Is the Tāghūt excused by Jahl?

Allah says,

“And wherever you differ, the verdict is with Allah. “Such is Allah, my Lord: in Him have I placed my trust, and unto Him do I always turn!” [42:10]

“Have you seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taghout (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray.” [4:60]

So the Ayah is clear and is understood from the Ayah that we cannot associate with Allah in His Hukm anybody. Allah says,

“He does not associate with his Hukm anybody." [18:26]

"Do not eat from anything that Allah’s name was not mentioned, that is sin, but the Shayateen whisper to his awliyaa to debate it with you, if you obey them you are Mushrikeen.” [6:121]

This is shirk in obedience to the legislation that Allah never legislated is what is called "worshipping Shaytaan", Allah says,

"Didn't I ask you O children of Adam, not to worship Shaytaan? He is your clear enemy." [36:60]

And this is what Ibraheem (as) said,

"O my father, do not worship the Shaytaan, verily the Shaytaan was disobedient to Allah." [19:44]

Those who worship the Shaytaan are those who accept the legislation of anybody who had no right to legislate, Allah says,

“And so to many of the Mushrikeen their "partners" have made fair-seeming the killing of their children, in order to lead them to their own destruction and cause confusion in their religion. And if Allah had willed they would not have done so. So leave them alone with their fabrications.” [6:137]

So even if he did not accept it, he is Kaafir because he sought that arbitration or legislation from them instead of Allah. However some people still try to justify the existing rulers saying that those who arbitrate to the Taghout are not Kaafir.

All of their argument is only that they are seeking some benefit and some rights (Huquq), but we know that the power of ruling is for none but Allah.

The legislators are different divisions or types:

(i) there is the legislator that judges by whatever Allah revealed and does not go out of it and that is the one that we refer to.

(ii) And then there is the one who rules by the Shari’ah of Allah but he does not rule by what Allah revealed in some matters of Ijtihaad by mistake.

(iii) And then there is the one who rules by Shari'ah but he does not rule by Islam in some matters out of Hawaa (rational desires).

(iv) and then there is the one who rules by different than the Shari’ah of Islam and that is one of two,

(a) either he is a ruler that he claims that wrong Shari'ah is the Shari’ah of Allah

(b) or the other that admits that he is the one who made his own system differing with the Shari'ah.

We find that the ruler who rules by other than the Shari’ah of Allah i.e. a different Shari’ah, we must explain it to him but the reason why we must call him Kaafir for that is because of the Ayah, "Whoever rules by other than what Allah revealed, he is Kafir." Allah says,

Verily, We did send down the Taurât (Torah) [to Musa (Moses)]; therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah’s Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the Taurât (Torah) after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun.” [5:44]

The other ruler is the one who says, he rules by what he believes is the best and while that was not the Shari'ah of Allah, and this is the reality of most of the rulers today, Allah ordered us to reject these people, to believe they are Kaafir and to have baraa'ah from them.

But what about those people who judge by other than what Allah revealed but they still pray and fast and do the good deeds and say the kalimah? Can we say that they are not Muslim?

The answer to that is that we know how the one who is ignorant about Laa ilaha illallah, cannot be excused when he committed an act of Shirk Akbar by his ignorance. Similarly ruling by other than what Allah revealed is known by necessity that it is Kuffr Akbar that will take you out of the fold of Islam.

The excuse of ignorance cannot be given in matters that are known by necessity, matters that people cannot be called a Muslim without believing in it. Otherwise, nobody will be called Kaafir from the Jews and Christians because they are ignorant!

We know that there was a group of Jews and Christians who confessed that Muhammad (saws) was the messenger and that he came with Wahi but they said that he was only sent to the Arabs, these people will still be Kaafir despite their ignorance. Just like if a Jew or Christian said, "I am a Muslim" or says "I believe in Islam" you cannot call him Muslim just because of his claim, the Muslim is the one who believes in Islam and he fulfills it, The rulers do believe in Islam but they are still Kaafir.

Now some people will rise and speak about those people who will commit Kuffr and they are Jahil.

We know that by the excuse of ignorance they mean, because of the ignorance of a person, although he did an act of Kuffr he will not be Kaafir, because he did not know that what he did was Kuffr.

Indeed the Ulemaa when they spoke about it they spoke about it from different angles. Firstly, what is ignorance?

There is ignorance on Usul ul-Deen and that ignorance is no excuse for these matters, the matters of Al-Masaa'il Al-Jaliyyah.

The Jahil must be one of two types for the excuse to be granted to him,

- Either he is a new Muslim, such that he was living with the non-Muslims and he embraced Islam.

In contrast, the one who was dhimmi living between the Muslims and he embraced Islam, he will not be given an excuse of ignorance in matters known by necessity.

- Or the one who the knowledge never reached him because he was living far away from anybody and so there was an obstacle between him and the knowledge reaching him.

The circumstances of the ignorance also has certain doubts or conjecture, from the angle of “if it is a matter of Duniya” or from the angle of “what is the ruling?” etc.

E.g. the circumstances of ignorance, we will look to the Duniya matters, we know that in the Duniya the child will be attributed to the parents, accordingly he will be attributed to the Kuffar if his parents were Kuffar. If he was from a Muslim family, we call him Muslim until proven otherwise.

In relation to the Akhirah, what is the ruling of the child of the Kaafir in the Akhirah?

The child in the hereafter will be from Ahl Al-Jannah even though in the Duniya, he is attributed to be from the people of the Kuffar.

So the Ahkaam of the child in the Duniya is different to the Ahkaam of the child in the Akhirah, similarly the same is true for the Mushrik who was ignorant in the Duniya, we will look to his ignorance, if he was ignorant about Asl Al-Deen he is still Kaafir, but if it was a matter not clear cut (e.g. to believe in the angels and in Mika'eel) we will look to the excuse of ignorance for him because he is Mushrik Jahil and embraced Islam and was still a new Muslim. However in the Akhirah, if he died in that situation, he will be tested by Allah.

So the topic is related to the ignorance and the topic of Islam in relation to him e.g. the child of the Mushrikeen, in the war, we cannot kill him and we do not kill Kuffar that the Da'wah never reached them and we cannot punish the Apostate until we gave him the offer to repent, we give him a period to return from his Apostasy. That is not because his ignorance is an excuse but in order to remove the ignorance.

So the ignorance can only be an excuse in matters that are not known from the Deen by necessity unless someone was a new Muslim living far away from the Muslims or there was an obstacle between him and knowledge. But even for the new Muslim or the one living in the jungle, ignorance will never be an excuse in matters of Usul ul-Deen i.e. those matters that explicit and clear like denying that Muhammad (saws) is the Messenger, or ruling or arbitrating to a Shari’ah other than that of Allah, or worshipping Shaytaan by obeying a legislation other than Allah’s.

By our honored Ustadh Abu Waleed (hafidhUllah)