scholars of the Religion.’…
"The Human being is an enemy to what he is ignorant of"
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks