Al-‘Udhr bil-Jahl in Asl ad-Deen !?!

For Educational purpose only and to raise Intellectual and Political awareness! 

[By ash-Shaykh al-‘Allamah ‘Abdul-‘Aziz at-Tuwayli’i (rahimahUllah)]

All praise belongs to Allah, and Salaah and Salaam be upon the Messenger of Allah, to proceed:

Indeed, from the matters where differences and mistakes have increased is the issue of “al-‘udhr bil-jahl” (i.e. excuse of ignorance) in Asl ad-Deen (the foundation of the Deen), and many of those who view that the jahil who commits major shirk is excused, make the basis and reason for that his affiliation to Islam and his claim that he’s from the Muslimeen. So if he worshiped other than Allah, and made du’a to it and sacrificed to it, and was raised upon that since his birth till his death, and he would profess with his tongue “I am a Muslim”, he would consider him from the Muslimeen, and if he worshiped other than Allah, and made du’a to it, and sacrificed to it, and would profess with his tongue, “I’m upon the way that Allah has commanded me to be upon”, he would not excuse him, and this is from the contradictions, without a doubt. And if he is cited with the comparison between the grave-worshipers and the idol worshipers, and not excusing either one of them with ignorance, he made the affiliation to Islam the difference (between the two), and due to this affiliation (to Islam), he rules upon the idol worshiper with Kuffr, and rules upon the grave worshiper with Islam.

And affiliation to Islam, if it meant solely ascribing to Islam without the rest of the obligations (like Salaah etc…), then it is a ruling without any proof for it, and if it means ascribing to the Deen of Allah, the Exalted and Majestic, whether that affiliation was to the Islam which Muhammad (saws) was sent with, or too judaism or christianity or other laws which the Messengers were sent with, The one who says this statement must rule the ignorant ones among the jews and christians and other than them with Islam, because they attribute themselves to the Deen of Allah which He ordered them to follow, and they fell into nullifiers due to ignorance, and whoever excuse those has disbelieved and left fold of Islam, and denied the authentic and explicit (texts) from the evidences.

In fact, he must rule upon the Mushrikeen of Quraysh with Islam before the advent of the Messenger of Allah (saws), because they say they are upon the Millah of Ibrahim (as) according to what they claim and assume, and they had some obliations taken from him, and Ahkam (i.e. rulings) such as Hajj, circumcision, exalting the rites, and they acknowledge that Allah is the Lord with no partners with Him in creating, sustenance, bringing to life, causing to die, however they commit shirk with others besides Allah, so it can bring them closer to Allah, believing that Allah has permitted him to be a mandate on His behalf, and an intermediary between Him and His creation, Allah is Exalted from what they claim. And the grave worshipers are exactly like them in all of this, except that the grave worshipers attribute themselves to the seal of the Prophets instead of the jahiliyyeen who attribute themselves to Ibrahim (as). Moreover, they and them are the same in everything and the grave worshipers will have no benefit in following the Prophet (saws) or adhering to some of his obligations in the Deen, just like the Kuffaar of Quraysh had no benefit in following Ibrahim (as) or adhering to some of his obligations in the Deen.

So affiliation to Islam is in contrast with affiliation to the way of Ibrahim, and some of the obligations which they abide by in worship is in contrast with those (the Mushrikeen perform), and the more, or less, (one performs of these) doesn’t make a difference in affirming Imaan and Kuffr, and acknowledging the Rububiyyah of Allah is in contrast with those (Mushrikeen) who affirm the Rububiyyah, and both parties are disbelievers in Allah, outside the fold of Islam, emitted from the Deen. And if he was affiliated to the correct Deen (i.e. upon pure Tawheed) and committed apostasy when he first grew up, as is the case with many of the quburiyyah and amongst the jahiliyyeen. And after that has surpassed of being upon the fitrah of Islam (they became apostates afterwards) as is the case with some of the quburiyyeen and the early ones who fell into apostasy from the jahiliyyeen.

In fact, the grave-worshipers even claim that what they are doing is what Allah and His Messenger has ordered, in contrast with the statement of the Mushrikeen in jahiliyyah, as Allah spoke about them, “And when they commit an immorality, they say, “We found our fathers doing it, and Allah has ordered us to do it.” [7:28]

And this is the proof of the over-whelming majority of the Mushrikeen amongst the grave worshipers today, rather I met with one of the major leaders from the people of shirk performing ‘Umrah, and he uses the same proof of the first Kuffaar, and he said, “It’s not allowed for you to rebuke what the people (i.e. grave worshippers) are practicing, because they took it from their fathers, and there’s no doubt that they (also) took it from their fathers, and the khalaf took it from the Salaf, so then it (is taken) from the Messenger of Allah (saws)!”

This is exactly what is mentioned in the Āyah from the ‘proofs’ of the Mushrikeen in two things: That they found their fore-fathers practicing it, and that Allah has ordered them to do it. Al-Hafidh Ibn Kathir said, “And they believe that the practice of their fore-fathers is traced back to a command from Allah and the Shari’ah.” And even though this is in the context of “al-Fahisha”, which was interpreted as being their tawaf around the Ka’bah naked, except that it’s indicative to the practice of their fore-fathers as an evidence (for them), and it’s their assumption that the practice of their fore-fathers is stemmed back to a Legislation from Allah. And this wrong mistake, just as it occurs with some of the opponents in the issue of “excuse of ignorance” from the students of knowledge, for verily it occurs amongst the laymen alot in excusing the stubborn person (who refuses to accept the Hujjah) that ascribes himself to Islam, so they don’t make Takfeer upon the one who ascribes himself to Islam at all, rather I heard from some of those who were called “Du’at as-Sahwa” (i.e. revivalist preachers), who flipped and turned so much say, “I do not make Takfeer upon whoever says I’m Muslim,” when he was asked about the likes of Hafidh al-Assad (i.e. Bashar’s father, may Allah curse his soul) and the Arab Tawagheet amongst the apostate rulers. And this is the exact blind misconception, and only if I knew, if this was the path of guidance and truth, then why did as-Siddiq (i.e. Abu Bakr) bother with fighting Musaylamah (the liar) and those with him, to the extent that the best Sahabah went out and died, and killings intensified among the Reciters, Scholars and people of the Qur’an?! And the majority of those who the Scholars have ruled upon with Kuffr were among the murtadeen, even though the over-whelming majority of them attributed themselves to Islam, and refused to be labelled with other than that.

Rather (to the extent that) this statement has ousted: That the one who says “I’m upon the religion of Musa” doesn’t disbelieve, or “I’m upon the religion of ‘Isa” among the jews and christians, and this statement is extravagantly pored in the furthest of misguidance from the Deen of Allah, and the Book of Allah, and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saws). And if it is said, “This is not acceptable, for they disbelieved after the advent of Muhammad (saws) and the abrogation of their ways,” so this necessitates that if they attributed themselves to Islam after the advent of Muhammad (saws) and remained upon what they are upon, their ignorant ones would be excused and be a Muslim, and it also necessitates that their ignorant ones were all Muslim believers during the advent of the Prophet (saws), and they only disbelieved due to his advent, and this is obviously invalid and false.

What we just mentioned doesn’t mean that we say there’s no difference at all between the one who ascribes himself to Islam and the one who doesn’t ascribe to it among the Mushrikeen. Rather, the affiliation of a person to Islam after he has disbelieved has Islam affirmed upon him in what is the “Dhahir” (i.e. what’s apparent), so if he didn’t adhere to its rulings, or he committed acts of Kuffr that nullify the Asl (i.e. Foundation) of Tawheed, then he is judged with apostasy. But as for the disbelieving groups that are raised upon this view (of shirk), then affirming Islam for them due to their affiliation to Islam has two statements among the Scholars. Some of them view that Islam is affirmed for them due to the affiliation, and apostasy is affirmed (right after) from what they commit from the acts of Kuffr, and others view that they are originally disbelievers (i.e. Kuffaar asliyyeen), and that their affiliation to Islam is just like the affiliation of the Mushrikeen of Quraysh to the Millah of Ibrahim, and this is what’s correct for what has surpassed of not differentiating between both affiliations, and Allah knows best. (see note)

This, and peace and blessings be upon His slave and Messenger Muhammad, and upon all of his household and companions.

NOTE:

It is only relatively recently that the Scholars have formed two opinions with regards to those who ascribe to Islam and have shirk with them. An ijma’ was stated by ash-Shaykh ‘Abdul-Latif from the ‘Ulama of the Da’wah Najdiyyah Salafiyyah Jihadiyyah that they are ruled upon with riddah. But, that does not suggest that they were ever Muslim for a day, as it is based on the principle that whoever says the Shahadah enters into Islam and whoever commits shirk leaves it. Allah knows best.