Answered by al-‘Allamah Hamud ibn ‘Uqla ash-Shu’aybi (rahimahUllah)
Question: As-salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu, as to what follows…
In this era it has spread that rulers in the Islamic world, Arabic world and others rely on ruling with man-made law instead of ruling with the Shari’ah of Allah, so what is the hukm on these rulers? We hope to see the answer being supported by Shari’ah evidences from the Kitab, Sunnah, and the statements of the ‘ulama.
Answer: All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the ‘Alameen, and may the Salaah and Salaam be upon the most noble of Prophets and Messengers, our Prophet Muhammad, his family and his companions. As to what follows:
When Allah sent His Messenger Muhammad (saws) with this honorable Deen, which led people from darkness to light, where people at that time were swinging in the darkness of ignorance and misguidance, sinking in the sea of myths and obsolete traditions which they inherited from their fathers and ancestors in every aspect of their lives, beliefs, worships, legal proceedings and judgments. Their beliefs and worships were based on shirk with Allah, as they associated partners and equals from trees, stones, angels, Shayateen, humans and others, approaching them with various types of approaches which are prohibited to be given to other than Allah; such as slaughtering, swearing oaths, and other than them.
As for legal proceedings and judgements, they are no less misguidance and corruption in comparison with their way in worship as they used to constitute Tawagheet, soothsayers and fortune-tellers who handle these proceedings between people in every dispute they have in aspects of wealth, blood, honor and other than that. They would establish one of these (Tawagheet) in every district, and if the sentencing is issued then it was applied with no objection or review in spite of it being oppressing. When Allah sent Muhammad (saws) with this pure Shari’ah he abolished these traditions and eradicated them and confined the worship to be to Allah and confined legal proceedings and seeking judgment to the Shari’ah of Allah. He said: “The hukm (ruling/judgment/legislation) is for none except Allah. He has commanded that you worship none except Him…al-Ayah”, and when He said: “The hukm (ruling/judgment/legislation) is for none except Allah”, (this) confines the hukm to the Shari’ah of Allah, and: “He has commanded that you worship none except Him”, means to confine worship to Allah with a way of confining the worship of Him in the most meaningful and stressed way, which is negation and exception.
Thus the one who reads the Book of Allah would find many Ayaat that shows the obligation of seeking judgement from what Allah has sent down of the pure Shari’ah to His Messenger (saws).
a. He said: “And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the disbelievers”, and this honorable Ayah is evidence regards to the Kuffr of the one who turns away from the hukm of Allah and His Messenger to another hukm. The ignorant Murjiah today have tried to divert the meaning of this Ayah regarding the Kuffr of the ruler who rules with other than what Allah has revealed and said: “This Ayah was sent down upon the Jews, so its judgment does not include us.” This highlights the extent of their ignorance on the fundamental principles that were established by the scholars of Tafsir, Hadith and Usul al-Fiqh, which is that the ruling is taken from the general expression (in the text) and not from the specific occasion of revelation (of that Ayah). Thus, if a ruling is sent down based on a specific reason, it is not applicable only on that reason of revelation, but it goes beyond it and includes every matter that falls under that general expression. And – whoever (man) – in the Ayah is a wording of generalization, and therefore the ruling is not confined to its reason (of revelation) unless there is a text from the Legislator that confines the ruling to its reason of revelation only, as the Hadith of the (saws) when he was asked by one of his companions: “Oh Messenger of Allah! I had a young she-goat that is beloved to me more than a sheep and I sacrificed it, is it sufficient for me?” He then said: “It is sufficient for you and none after you.”
And they, the Murjiah, said that it was narrated from ibn ‘Abbas that he was asked about the tafsir of the Ayah: “And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the disbelievers”, that ibn ‘Abbas said: “Kuffr less than Kuffr”, and in another narration: “It is not the Kuffr they (the Khawarij) go for.” The reply to that is to say Hisham ibn Hujayr, the narrator of this narration from Tawus from ibn ‘Abbas has been spoken about by the aimmah of Hadith such as Imaam Ahmad, Yahya ibn Ma’in and others, and we have a different narration from Tawus from a man who is more trustworthy than him (Hisham ibn Hujayr) who is ‘Abdullah ibn Tawus who narrated from his father that when ibn ‘Abbas was asked about the tafsir of this Ayah he said: “It is Kuffr in him (the ruler).”
b. He said: “But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, (O Muhammad), judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in full submission.”
This Ayah is evidence of negating the Imaan from whoever does not rule by the Shari’ah of Allah because Allah swears in it on negating the Imaan from the person until they have three matters:
1. To seek judgment from the Shari’ah of Allah.
2. Find within themselves no discomfort, rather they are pleased with it.
3. Submit to the hukm of Allah and are pleased with it.
And as the Murjiah have tried to divert the meaning of the previous Ayah on the Kuffr of the ruler who rules with other than what Allah has revealed, they have tried as well to divert the meaning of this Ayah from negating the reality of Imaan. They said: “This negation negates the completeness of Imaan, and it is not negating its reality.” These ignorant people do not know that the foundation in the authentic Arabic language is that we do not go for the majazaz (metaphor) regarding the meaning unless we have a presumption that obligates diverting the expression from the stronger possibility to the weaker possibility. Therefore which evidence and presumption is there to divert this Ayah from negating the reality of Imaan to negating the completeness of Imaan?
c. He said: “Have you not seen those who claim to have believed in what was revealed to you, (O Muhammad), and what was revealed before you? They wish to seek judgment from the Taghout, while they were commanded to disbelieve in it; and Shaytaan wishes to lead them far astray. And when it is said to them, “Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger,” you see the Munafiqeen turning away from you in aversion.” This noble Ayah is evidence that whoever seeks judgment from the Taghout or considers it as a source of legislation then their Imaan has been nullified as evidenced by His saying: “those who claim to have believed,” as if they were believers in truth then it would not have said that they claim to have believed, and when He said that they claim to have believed it indicates the absence of the reality of Imaan in Allah, and in His saying: “while they were commanded to disbelieve it, and Shaytaan wishes to lead them far astray,” is another proof on the absence of the reality of Imaan from them. It becomes clear regarding the Kuffr of whoever seeks judgment from the Taghout rules by it knowing the reason this Ayah was revealed.
The scholars of Tafsir have mentioned the reason behind revealing this Ayah was because there was a dispute between a man from the Jews and a man from other than the Jews. The Jew said: “Let us take our case to the Messenger of Allah.” The other man said: “No, let us take our case to Ka’b ibnul-Ashraf al-Yahudi.” Then this Ayah was revealed.
Ash-Sha’bi said: “There was a dispute between a man from the Munafiqeen and a man from the Jews, and the Jew said: ‘Let us take our case to Muhammad,’ as he knew that he (saws) does not accept bribes, and the Munafiq said: ‘Let us seek judgment from the Jews,’ since he knew that they take bribes. So they agreed to refer to a fortuneteller in Juhaynah and to seek judgment from him. Then the Ayah ‘Have you not seen those who claim…al-Ayah’ was revealed.” And despite that this narration from ash-Sha’bi has some weakness, there are plenty of related narrations that strengthen it.
And the supporting witness regarding the Kuffr and apostasy of those mentioned in the Ayah is that ‘Umar ibnul-Khattab killed the one who refused to prefer the ruling of the (saws), and if he was not an apostate, ‘Umar would not have killed him.
Also, it was narrated from ‘Urwah ibnuz-Zubayr that he said: “Two men disputed and referred to the Messenger of Allah (saws) and he judged for one of them, and the one who was judged against said, ‘Refer us to Umar,’ so the (saws) said, ‘Ok, refer to ‘Umar,’ and they went to him. When they met him, the one whom the (saws) judged for said, ‘Oh ibnul-Khattab! The Messenger of Allah (saws) judged for me, and this man said refer us to ‘Umar and the (saws) referred us to you,’ so ‘Umar said, ‘Is it like that?’ – to the one who was judged against – and he said, ‘Yes.’ So ‘Umar said, ‘Stay where you are until I come out and judge between you.’ Then, he came out with his sword and hit the one who said ‘refer us to ‘Umar’ and killed him.
This difference in the ways of the context does not invalidate its existence because of the possibility of having many incidents, as in His saying: “And when it is said to them, ‘Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger,’ you see the Munafiqeen turning away from you in aversion,” indicates that whoever shuns the hukm of Allah and His Messenger and turns away from it – that he is a Munafiq, and the Munafiq is a Kaafir.
The one who judges by man-made laws is Kaafir as established earlier, and the one who legislates man-made laws is a Kaafir as well, because by his legislating these laws he (claims to) become a partner with Allah in legislation. He said: “Or have they other deities who have legislated for them a way to which Allah has not given permission? But if not for the decisive word, it would have been concluded between them. And indeed, the wrongdoers will have a painful punishment,” and He said: “And He shares not His ruling with anyone,” and He said: “They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah.”
That is why when ‘Adi ibn Hatim heard this Ayah he said: “Oh Messenger of Allah, we did not worship them,” and the (saws) said: “Don’t they prohibit what Allah has permitted and you prohibit it, and they permit what Allah has prohibited and you permit it?” He said: “Yes.” He (saws) said: “That is you worshipping them.”
The noble Ayah, based on the Hadith of ‘Adi ibn Hatim, makes it clear that permitting, prohibiting and legislation is from the characteristics specific of Him and whoever prohibits, permits, legislates whatever contradicts the Shari’ah of Allah, then he claims to be a partner of Allah in His special qualities.
And based on the previous noble Ayaat and our comments on them it is clear that whoever rules by other than what Allah has revealed and turns away from the Shari’ah of Allah and His hukm – that he is a Kaafir in Allah al-‘Adhim, outside the fold of Islam, and like him is the one who sets man-made laws for people, because if he was not pleased with them, he would not have ruled by them, as reality shows his untruthfulness. Many of these rulers have the authority to postpone these laws, change the constitution, remove them, and other than that.
If we say, for example, that these rulers have not set these laws and legislated them for their people, then who made it obligatory upon the people to refer to these laws and punish whoever rejects them?
And their reality and situation is not far from the situation and reality of the Tatar that ibn Taymiyyah and ibn Kathir narrated the ijma’ on their Kuffr, as the Tatar did not set and legislate the Yasiq (their constitution), but the one who legislated it was one of their first rulers, Ghenghis Khan, and the status of these is like the status of that.
Therefore, it is clear that the ruler who rules by other than what Allah has revealed falls in Kuffr from one or two aspects:
First: From the aspect of legislation if he legislates.
Second: From the aspect of ruling if he rules.
And since I have finished mentioning the evidences on the Kuffr of the one who judges by man-made laws from the Texts (Qur’an and Sunnah), I will mention the statements of ‘ulama and aimmah on the issue of the Kuffr of those who rule by man-made laws:
First: Shaykhul-Islam TaqiyyaDeen ibn Taymiyyah said in al-Fatawa (3/267): “And whenever a person permits what is prohibited by ijma’, or prohibits what is permitted by ijma’, or changes the legislation that is agreed upon by ijma’, then he is a Kaafir by the agreement of the fuqaha.”
And he said in al-Fatawa (35/372): “And whenever the scholar leaves what he knows from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and follows the hukm of the ruler who contradicts the hukm of Allah and His Messenger, then he is an apostate Kaafir and deserves punishment in this life and the Hereafter.”
Second: ibn Kathir said in al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah (13/119): “Whoever leaves the legislation that was sent down to Muhammad, the seal of the Prophets , and seeks judgment to other abrogated laws (of other Messengers) then he has committed Kuffr, then what about the one who seeks judgment from the Yasiq and gives it priority? Whoever does that has committed Kuffr by the ijma’ of the Muslimeen.”
Third: Our Shaykh, Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin ash-Shanqiti after he mentioned the texts that showed the Kuffr of those who rule by man-made laws, said: “And with these Heavenly texts that we have mentioned, it becomes apparent that the ones who follow the man-made laws, which the Shaytaan has legislated upon the tongues of his allies and which oppose that which Allah has legislated upon the tongue of His Messenger (saws) that no one doubts their Kuffr and their shirk except him who Allah has removed his sight and has blinded them to the light of the revelation just like them.”
Fourth: Our Shaykh, Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al ash-Shaykh in his comment on the Ayah: “But no, by your Lord, they will not believe…al-Ayah,” he said: “Verily, Allah negated the Imaan of those who do not refer to the judgments of the (saws) in their disputes between them, an assured negation that is repeated by utilizing the linguistic tool of negation coupled with an oath.” That is what he has said commenting on this Ayah.
And since I have attended his circles for many years I have heard him more than once emphasizing this issue and stating the Kuffr of those who rule by other than the legislation of Allah, as he explained in his treatise “Ruling by man-made laws.”
Fifth: Our Shaykh, Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Aziz ibn Baaz in his treatise “Refuting Arab Nationalism” on page 39 he said on those who set laws that contradicts the Qur’an: “And that is great corruption, clear Kuffr, and the clear apostasy, as He said: ‘But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, (O Muhammad), judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in (full willing) submission,’ And He said: ‘Then is it the judgement of ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain…'” Until the Shaykh said: “…And every state that does not rule by the Shari’ah of Allah and does not submit to the ruling of Allah, then it is a jahiliyyah Kaafirah dhalimah fasiqah state based on the evidences in these clear Ayaat. It is obligatory on the people of Islam to hate it and show enmity towards it, and it is prohibited for them to love and ally with them until they believe in Allah alone and rule by his Shari’ah.”
And what I have mentioned of texts and statements of scholars is enough to show that ruling with man-made laws is Kuffr, and the one who rules by it is Kaafir in Allah al-‘Adhim, and if I was to mention all what the scholars have said in this issue, the speech would be long, and what I have mentioned is sufficient to answer the one who asked the question.
And may the Salaah and Salaam be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and his companions.
[10/2/1422 Hijr]
No comments:
Post a Comment