Ruler who rules by other than Law of Allah...

Question: From the well-known types of ruling by other than what Allah has revealed is the ruler who adhers to the Judgement of Allah outwardly and inwardly, however he makes a judgement based upon a whim and desire in a specific matter, once or twice, and as is well-known he doesn’t disbelieve, according to the Madhab of the Salaf, so is this correct? And what is the ruling on whomever applied Takfeer upon him in a few matters (of ruling by other than the Law of Allah)?

Answer: This matter became obscure to many brothers, that even the murjiah overcame them, and from that is the debate in the recording between (…) and another person who views the kuffr of the ruler that rules by other than the law of Allah, so (…) asked him, what if he ruled in one matter? So he replied: “He doesn’t disbelieve,” he asked in two matters? He replied: “He doesn’t disbelieve,” and (the murji) would keep increasing it bit by bit until he cornered him, and he said to him: “Give me the number which would make him reach kuffr.” So he (the brother) wasn’t able to respond, and the murjiah considered these words as a final decisive blow! Whereas it’s falsely corrupt. 

And to sum it up, the ruler in the likes of this situation is of two types:

١. Whoever’s authoritative source was the Shari’ah in all of his affairs, however he ruled upon some of the issues by his whims, and not by the Shari’ah, meaning that he questioned the integrity/justness of the witnesses for instance, while they are just, or he put doubts in a condition which is present, or he mentioned an impediment which doesn’t exist, and similar to that, so his main-grounds for judgement is all outwardly from the Shari’ah, and inwardly his desires. So this person is a sinner committing a major sin, and his sin increases depending on the issue that he ruled by, no matter how few or many, but he doesn’t disbelieve as long as he’s ruling by the Shari’ah, even if he was an oppressor. If he also leaves off a ruling in some affairs, such as leaving off the ruling upon one of his relatives, and upon one who bribes him with money, and similar to that, then he is an oppressor who is committing a major sin. However, he doesn’t disbelieve because his actions is a sin (leaving off a specific ruling), not judging by the rulings of the taghout from other laws. So there’s a difference between someone leaving off ruling by what Allah has revealed in (specific) matters, and whoever rules by other than what Allah revealed in (specific) matters.

٢. Whoever’s authoritative source was the Shari’ah in all his affairs, however in one issue, he went to the taghout for judgement, such as ruling upon a thief for instance by the French law, and zina with another law, and similar to that, so this person becomes a kaafir, even if he only ruled in one matter, because he ruled by the taghout. 

So if you know the difference between the two matters, the answer to the misconception of the murijah would be clear to you, and Allah knows best.

 [Fatawaa Hariyyah - By Ash-Shaykh Al-‘Allamah Nasir Ibnu Hamad Al-Fahd (fakk Allahu asrah)]