Comments by "Matt Smith" (@chrisconnor7934) on "Saudi Crown Prince leads washing ceremony of Holy Kaaba in Mecca." video.
-
12
-
7
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
@Gyrogen7 They never ruled with Shari'ah. And to backbite the open Fasiq or disbelievers is allowed.
Imam Hasan Al-Basri (rahimahullah) said:
"There is no [not considered] backbiting in the case of a person of Bid'ah [innovation] or a person who sins openly."
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Usool I'tiqaad Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah" (Vol. 1, pag. 140)] [Imam Al-Laalikaa'i]
LET ALONE IF SUCH PERSON IS A TAGHUT.
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"The one who judge without referring to the Qur'an is a Taghut".
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 201)]
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
36. And We certainly sent into every nation a messenger, [saying], "Worship Allah and avoid TAGHUT (...)". [Qur'an, 16:36]
Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman (rahimahullah) said:
"What it is meant by distancing from the Taghut is:
to hate him, to hate him in one's heart, to INSULT HIM, to expose his defects and weakness through the tongue, to remove him with the hand [action] when he has the capacity and to separate from him.
So whoever claims that he has avoided the Taghut even without having done all this, he's not truthful."
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah fi Al-Ajwibatil-Najdiyyah" (Vol. 10, pag. 502-503)]
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Gyrogen7 Exactly. 'Ali (radiAllahu anhu) was right while Mu'awiyah (radiAllahu anhu) was wrong.
It is not allowed to assume leadership in the way which Mu'awiyah (radiAllahu anhu) did.
(...) Sa'eed said: "I said to him: 'Banu Umaiyyah claim that the Khilafah is among them.'
He said: 'Banu Az-Zarqa' lie, rather they are a monarchy, AMONG THE WORST OF MONARCHIES."'
[REFERENCE: Jami' At-Tirmidhi, Vol. 4, Book 7, Hadith 2226]
No. Du'a for a person does not entail praiseworthiness for every single action which such person might commit.
Anyway, forget about the past. Those were honorable Sahaba who ruled with the Book of Allah.
Their reality is not even slightly comparable with the current situation today in Arabia and elsewhere.
MBS inherent kingship from his father.
'Umar ibn Al-Khattab (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"Whoever appoints a man solely due to friendship or kinship, he has betrayed Allah and His Messenger (ﷺ)."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Idarah Al-'Askariyah fi Ad-Dawla Al-Islamiyyah" (Vol. 1, pag. 66)]
He is NOT from Quraish.
Ibn 'Umar (radiAllahu anhu):
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"This matter (Caliphate) will remain with the Quraish even if only two of them were still existing."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari,Vol. 9, Book 89, # 254]
He doesn't rule with Shari'ah.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
44. (...) And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers. [Qur'an, 5:44]
He allies with the disbelievers [China/Israelis/US,..] against Muslims.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
51. O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. [Qur'an, 5:51]
Such betrayal wasn't present among the Ummayyads nor Abbasids.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Gyrogen7 THE OBLIGATION OF APPOINTING A KHALIFAH
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَٓئِكَةِ إِنِّى جَاعِلٌۭ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةًۭ ۖ
30. And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Verily, I am going to place a Khalifah on earth." (...). [Qur'an, 2:30]
____________________
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Al-Qurtubi, as well as other scholars, said that this Ayah proves the obligation of appointing a Khalifah to pass judgments on matters of dispute between people, to aid the oppressed against the oppressor, to implement the Islamic penal code and to forbid evil.
There are many other tasks that can be only fulfilled by appointing the Imam, and what is necessary in performing an obligation, is an obligation itself.
We should state here that Imamah occurs by either naming a successor, as a group among Ahl us-Sunnah scholars said occurred - by the Prophet (ﷺ) - in the case of Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu), or hinting to a successor.
Or, the current Khalifah names a certain person as Khalifah after him, as Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) did with 'Umar (radiAllahu anhu).
Or, the Khalifah might leave the matter in the hands of the Muslim consultative council (Shura), or a group of righteous men, just as 'Umar (radiAllahu anhu) did.
Or, the people of authority could gather around a certain person to whom they give the pledge of allegiance (Bay'ah), or they could select one among them to choose the candidate, according to the majority of the scholars.
The Khalifah must be a responsible adult Muslim male, able to perform Ijtihad (independent legal judgments), bodily able, righteous, with knowledge of warfare, politics.
He also must be from the tribe of Quraish, according to the correct view, but it is not necessary that he be from the tribe of Bani Hashim, or that he be immune from error, as the Rafidah (Shiites) falsely claim.
When the Khalifah becomes an immoral person (Fasiq), should he be impeached?
There is disagreement over this matter, but the correct view is that he is not to be removed, because the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"(...) Unless you witness a clear Kufr regarding which you have clear proof from Allah."
[Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 88, # 178]
Does the Khalifah have the right to resign from his post?
There is a difference on this issue. It is a fact that Al-Hasan ibn 'Ali removed himself from the position of Khalifah and surrendered it to Mu'awiyah.
However, this occurred because of a necessity, and Al-Hasan was praised for this action.
It is not permissible to appoint two Imams (Khulafah) for the world or more at the same time.
This is not allowed because the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"Whoever came to you while you are united and tried to divide you, then execute him, no matter who he is."
[Sahih Muslim, Book 20, # 4565]
This is the view of the majority of scholars."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 1, pag. 185-186)]
2
-
@Gyrogen7 The Caliphate was not even established when the Prophet (ﷺ) was living among the Sahaha.
The Hadith spreaks about the establishment of the Caliphate starting from Medina [which was its center] while Syria had kingship under the Byzantines before it was conquered and absorbed into the Caliphate of 'Umar ibn Al-Khattab (radiAllahu anhu).
Their kingdom had nothing to do with Muslims.
While the du'a and praise was for the Sahaba because they were among the best generation, and we overlook their mistakes.
Furthermore, to stretch out the importance of the Caliphate the scholars have concluded that it is SIN upon the whole community to be without a Khalifah and Khilafah for more than 3 days.
The Sahaba appointed a Caliph even before the burial of the Prophet (ﷺ).
"When the Companions knew for certain that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had indeed died, the Ansar gathered in the courtyard of Banu Saa'idah on the very same day, which was Monday, the 12th of Rabi' ul-Awwal, the year 11 Hijri.
The purpose of their meeting was to choose someone among them to be the first Caliph of the Muslim nation."
[REFERENCE: "At-Tareekh Al-Islami" (Vol. 9, pag. 21)]
This alone shows you how important the matter of the Khilafah is.
And the Caliph MUST be from Quraish.
Mu'awiyah (radiAllahu anhu) reported:
(....) I've heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) saying:
"This matter (of the Caliphate) will remain with the Quraish, and none will rebel against them, but Allah will throw him down on his face as long as they stick to the rules and regulations of the religion (Islam).'"
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 89, # 253]
2
-
@Gyrogen7 You cannot use Najashi as evidence because he was a Christian king BEFORE Islam even reached him.
He was not appointed as king on the basis of Islam and the Shari'ah of Muhammad (ﷺ).
Islam doesn't allow kingship in the absence of Khilafah. That's a lie.
The Ahadith quoted above speaking about kingship are just a description of a prophecy which has already took place, it is not an approval of kingship.
There is a huge difference between kingship and Khilafah.
Right now we are living in this stage:
(...) And then there will be a coercive rule (mulkan jabriyyatan) and it will continue as long as Allah Wills it to continue and then He Will remove it when He intends to remove it.
Then there will be the KHILAFAH upon the way of the Prophethood and [the Prophet (ﷺ)] kept silent (sakata)."
[REFERENCE: "Musnad Ahmad" (Vol. 4, pag. 273) # 18596]
Coercive rule (mulkan jabriyyatan) is obviously not a good thing. But the Khilafah will replace it.
Imam Ibn Al-Jawzi (rahimahullah) said:
"As for leadership, Allah Has given it to people whom He disliked. He gave a lot of bounties to people whom He is not fond of.
Some of them used their powers to harm righteous people as Allah said:
178. (...) We only extend it for them so that they may increase in sin (...) [Qur'an, 3:178]
This may apply to them".
[REFERENCE: "Talbis Iblis" (pag. 226)]
The description of the decline in the Ummah in terms of kingship and unjust leadership is similar to the description found in the following Hadith.
Abu Malik Al-Ash'ari (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"I've heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying:
"From among my followers there will be some people who will consider illegal sexual intercourse, the wearing of silk, the drinking of alcoholic drinks and the use of musical instruments, as lawful. (...)."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 69, # 494]
The fact that such people will exist is not an approval of their stance, rather it is merely a description of events which will take place.
Kingship is also inherited within the family alone, that itself is a strong evidence of being unislamic.
'Umar ibn Al-Khattab (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"Whoever appoints a man solely due to friendship or kinship, he has betrayed Allah and His Messenger (ﷺ)."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Idarah Al-'Askariyah fi Ad-Dawla Al-Islamiyyah" (Vol. 1, pag. 66)]
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Gyrogen7 Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَٓئِكَةِ إِنِّى جَاعِلٌۭ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةًۭ ۖ
30. And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Verily, I am going to place a Khalifah on earth." (...). [Qur'an, 2:30]
____________________
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Al-Qurtubi, as well as other scholars, said that this Ayah proves THE OBLIGATION TO APPOINTING A KHALIFAH to pass judgments on matters of dispute between people, to aid the oppressed against the oppressor, to implement the Islamic penal code and to forbid evil."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 1, pag. 185)]
Yes. There is, if you purposefully choose to reject him and not recognize him is up to you.
No kingship is not permitted.
We don't want to die a death of Jahiliyyah.
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"One who withdraws his band from obedience [to the Amir] will find no argument [in his defence] when he stands before Allah on the Day of Judgment,
and one who dies without having bound himself by an oath of allegiance [Bay'ah] [to an Amir] will die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahillyya [pre-Islamic ignorance]."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Muslim, Book 20, Hadith 4562]
The Ummah is not excuse to be without Khalifah for more than 3 days.
According to the Bay'ah which was giving to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (radiAllahu anhu), WITHIN 3 DAYS, even before the burial of the Prophet (ﷺ).
"When the Sahaba (radiAllahu anhum) knew for certain that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had indeed died, one of the MAIN DUTIES THAT RESTED ON THEIR SHOULDERS WAS CHOOSING A KHALIFAH - a leader who would guide the Muslim nation based on the teaching of Qur'an and Sunnah.
As such, the Ansar gathered in the courtyard of Banu Saa'idah on the very same day on which the Prophet (ﷺ) died, which was Monday, 12 Rabi'ul-Awwal, the year 11 A.H.
The purpose of their meeting was to choose someone among them to be the first Caliph of the Muslim nation."
[REFERENCE: "At-Tareekh Al-Islamee" (Vol. 9, pag. 21)]
Dr. 'Ali Muhammad Muhammad As-Sallabi said:
"Whenever a Khalifah died, IT WAS NECESSARY TO APPOINT HIS REPLACEMENT WITHOUT ANY DELAY.
A delay would have left the Muslim Nation temporarily without a leader - which is akin to temporary leaving a fast-moving bus without a driver."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Farooq, 'Umar Ibn Al-Khattab: His Life and Times" (pag. 255)]
NOTE: No king rules with Shari'ah today. So even from that perspective it cannot be an option to pick and choose.
So in such case is even better to have no ruler at all, than a Taghut.
Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman (rahimahullah) said:
"When you have realized that Tahakum (seeking judgment) from the Taghut is Kμfr - then you should also know that Allah Has mentioned in His Book that Kμfr is worse than bloodshed.
As He (ta'ala) said:
"And Fitnah is more severe (Ashadd) than killing" [Qur'an, 2:191]
And again:
"And Fitnah is greater (Akbar) than killing" [Qur'an, 2:217]
And Fitnah is none other than Kμfr (disbelief).
Thus, if the village and the city were to wage war against each other, 'till the point they all die - this would be undoubtedly be better than setting up a Taghut upon earth, governing in contradiction to the Shari'ah of Islam, the legislation with which Allah sent His Messenger (ﷺ)."
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah" (Vol. 10, pag. 509-511)]
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Ibn Ikbal, a young poet and collector of poetry OPEN TAFSIR IBN KATHIR.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
أَفَحُكْمَ ٱلْجَهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ ۚ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ ٱللَّهِ حُكْمًۭا لِّقَوْمٍۢ يُوقِنُونَ
50. Then is it the judgement of [the time of] ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain [in faith]. [Qur'an, 5:50]
_____
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Allah criticizes those who ignore the Commandments of Allah, which include every type of righteous good thing and prohibit every type of evil, but they refer instead to opinions, desires and customs that people themselves invented, all of which have no basis in the religion of Allah.
During the time of Jahiliyyah, the people used to abide by the misguidance and ignorance that they invented by sheer opinions and lusts.
The Tatar [Mongols] abided by the law that they inherited from their king Ghengis Khan who wrote Al-Yasiq, for them.
This book contains rulings that were derived from various religions, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Many of these rulings were derived from his own opinion and desires.
Later on, these rulings became the followed law among his children, preferring them to the Law of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (ﷺ).
Therefore, whoever does this, he is a disbeliever who deserves to be fought against, until he reverts to Allah's and His Messenger's decisions, so that no law, minor or major, is referred to except by His Law."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 3, pag. 202)]
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thaqalayni [Qur'an, 4:164] speaks about the Prophets and Messengers which were SENT before Muhammad (ﷺ).
Not a single Prophet nor Messenger has been sent after him.
The verse from then Qur'an is clear and sufficient.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
40. Muḥammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and SEAL [i.e., LAST] OF THE PROPHETS. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing. [Qur'an, 33:40]
The Shahada itself also testifies to that.
But the Sunnah put more light on the issue in details.
Abu Huraira (radiAllahu anhu) has reported:
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"My similitude in comparison with the other prophets before me, is that of a man who has built a house nicely and beautifully, except for a place of one brick in a corner.
The people go about it and wonder at its beauty, but say: 'Would that this brick be put in its place!'
So I am that brick, and I AM THE LAST OF THE PROPHETS."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 56, Hadith 735]
Every Messenger is also a Prophet but not every Prophet is also a Messenger.
Therefore someone cannot be a Messenger [arriving with new written laws and Revelation] without also being a Prophet.
This alone refutes all your arguments.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@syed126 Yes. To follow another system other than the Shari'ah of Allah is SHIRK.
Allah described His Hukm [legislation] as a form of Ibadah [worship] in the following verse.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
40. (...) LEGISLATION IS NOT BUT FOR ALLAH. He has commanded that you worship not except Him. That is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know. [Qur'an, 12:40]
Shaykh Al-Shinqiti (rahimahullah) said:
"To commit Shirk with Allah in judging is of the same meaning as to commit Shirk in His worship, there is no difference between the two in any manner.
There is no difference in any sense between he who follows a system (nizam) other than Allah's system or law other than Allah's law (Shari'ah) and he who worships an idol or prostrates to a false god.
They are the same and both are polytheists [associating others] with Allah."
[REFERENCE: "Adwa' Al-Bayan" (Vol. 7, pag. 162)]
To trade with enemies, under certain conditions, is different from:
Organizing music concerts in the land of the Prophet (ﷺ) and the Sahaba, let the crusaders to have a permanent military base in the land of the Prophet (ﷺ) and the Sahaba, imprisoning Islamic scholars who speak the truth, inviting the worse enemies of Islam like Mμshrik China telling them that they are doing a great job with the Uyghur Muslims, ruling with his own laws against Allah's Right of Legislation, normalizing ties with Israelis, bombing Muslims in Yemen, allowing banks of Riba', allowing gambling,...
1
-
@syed126 To have many governors and rulers under the Khalifah is allowed.
Dr. 'Ali Muhammad Muhammad As-Sallabi said:
"Rare, in fact, is the Hadith compilation that contains no mention of a narration that refers to Quraish's right to the Caliphate.
The wording of such narrations might differ, but they all convey the same clear and emphatic message:
In any given era, the Khalifah of the Muslim nation should be a man from the Quraish.
This ruling applies to the Caliphate only, and not to other lesser positions of leadership - positions that may be held by any qualified candidate."
[REFERENCE: "The Biography of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq" (pag. 218-219)]
What is not allowed is to have many different kings ruling their own portion of land divided from the others.
The Khalifah had different wilayat [providences] in which he appointed different governors, but they were all united and working under his leadership.
PS: The Hadith which you have posted only applies to Muslim rulers under a Khalifah, not Taghut rulers which follow a system other than Islam.
If that's the case they wouldn't even be Muslims to begin with.
Imam An-Nawawi (rahimahullah) said:
"The scholars have unanimously agreed that a K4fir (disbeliever) should not be assigned as a ruler, and if the governor becomes a K4fir, he must be deposed (replaced)".
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Muslim" (Vol. 12, pag. 229)]
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@syed126 The Fatwa of Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) which I have shared does apply to the current rulers.
The Shari'ah in Arabia has been dismatle on a large extent throughout the years, under many different aspects.
These are just some:
In an Arabic book titled “The Constitutional Laws of the Arab Countries” under the subtitle “The Constitution of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” the author states, “The words ‘law (qanoon)’ and ‘Legislation (Tashree’)’ are only used in Saudi to refer to the rules taken from the Islamic Shari‘ah...
As for the man-made such as systems (Anthimah)’ or ‘ instructions (Ta’leemaat)’ or ‘ edict (Awamir)’......”
In an Arabic book titled Al-Wajeez fi Tareekh Al-Qawneen (The Compact in the History of Cannons) by Dr. Mahmood Al-Maghribi, p443, after mentioning that legislation in the past was Islamic and simple, he complements Saudi by saying, “this situation has changed after the rise of the Saudi State and the natural resources.
This new situation required reforms and changes ... Due to these changes, there was a need for new laws.
As a result, laws were formulated in the following areas; Laws in the basis of court systems, trade, penal code, labour, Taxation, among others ..”
Regarding Trade laws, he stated:
“The trade laws, land and sea, which are known as ‘The Trade System’ are considered one of the most important Saudi trade laws. This law was issued in 1931
and is similar to the modern trade laws, be they Arab or European.”
With regard to the Islamic
penal code, he said they are implemented (of course), “with some alterations required by the public interest.” He also added, “ Public interest also required making taxation revenue laws or the state...”
The author is actually telling us that Saudi has been implementing man-made laws in trade, “similar to the modern trade laws.”
He also tells us that Al-Saud have altered the Deen of Allah (Subhana wa ta’ala) by changing some of its laws due to “public interest”.
In actuality, there are many man-made laws which the author did not mention such as:
* The system of observing banks issued by the king’s edict #M/5 in 1386 AH.
*The system of the Saudi Arab citizenship decided by the ministers Council resolution #4 on 25th January 1974 and approved by the king in his speech in High Council #8/5/8604 on 22nd February 1974 to put it in effect.
*The system of printed material and publication issued by the king’s edict #M/17 in 13/4/1402 AH.
•The law of reviving the dead land used to be according to Islam, where if a person works a piece of land that becomes his. This was the case until an edict was issued declaring the nullification of this Islamic law starting from 1987 onwards, ECT...
1
-
@syed126 Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) infact spoke about those who mixed Shari'ah rulings with man-made rulings.
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"So whoever leaves the clear Shari'ah, which was revealed to Muhammad ibn Abdullah (ﷺ), the Seal of the Prophets, and takes the Hukm (legislation) to other than it from the laws of Kμfr (disbelief) which are abrogated, he has disbelieved.
So what about the one who takes the Hukm (legislation) to the "Yasiq" (the law of the Tatars which mixed Shari'ah rulings with invented rulings) and puts it before it?!
Whoever does that, he has disbelieved by the 'Ijma (consensus) of the Muslims."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah" (Vol. 13, pag. 119)]
What you don't understand is that places like music concerts, cinemas, gambling,ect... They need to be approved [they need to be made Halal] by the State and signed on a document for the law to pass.
SUCH SIGNATURE IS RIDDAH [APOSTASY].
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"Whenever a person makes Halal (permissible) what is Haram (forbidden) by consensus or makes Haram what is Halal by consensus or replaces the Shari'ah that is agreed upon by consensus, then he is a K4fir (disbeliever) by the agreement of the scholars of Fiqh".
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 3, pag. 267)]
Shari'ah is broad and covers all aspects of life...not just Hadd punishments.
If any of those Divine Laws are replaced with another law [which human legislated from themselves] then such rulings apply on those rulers.
1
-
@syed126 It seems that you haven't understood the matter in details.
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) explained beautifully in the Tafsir of Sura Al-Maidah verse 50.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
أَفَحُكْمَ ٱلْجَهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ ۚ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ ٱللَّهِ حُكْمًۭا لِّقَوْمٍۢ يُوقِنُونَ
50. Then is it the judgement of [the time of] ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain [in faith]. [Qur'an, 5:50]
_____
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Allah criticizes those who ignore the Commandments of Allah, which include every type of righteous good thing and prohibit every type of evil, but they refer instead to opinions, desires and customs that people themselves invented, all of which have no basis in the religion of Allah.
During the time of Jahiliyyah, the people used to abide by the misguidance and ignorance that they invented by sheer opinions and lusts.
The Tatar [Mongols] abided by the law that they inherited from their king Ghengis Khan who wrote Al-Yasiq, for them.
This book contains rulings that were derived from various religions, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Many of these rulings were derived from his own opinion and desires.
Later on, these rulings became the followed law among his children, preferring them to the Law of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (ﷺ).
Therefore, whoever does this, he is a disbeliever who deserves to be fought against, until he reverts to Allah's and His Messenger's decisions, so that no law, minor or major, is referred to except by His Law."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 3, pag. 202)]
👆 WHOEVER THIS HAS SET HIMSELF AS ALLAH'S RIVAL TO HIS LEGISLATION...AND BECAME A TAGHUT.
1
-
@syed126 The statements of the classical scholars which I have quoted are INDEED relevant to the topic.
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) explained the matter beautifully, and in details, when he explained [Qur'an, 5:50]
I brought you the evidences directly from their laws.
Do you need more?
- The general rule for taxes, approved by the king’s edict #M/9, on 4/6/1395 AH.
The country has civil courts that rule with man-made laws:
For example, military courts are placed under a special Diwan called Diwan of Military Courts.
In it, Saudi uses man-made laws called “the System of the Saudi Arab Army” issued on 11/11/1366 AH.
This system is a combination of Shari’i and non-Shari’i law which are exclusive to military personnel.
In “the System of the Saudi Arab Army” chapter 8 article no.12 states:
“The officers and the soldiers who steal something that belongs to other officers and soldiers or their moneys, and the item is consumable, then the thief is to pay its value, if consumed, and be imprisoned for a period ranging from a month and a half to three months...”
Furthermore, if an officer commits theft and wants to repent and get punished according to article 20 and 22 from chapter 3 of the same system that places some crimes under the authority of the Shar’i courts and others under the “Council of trials”.
Also, Saudi takes and gives Riba whoever takes a stroll near the Haram will see the British-Saudi Bank, American-Saudi Bank, Arab-National Bank, the Cairo-Saudi Bank etc.
These banks with their Riba transactions are allowed to operate in accordance to Section B, article 1 of the Saudi law, issued by the king’s edict no.M/5 in 1386 AH. It is well known that any case dealing with Riba and banks is automatically transferred to the monetary establishment where it is handled by specific committees.
Cases of such nature do not go to Shar’i courts.
Prior to this law, whenever a person borrowed money from a bank or an establishment and was late in paying it back, and got charged interest, he would go to a Shar’i court judge, who would nullify the interest. This led to a conflict.
On the one land they needed the Shar’i courts, at least to keep up the farce, and at the same time they needed their banks. To resolve this conflict, Shar’i courts were prohibited from interfering in such cases under the “Specialisation” law (articles 20 and 21 from chapter 3 of the System of Saudi Arab Army).
Do you understand how man-made laws were introduced?
This is very similar to "Al-Yasiq"
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"So whoever leaves the clear Shari'ah, which was revealed to Muhammad ibn Abdullah (ﷺ), the Seal of the Prophets, and takes the Hukm (legislation) to other than it from the laws of Kμfr (disbelief) which are abrogated, he has disbelieved.
So what about the one who takes the Hukm (legislation) to the "Yasiq" (the law of the Tatars which mixed Shari'ah rulings with invented rulings) and puts it before it?!
Whoever does that, he has disbelieved by the 'Ijma (consensus) of the Muslims."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah" (Vol. 13, pag. 119)]
1
-
@syed126 Yes. The Ahadith about obeying the MUSLIM rulers and to not rebel against them are CLEAR.
The Khalifah and his MUSLIM governors [working under his Khilafah]; it is NOT allowed to rebel against such rulers because the Fitna of not having a Khilafah intact which unites the entire Ummah and implements Shari'ah would be a GREATER evil.
'Arfaja (radiAllahu anhu) has reported:
"I have heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"(...) Anyone who tries to disrupt the affairs of this Umma while they are united you should strike him with the sword whoever he be."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Muslim, Book 20, Hadith 4565]
___________________
Dr. 'Ali Muhammad Muhammad As-Sallabi said:
"Uniting upon a leader is so important that, in Islam, one is commanded to kill anyone who attempts to stage a rebellion or coup AGAINST THE KHILAFAH or IMAM [KHALIFAH] of the Muslims.
Such attempts at rebellion threaten the stability of a nation and almost always lead to trials, tribulations and a great deal of bloodshed."
[REFERENCE: "The Biography of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq" (pag. 249)]
Verily, the Khalifah should not be removed for just being sinful, but for that which takes him outside the fold of Islam.
Basically, he should be removed if he apostatizes.
Imam An-Nawawi (rahimahullah) said:
"The scholars have unanimously agreed that a K4fir (disbeliever) should not be assigned as a ruler, and if the governor BECOMES A K4FIR, he must be deposed (replaced)".
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Muslim" (Vol. 12, pag. 229)]
...which is also the command of the Prophet (ﷺ)
Junada bin Abi Umaiya (radiAllahu anhu) narrated:
"The Prophet (ﷺ) called us and we gave him the Pledge of allegiance for Islam, and among the conditions on which he took the Pledge from us, was that we were to listen and obey (the orders) both at the time when we were active and at the time when we were tired, and at our difficult time and at our ease and to be obedient to the ruler and give him his right even if he did not give us our right...
...and not to fight against him UNLESS WE NOTICED HIM HAVING OPEN KμFR (disbelief) for which we would have a proof with us from Allah (Qur'an)."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 88, # 178]
1
-
@syed126 Do you think that permission wasn't sought to open cinemas, music concerts, Riba' banks, places of gambling,ect...?
Nothing becomes law without a signature that firstly approves it.
The signature is the approval of making such Haram things as Halal.
Also, Imam Ibn Kathir explained that to rule with "Al-Yasiq" made those "Muslim" Tatars become disbelievers.
It was a "Constitution" based on Shar'iah rulings mixed with made man laws.
Just like THESE ones [described above]:
- Specialisation” law (articles 20 and 21 from chapter 3 of the System of Saudi Arab Army).
- Section B, article 1 of the Saudi law, issued by the king’s edict no.M/5 in 1386 AH.
...a Constitution very similar to "Al-Yasiq" of the Tatars.
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"The Tatar [Mongols] abided by the law that they inherited from their king Ghengis Khan who wrote Al-Yasiq, for them.
This book contains rulings that were derived from various religions, such as Judaism, Christianity and ISLAM.
MANY OF THESE RULINGS WERE DERIVED from his own OPINION and DESIRES.
Later on, these rulings became the followed law among his children, preferring them to the Law of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (ﷺ).
Therefore, WHOEVER DOES THIS, HE IS A DISBELIEVER who deserves to be fought against, until he reverts to Allah's and His Messenger's decisions, so that no law, minor or major, is referred to except by His Law."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 3, pag. 202)]
To recite the Shahada and to pray doesn't make someone infallible from falling into Riddah.
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (radiAllahu anhu) fought people who recited the Shahada and ALSO PRAYED, but they simply refuted to pay Zakat.
THEY WERE CONSIDERED MμRTADDIN EVEN WHILE PRAYING.
Abu Hurairah (radiAllahu anhu) reported:
"When the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) passed away, Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) was appointed as his successor (Caliph). Amongst the Arabs some men apostatised.
Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) resolved to fight them.
'Umar bin Al-Khattab (radiAllahu anhu) said to Abu Bakr:
"How can you fight them when the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has declared:
"I have been commanded to fight people till they testify La ilaha illallah (there is no true god except Allah); and if they do it, their blood (life) and property are secured except when justified by law, and it is for Allah to call them to account."
Upon this Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"By Allah, I would definitely fight him who makes distinction between Salat and the Zakat, because it is an obligation upon the rich to pay Zakat.
By Allah I will fight them even to secure the piece of rope which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)."
'Umar (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"I realized that Allah opened the heart of Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) for fighting those who refused to pay Zakat, and I fully recognized that Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) was right."
[REFERENCE: Riyad As-Salihin # 1210]
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"The Salaf called those who refused (to pay) Zakat Mμrtaddin (apostates) despite the fact that they were fasting and praying, and not fighting a group of Muslims."
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 539)]
To judge with anything other than what Allah Has revealed is sufficient to go outside the fold of Islam.
Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) said it clearly in the Qur'an.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فَأُو۟لَٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْكَفِرُونَ
44. (...) And whosoever does not judge by what Allah Has revealed, such are the Kafirun. [Qur'an, 5:44]
____________________________
Al-Hasan Al-Basri (rahimahullah) said:
"This Ayah [verse] also applies to us [Muslims]."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir At-Tabari" (Vol. 10, pag. 357)]
1
-
@syed126 No. It is not called slandering nor backbiting.
This is the implementation of Kμfr bit-Taghut.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
36. And We certainly sent into every nation a messenger, [saying]: "Worship Allah and avoid Taghut." (...) [Qur'an, 16:36]
___________
Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim (rahimatullah) said:
"(Taghut) is anything in which the man exceed in his limits, either is by being worshipped, followed or obeyed.
So the TAGHUT of every community is the one in which they seek the judgment other than Allah and His Messenger (ﷺ) had legislated; or those who worship other than Allah; or those who follow without a proof from Allah; or those who obey while they don't know if it's according to the Judgment of Allah.
So these are the Tawagheet of the world; if you ponder about them and you see the condition of the people with them, you will see that the majority of them are astray from worshipping Allah Alone, because of the worship of the Taghut; far away from seeking the Judgment of Allah and His Messenger (ﷺ), to seek judgement from the Taghut."
[REFERENCE: "I'lam Al-Muwaqqi'in" (Vol. 1, pag.50)]
Who is the Taghut?
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"The one who judge without referring to the Qur'an is a Taghut".
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 201)]
How to reject the Taghut?
Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman (rahimahullah) said:
"What it is meant by distancing from the Taghut is:
to hate him, to hate him in one's heart, to insult him, to expose his defects and weakness through the tongue, to remove him with the hand [action] when he has the capacity and to separate from him.
So whoever claims that he has avoided the Taghut even without having done all this, he's not truthful."
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah fi Al-Ajwibatil-Najdiyyah" (Vol. 10, pag. 502-503)]
...and there is no sin in doing so.
Imam Hasan Al-Basri (rahimahullah) said:
"There is no [not considered] backbiting in the case of a person of Bid'ah [innovation] or a person who sins openly."
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Usool I'tiqaad Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah" (Vol. 1, pag. 140)] [Imam Al-Laalikaa'i]
1
-
1
-
@syed126 The Prophet (ﷺ) said:
"...and not to fight against him UNLESS WE NOTICED HIM HAVING OPEN KμFR (disbelief) for which we would have a proof with us from Allah (Qur'an)."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 88, # 178]
FROM QUR'AN:
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فَأُو۟لَٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْكَفِرُونَ
44. (...) And whosoever does not judge by what Allah Has revealed, such are the K4firun. [Qur'an, 5:44]
____________________________
Al-Hasan Al-Basri (rahimahullah) said:
"This Ayah [verse] also applies to us [Muslims]."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir At-Tabari" (Vol. 10, pag. 357)]
Why do you want to single out the Hadith about Salat alone?
Both need to be understood.
Even Abdullah ibn Ubayy prayed...and even gave Khutbah.
While Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (radiAllahu anhu) fought people as Mμrtaddin, and considered them as such KNOWING they were praying.
[See above Hadith: Riyad As-Salihin # 1210]
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"The Salaf called those who refused (to pay) Zakat Mμrtaddin (apostates) DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY WERE FASTING AND PRAYING."
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 539)]
...and ruling with man-made laws is not a sin, but Kμfr Akbar which takes outside the fold of Islam according to the CONSENSUS ['Ijma] OF THE MUSLIMS.
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"And it is known from the religion [of Islam] by necessity and by consensus ('Ijma) of all Muslims that whoever legalizes to follow other than the religion of Islam or a Shari'ah other than the Shari'ah of Muhammad (ﷺ), he is a K4fir (disbeliever).
And his kμfr (disbelief) is similar to that of the one who believes in some part of the book (Qur'an) and reject some of it."
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 524)]
WE ARE NOT ALLOW TO GO AGAINST THE 'IJMA [CONSENSUS].
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَمَن يُشَاقِقِ ٱلرَّسُولَ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ ٱلْهُدَىٰ وَيَتَّبِعْ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ نُوَلِّهِۦ مَا تَوَلَّىٰ وَنُصْلِهِۦ جَهَنَّمَ ۖ وَسَآءَتْ مَصِيرًا
115. And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (ﷺ) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, AND FOLLOWS OTHER THAN THE BELIEVERS' WAY. We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell - what an evil destination. [Qur'an, 4:115]
1
-
@syed126 There are many Kμfr which has been done openly from which we can bring evidences from the Qur'an.
- Ruling with man-made laws which have been preferred over the Book of Allah [i showed you some evidences already]
- Joining the U.N. and abiding to their Dajjalic system
- Signing the permission [making Halal] for the opening of music concerts, cinemas, places of gambling, clubs, Riba' banks,...
- Keeping the crusaders as allies and let them have a permanent military base within the holy land
- Siding with the disbelievers against Muslims and imprisoning Islamic scholars who speak the truth and condemn their fasad
- Normalizing ties with Israel
- Bombarding Muslims in Yemen,...
The Hadith about the Khawarij and their grudge against 'Ali (radiAllahu anhu) is COMPLETELY different.
The evidence is in the Hadith itself which you have quoted.
The Khawarij accused 'Ali (radiAllahu anhu) of being a disbeliever for appointing a judge between two people [according to the Shari'ah] to solve their disputes. Quoting:
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فَأُو۟لَٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْكَفِرُونَ
44. (...) And whosoever does not judge by what Allah Has revealed, such are the K4firun. [Qur'an, 5:44]
Those Khawarij exaggerated in regards to the application of the Ayah [verse] saying that it wasn't allowed for 'Ali (radiAllahu anhu) to APPOINT a man as judge [to judge with the Shari'ah under his Caliphate] saying that "NO MAN HAS SUCH RIGHT TO BE APPOINTED AS JUDGE".
Do you understand the difference?
The Khawarij basically said:
"If you appoint a MAN [judge] in the courthouse to rule with the Qur'an, you become a disbeliever because only Allah can judge. So don't appoint any man in charge of it."
That's way too extreme and they have exaggerated in regards to the understanding of the Ayah [Qur'an, 5:44].
Infact, in the Hadith which you have quoted, Ibn 'Abbas (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"You know that if Allah had willed, he would have judged himself and NOT DELEGATED IT TO MEN."
Thanks for sharing the Hadith and proving my point.
On the other hand, it's the CONSENSUS ['IJMA] OF ALL MUSLIMS that whoever dismantle the Shari'ah and does not rule by it, then such a person becomes a disbeliever.
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"And it is known from the religion [of Islam] by necessity and by CONSENSUS ('IJMA) OF ALL MUSLIMS that whoever legalizes to follow other than the religion of Islam or a Shari'ah other than the Shari'ah of Muhammad (ﷺ), he is a K4fir (disbeliever).
And his kμfr (disbelief) is similar to that of the one who believes in some part of the book (Qur'an) and reject some of it."
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 524)]
Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah understood that NO MAN CAN BE A LEGISLATOR BESIDES ALLAH...and not that no Khalifah is allowed to appoint men as judges to solves the disputes among people.
Such is the 'Ijma of ALL Muslims, and as I've said, we are not allowed to go against the CONSENSUS.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَمَن يُشَاقِقِ ٱلرَّسُولَ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ ٱلْهُدَىٰ وَيَتَّبِعْ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ نُوَلِّهِۦ مَا تَوَلَّىٰ وَنُصْلِهِۦ جَهَنَّمَ ۖ وَسَآءَتْ مَصِيرًا
115. And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (ﷺ) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers' way. We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell - what an evil destination. [Qur'an, 4:115]
_______
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Refers to whoever intentionally takes a path other than the path of the Law revealed to the Messenger (ﷺ), after the truth has been made clear, apparent and plain to him.
The Statement of Allah:
"and follows other than the believers' way."
Refers to a type of conduct that is closely related to contradicting the Messenger (ﷺ).
This contradiction could be in the form of contradicting a text [from Qur'an or Sunnah] or CONTRADICTING WHAT THE UMMAH OF MUHAMMAD (ﷺ) HAS AGREED ON.
The Ummah of Muhammad (ﷺ) is immune from error when they all agree on something, a miracle that serves to increase their honor, due to the greatness of their Prophet (ﷺ).
There are many authentic Ahadith on this subject.
Allah Has warned against the evil of contradicting the Prophet (ﷺ) AND HIS UMMAH, when He said:
"We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell - what an evil destination."
Meaning: when one goes on this wicked path, We will punish him by making the evil path appear good in his heart, and will beautify it for him so that he is tempted further. (...)
Allah made the Fire the destination of such people in the Hereafter."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 2, pag. 580-582)]
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Fawaz Shaikh Yes. These are just some of them:
In an Arabic book titled “The Constitutional Laws of the Arab Countries” under the subtitle “The Constitution of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” the author states, “The words ‘law (qanoon)’ and ‘Legislation (Tashree’)’ are only used in Saudi to refer to the rules taken from the Islamic Shari‘ah...
As for the man-made such as systems (Anthimah)’ or ‘ instructions (Ta’leemaat)’ or ‘ edict (Awamir)’......”
In an Arabic book titled Al-Wajeez fi Tareekh Al-Qawneen (The Compact in the History of Cannons) by Dr. Mahmood Al-Maghribi, p443, after mentioning that legislation in the past was Islamic and simple, he complements Saudi by saying, “this situation has changed after the rise of the Saudi State and the natural resources.
This new situation required reforms and changes ... Due to these changes, there was a need for new laws.
As a result, laws were formulated in the following areas; Laws in the basis of court systems, trade, penal code, labour, Taxation, among others ..”
Regarding Trade laws, he stated:
“The trade laws, land and sea, which are known as ‘The Trade System’ are considered one of the most important Saudi trade laws. This law was issued in 1931
and is similar to the modern trade laws, be they Arab or European.”
With regard to the Islamic
penal code, he said they are implemented (of course), “with some alterations required by the public interest.” He also added, “ Public interest also required making taxation revenue laws or the state...”
The author is actually telling us that Saudi has been implementing man-made laws in trade, “similar to the modern trade laws.”
He also tells us that Al-Saud have altered the Deen of Allah (Subhana wa ta’ala) by changing some of its laws due to “public interest”.
In actuality, there are many man-made laws which the author did not mention such as:
* The system of observing banks issued by the king’s edict #M/5 in 1386 AH.
*The system of the Saudi Arab citizenship decided by the ministers Council resolution #4 on 25th January 1974 and approved by the king in his speech in High Council #8/5/8604 on 22nd February 1974 to put it in effect.
*The system of printed material and publication issued by the king’s edict #M/17 in 13/4/1402 AH.
•The law of reviving the dead land used to be according to Islam, where if a person works a piece of land that becomes his. This was the case until an edict was issued declaring the nullification of this Islamic law starting from 1987 onwards,...
- The general rule for taxes, approved by the king’s edict #M/9, on 4/6/1395 AH.
The country has civil courts that rule with man-made laws:
For example, military courts are placed under a special Diwan called Diwan of Military Courts.
In it, Saudi uses man-made laws called “the System of the Saudi Arab Army” issued on 11/11/1366 AH.
This system is a combination of Shari’i and non-Shari’i law which are exclusive to military personnel.
In “the System of the Saudi Arab Army” chapter 8 article no.12 states:
“The officers and the soldiers who steal something that belongs to other officers and soldiers or their moneys, and the item is consumable, then the thief is to pay its value, if consumed, and be imprisoned for a period ranging from a month and a half to three months...”
Furthermore, if an officer commits theft and wants to repent and get punished according to article 20 and 22 from chapter 3 of the same system that places some crimes under the authority of the Shar’i courts and others under the “Council of trials”.
Also, Saudi takes and gives Riba whoever takes a stroll near the Haram will see the British-Saudi Bank, American-Saudi Bank, Arab-National Bank, the Cairo-Saudi Bank etc.
These banks with their Riba transactions are allowed to operate in accordance to Section B, article 1 of the Saudi law, issued by the king’s edict no.M/5 in 1386 AH. It is well known that any case dealing with Riba and banks is automatically transferred to the monetary establishment where it is handled by specific committees.
Cases of such nature do not go to Shar’i courts.
Prior to this law, whenever a person borrowed money from a bank or an establishment and was late in paying it back, and got charged interest, he would go to a Shar’i court judge, who would nullify the interest. This led to a conflict.
On the one land they needed the Shar’i courts, at least to keep up the farce, and at the same time they needed their banks. To resolve this conflict, Shar’i courts were prohibited from interfering in such cases under the “Specialisation” law (articles 20 and 21 from chapter 3 of the System of Saudi Arab Army).
Do you understand how man-made laws were introduced?
This is very similar to "Al-Yasiq"
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"So whoever leaves the clear Shari'ah, which was revealed to Muhammad ibn Abdullah (ﷺ), the Seal of the Prophets, and takes the Hukm (legislation) to other than it from the laws of Kμfr (disbelief) which are abrogated, he has disbelieved.
So what about the one who takes the Hukm (legislation) to the "Yasiq" (the law of the Tatars which mixed Shari'ah rulings with invented rulings) and puts it before it?!
Whoever does that, he has disbelieved by the 'Ijma (consensus) of the Muslims."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah" (Vol. 13, pag. 119)]
NOTE: Those who came at the same conclusion are being imprisoned by the tyrant regime and not allowed to give Khutbah, that's why.
Their prisons are filled with scholars of haqq.
1
-
@syed126 The Hadith which you have quoted about the Ansar who attacked the man who uttered the Shahada is often misinterpreted, especially among the Murji'ah.
The action of the Ansar was blameworthy because he didn't gave that man a chance to prove his Shahada being truthful or not, he wasn't given him the time to commit actions which would have contradicted and nullified his Shahada.
" (...) Also, one becomes an apostate when one says or DOES SOMETHING that clearly entails disbelief; (...)
[REFERENCE: "Harakatur-Riddah" (pag. 18)] [Dr. 'Ali Al-'Utoom]
If a man considers himself Muslim for long time, but then he utters, commits or believe in something which nullifies his Shahada, then he must be judge accordingly.
Sulayman Ibn Sahman (rahimahullah) said:
"If the man was a Muslim, and he was a constant good-doer, but then it happens to say something, or DO SOMETHING, or believe in something that cancels that (his Islam).
Then to say "La illah illa Allah" (there is no divinity except Allah) has not benefit him".
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah" (Vol. 2, pag. 350)]
We do not separate the actions of the limbs or the utterance of the tongue, both are part of Iman.
We judge the deeds and saying of individuals which have been manifested.
Abdullah ibn ‘Utbah (radiAllahu anhu) reported:
'Umar ibn al-Khattab (radiAllahu anhu) said:
“Verily, people were judged by revelation in the time of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and the revelation has ceased.
We only judge now what is manifested outwardly of your deeds.
Whoever shows us good, we will trust him and bring him close. It is not for us to judge anything of his inner secrets; Allah will hold him accountable for his inner secrets.
Whoever shows us evil, we will never trust him or believe him even if it is said his intentions are good.”
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari # 2498]
...and we have seen a lot of evil which has reached levels of Kμfr Akbar and Shirk Abkar.
To perform prayer, du'a ,Tawaf and cleaning the Ka'bah are not sufficient actions to keep someone's Islam intact.
Tawhid must also be correct.
ALL the nullifiers of Islam MUST be avoided. It only takes one nullifier to be ejected outside the fold of Islam.
1
-
@syed126 THEY PRAYED...BUT REFUSED TO PAY ZAKAT
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (radiAllahu anhu) declared war against the Mμrtaddin and considered them as apostates because they refused to pay Zakat.
They were still uttering Shahada, praying, fasting,...and yet those actions were not sufficient to REMAIN inside the fold of Islam.
Abu Hurairah (radiAllahu anhu) reported:
"When the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) passed away, Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) was appointed as his successor (Caliph). Amongst the Arabs some men apostatised.
Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) resolved to fight them.
'Umar bin Al-Khattab (radiAllahu anhu) said to Abu Bakr:
"How can you fight them when the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has declared:
"I have been commanded to fight people till they testify La ilaha illallah (there is no true god except Allah); and if they do it, their blood (life) and property are secured except when justified by law, and it is for Allah to call them to account."
Upon this Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"By Allah, I would definitely fight him who makes distinction between Salat and the Zakat, because it is an obligation upon the rich to pay Zakat.
By Allah I will fight them even to secure the piece of rope which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)."
'Umar (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"I realized that Allah opened the heart of Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) for fighting those who refused to pay Zakat, and I fully recognized that Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) was right."
[REFERENCE: Riyad As-Salihin # 1210]
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"The Salaf called those who refused (to pay) Zakat Mμrtaddin (apostates) DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY WERE FASTING AND PRAYING."
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 539)]
There are some actions that when denied, or refuse to act upon, are considered forms of Riddah.
Infact, to abandon the Shari'ah and refuse to implement it is one of them.
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"So WHOEVER LEAVES the clear Shari'ah, which was revealed to Muhammad ibn Abdullah (ﷺ), the Seal of the Prophets, and takes the Hukm (legislation) to other than it from the laws of Kufr (disbelief) which are abrogated, he has disbelieved.
So what about the one who takes the Hukm (legislation) to the "Yasiq" (the law of the Tatars which mixed Shari'ah rulings with invented rulings) and puts it before it?!
Whoever does that, he has disbelieved by the 'Ijma (consensus) of the Muslims."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah" (Vol. 13, pag. 119)]
Even though he was a tyrant ruler, Al-Hajjaj ruled with the Shari'ah which HE DID NOT DISMANTLED and never betrayed the Ummah by giving his allegiance to the Byzantines or Persians.
Verily, he was a sinner but never implemented the laws of the Dajjal by signing up into the U.N. in exchange of the Laws of Allah.
These situations are incomparable.
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"The one who judge without referring to the Qur'an is a Taghut".
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 201)]
Al-Hajjaj was NOT a Taghut.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
256. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing. [Qur'an, 2:256]
Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman (rahimahullah) said:
"What it is meant by distancing from the Taghut is:
to hate him, to hate him in one's heart, to insult him, to expose his defects and weakness through the tongue, to remove him with the hand [action] when he has the capacity and to separate from him.
So whoever claims that he has avoided the Taghut even without having done all this, he's not truthful."
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah fi Al-Ajwibatil-Najdiyyah" (Vol. 10, pag. 502-503)]
1
-
@syed126 You're not intelligent enough to understand simple principles of Tawhid [which I had already explained to you over and over]. If you had insight you would have understood it the first time.
One word to the wise is sufficient.
Still I'm going to explain it to you one more time.
Why is it Kμfr BUT also Shirk?
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
40. (...) LEGISLATION IS NOT BUT FOR ALLAH . He has commanded that you worship not except Him. That is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know. [Qur'an, 12:40]
As you can see in the above Ayah, Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) described His Hukm [Legislation] and following it as a form of worship [Ibadah].
Therefore if such attribute is given to men, it means that you have taken such individuals as "legislators" besides Him Alone [which is Shirk].
Shaykh Al-Shinqiti (rahimahullah) said:
"To commit Shirk with Allah in judging is of the same meaning as to commit Shirk in His worship, there is no difference between the two in any manner.
There is no difference in any sense between he who follows a system (nizam) other than Allah's system or law other than Allah's law (Shari'ah) and he who worships an idol or prostrates to a false god.
They are the same and both are polytheists [associating others] with Allah."
[REFERENCE: "Adwa' Al-Bayan" (Vol. 7, pag. 162)]
Another example of this type of Shirk is also found in the explanation of the following Ayah.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
31. They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah (...) [Qur'an, 9:31]
__
Adi bin Hatim:
"I came to the Prophet (ﷺ) while I had a cross of gold around my neck. He said: 'O 'Adi! Remove this idol from yourself!'
And I heard him reciting from Surah Bara'ah: They took their rabbis and monks as lords besides Allah (9:31).
He said: 'As for them, they did not worship them, but when they made something lawful for them, they considered it lawful, and when they made something unlawful for them, they considered it unlawful.'"
[REFERENCE: Jami' At-Tirmidhi, Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 3095]
"It is therefore necessary that the slave of Allah purifies his heart in relation to Allah and bows his head before Him.
This is forbidden that he invents such substitutes of Allah who lay down such ways of worship and conducting social affairs which have not been permitted by Allah.
Such a thing was done by the Jews and Christians that they made their priests and rabbis their lords IN MATTER OF LEGISLATING.
This made them declare the things forbidden by Allah as permissible and the things made permissible by Him as forbidden and they FOLLOWED the priests and the rabbis in these matters".
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Al-Aqeedat-il-Wasitiyah" (pag. 99)]
And the Taghut is of 3 TYPES:
Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman (rahimatullah) said:
"There are 3 types of Taghut:
1) Taghut of Hukm (legislation)
2) Taghut of 'Ibadah (worship)
3) Taghut of Mutaba'ah (following) and Ta'ah (obedience)."
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah fi Al-Ajwibah An-Najdiyyah" (Vol. 10, pag. 503)]
To join the U.N. is Kμfr but also Shirk because entails following their system in making Halal what Allah made Haram and viceversa.
In regards to the issue of Zakat, I made an example of an action that if rejected or abandoned it becomes Riddah. Likewise to abandon the Shari'ah and replacing it with man-made laws is also Riddah.
There are many evidences but you purposefully choose to be blind and follow your desires instead.
As I've already said. Anything which takes place in the kingdom needs to be approved with a signature [ACTION].
Riba' banks and music concerts for example, are SO CLEAR that such signature took even a physical form of a BUILDING. Are you not able to see those structures?
They have been made Halal by way of approval, those documents have been SIGNED and APPROVED as Halal to take place within the land.
These banks with their Riba transactions are allowed to operate in accordance to Section B, article 1 of the Saudi law, issued by the king’s edict no.M/5 in 1386 AH. It is well known that any case dealing with Riba and banks is automatically transferred to the monetary establishment where it is handled by specific committees.
Cases of such nature do not go to Shar’i courts.
Prior to this law, whenever a person borrowed money from a bank or an establishment and was late in paying it back, and got charged interest, he would go to a Shar’i court judge, who would nullify the interest. This led to a conflict.
On the one land they needed the Shar’i courts, at least to keep up the farce, and at the same time they needed their banks. To resolve this conflict, Shar’i courts were prohibited from interfering in such cases under the “Specialisation” law (articles 20 and 21 from chapter 3 of the System of Saudi Arab Army).
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"Whenever a person makes Halal (permissible) what is Haram (forbidden) by consensus or makes Haram what is Halal by consensus or replaces the Shari'ah that is agreed upon by consensus, then he is a K4fir (disbeliever) by the agreement of the scholars of Fiqh".
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 3, pag. 267)]
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thaqalayni
[Qur'an, 11:49] talks about historical accounts about the previous nations in which Prophets were sent. A knowldge that only to Prophets are giving, Infact Allah addressed the Prophet (ﷺ) directly.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
65. Say, "None in the heavens and earth knows the unseen EXCEPT ALLAH , and they do not perceive when they will be resurrected." [Qur'an, 27:65]
Masruq (radiAllahu anhu) reported
`Aisha (radiAllahu anha) said:
"(...) And if anyone tells you that Muhammad (ﷺ) has seen the Unseen, he is a liar, for Allah says:
"None has the knowledge of the Unseen but Allah."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 93, Hadith 477]
FEAR ALLAH.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@khalidibnwalid1340 Tafsirs are sufficient to destroy your Murji' aqidah.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَٓئِكَةِ إِنِّى جَاعِلٌۭ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةًۭ ۖ
30. And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Verily, I am going to place a Khalifah on earth." (...). [Qur'an, 2:30]
____________________
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Al-Qurtubi, as well as other scholars, said that this Ayah proves the obligation of appointing a Khalifah to pass judgments on matters of dispute between people, to aid the oppressed against the oppressor, TO IMPLEMENT THE ISLAMIC PENAL CODE and to forbid evil.
There are many other tasks that can be only fulfilled by appointing the Imam, and what is necessary in performing an obligation, is an obligation itself.
We should state here that Imamah occurs by either naming a successor, as a group among Ahl us-Sunnah scholars said occurred - by the Prophet (ﷺ) - in the case of Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu), or hinting to a successor.
Or, the current Khalifah names a certain person as Khalifah after him, as Abu Bakr (radiAllahu anhu) did with 'Umar (radiAllahu anhu).
Or, the Khalifah might leave the matter in the hands of the Muslim consultative council (Shura), or a group of righteous men, just as 'Umar (radiAllahu anhu) did.
Or, the people of authority could gather around a certain person to whom they give the pledge of allegiance (Bay'ah), or they could select one among them to choose the candidate, according to the majority of the scholars.
The Khalifah must be a responsible adult Muslim male, able to perform Ijtihad (independent legal judgments), bodily able, righteous, with knowledge of warfare, politics.
He also must be from the tribe of Quraish, according to the correct view, but it is not necessary that he be from the tribe of Bani Hashim, or that he be immune from error, as the Rafidah (Shiites) falsely claim.
When the Khalifah becomes an immoral person (Fasiq), should he be impeached?
There is disagreement over this matter, but the correct view is that he is not to be removed, because the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"(...) Unless you witness a clear Kμfr regarding which you have clear proof from Allah."
[Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 88, # 178]
Does the Khalifah have the right to resign from his post?
There is a difference on this issue. It is a fact that Al-Hasan ibn 'Ali removed himself from the position of Khalifah and surrendered it to Mu'awiyah.
However, this occurred because of a necessity, and Al-Hasan was praised for this action.
It is not permissible to appoint two Imams (Khulafah) for the world or more at the same time.
This is not allowed because the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"Whoever came to you while you are united and tried to divide you, then execute him, no matter who he is."
[Sahih Muslim, Book 20, # 4565]
This is the view of the majority of scholars."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 1, pag. 185-186)]
NOTE: I've already explained the difference between the linguistic meaning and the Shar'i meaning.
1
-
1
-
@khalidibnwalid1340 Do you know the difference between their linguistic meanings from their Shar'i meanings?
When we talk about Islamic issues we always refer to Arabic words in their Shar'i meaning, not linguistically alone.
The Khalifah meant in the Qur'an and Sunnah is the Amir who rules with the Shari'ah of Allah [Divine Laws] alone...which is the only rulership known in Islam.
Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf said:
"By rulership is meant Caliphate (Khilafah)."
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Riyad As-Salihin" (Vol. 1, pag. 576)]
Those who rule in contradiction with the Shari'ah of Allah like secularism, communism, kingship,etc...have been classified under a different name which is "TAGHUT" [plur. Tawagheet] NOT "Khalifah" [plur. Khulafa'].
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى ٱلَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ ءَامَنُوا۟ بِمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَن يَتَحَاكَمُوٓا۟ إِلَى ٱلطَّغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوٓا۟ أَن يَكْفُرُوا۟ بِهِۦ وَيُرِيدُ ٱلشَّيْطَنُ أَن يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَلًۢا بَعِيدًۭا
60. 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 Taghut while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaitan wishes to lead them far astray. [Qur'an, 4:60]
__
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Allah chastises those who claim to believe in what Allah Has sent down to His Messenger (ﷺ) and to the earlier Prophets, yet they refer to other than the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (ﷺ) for judgment in various disputes.
It was reported that the reason behind revealing this Ayah [verse] was that a man from the Ansar and a Jew had a dispute, and the Jew said:
"Let us refer to Muhammad (ﷺ) to judge between us."
However, the Muslim man said:
"Let us refer to Ka'b ibn Al-Ashraf [a Jew] to judge between us."
It was also reported that the Ayah [verse] was revealed about some hypocrites who pretended to be Muslims, yet they sought to refer to the judgment of Jahiliyyah.
Other reasons were also reported behind the revelation of the Ayah [verse].
However, the Ayah [verse] has a general meaning, as it chastises all those who refrain from referring to the Qur'an and Sunnah for judgment and prefer the judgment of whatever they chose of falsehood, which befits the description of Taghut here.
This is why Allah said:
"and they wish to go for judgement to the Taghut"
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 2, pag. 500)]
No. Shari'ah linguistically means: "The path leading to the watering place" while Islamically in the Shar'i meaning is the "Divine Law of Allah".
Legislation is described with the word "Hukm" [not Shari'ah].
Those are two completely different words. Every country implements their "Ahkam" [sing. Hukm], but not every country implements Shari'ah.
1
-
1
-
@PADE2000 Taghut: comes from the root word "Tagha" which means "to transgress the boundaries [set by Allah]".
And to judge people with your own set of laws makes such person a Taghut because he consider himself a better legislator than Allah.
Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:
"The one who judge without referring to the Qur'an is a Taghut".
[REFERENCE: "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa" (Vol. 28, pag. 201)]
It is not a matter aqidah alone, in which someone might differ, this is clear Arabic linguistic terminology.
Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman (rahimatullah) said:
"There are 3 types of Taghut:
1) Taghut of Hukm (legislation)
2) Taghut of 'Ibadah (worship)
3) Taghut of Mutaba'ah (following) and Ta'ah (obedience)."
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah fi Al-Ajwibah An-Najdiyyah" (Vol. 10, pag. 503)]
We judge people with the Revelation.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
44. (...) And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers. [Qur'an, 5:44]
Which is also found in the Sunnah.
Abu Huraira and Zaid ibn Khalid (radiAllahu anhum) said:
We were with the Prophet (ﷺ) when he said [to two men]:
"I shall judge between you according to the Book of Allah [Shari'ah]."
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 92, # 383]
_________________
Abdullah ibn ‘Utbah (radiAllahu anhu) reported:
'Umar ibn al-Khattab (radiAllahu anhu) said:
“Verily, people were judged by revelation in the time of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and the revelation has ceased.
We only judge now what is manifested outwardly of your deeds.
Whoever shows us good, we will trust him and bring him close. It is not for us to judge anything of his inner secrets; Allah will hold him accountable for his inner secrets.
Whoever shows us evil, we will never trust him or believe him even if it is said his intentions are good.”
[REFERENCE: Sahih Al-Bukhari # 2498]
1
-
1
-
1
-
@boamourani The Shari'ah in Arabia has been dismatle on a large extent throughout the years, under many different aspects.
These are just some:
In an Arabic book titled “The Constitutional Laws of the Arab Countries” under the subtitle “The Constitution of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” the author states, “The words ‘law (qanoon)’ and ‘Legislation (Tashree’)’ are only used in Saudi to refer to the rules taken from the Islamic Shari‘ah...
As for the man-made such as systems (Anthimah)’ or ‘ instructions (Ta’leemaat)’ or ‘ edict (Awamir)’......”
In an Arabic book titled Al-Wajeez fi Tareekh Al-Qawneen (The Compact in the History of Cannons) by Dr. Mahmood Al-Maghribi, p443, after mentioning that legislation in the past was Islamic and simple, he complements Saudi by saying, “this situation has changed after the rise of the Saudi State and the natural resources.
This new situation required reforms and changes ... Due to these changes, there was a need for new laws.
As a result, laws were formulated in the following areas; Laws in the basis of court systems, trade, penal code, labour, Taxation, among others ..”
Regarding Trade laws, he stated:
“The trade laws, land and sea, which are known as ‘The Trade System’ are considered one of the most important Saudi trade laws. This law was issued in 1931
and is similar to the modern trade laws, be they Arab or European.”
With regard to the Islamic
penal code, he said they are implemented (of course), “with some alterations required by the public interest.” He also added, “ Public interest also required making taxation revenue laws or the state...”
The author is actually telling us that Saudi has been implementing man-made laws in trade, “similar to the modern trade laws.”
He also tells us that Al-Saud have altered the Deen of Allah (Subhana wa ta’ala) by changing some of its laws due to “public interest”.
In actuality, there are many man-made laws which the author did not mention such as:
* The system of observing banks issued by the king’s edict #M/5 in 1386 AH.
*The system of the Saudi Arab citizenship decided by the ministers Council resolution #4 on 25th January 1974 and approved by the king in his speech in High Council #8/5/8604 on 22nd February 1974 to put it in effect.
*The system of printed material and publication issued by the king’s edict #M/17 in 13/4/1402 AH.
•The law of reviving the dead land used to be according to Islam, where if a person works a piece of land that becomes his. This was the case until an edict was issued declaring the nullification of this Islamic law starting from 1987 onwards,...
- The general rule for taxes, approved by the king’s edict #M/9, on 4/6/1395 AH.
The country has civil courts that rule with man-made laws:
For example, military courts are placed under a special Diwan called Diwan of Military Courts.
In it, Saudi uses man-made laws called “the System of the Saudi Arab Army” issued on 11/11/1366 AH.
This system is a combination of Shari’i and non-Shari’i law which are exclusive to military personnel.
In “the System of the Saudi Arab Army” chapter 8 article no.12 states:
“The officers and the soldiers who steal something that belongs to other officers and soldiers or their moneys, and the item is consumable, then the thief is to pay its value, if consumed, and be imprisoned for a period ranging from a month and a half to three months...”
Furthermore, if an officer commits theft and wants to repent and get punished according to article 20 and 22 from chapter 3 of the same system that places some crimes under the authority of the Shar’i courts and others under the “Council of trials”.
Also, Saudi takes and gives Riba whoever takes a stroll near the Haram will see the British-Saudi Bank, American-Saudi Bank, Arab-National Bank, the Cairo-Saudi Bank etc.
These banks with their Riba transactions are allowed to operate in accordance to Section B, article 1 of the Saudi law, issued by the king’s edict no.M/5 in 1386 AH. It is well known that any case dealing with Riba and banks is automatically transferred to the monetary establishment where it is handled by specific committees.
Cases of such nature do not go to Shar’i courts.
Prior to this law, whenever a person borrowed money from a bank or an establishment and was late in paying it back, and got charged interest, he would go to a Shar’i court judge, who would nullify the interest. This led to a conflict.
On the one land they needed the Shar’i courts, at least to keep up the farce, and at the same time they needed their banks. To resolve this conflict, Shar’i courts were prohibited from interfering in such cases under the “Specialisation” law (articles 20 and 21 from chapter 3 of the System of Saudi Arab Army).
Do you understand how man-made laws were introduced?
This is very similar to "Al-Yasiq"
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"So whoever leaves the clear Shari'ah, which was revealed to Muhammad ibn Abdullah (ﷺ), the Seal of the Prophets, and takes the Hukm (legislation) to other than it from the laws of Kμfr (disbelief) which are abrogated, he has disbelieved.
So what about the one who takes the Hukm (legislation) to the "Yasiq" (the law of the Tatars which mixed Shari'ah rulings with invented rulings) and puts it before it?!
Whoever does that, he has disbelieved by the 'Ijma (consensus) of the Muslims."
[REFERENCE: "Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah" (Vol. 13, pag. 119)]
Did Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) had Khawarij tendencies according to you?
1
-
@dmdr9776 DU'A AGAINST OPPRESSORS
When they [pagans] took him out of the Haram of Makkah to kill him outside its boundaries, (...)
Khubaib (radiAllahu anhu) said:
"(...) O Allah! Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them."
[Al-Bukhari]
[REFERENCE: Riyad As-Salihin # 1509]
_____________________
Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf said:
"It is lawful to imprecate for oppressors and disbelievers."
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Riyad As-Salihin" (Vol. 2, pag. 1121)]
I think you have to learn the basics of Tawhid.
How can you reject the Taghut if you consider them brothers? What a dodgy aqidah.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
36. And We certainly sent into every nation a messenger, [saying]: "Worship Allah and avoid Taghut." (...) [Qur'an, 16:36]
IMPLEMENTATION OF KμFR BIT-TAGHUT
Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman (rahimahullah) said:
"What it is meant by distancing from the Taghut is:
to hate him, to hate him in one's heart, to insult him, to expose his defects and weakness through the tongue, to remove him with the hand [action] when he has the capacity and to separate from him.
So whoever claims that he has avoided the Taghut even without having done all this, he's not truthful."
[REFERENCE: "Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah fi Al-Ajwibatil-Najdiyyah" (Vol. 10, pag. 502-503)]
EVEN MUSA MADE DU'A AGAINST THE FIR'AWN OF HIS TIME.
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
88. And Moses said, "Our Lord, indeed You have given Pharaoh and his establishment splendor and wealth in the worldly life, our Lord, that they may lead [men] astray from Your way. Our Lord, obliterate their wealth and harden their hearts so that they will not believe until they see the painful punishment."
[Qur'an, 10:88]
1
-
@dmdr9776 WAS IBN KATHIR ALSO MISINTERPRETING THE QUR'AN?
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
أَفَحُكْمَ ٱلْجَهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ ۚ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ ٱللَّهِ حُكْمًۭا لِّقَوْمٍۢ يُوقِنُونَ
50. Then is it the judgement of [the time of] ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain [in faith]. [Qur'an, 5:50]
_____
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Allah criticizes those who ignore the Commandments of Allah, which include every type of righteous good thing and prohibit every type of evil, but they refer instead to opinions, desires and customs that people themselves invented, all of which have no basis in the religion of Allah.
During the time of Jahiliyyah, the people used to abide by the misguidance and ignorance that they invented by sheer opinions and lusts.
The Tatar [Mongols] abided by the law that they inherited from their king Ghengis Khan who wrote Al-Yasiq, for them.
This book contains rulings that were derived from various religions, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Many of these rulings were derived from his own opinion and desires.
Later on, these rulings became the followed law among his children, preferring them to the Law of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (ﷺ).
Therefore, whoever does this, he is a disbeliever who deserves to be fought against, until he reverts to Allah's and His Messenger's decisions, so that no law, minor or major, is referred to except by His Law."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 3, pag. 202)]
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@talal-alqahtani 1) In Islam, the Khilafa is the only system of governance which is recognized after Prophethood.
Abu Hurairah (radiAllahu anhu) reported:
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
"The Banu Isra'il were ruled by the Prophets. When one Prophet died, another succeeded him.
There will be no Prophet after me. Caliphs will come after me, and they will be many."
The Companions said:
"O Messenger of Allah, what do you command us to do?"
He said: "Fulfill the pledge of allegiance to which is sworn first (then swear allegiance to the others). (...)
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
[REFERENCE: Riyad As-Salihin # 656]
__
Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf said:
"The Hadith settles the issue of the finality of Prophethood once for all.
"No Prophet will succeed me EXCEPT THE CALIPHS", said the Prophet (ﷺ).
In the case of many claimants to caliphate, he also gave a ruling, that is, people should primarily fulfill their allegiance pledged to the first caliph and keep away from caring for another claimant to caliphate."
[REFERENCE: "Sharh Riyad As-Salihin" (Vol. 1, pag. 564)]
And it is not allowed for the Ummah to be without it.
THE OBLIGATION OF APPOINTING A KHALIFAH
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim:
وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَٓئِكَةِ إِنِّى جَاعِلٌۭ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةًۭ ۖ
30. And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Verily, I am going to place a Khalifah on earth." (...). [Qur'an, 2:30]
____________________
Imam Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said:
"Al-Qurtubi, as well as other scholars, said that this Ayah proves the obligation of APPOINTING A KHALIFAH to pass judgments on matters of dispute between people, to aid the oppressed against the oppressor, TO IMPLEMENT THE ISLAMIC PENAL CODE and to forbid evil."
[REFERENCE: "Tafsir Ibn Kathir" (Vol. 1, pag. 185)]
Nowhere in Islam it is said to establish kingship nor kingdoms.
Dr. 'Ali Muhammad Muhammad As-Sallabi said:
"Muslim scholars UNANIMOUSLY AGREE that it is the OBLIGATORY DUTY of Muslims of ANY GIVEN ERA to appoint someone to be their KHALIFAH."
[REFERENCE: "The Biography of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq" (pag. 238)]
2) I told you where to look for it, if you are interested. Stop climbing on mirrors.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1