ÉΟŠÏm§9$# Ç≈uΗ÷q§9$# «!

$# ÉΟó¡Î0

Seeking the Judgement of the Taghut, the laws of the Taghut

The aim of the article is not to call to Takfir (excommunication) of the rulers
who rule by man-made laws, but just to mention the religious verdict on this
matter, in the same manner as one would give the verdict on a ruler who
allows grave worship. And Takfir requires conditions and removal of doubts,
and also this should be done when there is a benefit in doing such.

Also at the same time, Ahlul Hadith condemn terrorist attacks and killings of
innocent people, suicide bombings and other actions and do not see such
actions as a way to implement the Sharia’ah in Muslim countries, rather they
encourage the implementation of the Shari’ah by educating the people and/or
by politics and elections such as Jam’iyat Ahlul Hadith in Pakistan. And one
should know that major scholars such as sh Albani, ibn Baz, ibn Utheymeen,
Abbad, Wasiullah Abbas allowed entering elections in countries who adopt
this system in order to prevent seculars from having power.

And I am quoting from many famous books related to Tawheed and ‘Aqidah,
and learning these matters from these reliable books is very important, and
these scholars mentioned this among the matters related to Tawheed. Also
most of these quotes have been mentioned in books of senior scholars or
approved by senior scholars such as the book “Al-Hukm bi ghayri ma anza
Allah” of Dr ‘AbdurRahman ibn Salih Ale Mahmud, “Ar-Rad ‘alal ‘Anbari”
introduced by Shaykh ‘Abdullah ibn Al-Ghunayman, and “Raf’ Al-Laimah”
(removing the blame from the Fatwa of the Lajnah) introduced by Shaykh Al-
Fawzan. And one should know that Dr Ash-Shithri declared Shaykh Ale
Mahmud and Ibn Al-Ghunayman to be from senior scholars. Many quotes
have been taken from the English translation of the book of Dr AbdurRahman
ibn Salih Ale Mahmud under the name “Man-made laws versus the Shariah”.

Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah

Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in his “Sarim Al-Maslul”:

‫"اﻟﺪﻟﯿﻞ اﻟﺮاﺑﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟﻚ اﯾﻀﺎ ﻗﻮﻟﮫ ﺳﺒﺤﺎﻧﮫ وﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬

‫^ ﻓﻼ ورﺑﻚ ﻻﯾﺆﻣﻨﻮن ﺣﺘﻰ ﯾﺤﻜﻤﻮك ﻓﯿﻤﺎ ﺷﺠﺮ ﺑﯿﻨﮭﻢ ﺛﻢ ﻻ ﯾﺠﺪوا ﻓﻲ اﻧﻔﺴﮭﻢ ﺣﺮﺟﺎ ﻣﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻗﻀﯿﺖ وﯾﺴﻠﻤﻮا ﺗﺴﻠﯿﻤﺎ ^ اﻗﺴﻢ ﺳﺒﺤﺎﻧﮫ ﺑﻨﻔﺴﮫ اﻧﮭﻢ ﻻ ﯾﺆﻣﻨﻮن ﺣﺘﻰ ﯾﺤﻜﻤﻮه ﻓﻲ اﻟﺨﺼﻮﻣﺎت‬
‫اﻟﺘﻲ ﺑﯿﻨﮭﻢ ﺛﻢ ﻻ ﯾﺠﺪوا ﻓﻲ اﻧﻔﺴﮭﻢ ﺿﯿﻘﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻜﻤﮫ ﺑﻞ ﯾﺴﻠﻤﻮا ﻟﺤﻜﻤﮫ ظﺎھﺮا وﺑﺎطﻨﺎ‬

‫وﻗﺎل ﻗﺒﻞ ذﻟﻚ ^ اﻟﻢ ﺗﺮ اﻟﻰ اﻟﺬﯾﻦ ﯾﺰﻋﻤﻮن اﻧﮭﻢ اﻣﻨﻮا ﺑﻤﺎ اﻧﺰل اﻟﯿﻚ وﻣﺎ اﻧﺰل ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻠﻚ‬
‫ﯾﺮﯾﺪون ان ﯾﺘﺤﺎﻛﻤﻮا اﻟﻰ اﻟﻄﺎﻏﻮت وﻗﺪ اﻣﺮوا ان ﯾﻜﻔﺮوا ﺑﮫ وﯾﺮﯾﺪ اﻟﺸﯿﻄﺎن ان ﯾﻀﻠﮭﻢ‬
 ‫ﺿﻼﻻ ﺑﻌﯿﺪا واذا ﻗﯿﻞ ﻟﮭﻢ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻮا اﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ اﻧﺰل ﷲ واﻟﻰ اﻟﺮﺳﻮل راﯾﺖ اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﻘﯿﻦ ﯾﺼﺪون ﻋﻨﻚ‬
‫ﺻﺪودا ^ ﻓﺒﯿﻦ ﺳﺒﺤﺎﻧﮫ ان ﻣﻦ دﻋﻲ اﻟﻰ اﻟﺘﺤﺎﻛﻢ اﻟﻰ ﻛﺘﺎب ﷲ واﻟﻰ رﺳﻮﻟﮫ ﻓﺼﺪ ﻋﻦ رﺳﻮﻟﮫ‬
‫ﻛﺎن ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻘﺎ‬

‫ وﺑﺎﻟﺮﺳﻮل واطﻌﻨﺎ ﺛﻢ ﯾﺘﻮﻟﻰ ﻓﺮﯾﻖ ﻣﻨﮭﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻌﺪ ذﻟﻚ وﻣﺎ‬K‫وﻗﺎل ﺳﺒﺤﺎﻧﮫ ^ وﯾﻘﻮﻟﻮن اﻣﻨﺎ ﺑﺎ‬
‫اوﻟﺌﻚ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺆﻣﻨﯿﻦ واذا دﻋﻮا اﻟﻰ ﷲ ورﺳﻮﻟﮫ ﻟﯿﺤﻜﻢ ﺑﯿﻨﮭﻢ اذا ﻓﺮﯾﻖ ﻣﻨﮭﻢ ﻣﻌﺮﺿﻮن وان ﯾﻜﻦ‬
‫ﻟﮭﻢ اﻟﺤﻖ ﯾﺎﺗﻮا اﻟﯿﮫ ﻣﺬﻋﻨﯿﻦ اﻓﻲ ﻗﻠﻮﺑﮭﻢ ﻣﺮض ام ارﺗﺎﺑﻮا أم ﯾﺨﺎﻓﻮن ان ﯾﺤﯿﻒ ﷲ ﻋﻠﯿﮭﻢ‬
‫ورﺳﻮﻟﮫ ﺑﻞ اوﻟﺌﻚ ھﻢ اﻟﻈﺎﻟﻤﻮن اﻧﻤﺎ ﻛﺎن ﻗﻮل اﻟﻤﺆﻣﻨﯿﻦ اذا دﻋﻮا اﻟﻰ ﷲ ورﺳﻮﻟﮫ ﻟﯿﺤﻜﻢ‬
^ ‫ﺑﯿﻨﮭﻢ ان ﯾﻘﻮﻟﻮا ﺳﻤﻌﻨﺎ واطﻌﻨﺎ‬

‫ﻓﺒﯿﻦ ﺳﺒﺤﺎﻧﮫ ان ﻣﻦ ﺗﻮﻟﻰ ﻋﻦ طﺎﻋﺔ اﻟﺮﺳﻮل واﻋﺮض ﻋﻦ ﺣﻜﻤﮫ ﻓﮭﻮ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﻘﯿﻦ وﻟﯿﺲ‬
‫ﺑﻤﺆﻣﻦ وان اﻟﻤﺆﻣﻦ ھﻮ اﻟﺬي ﯾﻘﻮل ﺳﻤﻌﻨﺎ واطﻌﻨﺎ ﻓﺎذا ﻛﺎن اﻟﻨﻔﺎق ﯾﺜﺒﺖ وﯾﺰول اﻻﯾﻤﺎن‬
‫ﺑﻤﺠﺮد اﻻﻋﺮاض ﻋﻦ ﺣﻜﻢ اﻟﺮﺳﻮل وارادة اﻟﺘﺤﺎﻛﻢ اﻟﻰ ﻏﯿﺮه ﻣﻊ ان ھﺬا ﺗﺮك ﻣﺤﺾ وﻗﺪ‬
"‫ﯾﻜﻮن ﺳﺒﺒﮫ ﻗﻮة اﻟﺸﮭﻮة ﻓﻜﯿﻒ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻨﻘﺺ واﻟﺴﺐ وﻧﺤﻮه‬

Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

“The fourth evidence upon this is His sayings:

“But no, by your Lord, they can have no faith, until they make you (O
Muhammad (saw)) judge in all disputes between them, and find in
themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with
full submission.” (An-Nisa : 65)

He (Subhanahu) swore by himself that they will not believe until they seek
his judgement in their internal disputes and find no difficulty in their
selves about his judgement, rather they submit to his judgement
apparently and inwardly (Zahiran wa Batinan).

He said before this: “Have you seen those 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 (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject it. But
Shaitan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray. And when it is said to
them: "Come to what Allah has sent down and to the Messenger" you
(Muhammad (saw)) see the hypocrites turn away from you with
aversion.” (An-Nisa : 60-61)

He (Subhanahu) made it clear that the one who is called to refer

judgement to the Book of Allah and to His Messenger, and he turns
away from His Messenger, he is among the hypocrites.

“They say: "We have believed in Allah and in the Messenger (saw),
and we obey," then a party of them turn away thereafter, such are not
believers. And when they are called to Allah and his Messenger (saw),
to judge between them, Lo! A party of them turns aside. But if the
 right is with them, they come to him willingly with submission. Is
there a disease in their hearts? Or do they doubt or fear lest Allah and
his Messenger (saw) should wrong them in judgement. Nay, it is they
themselves who are the Zâlimûn. The only saying of the faithful
believers, when they are called to Allah and his Messenger (saw), to
judge between them, is that they say: "We hear and we obey." and
such are the prosperous ones.” (An-Nur : 47-51)

He (Subhanahu) made it clear that the one who turns away from the
obedience to the Messenger and turns away from his judgement, he is
among the hypocrites and he is not a believer. The believer is the one
who says: "We hear and we obey."

So when Nifaq (hypocrisy) is established and Iman (faith) is removed

by merely turning away from the Hukm (judgement) of the Messenger
and desiring to seek the judgement from others, although this is a
pure abandon and its cause can be the intensity of desire ( Quwatu
shahwah), so what about degrading him, insulting him and other
similar things?"

Shaykh Al-Fawzan, in his “Kitab At-Tawheed”, Eng Tran. Darussalam p 67,

quoted from Shayk Al-Islam ibn Taymiyah (Fatawa p 388) to explain that
there is a difference in the topic of judging by other than what Allah revealed
in a particular matter and a general law:

“This applies to cases that concern individuals, but ruling on cases that
concern the public is a different case. Shaykhul Islam b Taymiyyah
said: “If the ruler was religious and yet ruled ignorantly without
knowledge, he would end up in Hell-fire. But if he is aware of the
Divine laws and yet he ruled by other than the truth of which he is
aware, he would belong to the people of Hell-Fire. And if he rules
unjustly and without knowledge, he would be more deserving of Fire.
This in case he judges in a case of an individual, but if he judges a
case which concerns the public, and altered the truth into falsehood,
and the falsehood into truth, the Sunnah into Bad’ah or the Bid’ah into
Sunnah, and the good into evil and the evil into good, and opposes the
commands of Allah and His Messenger and commands what Allah
and His Messenger forbid, then this is another type to be judged by
Allah, the Rabb of the Worlds”

This is mentioned in “Majmu Fatawa” (35: 388):

‫" ﻓﺈن اﻟﺣﺎﻛم إذا

ﺎن دﯾﻧﺎ ﻟﻛﻧﻪ ﺣ
م ﻐﯾر ﻋﻠم
ﺎن ﻣن أﻫﻞ اﻟﻧﺎر ٕوان
ﺎن ﻋﺎﻟﻣﺎ ﻟﻛﻧﻪ ﺣ
م‬
‫ ﻌﻠﻣﻪ
ﺎن ﻣن أﻫﻞ اﻟﻧﺎر ٕواذا ﺣ
م ﻼ ﻋدل وﻻ ﻋﻠم
ﺎن أوﻟﻰ أن 
ون ﻣن‬$‫ اﻟذ‬%‫ﺑﺧﻼف اﻟﺣ‬
‫أﻫﻞ اﻟﻧﺎر وﻫذا إذا ﺣ
م ﻓﻰ ﻗﺿﺔ ﻣﻌﯾﻧﺔ ﻟﺷﺧص وأﻣﺎ إذا ﺣ
م ﺣ
ﻣﺎ ﻋﺎﻣﺎ ﻓﻰ دﯾن‬
 ‫ ﺎطﻼ واﻟﺎطﻞ ﺣﻘﺎ واﻟﺳﻧﺔ ﺑدﻋﺔ واﻟﺑدﻋﺔ ﺳﻧﺔ واﻟﻣﻌروف ﻣﻧ
ار واﻟﻣﻧ
ر‬%‫اﻟﻣﺳﻠﻣﯾن ﻓﺟﻌﻞ اﻟﺣ‬
‫ﻣﻌروﻓﺎ وﻧﻬﻰ ﻋﻣﺎ أﻣر ﷲ ﻪ ورﺳوﻟﻪ وأﻣر ﻣﺎ ﻧﻬﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻧﻪ ورﺳوﻟﻪ ﻓﻬذا ﻟون آﺧر ﺣ
م ﻓﻪ‬
‫رب اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻣﯾن ٕواﻟﻪ اﻟﻣرﺳﻠﯾن ﻣﺎﻟك ﯾوم اﻟدﯾن‬

Hafiz ibn Qayim Al-Jawziyah

It is written in “Fath Al-Majeed Sharh Kitab Tawhid” of Shaykh

AbdurRahman ibn Hasan Ale Shaykh, chapter 39, “Allah’s words: “Have you
seen those 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 (false judges, etc.) while they
have been ordered to reject it”

“Ibn Al-Qayim said: “Whoever is called to seek the judgement of

Allah’s Book and the Prophetic Sunnah, and he refuses, he is one of the
hypocrites”

Hafiz ibn Kathir

Hafiz Ibn Kathir said in his “Tafsir”, Surah Al-Maidah, verse 50:

‫ وﻋدل‬،‫"ﯾﻧ
ر ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣن ﺧرج ﻋن ﺣ
م ﷲ اﻟﻣﺣ
م اﻟﻣﺷﺗﻣﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻞ ﺧﯾر اﻟﻧﺎﻫﻲ ﻋن
ﻞ ﺷر‬
‫ﻌﺔ ﷲ
ﻣﺎ‬A‫إﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺳواﻩ ﻣن اﻵراء واﻷﻫواء واﻻﺻطﻼﺣﺎت اﻟﺗﻲ وﺿﻌﻬﺎ اﻟرﺟﺎل ﻼ ﻣﺳﺗﻧد ﻣن ﺷر‬
‫
ﺎن أﻫﻞ اﻟﺟﺎﻫﻠﺔ ﺣ
ﻣون ﻪ ﻣن اﻟﺿﻼﻻت واﻟﺟﻬﺎﻻت ﻣﻣﺎ ﺿﻌوﻧﻬﺎ ﺂراﺋﻬم وأﻫواﺋﻬم و
ﻣﺎ ﺣ
م‬
‫ وﻫو‬%‫ وﺿﻊ ﻟﻬم اﻟﺎﺳ‬$‫ﻪ اﻟﺗﺗﺎر ﻣن اﻟﺳﺎﺳﺎت اﻟﻣﻠﻛﺔ اﻟﻣﺄﺧوذة ﻋن ﻣﻠﻛﻬم ﺟﻧ
ﯾز ﺧﺎن اﻟذ‬
‫ﻋﺎرة ﻋن
ﺗﺎب ﻣﺟﻣوع ﻣن أﺣ
ﺎم ﻗد اﻗﺗﺳﻬﺎ ﻣن ﺷراﺋﻊ ﺷﺗﻰ ﻣن اﻟﯾﻬودﺔ واﻟﻧﺻراﻧﺔ ﻓﺻﺎرت ﻓﻲ‬
‫ ﻓﻣن ﻓﻌﻞ ذﻟك ﻣﻧﻬم ﻓﻬو
ﺎﻓر‬،‫ﺑﻧﻪ ﺷرﻋًﺎ ﻣﺗﻌًﺎ ﻘدﻣوﻧﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺣ
م 
ﺗﺎب ﷲ وﺳﻧﺔ رﺳوﻟﻪ ﷺ‬
‫ﯾﺟب ﻗﺗﺎﻟﻪ ﺣﺗﻰ ﯾرﺟﻊ إﻟﻰ ﺣ
م ﷲ ورﺳوﻟﻪ ﻓﻼ ﺣ
م ﺳواﻩ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻠﯾﻞ وﻻ
ﺛﯾر‬

“Allah, Exalted, denounces those who exit His clear Hukm which
enjoins every possible good and precludes all forms of mischief, and
turn to other than it from personal views, whims and doctrines which
were established without a legal precedent from Divine Legislation.
Such was the case of the Arabs, during the Pre-Islamic Period of
Ignorance (the Jahiliyyah), who used to judge according to delusions
and false opinions. Such is also the case of the Tatars who would judge
according to laws enunciated by Gengis Khan who composed Al-Yasiq,
a book of legal issues adopted from various Jewish, Christian and
Muslim writings. Some of its rules were formulated in accordance with
his personal views and whims. Afterwards, they would give
precedence (Yadaddimunaha) to such regulations over the Ever-
 Glorious Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet (saw). Thus, whoever
among them does such is a Kafir who should be fought until he
returns to Allah’s divine Law and does not rule by anything else in
minor or major matters”

Hafiz ibn Kathir said in his “Al-Bidayah wan Nihayah” (13/128):

‫"ﻓﻣن ﺗرك اﻟﺷرع اﻟﻣﺣ

م اﻟﻣﻧزل ﻋﻠﻰ ﷴ ﺑن ﻋﺑدﷲ ﺧﺎﺗم اﻷﻧﺑﺎء وﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻰ ﻏﯾرﻩ ﻣن اﻟﺷراﺋﻊ‬
"‫ ﻓﻛﯾﻒ ﻣن ﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻰ اﻟﺎﺳﺎ وﻗدﻣﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻪ؟! ﻣن ﻓﻌﻞ ذﻟك
ﻔر ﺑﺈﺟﻣﺎع اﻟﻣﺳﻠﻣﯾن‬،‫اﻟﻣﻧﺳوﺧﺔ
ﻔر‬

“So whoever abandons the clear laws revealed to Muhammad ibn

‘Abdillah, the seal of the Prophets, and seek the judgment from other
among abrogated laws, then he is a Kafir. So what about the one who
seeks judgment from Al-Yasa and gives precedence to it over them?
Whoever does such is a Kafir by consensus of Muslims.”

Allamah Ibn Hazm

Allamah ibn Hazm said in his “Al-Ihkam fi Usul Al-Ahkam” v 5 p 162:

‫ وأن ﻣن ﺣ
ـم ﺣ
ـم اﻹﻧﺟﯾـﻞ ﻣﻣـﺎ‬، ‫" ﻻ ﺧﻼف ﺑﯾن اﺛﻧﯾن ﻣن اﻟﻣﺳﻠﻣﯾن أن ﻫذا ﻣﻧﺳوخ‬
" ‫ﻌﺔ اﻹﺳﻼم ﻓﺈﻧﻪ
ﺎﻓر ﻣﺷرك ﺧﺎرج ﻋن اﻹﺳﻼم‬A‫ﻟم ﺄت ﺎﻟﻧص ﻋﻠﻪ وﺣﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺷر‬

“There is no difference between two of the Muslims that this is

abrogated, and that whoever judges with the judgment of the Injeel
(Gospel) for which no revelation came from the Shari’ah of Islam with
a clear text, he is a Kafir Mushrik outside the fold of Islam”

Imam Ash-Shawkani

Imam Ash-Shawkani said in his “Risaalah Ad-Dawaa’ al-‘Aajil fi Daf’ al-‘Adw

wa’s-Saa’il” p 33-34 speaking about some tribes in Yemen:

“But in addition to that, there are serious problems and appalling

deviations among them, things which are not found in the first part.
For example, they refer for judgment to those among them who know
the rulings of taaghoot concerning all matters that they come across,
without anyone denouncing them and without their feeling any shame
before Allah or His slaves. They are not afraid of anyone. They may
judge in such a manner between any people who come to them. This is
well-known to all people, but no one is able to denounce it or ward it
off. It is more obvious than a beacon on a hill.
 Undoubtedly this is kufr, disbelief in Allah and His shari’ah which He
enjoined through His Messenger and chose for His slaves in His Book
and on the lips of His Messenger. Indeed, they have disbelieved in all
the laws from Adam to the present. It is obligatory to wage jihad
against these people and to fight them until they accept the rulings of
Islam and submit to them, and judge amongst them according to the
pure shari’ah, and give up all the devilish taaghoot which they are
currently following. In addition to this they are persisting in other
matters apart from judging according to the taaghoot and referring to
it for judgement.”

Shaykh Sulayman ibn ‘Abdillah Ale Shaykh

Shaykh Sulayman ibn ‘Abdillah Ale Shaykh said in his “Taysir Al-‘Aziz
Al-Hameed Sharh Kitab At-Tawhid”, in chapter 39: “Have you seen
those 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 (false judges, etc.)
while they have been ordered to reject it.” (An-Nisa : 60):

‫"ﻗﺎل اﺑن ﺛﯾر واﻵﺔ ذاﻣﺔ ﻟﻣن ﻋدل ﻋن اﻟﻛﺗﺎب واﻟﺳﻧﺔ وﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺳواﻫﻣﺎ ﻣن اﻟﺎطﻞ وﻫو‬
‫اﻟﻣراد ﺎﻟطﺎﻏوت ﻫﻬﻧﺎ وﻗوﻟﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ وﻗد أﻣروا أن  ﻔروا ﻪ أ& ﺎﻟطﺎﻏوت وﻫو دﻟﯾﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ أن‬
‫اﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻰ اﻟطﺎﻏوت ﻣﻧﺎف ﻟﻼﻣﺎن ﻣﺿﺎد ﻟﻪ ﻓﻼ ﺻﺢ اﻻﻣﺎن اﻻ ﺎﻟﻛﻔر ﻪ وﺗرك اﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم اﻟﻪ‬
"4‫ﻓﻣن ﻟم  ﻔر ﺎﻟطﺎﻏوت ﻟم ﯾؤﻣن ﺎ‬

“Ibn Kathir said that the verse blames those who turn away from the
Book and the Sunnah and seek the judgement from other than these
two among falsehood, and this is what is meant by At-Taghut here,
and His (Ta’ala) saying: “while they have been ordered to reject it”
means the Taghut, and it is a proof that referring the judgement to the
Taghut contradicts Iman (faith), opposes it, Iman (faith) is not correct
except by rejecting it and abandoning referring to it (Taghut) and the
one who does not reject the Taghut does not believe in Allah.”

Shaykh ‘AbdurRahman ibn Hasan Ale Shaykh

Shaykh ‘AbdurRahman ibn Hasan said in his “Fath Al-Majeed Sharh

Kitab At-Tawhid”, in chapter 39: “Have you seen those 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 (false judges, etc.) while they have been
ordered to reject it.” (An-Nisa : 60):
 ‫ أو طﻠب ذﻟك اﺗﺎﻋﺎ‬،‫"ﻓﻣن ﺧﺎﻟﻒ ﻣﺎ أﻣر ﷲ ﻪ ورﺳوﻟﻪ ﷺ ﺄن ﺣ
م ﺑﯾن اﻟﻧﺎس ﻐﯾر ﻣﺎ أﻧزل ﷲ‬
‫ ﻓﺈن ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬،‫ ٕوان زﻋم أﻧﻪ ﻣؤﻣن‬،‫ﻘﺔ اﻹﺳﻼم واﻹﻣﺎن ﻣن ﻋﻧﻘﻪ‬V‫دﻩ ﻓﻘد ﺧﻠﻊ ر‬A‫ر‬A‫ﻟﻣﺎ ﯾﻬواﻩ و‬
‫ وأﻛذﺑﻬم ﻓﻲ زﻋﻣﻬم اﻹﻣﺎن ﻟﻣﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺿﻣن ﻗوﻟﻪ }ﯾزﻋﻣون{ ﻣن ﻧﻔﻲ‬،‫أﻧ
ر ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣن أراد ذﻟك‬
‫ ﻫو ﻓﯾﻬﺎ
ﺎذب ﻟﻣﺧﺎﻟﻔﺗﻪ ﻟﻣوﺟﺑﻬﺎ وﻋﻣﻠﻪ‬Z‫ ﻓﺈن }ﯾزﻋﻣون{ إﻧﻣﺎ ﻘﺎل ﻏﺎﻟﺎ ﻟﻣن ادﻋﻰ دﻋو‬،‫إﻣﺎﻧﻬم‬
‫
ﻣﺎ‬،‫ }وﻗد أﻣروا أن 
ﻔروا ﻪ { ﻷن اﻟﻛﻔر ﺎﻟطﺎﻏوت ر
ن اﻟﺗوﺣﯾد‬:‫ ﻫذا ﻗوﻟﻪ‬%‫ ﺣﻘ‬،‫ﻣﺎ ﯾﻧﺎﻓﯾﻬﺎ‬
‫ ﺗﺻﻠﺢ‬$‫ واﻟﺗوﺣﯾد ﻫو أﺳﺎس اﻹﻣﺎن اﻟذ‬،‫ ﻓﺈن ﻟم ﺣﺻﻞ ﻫذا اﻟر
ن ﻟم 
ن ﻣوﺣدا‬،‫ﻓﻲ آﺔ اﻟﻘرة‬
‫ؤﻣن‬A‫ }ﻓﻣن 
ﻔر ﺎﻟطﺎﻏوت و‬:‫
ﻣﺎ أن ذﻟك ﺑﯾن ﻓﻲ ﻗوﻟﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬.‫ﻪ ﺟﻣﻊ اﻷﻋﻣﺎل وﺗﻔﺳد ﻌدﻣﻪ‬
"‫ وذﻟك أن اﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻰ اﻟطﺎﻏوت إﻣﺎن ﻪ‬.{‫ﺎ^ ﻓﻘد اﺳﺗﻣﺳك ﺎﻟﻌروة اﻟوﺛﻘﻰ‬

“Whoever opposes what Allah and His Messenger (saw) have ordered
by ruling among the people by other than what Allah revealed, or by
seeking this (ruling) following his desires and wishes, he has taken off
the loop of Islam and Iman from his neck, even of he claims to be a
believer, as indeed Allah (Ta’ala) denounced those who desired such (a
ruling), and He denied their claim of Iman as there is within His
saying: “those who claim” a negation of their Iman, because “claim” is
only said in most cases for those who make a claim in which they lie
by opposing its requirements and acting in contradiction to it. And this
is verified by His saying: “while they have been ordered to reject it“,
because rejecting the Taghut is a pillar of Tawhid, as mentioned in
the verse of Surah Al-Baqarah, and if this pillar is not fulfilled, the
person is not a monotheist (Muwahhid), and Tawhid is the
foundation of Iman by which all actions are correct and its absence
causes the corruption (of all actions), as He made it clear in His saying:
“Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has
grasped the most trustworthy handhold” (2 : 256) and this because
seeking the judgement of the Taghut is Iman (faith) in it”

Shaykh ‘AbdulLateef ibn AbdirRahman

Shaykh ‘AbdulLateef ibn ‘AdbirRahman was asked as in “Ad-Durar As-

Saniyyah” v 10 p 426 about the tribes of Bedouins who rule by the costumes
of their father and great fathers, should we attribute Kufr to them after
informing them (of this)? He replied:

‫ ﺳﺋﻞ اﻟﺷﯾﺦ ﻋﺑد اﻟﻠطﯾﻒ ﺑن ﻋﺑد اﻟرﺣﻣن ﺑن ﺣﺳن ﺑن ﷴ ﺑن ﻋﺑد اﻟوﻫﺎب رﺣﻣﻬم ﷲ ﻋﻣﺎ ﺣ
م ﻪ أﻫﻞ‬: -
": ‫ﻒ؟ ﻓﺄﺟﺎب‬A‫ ﻋﻠﯾﻬم ﺑذﻟك اﻟﻛﻔر ﻌد اﻟﺗﻌر‬%‫ ﻫﻞ طﻠ‬، ‫ وﻏﯾرﻫم ﻣن ﻋﺎدات اﻵﺎء واﻷﺟداد‬$‫اﻟﺳواﻟﻒ ﻣن اﻟﺑواد‬
‫ ﻗﺎل ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ } وﻣن ﻟم ﺣ
م ﻣﺎ أﻧزل ﷲ‬، ‫ﻒ ﻓﻬو
ﺎﻓر‬A‫ﻣن ﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻰ ﻏﯾر
ﺗﺎب ﷲ وﺳﻧﺔ رﺳوﻟﻪ ﷺ ﻌد اﻟﺗﻌر‬
‫ وﻗﺎل ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ } أﻟم ﺗر إﻟﻰ اﻟذﯾن ﯾزﻋﻣون‬، ‫ﻓﺄوﻟﺋك ﻫم اﻟﻛﺎﻓرون { وﻗﺎل ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ } أﻓﻐﯾر دﯾن ﷲ ﯾﻐون { اﻵﺔ‬
‫دون أن ﯾﺗﺣﺎﻛﻣوا إﻟﻰ اﻟطﺎﻏوت وﻗد أﻣروا أن 
ﻔروا ﻪ { اﻵﺔ‬A‫أﻧﻬم آﻣﻧوا ﻣﺎ أﻧزل إﻟك وﻣﺎ أﻧزل ﻣن ﻗﺑﻠك ﯾر‬
‫ واﻵﺎت ﻓﻲ ﻫذا اﻟﻣﻌﻧﻰ‬، ‫ وﻗﺎل ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ } وﻟﻘد ﻌﺛﻧﺎ ﻓﻲ
ﻞ أﻣﺔ رﺳوﻻ أن اﻋﺑدوا ﷲ واﺟﺗﻧﺑوا اﻟطﺎﻏوت { اﻵﺔ‬،
[ ‫
ﺛﯾرة " ]اﻟدرر اﻟﺳﻧﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻷﺟوﺔ اﻟﻧﺟدﺔ‬

“Whoever refers to judgment to other than the Book of Allah and the
Sunnah of His Messenger (saw) after being told about that, is a Kafir.

Allah (Ta’ala) said:

“And Whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed, such are
the Kâfirûn” (5 : 44)

“Do they seek other than the Religion of Allâh.” (3:83)

“Have You seen those 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 Tâghût (false
judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them.” (An-Nisa :
60)

“And Verily, we have sent among Every Ummah (community, nation)

a Messenger (proclaiming): "Worship Allâh (Alone), and avoid (or
keep away from) Tâghût”” (An-Nahl : 36)

And the verses with this meaning are many”

Shaykh Hamad ibn ‘Ateeq:

Shaykh Hamad ibn ‘Ateeq said in his “Sabeel an-Najaat wal Fakaak” p 74-83,
after quoting the words of Ibn Kathir on the Tatars in surah Al-Maidah,
verse 50:

‫ وﻣن ﺷﺎﺑﻬﻬم ﻣن ﺗﺣ
م ﻋﺎدات آﺎﺋﻬم وﻣﺎ وﺿﻌﻪ أواﺋﻠﻬم ﻣن‬$‫وﻣﺛﻞ ﻫؤﻻء ﻣﺎ وﻗﻊ ﻓﻪ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ اﻟﺑواد‬
‫ وﻣن ﻓﻌﻞ ذﻟك ﻓﺈﻧﻪ‬، ‫ ﻘدﻣوﻧﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﺗﺎب ﷲ وﺳﻧﺔ رﺳوﻟﻪ‬، ‫اﻟﻣوﺿوﻋﺎت اﻟﻣﻠﻌوﻧﺔ اﻟﺗﻲ ﺳﻣوﻧﻬﺎ ﺷرع اﻟرﻓﺎﻗﺔ‬
(‫
ﺎﻓر ﯾﺟب ﻗﺗﺎﻟﻪ ﺣﺗﻰ ﯾرﺟﻊ إﻟﻰ ﺣ
م ﷲ ورﺳوﻟﻪ‬

“And I say that this is like what the common folk among the Bedouin
and their like do, when they refer for judgment to the customs of their
forefathers and the accursed rules fabricated by their leaders, which
they call shar’ ar-Rifaaqah (the laws of kindness) and give them
precedence over the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger
(saw). Whoever does that is a kaafir who should be fought until he
returns to the ruling of Allah and His Messenger.”

Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman

Shaykh Sulayman ibn Sahman said, as mentioned in “Ad-Durar As-Saniyah”
v 10 p 505, after quoting the words of Ibn Kathir on the Tatars in Surah Al-
Maidah, verse 50:

“And what we have mentioned from the customs of the Bedouins, that
they call “Shar’ Ar-Rifaqah” (the laws of kindness), this is from this
category. Whoever does such is a Kafir, it is obligatory to fight him
until he returns to the Hukm of Allah and His Messenger and he does
not rule by other than it in minor or major matters (Fi Qaleel wala
Kathir)”

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Ale Shaykh

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Ale Shaykh, former Mufti of Saudi Arabia,
mentioned in his risalah “Tahkeem Al-Qawanin Al-Wad’iyah” the different
categories about ruling by other than what Allah revealed:

“The fifth is the most serious, and is an obviously stubborn resistance

against the shari’ah and its rules. Opposing Allah and His Messenger,
setting up courts to compete with the Shari’ah courts be preparing
them, supporting them, establishing principles for them, making them
of different types, making their rulings binding, and preparing
theoretical bases for them. Just as the shari’ah courts have references
which are all based on the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His
Messenger, so too these courts have references which are the laws
fabricated from many various laws and legal systems, such as French
law, American law, British law and other kinds of laws, and from the
madhhabs of some of the innovators who claim to belong to Islam, ect

These courts are now well-established in many Islamic regions. Their

doors are open and people are flocking to them so that their judges
may judge between them according to these laws that go against the
rulings of the Sunnah and the Quran. These courts rulings are made
binding upon them. What Kufr can be greater than this kufr, what
contradiction of the testimony that Muhammad is the Messenger of
Allah can there be after this contradiction?”

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Ale Shaykh said in his “Fatawa” v 6, n 1451:

. ‫ ھﻞ ﺗﺠﺐ اﻟﮭﺠﺮة ﻣﻦ ﺑﻼد اﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﯿﻦ اﻟﺘﻲ ﯾﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﯿﮭﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن‬: ‫ ـ س‬1451)

 ‫ وﻛﺬﻟﻚ إذا‬، ‫ ﺗﺠﺐ اﻟﮭﺠﺮة ﻣﻨﮭﺎ‬. ‫ اﻟﺒﻠﺪ اﻟﺘﻲ ﯾﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﯿﮭﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن ﻟﯿﺴﺖ ﺑﻠﺪ إﺳﻼم‬: ‫ج‬

‫ ھﺬه‬. ‫ظﮭﺮت اﻟﻮﺛﻨﯿﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻏﯿﺮ ﻧﻜﯿﺮ وﻻ ﻏﯿﺮت ﻓﺘﺠﺐ اﻟﮭﺠﺮة ﻓﺎﻟﻜﻔﺮ ﺑﻔﺸﻮ اﻟﻜﻔﺮ وظﮭﻮره‬

. ‫ﺑﻠﺪ ﻛﻔﺮ‬

. ‫أﻣﺎ إذا ﻛﺎن ﻗﺪ ﯾﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﯿﮭﺎ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻷﻓﺮاد أو وﺟﻮد ﻛﻔﺮﯾﺎت ﻗﻠﯿﻠﺔ ﻻ ﺗﻈﮭﺮ ﻓﮭﻲ ﺑﻠﺪ إﺳﻼم‬

( ‫) ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ‬

‫ﻣﺎ اﻟﺬي ﺳﻠﻂ اﻷﻋﺪاء ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﯿﻦ ؟‬

‫إذا ﻛﺎن ﻧﻔﺲ اﻟﺸﻲء اﻟﺬي ﻧﻘﻤﮫ اﻟﺮﺳﻮل ھﻮ اﻟﻤﻘﺪم ﻋﻨﺪھﻢ واﺳﺘﻐﻨﻮا ﺑﺎﺳﻢ اﻹﺳﻼم وﺻﻼة‬

. ‫وﻧﺤﻮ ذﻟﻚ‬

. ‫إن ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺮآن واﻟﺴﻨﺔ واﻟﺸﻔﺎء واﻟﺒﯿﺎن‬

‫ ﺛﻢ‬، ‫ﺷﻲء واﺿﺢ ﺑﯿﻨﮫ اﻟﻘﺮآن ووﺿﺤﮫ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺪة ﻣﻮاﺿﻊ أن اﻟﻤﺸﺮﻛﯿﻦ ﻣﻘﺮﯾﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺑﻮﺑﯿﺔ‬

. ‫ ﻓﮭﺬا ھﻮ اﻟﺬي أﻧﻜﺮه اﻟﻘﺮآن ﻋﻠﯿﮭﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺟﮭﺔ اﻟﻌﻘﯿﺪة‬، ‫آﯾﺎت أﺧﺮ ﻋﯿﻨﺖ اﻟﺸﻲء اﻟﺬي طﻠﺒﻮه‬

‫ ﺑﻞ ھﻮ‬، ‫ ﻓﮭﺬا ﻻ أﺛﺮ ﻟﮫ‬. ‫ أﻧﺎ أﻋﺘﻘﺪ أﻧﮫ ﺑﺎطﻞ‬: ‫ ﻟﻮ ﻗﺎل ﻣﻦ ﺣﻜﻢ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن‬: ‫وﻟﻌﻠﻚ أن ﺗﻘﻮل‬

. ‫ وأﻋﺘﻘﺪ أﻧﮭﺎ ﺑﺎطﻞ‬، ‫ أﻧﺎ أﻋﺒﺪ اﻷوﺛﺎن‬: ‫ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻟﻮ ﻗﺎل أﺣﺪ‬، ‫ﻋﺰل ﻟﻠﺸﺮع‬
(‫وإذا ﻗﺪر ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﮭﺠﺮة ﻣﻦ ﺑﻼد ﺗﻘﺎم ﻓﯿﮭﺎ اﻟﻘﻮاﻧﯿﻦ وﺟﺐ ذﻟﻚ )ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ‬

Q: Is emigration from lands of Muslims which rules by Qanun (man-

made laws) obligatory?

A: A country which rules by the Qanun (man-made laws) is not a

land of Islam, emigrating from it is obligatory, and it is the same if
idolatry is apparent without any objection and it is not changed,
emigration is obligatory, the Kufr is because of open and apparent
Kufr, this is a land of Kufr. If some individuals judge (by man-made
laws) or there is the presence of few Kufr, it is not apparent then it is a
land of Islam.

What about what is imposed by the enemies upon the Muslims?

If the exact thing that the Prophet (saw) removed is what is given
precedence by them and they suffice themselves with the name of
Islam, the prayer and others, then there is in the Quran and the Sunnah
a cure and clear explanation. This is something that the Quran made
clear in many places that the polytheists accepted the Lordship
 (Rububiyah), and other verses specified what they sought, and this is
what the Quran blames them with from the perspective of the creed.

Maybe you want to say: if the one who rules by the Qanun says: I
believe that it (Qanun) is falsehood, then it has no effect, rather it is a
removal of the law. It is like someone was to say: I am worshiping an
idol and I believe that it is falsehood. So when one is able to emigrate
from a land that rules with Qawaneen (man-made laws), then it is
obligatory upon him to do such”

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim said in his “Fatawa” as quoted by Shaykh

Al-Fawzan in his “Kitab At-Tawheed”, Eng. Tran. Darussalam, p 69:

“As for that which is described as lesser infidelity, it is when he refers

the dispute to other than the Book of Allah knowing that he is
disobeying Allah by doing so, and that the ruling of Allah is the truth,
and he does it once. Such a person would not be committing major
infidelity. As for those who legislate laws and make others obey them,
this constitutes infidelity, even if they claim that they made a mistake
and that the laws of Allah are more just; such is considered as an
infidelity which entails apostasy.”

Shaykh ‘AbdurRahman ibn Muhammad ibn Qasim

Shaykh ‘AbdurRahman ibn Muhammad ibn Qasim wrote in his “Hashiyah

Al-Usul Ath-Thalathah” about the Taghuts, as in the Eng. Tran. under the
name “Notes to the three tenets”, published by Dar al-Khair p 176:

“(And one who rules by other than what Allah has revealed.) Such as
those who judge by laws of the Pre-Islam era and international (man-
made) laws”

Shaykh ‘AbdurRahman As-Sa’di

Shaykh ‘AbdurRahman As-Sa’di said in his “Al-Qawl As-Sadid” which is an

explanation of “Kitab At-Tawhid”, chapter 39, Eng. Tran.p 196-197:

“Anyone who judges with other than the judgement of Allah and His
Messenger, then he has rendered his judgement to the taghut, and if
he claims that he is a believer then he is a liar.

Faith is not correct nor complete except according to the judgement of

Allah and His Messenger, both in the foundations of religion and its
branches, regarding all cases, as the author mentions in the following
chapter.”
Shaykh Ahmad Shakir

Shaykh Ahmad Shakir wrote in his footnotes to “’Umdat At-Tafseer”, the

abridged version of “Tafsir ibn Kathir”, after Ibn Kathir speech on the Tatars:

“I say, how can it be right, according to the laws of Allah, for the
Muslims to rule in their land according to the heretic and pagan laws of
Europe? Laws which are subject to whims and desires and false opinions,
which they change and alter as they wish, and those who institute them
do not care whether they are in accordance with Islamic shari’ah or go
against it.

The Muslims did not face such a (serious) problem at all- as far as we
know from their history- except at that time, the time of the Tartars. Do
you not see how Al-Haafiz ibn Katheer, in the eighth century (AH)
described and condemned in such strong terms the man-made law
invented by the enemy of Islam, Genhiz Khan? But the Muslims now
are in a worse position and are deviating further than they were then,
because most of the Muslim nations, now, have virtually fully adopted
such laws which go against the shari’ah, which resemble Yaasiq made
by a kaafir whose kufr was obvious. These laws are legislated by people
who claim to follow Islam. They teach them to the children of the
Muslims, and fathers and sons feel proud of that. They entrust their
affairs to the followers of this modern Yaasiq, and they belittle those
who oppose them, describing those who call them to adhere to their
religion and their shari’ah as backward and rigid, and use other
insulting terms. The matter of these man-made laws is clear as the light:
they constitute blatant kufr…”

Shaykh Mahmood Shakir

Shaykh Mahmood Shakir wrote in his notes to “Tafsir At-Tabari” (Quran 5 :

44) about the saying of Abu Majliz to the Ibadiyah (a sect from Khawarij):

“So their question was not about something that the innovators refer
to in our times, of ruling or judging concerning matters of wealth,
honour and blood-money according to laws which go against the
Islamic shari’ah or of issuing laws obliging the Muslims to refer for
judgment to a ruling other than the ruling of Allah in His Book or in
the words of His Prophet (saw), because such actions are tantamount
to turning away from the ruling of Allah and rejecting His religion,
and preferring the rulings of the kuffaar (disbelievers) to the rulings of
Allah. This is kufr and no one among any of the various groups doubts
that those who say or advocate this are kaafir.”

Shaykh Muhammad Hamid Al-Fiqi

Shaykh Muhammad Hamid Al-Fiqi said in his notes on “Fath Al-Majeed” on
the words of Hafiz ibn Katheer about the Kufr of the Tatars:

‫"وﻣﺛﻞ ﻫذا وﺷر ﻣﻧﻪ ﻣن اﺗﺧذ ﻣن

ﻼم اﻟﻔرﻧﺟﺔ ﻗواﻧﯾن ﯾﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﯾﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟدﻣﺎء واﻟﻔروج واﻷﻣوال‬
‫وﻘدﻣﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻋﻠم وﺗﺑﯾن ﻟﻪ ﻣن
ﺗﺎب ﷲ وﺳﻧﺔ رﺳوﻟﻪ ﷺ ﻓﻬو ﻼ ﺷك
ﺎﻓر ﻣرﺗد إذا أﺻر‬
‫ ﻋﻣﻞ ﻣن ظواﻫر‬$‫ اﺳم ﺗﺳﻣﻰ ﻪ وﻻ أ‬$‫ وﻻ ﯾﻧﻔﻌﻪ أ‬،‫ﻋﻠﯾﻬﺎ وﻟم ﯾرﺟﻊ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺣ
م ﻣﺎ أﻧزل ﷲ‬
". ‫أﻋﻣﺎل اﻟﺻﻼة واﻟﺻﺎم وﻧﺣوﻫﺎ‬

“And similar to it and worse to it is the one who takes from the words
of the occidentals laws to which people refer in matters of blood,
private parts and properties, and he gives precedence to them
(Yuqaddimuha) over what he knows and what is manifest to him from
the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw). Such a
person is without any doubt Kafir apostate if he persists upon them
and does not return to judging with the Hukm revealed by Allah,
and the name he chooses will not benefit him, nor any of his apparent
actions such as prayer, fasting and others.”

Shaykh AbdurRazaq Al-‘Afifi

In his essay “Al-Hukm bi ghayri ma anzala Allah”, which is in the book

“Shubuhat hawl as-Sunnah”, Shaykh Al-Afifi followed his introduction with
a list of different types of those who rule by something other that which Allah
has revealed. After mentioning the first and second types, he said: “

‫ ﻟﻌﻣﻠوا‬،‫ وﻫﺄ ﻟﻬم ﻧظﻣﺎ‬،‫ ﺛم وﺿﻊ ﻟﻠﻧﺎس أﺣ

ﺎﻣﺎ‬،‫ ﻋﺎﻟﻣﺎ ﺄﺣ
ﺎﻣﻪ‬،‫ ﻣن
ﺎن ﻣﻧﺗﺳﺎ ﻟﻺﺳﻼم‬:‫اﻟﺛﺎﻟﺛﺔ‬
. ‫ ﻣن ﻣﻠﺔ اﻹﺳﻼم‬،‫ ﺧﺎرج‬،‫ ﻓﻬو
ﺎﻓر‬،‫ وﻫو ﻌﻠم أﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﺧﺎﻟﻒ أﺣ
ﺎم اﻹﺳﻼم‬،‫ﺗﺣﺎﻛﻣوا إﻟﯾﻬﺎ‬A‫ﺑﻬﺎ و‬

‫ وﻣن أﻣر اﻟﻧﺎس ﺎﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻰ ﺗﻠك اﻟﻧظم‬،‫و

ذا اﻟﺣ
م ﻓﻣن أﻣر ﺑﺗﺷ
ﯾﻞ ﻟﺟﻧﺔ أو ﻟﺟﺎن ﻟذﻟك‬
. ‫ﻌﺔ اﻹﺳﻼم‬A‫واﻟﻘواﻧﯾن أو ﺣﻣﻠﻬم ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﯾﻬﺎ وﻫو ﻌﻠم أﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺧﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﻟﺷر‬

‫ ﻣﻊ ﻋﻠﻣﻪ‬،‫ وﻣن أطﺎﻋﻬم ﻓﻲ اﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﯾﻬﺎ ﺎﺧﺗﺎرﻩ‬،‫ وطﻘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺿﺎﺎ‬،‫و

ذا ﻣن ﯾﺗوﻟﻰ اﻟﺣ
م ﺑﻬﺎ‬
. ‫ﻣﺧﺎﻟﻔﺗﻬﺎ ﻟﻺﺳﻼم‬

. ‫ﻓﺟﻣﻊ ﻫؤﻻء ﺷر
ﺎء ﻓﻲ اﻹﻋراض ﻋن ﺣ
م ﷲ‬

. ‫ﯾﻧﻪ‬V‫ﻧﺎﻗﺿﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻠم ﻣﻧﻪ و‬A‫ﻊ اﻹﺳﻼم و‬A‫ﻌﺎ ﺿﺎﻫﻲ ﻪ ﺗﺷر‬A‫ﻟﻛن ﻌﺿﻬم ﺿﻊ ﺗﺷر‬
‫ أو وﻟﻲ اﻟﺣ
م ﻪ ﺑﯾن اﻟﻧﺎس أو ﻧﻔذ اﻟﺣ
م‬،‫ أو ﺣﻣﻞ اﻷﻣﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻌﻣﻞ ﻪ‬،‫وﻌﺿﻬم ﺎﻷﻣر ﺑﺗطﺑﻘﻪ‬
. ‫ﻣﻘﺗﺿﺎﻩ‬

. ‫وﻌﺿﻬم طﺎﻋﺔ اﻟوﻻة واﻟرﺿﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺷرﻋوا ﻟﻬم ﻣﺎ ﻟم ﺄذن ﻪ ﷲ وﻟم ﯾﻧزل ﻪ ﺳﻠطﺎﻧﺎ‬

‫ و
ﺎﻧوا ﺷر
ﺎء ﻓﻲ‬،‫ وﺻدق ﻋﻠﯾﻬم إﺑﻠس ظﻧﻪ ﻓﺎﺗﻌوﻩ‬،‫ ﻣن ﷲ‬Z‫ﻓﻛﻠﻬم ﻗد اﺗﻊ ﻫواﻩ ﻐﯾر ﻫد‬
‫ ﻣﻊ إﻋراﺿﻬم‬،‫ واﻋﺗﻘﺎدﻫم ﻣﺎ ﻓﻪ‬،‫ واﻟطﻐﺎن وﻻ ﯾﻧﻔﻌﻬم ﻋﻠﻣﻬم ﺷرع ﷲ‬،‫ واﻟﻛﻔر‬،‫ واﻹﻟﺣﺎد‬،‫ﻎ‬A‫اﻟز‬
‫
ﻣﺎ ﻟم ﯾﻧﻔﻊ إﺑﻠس‬،‫ واﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم إﻟﻪ‬،‫ وﺗطﺑﻘﻪ‬،‫ﻊ ﻣن ﻋﻧد أﻧﻔﺳﻬم‬A‫ ﺑﺗﺷر‬،‫ وﺗﺟﺎﻓﯾﻬم ﻷﺣ
ﺎﻣﻪ‬،‫ﻋﻧﻪ‬
". ‫ وﻋدم اﻻﺳﺗﺳﻼم واﻻﻧﻘﺎد إﻟﻪ‬،‫ ﻣﻊ إﻋراﺿﻪ ﻋﻧﻪ‬،‫ واﻋﺗﻘﺎدﻩ اﺎﻩ‬،%‫ﻋﻠﻣﻪ ﺎﻟﺣ‬

“The third (type) is the one who claims to belong to Islam and knows
its rulings, but he legislates- makes laws, for the people and sets up a
system to be followed by people and refer to them for judgment,
knowing that they go against the rulings of Islam. Such a person is
kaafir, is beyond the pale of Islam. The same ruling applies to the one
who orders the forming of committees or councils for that purpose,
and orders the people to refer for judgment to that system and those
laws, or forces them to do so, knowing that they are against the
shari’ah. The same applies to the one who passes a judgment on that
basis and applies it to different cases, and those who obey them on
referring to it for judgment by choice, knowing that it goes against
Islam. They are all the same in turning away from the ruling of Allah.
The same ruling (of kufr which puts one beyond the pale of Islam) also
applies to those who knowingly make laws to compete with and
oppose the laws of Islam, and those who enforce its implementation or
force the ummah to follow it, or become judges to judge the people
according to those laws or implement rulings according to them…they
are partners in deviation, heresy, kufr and transgression; their
knowledge of the laws of Allah and their belief in what they contain do
not benefit them when they have turned away from them and kept
away from their rulings by implementing laws legislated by
themselves and referring to them for judgment- just as Iblees did not
benefit from his knowledge of the truth and his belief in it, when he
turned away from it and did not submit to it…”

The Shaykh said before in the second type:

‫ أو ﺣ
م ﺑﯾن‬،‫ ﻟﻛن ﻏﻠﻪ ﻫواﻩ أﺣﺎﻧﺎ ﻓﻌﻣﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔﺳﻪ‬،‫ ورﺿﻲ ﺣ
م ﷲ‬%‫ و
ذا ﻣن ﻋﻠم اﻟﺣ‬:‫اﻟﺛﺎﻧﺔ‬
- ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﻼف ﻣﺎ ﻋﻠﻣﻪ ﻣن اﻟﺷرع ﻟﻌﺻﺑﺔ أو ﻟرﺷوة‬-‫ﻓﻲ ﻌض اﻟﻣﺳﺎﺋﻞ أو اﻟﻘﺿﺎﺎ‬- ‫اﻟﻧﺎس‬
‫ وﻟم ﯾﻧﺗﻘص‬،‫ إذا
ﺎن ﻣﻌﺗرﻓﺎ ﺄﻧﻪ أﺳﺎء‬،‫ ﻟﻛﻧﻪ ﻏﯾر
ﺎﻓر
ﻔ ار ﯾﺧرج ﻣن اﻹﺳﻼم‬،‫ ﻓﻬو آﺛم‬-‫ﻣﺛﻼ‬
 ‫ أن اﻟﺧﯾر واﻟﺻﻼح ﻓﻲ‬Z‫ر‬A‫ و‬،‫ ﺑﻞ ﺣز ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔﺳﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺻدر ﻣﻧﻪ‬،‫ وﻟم ﺳﻲء اﻟظن ﻪ‬،‫ﺷرع ﷲ‬
. ‫اﻟﻌﻣﻞ ﺣ
م ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬

‫ وﻗﺎض ﻓﻲ‬،‫ﻗﺎﺿﺎن ﻓﻲ اﻟﻧﺎر‬: [‫ أﻧﻪ ﻗﺎل‬،‫ ﻋن اﻟﻧﺑﻲ ﷺ‬،‫دة رﺿﻲ ﷲ ﻋﻧﻪ‬A‫ اﻟﺣﺎﻛم ﻋن ﺑر‬Z‫رو‬
‫ ﻓﺟﺎر ﻣﺗﻌﻣدا أو ﻗﺿﻰ‬%‫ وﻗﺎض ﻋرف اﻟﺣ‬،‫ ﻓﻬو ﻓﻲ اﻟﺟﻧﺔ‬،‫ ﻓﻘﺿﻰ ﻪ‬%‫ ﻗﺎض ﻋرف اﻟﺣ‬:‫اﻟﺟﻧﺔ‬
}. ‫ ﻓﻬﻣﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻧﺎر‬،‫ﻐﯾر ﻋﻠم‬

The second: The one who knows the truth and is satisfied with the
ruling of Allah, but his desire prevailed sometimes so he acted for
himself or judged between people in some matters or cases contrary to
what he knows to be from the shar’ by bigotry or corruption for
instance, then he is a sinner, but not a kafir with a Kufr that expels
from the religion, when he admits that he acted wrongfully and he did
do tanqis of the law of Allah…

Shaykh Al-Fawzan

It is mentioned in “Guide to sound creed” (“Irshad ila Sahih Al-‘Itiqad”) of

Shaykh Salih Al-Fawzan, Eng. Tran. p 91:

“Allah, Exalted be He, has named all laws contradicting His Divine
Legislation as a judgment of ignorance referring to the Pre-Islamic Period of
Ignorance (the Jahiliyyah). Almighty Allah says:

“Then is it the judgment of (the time of) ignorance they desire? But
who is better that Allah in judgment for a people who are certain (in
faith).”

Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

“According to the aforementioned Qur’anic verse, Allah, Exalted and

Glorified be He, decidedly denounces those who replace His Law
which enjoins every possible good and precludes all forms of mischief
with personal views, whims and doctrines which were established
without a legal precedent from Divine Legislation. Such was the case
of the Arabs, during the Pre-Islamic Period of Ignorance (the
Jahiliyyah), who used to judge according to delusions and false
opinions. Such is also the case of the Tatars who would judge
according to laws enunciated by Gengis Khan who composed Al-Yasiq,
a book of legal issues adopted from various Jewish, Christian and
Muslim writings. Some of its rules were formulated in accordance with
his personal views and whims. Afterwards, they would give
precedence to such regulations over the Ever-Glorious Quran and
Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH). Thus, whoever applies such legislation
 is deemed a disbeliever and should be fought until he returns to
Allah’s divine Law”

Such is also the case of our secular laws, which have become in many
Muslim countries the main sources of judiciaries with the exception of what is
commonly known as Personal Status Law.

There are, however, a number of Qur’anic verses which prove the disbelief
of those who resort to such secular laws. Almighty Allah says:

”…And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed- then it is
those who are the disbelievers.” (Al-Maidah : 44)

And He says: “But no, by your Lord, they will not (truly) believe until they
make you, (O Muhammad), judge concerning that over which they dispute
among themselves…” (An-Nisa : 65)

And He also says: “…So do you believe in part of the Scripture and
disbelieve in part?...” (Al-Baqarah : 85)

End of quote from Shaykh Al-Fawzan.

Shaykh Al-Fawzan wrote in his “kitab At-Tawheed”, Eng. Tran. Darussalam,

p 70 and after:

“Chapter 7: claiming the right of legislation, legalization and

illegalization

Legislating rules for the slaves of Allah to follow in their acts of

worship, transactions, settling disputes, litigation, and in the rest of
their affairs is an exclusive right of Allah, the Exalted, the Rabb of
mankind and the Creator of the creatures.

Allah says: “Verily the creation and the command belong to Him,
and He is the blessing Granter, the Rabb of the worlds.” (7: 54)…

Allah, Glory be to Him, denies that His slaves should accept a

lawmaker other than Himself. He says:

“Of do they have partners to Allah to legislate for them in the deen
what Allah does not allow?” (42: 21)

Hence, he who accepts a law other than Allah’s ascribes a partner to

Allah…While any other law which is legislated by neither Allah nor
His Messenger in politics, or for judging in people’s disputes, it is
considered as the law of Taghut and Jahiliyyah (Pre-Islamic era). Allah
says:

“Do they seek the judgement of Jahiliyyah? And who is better than
Allah as a judge for a people who have firm faith?” (5: 50)

The right of legalizing and illegalizing belongs to Allah too, and no one
is permitted to share this right with Him. Allah says:

“And do not eat of that on which the name of Allah is not

pronounced, for surely that is disobedience. And certainly Satans
inspire their friends to argue with you. And if you obey them, then
you are polytheists” (6: 121)

Thus Allah, the Exalted, considers obeying Satans and their followers,
with regard to legalizing what Allah prohibits as Shirk. Likewise,
whoever obeys scholars and rulers in prohibiting what Allah made
lawful, or legalizing what He prohibited, he would be considered as
taking them as lords to the exclusion of Allah. Allah, the Exalted says:

“They have taken their learned man and their monks, and the
Messiah, the son of Maryam for lords aside from Allah. And they
were commanded to worship One God. There is no true god but He.
Far is He removed from what they ascribe to Him!” (9:31)

At-Tirmidhi and others reported that the Prophet (saw) recited the
above ayah to Adi bin Hatim At-Ta’i (just before he accepted Islam)
may Allah be pleased with him, who said:

“O Messenger of Allah, we do not worship them! The Prophet (saw)

said: Do they not make legal for you what Allah makes illegal? And
you deem it as legal, and they illegalize what Allah made legal and
you deem it as illegal? He said: Certainly! Thereupon, the Prophet
(saw) said: That is how you worship them.” (Tirmidhi and others)

Hence, the obedience of the Christians to their learned men, with

regards to illegalization and legalization is considered as worship and
major Shirk, which contradicts the Tawhid, which is signified by the
testimony of Faith, La ilahah illal Allah. This testimony which signifies
that legalization and illegalization is an exclusive right of Allah, the
Exalted.

If obeying scholars and worshippers in illegal and legal matters that

oppose the law of Allah, is considered as Shirk, even though the
scholars and worshippers are religious people whose mistake may be
forgiven if it were made after exerting their efforts, and they will be
 rewarded for that. If obeying such people constitutes major Shirk,
then how about those who obey man-made laws that are the work of
the unbelievers and the atheists, imported into Muslims countries
and applied? They are much worse than the former. There is no
altering of one condition into another nor is there power except
through Allah. For the latter take the unbelievers as lords aside Allah
to legislate laws for him, and legalize the illegal, and rule people by
such laws.”

Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd

Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd said in his “Ar-Rudud” p 203 (“Tahrif An-Nusus”)
about the creed of Irja:

“And from its worse manifestations in our times, is the “Shirk of

legislation” by exiting the Shari’ah of the Lord of the earth and the
heavens by man-made laws, and these (laws) according to this Irja is
not Kufr”

Shaykh Salih Ale Shaykh

Shaykh Salih Ale Shaykh said in his “At-Tamheed” which is an

explanation of “Kitab At-Tawhid”, published by Dar Al-Manhaj:

.‫ﻌﺔ‬6‫وﺻﺎرت ﻋﻧدﻧﺎ اﻷﺣوال أر‬

ِّ
،‫اﻟﻣﺷرع وﻣن أطﺎﻋﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺟﻌﻞ اﻟﺣـﻼل ﺣ ارﻣـﺎ واﻟﺣـرام ﺣـﻼﻻ وﻣﻧﺎﻗـﺿﺔ ﺷـرع ﷲ ﻫـذا ـﺎﻓر‬
.‫ﺎ ﻣن دون ﷲ‬6‫وﻣن أطﺎﻋﻪ ﻓﻲ ذﻟك ﻓﻘد اﺗﺧذﻩ ر‬
:‫ﻊ ﻓﻪ ﺗﻔﺻﯾﻞ‬F‫واﻟﺣﺎﻛم ﺑذﻟك اﻟﺗﺷر‬
‫ وﻫــو ﻌﻠــم أﻧــﻪ‬،‫ وﻟــم  ــن ذﻟــك دﯾــدﻧﺎ ﻟــﻪ‬،‫
ﻓــﺈن ﺣ ــم ﻣ ـرة أو ﻣ ـرﺗﯾن أو أﻛﺛــر ﻣــن ذﻟــك‬
‫ ﻓﻬـذا ﻟــﻪ‬،‫ﻋـﺎص؛ ﻌﻧـﻲ ﻣــن ﺟﻬـﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﺿــﻲ اﻟـذ& ﺣ ــم ﻌﻠـم أﻧــﻪ ﻋـﺎص وﺣ ــم ﻐﯾـر ﺷــرع ﷲ‬
:‫ وﻟﻬـذا ﺗﺟـد أن ﻌـض أﻫـﻞ اﻟﻌﻠـم ﻘـول‬،‫ وﻻ  ﱠﻔر ﺣﺗﻰ ـﺳﺗﺣﻞ‬،‫ﺣ م أﻣﺛﺎﻟﻪ ﻣن أﻫﻞ اﻟذﻧوب‬
‫ ﻓﻬــذا ﺻــﺣﺢ؛ وﻟﻛــن ﻻ ﺗﻧــزل ﻫــذﻩ اﻟﺣﺎﻟــﺔ‬.‫اﻟﺣ ــم ﻐﯾــر ﺷــرع ﷲ ﻻ  ﻔــر ــﻪ إﻻ إذا اﺳــﺗﺣﻞ‬
‫ ﻔر دون ﻔر ﻟس اﻟذ& ﯾـذﻫﺑون‬:‫ ﻓﺎﻟﺣﺎﻛم ﻣﺎ ﻗﺎل اﺑن ﻋﺎس‬،‫ﻊ‬F‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺗﻘﻧﯾن واﻟﺗﺷر‬
،‫ أو ﻓـﻲ ﻣــﺳﺄﻟﺗﯾن ﺑﻬـواﻩ ﻐﯾـر ﺷــرع ﷲ‬،‫ ﻫـو ﻔـر دون ﻔــر؛ ﻌﻧـﻲ ﻣـن ﺣ ــم ﻓـﻲ ﻣـﺳﺄﻟﺔ‬،‫إﻟـﻪ‬
.‫ ﻫذا ﻔر دون ﻔر‬،‫وﻫو ﻌﻠم أﻧﻪ ﻋﺎص وﻟم ﺳﺗﺣﻞ‬
،‫ﻠــزم اﻟﻧــﺎس ﻐﯾــر ﺷــرع ﷲ‬F‫ وﺣ ــم داﺋﻣــﺎ و‬،‫ أﻣــﺎ اﻟﺣــﺎﻛم اﻟــذ& ﻻ ﺣ ــم ــﺷرع ﷲ ﺑﺗﺎﺗــﺎ‬
:‫ﻓﻬذا‬
‫
ﻣــن أﻫــﻞ اﻟﻌﻠــم ﻣــن ﻗــﺎل  ﻔــر ﻣطﻠﻘــﺎ ﻔــر اﻟــذ& ﺳـ ّـن اﻟﻘــﺎﻧون؛ ﻷن ﷲ ﺟــﻞ وﻋــﻼ ﻗــﺎل‬
‫)ﯾر‪F‬دون أن ﯾﺗﺣﺎﻛﻣوا إﻟﻰ اﻟطﺎﻏوت( ﻓﺟﻌﻞ اﻟذ& ﺣ م ﻐﯾر ﺷرع ﷲ ﻣطﻠﻘﺎ ﺟﻌﻠﻪ طﺎﻏوﺗـﺎ‪،‬‬
‫وﻗﺎل )" وﻗد أﻣروا أن  ﻔروا ﻪ(‪.‬‬
‫
وﻣــن أﻫــﻞ اﻟﻌﻠــم ﻣــن ﻗــﺎل‪ :‬ﺣﺗــﻰ ﻫــذا اﻟﻧــوع ﻻ  ﻔــر ﺣﺗــﻰ ــﺳﺗﺣﻞ؛ ﻷﻧــﻪ ﻗــد ﻌﻣــﻞ ذﻟــك‬
‫وﺣ م وﻫو ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔﺳﻪ ﻋﺎﺻﻲ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﻪ ﺣ م أﻣﺛﺎﻟﻪ ﻣـن اﻟﻣـدﻣﻧﯾن ﻋﻠـﻰ اﻟﻣﻌـﺻﺔ اﻟـذﯾن ﻟـم ﯾﺗو‪6‬ـوا‬
‫ﻣﻧﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫و‪F‬ﻠزم اﻟﻧﺎس ﻐﯾـر ﺷـرع ﷲ أﻧـﻪ ـﺎﻓر‬ ‫واﻟﻘول اﻷول ﻣن أن اﻟذ& ﺣ م داﺋﻣﺎ ﻐﯾر ﺷرع ﷲ ُ‬
‫ﻫــو اﻟ ــﺻﺣﺢ ﻋﻧ ــد&‪ ،‬وﻫ ــو ﻗ ــول اﻟﺟ ــد اﻟ ــﺷﯾﺦ ﷴ ﺑ ــن إﺑـ ـراﻫم رﺣﻣ ــﻪ ﷲ ﻓ ــﻲ رﺳ ــﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﺣ ــم‬
‫ظم‬ ‫اﻟﻘواﻧﯾن؛ ﻷﻧﻪ ﻻ ﺻدر ﻓﻲ اﻟواﻗﻊ ﻣن ٍ‬
‫ﻗﻠب ﻗد ﻔر ﺎﻟطﺎﻏوت؛ ﺑﻞ ﻻ ﺻدر إﻻ ﻣﻣن ﻋ ّ‬
‫اﻟﻘﺎﻧون وﻋظم اﻟﺣ م ﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧون‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﺣــﺎل اﻟﺛﺎﻟﺛــﺔ ﺣــﺎل اﻟﻣﺗﺣــﺎﻛم‪ ,‬اﻟﺣﺎﻟــﺔ اﻷوﻟــﻰ ‪-‬ذ رﻧــﺎ‪ -‬ﺣــﺎل اﻟﻣـ ِّ‬
‫ـﺷرع‪ ،‬اﻟﺣــﺎل اﻟﺛــﺎﻧﻲ ﺣــﺎل‬
‫اﻟﺣﺎﻛم‪.‬‬
‫ اﻟﺣﺎل اﻟﺛﺎﻟﺛﺔ ﺣﺎل اﻟﻣﺗﺣـﺎﻛم؛ ﻌﻧـﻲ اﻟـذ& ﯾـذﻫب ﻫـو وﺧـﺻﻣﻪ و‪F‬ﺗﺣـﺎﻛﻣون إﻟـﻰ ﻗـﺎﻧون‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻬذا ﻓﻪ ﺗﻔﺻﯾﻞ أﺿﺎ وﻫو‪:‬‬
‫
إن ﺎن ﯾر‪F‬د اﻟﺗﺣﺎﻛم ﻟﻪ رﻏﺔ ﻓﻲ ذﻟك و‪F‬ر] أن اﻟﺣ م ﺑذﻟك ﺳﺎﺋﻎ وﻫو ﯾر‪F‬ـد أن ﯾﺗﺣـﺎﻛم‬
‫إﻟــﻰ اﻟطــﺎﻏوت وﻻ  ـرﻩ ذﻟــك‪ ،‬ﻓﻬــذا ــﺎﻓر أــﺿﺎ؛ ﻷﻧــﻪ داﺧــﻞ ﻓــﻲ ﻫــذﻩ اﻵــﺔ‪ ،‬وﻻ ﯾﺟﺗﻣــﻊ ذﻟــك‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﻗﺎل اﻟﻌﻠﻣـﺎء إرادة اﻟﺗﺣـﺎﻛم إﻟـﻰ اﻟطـﺎﻏوت ﻣـﻊ اﻹﻣـﺎن ـﺎ‪4‬؛ ﺑـﻞ ﻫـذا ﯾﻧﻔـﻲ ﻫـذا وﷲ ﺟـﻞ‬
‫وﻋﻼ ﻗﺎل اﻟم ﺗر إﻟﻰ اﻟذﯾن ﯾزﻋﻣون (‪.‬‬
‫
اﻟﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺛﺎﻧـﺔ أﻧـﻪ ﻻ ﯾر‪F‬ـد اﻟﺗﺣـﺎﻛم؛ وﻟﻛﻧـﻪ ﺣـﺎﻛم إﻣـﺎ ﺑﺈﺟـﺎرﻩ ﻋﻠـﻰ ذﻟـك ﻣـﺎ ﺣـﺻﻞ ﻓـﻲ‬
‫اﻟـﻼد اﻷﺧــر] أﻧـﻪ ﯾﺟﺑــر أن ﺣـﺿر ﻣــﻊ ﺧـﺻﻣﻪ إﻟــﻰ ﻗـﺎض ﺣ ــم ﺎﻟﻘـﺎﻧون‪ ،‬أو أﻧــﻪ ﻋﻠــم أن‬
‫اﻟﺣ` ﻟﻪ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺷرع‪ ،‬ﻓرﻓﻊ اﻷﻣر إﻟﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺎﻧون ﻟﻌﻠﻣﻪ أﻧﻪ ﯾواﻓـ` ﺣ ـم اﻟـﺷرع‪ ،‬ﻓﻬـذا‬
‫اﻟذ& رﻓﻊ أﻣرﻩ ﻓﻲ اﻟدﻋوة ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺧـﺻﻣﻪ إﻟـﻰ ﻗـﺎض ﻗـﺎﻧوﻧﻲ ﻟﻌﻠﻣـﻪ أن اﻟـﺷرع ﻌطـﻪ ﺣﻘـﻪ وأن‬
‫اﻟﻘﺎﻧون واﻓ` اﻟﺷرع ﻓﻲ ذﻟك‪:‬‬
‫ﻓﻬذا اﻷﺻﺢ أﺿﺎ ﻋﻧد& أﻧﻪ ﺟﺎﺋز‪.‬‬ ‫·‬
‫وﻌض أﻫﻞ اﻟﻌﻠم ﻘول ﺷر ﻪ وﻟو ﺎن اﻟﺣ` ﻟﻪ‪.‬‬ ‫·‬
‫وﷲ ﺟ ـ ـ ــﻞ وﻋ ـ ـ ــﻼ وﺻ ـ ـ ــﻒ اﻟﻣﻧ ـ ـ ــﺎﻓﻘﯾن ﻘوﻟ ـ ـ ــﻪ ﴿ ٕوِان ﱠ
ـــــــن َﻟﻬـــــــم اﻟﺣـــــــ‪ %‬ـــــــﺄْﺗوا ِإَﻟـ ِ‬
‫ــــــﻪ‬ ‫َ ّ َ ُ ْ‬ ‫َ ُ ْ ُ‬
‫ﯾن﴾]اﻟﻧــور‪ ،[49:‬ﻓﺎﻟــذ& ﯾــر] أن اﻟﺣــ` ﺛﺑــت ﻟــﻪ ﻓــﻲ اﻟــﺷرع وﻣــﺎ أﺟــﺎز ﻟﻧﻔــﺳﻪ أن ﯾﺗ ارﻓــﻊ‬ ‫ِِ‬
‫ُﻣـ ْذﻋﻧ َ‬
‫إﻟـﻰ ﻏﯾـر اﻟـﺷرع إﻻ ﻷﻧـﻪ ﺄﺗـﻪ ﻣـﺎ ﺟﻌﻠـﻪ ﷲ ﺟـﻞ وﻋـﻼ ﻟـﻪ ﻣـﺷروﻋﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬـذا ﻻ ﯾـدﺧﻞ ﻓــﻲ إرادة‬
‫اﻟﺗﺣــﺎﻛم إﻟــﻰ اﻟطــﺎﻏوت‪ ،‬ﻓﻬــو ــﺎرﻩ وﻟﻛﻧــﻪ ﺣــﺎﻛم إﻟــﻰ اﻟــﺷرع‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠــم أن اﻟــﺷرع ﺣ ــم ﻟــﻪ ﻓﺟﻌــﻞ‬
‫اﻟﺣ م اﻟذ& ﻋﻧد اﻟﻘﺎﻧوﻧﻲ ﺟﻌﻠﻪ وﺳﯾﻠﺔ ﻹﺻﺎل اﻟﺣ` اﻟذ& ﺛﺑت ﻟﻪ ﺷرﻋﺎ إﻟﻪ‪.‬‬
 ‫ﻫذﻩ ﺛﻼث أﺣوال‪.‬‬
‫ اﻟﺣــﺎل اﻟ ارــﻊ ﺣــﺎل اﻟدوﻟــﺔ اﻟﺗــﻲ ﺗﺣ ــم ﻐﯾــر اﻟــﺷرع؛ ﺗﺣ ــم ﺎﻟﻘــﺎﻧون‪ ,‬اﻟــدول اﻟﺗــﻲ ﺗﺣ ــم‬
‫ﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧون أﺿﺎ ﺣﺳب ﻼم اﻟﺷﯾﺦ ﷴ ﺑن إﺑراﻫم وﺗﻔﺻﯾﻞ اﻟﻛﻼم ﻓﻲ ﻫذﻩ اﻟﻣﺳﺄﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻓﺗﺎوﻪ‬
‫ﻗﺎل أو ﻣﻘﺗﺿﻰ ﻼﻣﻪ وﺣﺎﺻﻠﻪ‪ :‬أن اﻟﻛﻔر ﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧون ﻓرض‪ ،‬وأن ﺗﺣ م اﻟﻘﺎﻧون ﻓﻲ اﻟدول‪:‬‬
‫إن ﺎن ﺧﻔﺎ ﻧﺎد ار ﻓﺎﻷرض أرض إﺳﻼم؛ ﻌﻧﻲ اﻟدوﻟﺔ دوﻟﺔ إﺳﻼم‪ ،‬ﻓ ون ﻟـﻪ ﺣ ـم‬ ‫·‬
‫أﻣﺛﺎﻟﻪ ﻣن ِّ‬
‫اﻟﺷر ﺎت اﻟﺗﻲ ﺗﻛون ﻟﻪ ﻓﻲ اﻷرض‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﺎل‪ :‬إن ﺎن ظﺎﻫ ار ﻓﺎﺷﺎ ﻓﺎﻟدار دار ﻔر؛ ﻌﻧﻲ اﻟدوﻟﺔ دوﻟﺔ ﻔر‪.‬‬ ‫·‬
‫ﻓﺻﺢ اﻟﺣ م ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟدوﻟﺔ راﺟﻊ إﻟﻰ ﻫذا اﻟﺗﻔﺻﯾﻞ‪:‬‬
‫إن ﺎن ﺗﺣ م اﻟﻘﺎﻧون ﻗﻠﻼ وﺧﻔﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬذا ﻟﻬﺎ ﺣ م أﻣﺛﺎﻟﻪ ﻣن اﻟـدول اﻟظﺎﻟﻣـﺔ أو اﻟﺗـﻲ‬ ‫·‬
‫ﻟﻬﺎ ذﻧوب وﻋﺻﺎن‪ ،‬وظﻬور أو وﺟود ﻌض اﻟﺷر ﺎت ﻓﻲ دوﻟﺗﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ٕوان ــﺎن ظــﺎﻫ ار ﻓﺎﺷــﺎ ‪-‬اﻟظﻬــور ــﺿﺎدﻩ اﻟﺧﻔــﺎء واﻟﻔــﺷو ــﺿﺎدﻩ اﻟﻘﻠــﺔ‪-‬‬ ‫·‬
‫ﻗﺎل‪ :‬ﻓﺎﻟدار دار ﻔر‪.‬‬
‫وﻫذا اﻟﺗﻔﺻﯾﻞ ﻫـو اﻟـﺻﺣﺢ؛ ﻷﻧﻧـﺎ ﻧﻌﻠـم أﻧـﻪ ﻓـﻲ دول اﻹﺳـﻼم ﺻـﺎر ﻫﻧـﺎك ﺗـﺷر‪F‬ﻌﺎت ﻏﯾـر‬
‫ﻣواﻓﻘﺔ ﻟﺷرع ﷲ ﺟﻞ وﻋﻼ‪ ،‬واﻟﻌﻠﻣﺎء ﻓﻲ اﻷزﻣﻧﺔ اﻷوﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺣ ﻣوا ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟدار ﺄﻧﻬـﺎ دار ﻔـر‬
‫وﻻ ﻋﻠــﻰ ﺗﻠــك اﻟــدول ﺄﻧﻬــﺎ دول ﻔر‪F‬ــﺔ؛ ذﻟــك ﻷن اﻟــﺷرك ﻟــﻪ أﺛــر ﻋﻠــﻰ اﻟــدار ‪-‬إذا ﻗﻠﻧــﺎ اﻟــدار‬
‫ﻌﻧــﻲ اﻟدوﻟــﺔ‪ -‬ﻓﻣﺗــﻰ ــﺎن ظــﺎﻫ ار ﻓﺎﺷــﺎ ﻓﺎﻟدوﻟــﺔ دوﻟــﺔ ﻔــر‪ ،‬وﻣﺗــﻰ ــﺎن ﻗﻠــﻼ ظــﺎﻫ ار و‪F‬ﻧ ــر‬
‫ﻓﺎﻷرض أرض إﺳﻼم واﻟدار دار إﺳﻼم‪ ،‬وﺎﻟﺗﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﺎﻟدوﻟﺔ دوﻟﺔ إﺳﻼم‪.‬‬

‫‪“There are four conditions:‬‬

‫‪The legislator and the one who obeys him in making the Halal Haram and the‬‬
‫‪Haram Halal and in contradiction with the law of Allah, this one is a Kafir,‬‬
‫‪and whoever obeys him in this, he has taken him as a lord besides Allah.‬‬

‫‪The ruler with this legislation, then there is a Tafseel (distinction):‬‬

‫‪1) If he rules once or twice or more times, but this is not a habit, and he‬‬
‫‪knows that he is a sinner, meaning from the direction of the judge who‬‬
‫‪judges, he knows that he is a sinner and he judges without the law of‬‬
‫‪Allah, then he has the ruling of his similar sinners, he is not declared‬‬
‫‪disbeliever until he declares it permissible (Istahalla). This is why you‬‬
‫‪see some people of knowledge who say that judging with other than‬‬
‫‪the law of Allah is not kufr until one makes it permissible, and this is‬‬
‫‪correct but this condition does not reach the condition of making a law‬‬
‫‪and legislation. So the ruler, as said by ibn ‘Abbas: Kufr duna Kufr, not‬‬
‫‪the one they are going to, this is Kufr duna Kufr, meaning the one who‬‬
‫‪ruled in a case or two cases by his desire with other than the law of‬‬
 Allah and he knows he is a sinner and he does not make it permissible,
this is Kufr duna Kufr.

2) As for the ruler who does not rule with the law of Allah at all, and
always rules and makes Lazim upon the people other than the law of
Allah, then some people of knowledge said that he is declared Kafir
absolutely like the legislator as Allah (Jalla wa ‘ala) said: “They wish to
go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taghut (false judges,
etc.)” so they established the one who rules by other than the law of
Allah absolutely as a taghut and He said: “While they have been
ordered to reject it.”

Some from the people of knowledge said: even this category, he is not
declared a Kafir until he declares it Halal (Istahalla), because he can do this
and rule by it and he is in himself a sinner, so he has a rule similar to those
who remain upon sins and do not repent from it.

And the first saying, that the one who always rule by other than the law of
Allah and makes Ilzam to people to other than the law of Allah, then he is a
Kafir, and this is what is correct for me, and this is the saying of my grand
father Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim (rah) in his Risalah “Tahkeem Al-
Qawaneen”, because in reality this is not done except by someone whose
heart has not rejected the Taghut, rather it is done except by someone who
respects the Qanun (man-made laws) and respects ruling by the Qanun.

The third condition is the condition of the one who refers (to these laws),
meaning the one who goes with his litigant and they refer to the Qanun, and
there is a Tafseel in this as well:

1) If he desires to refer judgement with desire in this and considers that the
ruling with such is permissible, and he desires to refer the judgement to the
Taghut and he does not dislike this, this one is a kafir as well, because he is
included in this verse, and as said by the scholars, the desire to refer the
judgement to the Taghut cannot be combined with faith in Allah, rather this
negates the other, and Allah (Jalla wa ‘Ala) says: “Have you seen those who
claim that they believe”

2) The second case is that he does not desire referring the judgement, but he
refers, either he is forced to as it happens in other countries, that he is forced
to come with his litigant to a judge who will judge by the Qanun, or he knows
that the right is with him in the Shar’, so he refers the matter to the judge in
the Qanun because he knows that he will agree with the ruling of the Shar’, so
he is the one who refers his matter in his claim against his litigant to the judge
of the Qanun because of his knowledge that the Shar’ gives him his right and
that the Qanun is in accordance with the Shar’ in this, and this is the most
correct for me, that it is permissible
Some people of knowledge say that he is a mushrik even if the right is with
him…

The fourth condition: the status of the country that rules by other than the
law of Allah, which judges with the Qanun, the country why judges with
Qanun also according to the speech of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim and
detailed speech about this topic in his Fatatwa or what is obtained and
derived from it: rejecting the Qanun is an obligation, and ruling by the Qanun
in a country:

1) If it is hidden and rare, the land is a land of Islam, meaning the country is a
Muslim country, and it will have the ruling of its similar from shirk occurring
in its land.

2) He (Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim) said: If it is apparent and

overwhelming, the land is a land of Kufr, meaning the country is a country of
Kufr.

So the ruling upon a country will return to this distinction, if ruling by Qanun
is little and hidden, it will have the similar ruling of unjust countries that has
sins and disobedience and the appearance and presence of some Shirkiyat in
the country. And if it is apparent and overwhelming, its appearance
contradicts it being hidden and it being overwhelming contradicts fewness,
the land is a land of Kufr.

This distinction is what is correct, because we know that there are in Muslim
countries legislations not in accordance with the law of Allah (Jalla wa ‘Ala),
and the scholars in first times did not rule upon the land that it is a land of
Kufr nor on these countries that they are countries of Kufr. And this because
Shirk has an influence upon the land, when we say land we mean country, so
when it is apparent and overwhelming, the country is a country of Kufr, and
when it is little apparent and it is objected, the land is a land of Islam, and in
consequence the country is a country of Islam.

Fatwa of the Lajnah against Dr Khalid Anbari

Number: 21154
Date: 24/10/1420 A.H.

Clarification from the permanent body for research and legal opinion
regarding a book with the name: "Ruling by other than what Allah has
revealed and the principles of Takfeer". by the writer: "Khalid Ali al-Anbaree"

All praise is due to Allah and may the peace and blessings be upon our
Prophet Muhammad and upon his companions, and after that:
The Permanent body for research and legal opinion has reviewed the book
bearing the name: "Ruling by other than what Allah has revealed and the
Principles of takfeer" of the writer Khalid al-Anbari, and after having studied
the book, it has become clear that it (the book) contains a breach (Ikhlaal) of
the scholarly trust in that which he has reported from the scholars of Ahlus-
sunnah wal-jamaah and distortion of the proofs from their (correct) meanings
as understood from the arabic language and the goals of the Shariah. From
examples of such is as follows:

1 - His distortion of the meanings of the proofs of Shariah and his manner of
dealing with some of the texts narrated from the people of knowledge, by
deleting or changing from the point of understanding, to other than the
meaning intended in the first place.

2 - Interpretation of some of the sayings of the people of knowledge by that

which does not agree with their position (on that issue).

3 - Lying upon the people of knowledge and that is in his attributing to the
Allaamah the Sheikh Muhammad bin Ibrahim Aal-Sheikh - may Allah have
mercy on him - that which he did not say.

4 - His reporting of consensus (ijmaa) of ahlus-sunnah regarding absence of

kufr of the one who ruled by other than what Allah has revealed in general
legislations, except by making it permissible from the heart like the rest of
the sins which are excluded from kufr.

And this pure fabrication (mahadul-Iftiraa) upon

ahlus-sunnah has its origins in ignorance (jahal) or evil intentions (soo' al-
Qasd) - we ask Allah for safety and good...

And due to that which has preceeded, the lajnah considers prohibition
(tahreem) of printing (of the mentioned book), distribution and selling of it.
We urge the writer to repent to Allah the most High, and to consult with the
trustworthy people of Knowledge, to learn from them and to understand
from them his errors, and we ask Allah for everyone, guidance, success and
firmness upon Islam and the Sunnah and may the peace and blessings be
upon the Prophet, his companions and his family.

The Permanent council for research and legal opinion.

Signed:

Abdul-Aziz bin Abdullah bin Muhammad Aaal-Sheikh

Head

Abdullah bin Abdur-Rahmaan al-Gudeyaan

Member
Saalih bin Fouzaan al-Fouzaan
Member

Bakr bin Abdullah Abu Zaid

Member

Fatwa of the Lajnah against Ali Al-Halabi

In the name of Allah – the Most Merciful – the Dispenser of Mercy

Fatwa Number: 21517 and Dated: 14/6/1421 AH

Praise be to Allah alone, and the Salaah and the Salaam be upon the one after
whom there is no prophet… And as for what follows:

For verily, The Permanent body for research and legal opinion was informed
about what was mentioned to the eminent General Mufti from some of the
sincere ones about the requests for a legal formal opinion specifically for the
secretariat general of the Council of Senior Scholars with number: 2928 and
dated: 13/5/1421 AH. And number: 2929 and dated: 13/5/1421 AH,
regarding the two books: “at-Tahdheer Min Fitnatit-Takfeer” [Warning from
the tribulations of Takfeer] and “Saihatun-Nadheer” [An Outcry of the
Warner] by their compiler – ‘Alee Hasan al-Halabi, and that they [the two
books] are calling to the Madhhab of Irjaa [by claiming] that al-‘Amal [action]
is not the condition for the correctness of Imaan, and he attributes this to
Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, and basis these two books upon distorted
reports from Sheikh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyah, al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer and
others than them two – May Allah have mercy upon all, as well as the desire
of those sincere ones for an explanation to what exists in these two books so
that the readers may acknowledge the truth from falsehood… and so on…

And after the study carried out by The Body of the two aforementioned books
and the examination of them, it has become clear to The Body that the book
“at-Tahdheer Min Fitnatit-Takfeer” compiled by ‘Alee Hasan al-Halabi, in
what he appended to the statements of the Scholars in his forward as well as
his footnotes, comprises of the following:

1 – Its author based it [the book] upon the false, innovated Madhhab of the
Murji`ah, those who encircle al-Kufr, with the Kufr of Juhood [rejection],
Takdheeb [denial] and al-Istihlaal al-Qalbee [making permissible that which
is forbidden – in the heart, only] as it [appeared] on p.6 f.2 and p.22 and this is
contrary to what Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah are upon, that al-Kufr occurs by
al-I’itiqaad [belief], by al-Qawl [statements], by al-Fi’l [actions] and by ash-
Shak [doubts].
2 – His distortion while conveying from Ibn Katheer – May Allah have Mercy
upon him – from “al-Bidaayah an-Nihaayah” [The beginning and the end]
13/118, when he mentioned in the footnote on p.15, conveying from Ibn
Katheer: “That Jankeez Khaan claimed regarding al-Yaasiq that it is from
Allah, and this is the reason for their Kufr”, but when referring back to that
passage [in the book we come to know that], what he attributed to Ibn
Katheer – may Allah have Mercy upon him – was not found.

3 – Attributing an unfounded statement to Sheikhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyah –

may Allah have mercy upon him – on p.17-18 when the aforementioned
compiler of the book, attributes to him, that the ruling on the Mubaddal [the
one who replaces the Sharee’ah of Allah with other laws] according to
Sheikh al-Islaam is not Kufr [Akbar], unless if [the replacement of the
Sharee’ah] occurs with Ma’rifah [acknowledgement], I’tiqaad [belief] and
Istihlaal [making permissible that which is forbidden], and this is merely a
baseless statement attributed to Sheikhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyah – May
Allah have Mercy upon him – as he was the propagator of the Madhhab of
the Salaf of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, and their Madhhab is what has
preceded, whereas this [i.e. Alee Hasan’s Madhhab], indeed it is the Madhhab
of the Murji`ah.

4 – His alteration of the intent of the eminent al-‘Allaamah ash-Sheikh

Muhammad bin Ibraahim – May Allah have Mercy on him – in his article –
Tahkeem al-Qawaaneen al-Wadha’eeyah [Ruling by man-made laws], when
the compiler of the aforementioned book claims that the Sheikh places a
condition of Istihlaal al-Qalbee [making permissible that which is forbidden –
in the heart], whereas the statement of the Sheikh is as clear as the sun in his
aforementioned article to the mainstream of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.

5 – His comments upon the statements of those whom he mentioned from the
people of knowledge, by implying a meaning from their statements which do
not carry that meaning, as it appeared on p.108 f.1, p.109 f.21 and p.110 f.2.

6 – As there exists in the book showing insignificance to ruling with other

than the laws of Allah, and especially on p.5 f.1 with a claim that having
concern for the realisation of Tawheed in this issue has similarities with the
Shee’ah – ar-Raafidhah – and this is a grave error.

7 – And by examining the second piece of work – Saihatun-Nadheer, it is

found that it [the book] is as if a continuation of the aforementioned book
[Fitnatut-Takfeer] – and its condition is as has been mentioned. For this
reason, verily, The Permanent Body views that these two books, it is not
permissible to publish them, nor propagating them, nor circulating them, due
to what they contain from falsehood and distortion. And we advise their
author to fear Allah regarding himself, and regarding the Muslims and
especially their youth, and that he strives to gain Shara’ee knowledge first-
hand from the Scholars, those trustworthy in regards to knowledge and
correctness of their belief. And that knowledge is a trust, and it is not
permissible to propagate it, unless it is in accordance to the Book and the
Sunnah. And to uproot the likes of these opinions and the despicable method
of distorting the statements of the people of knowledge. And it is known that
to return to the truth is a virtue and a nobility for a Muslim.

And Allah is the granter of success, and the Salaah and Salaam of Allah be
upon our Prophet Muhammad, his followers and his companions.

The Permanent body for research and legal opinion

Head Abdul ‘Azeez bin ‘Abdullah bin Muhammad Aal ash-Sheikh

Member ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdur-Rahmaan al-Gudeyaan

Member Bakr bin ‘Abdullah Abu Zaid

Member Saalih bin Fawzaan al-Fawzaan

Note: the Fatawa of the Lajnah have been taken from some websites

Conclusion

These are Fatawa from the greatest scholars about the Taghut, and how its
rejection is a pillar of Tawhid. I would like to further add that Shaykh
Hammad Al-Ansari refused to introduce the book of Dr Anbari showing that
not only the Lajnah disapprove of it but also Shaykh Hammad.

May Allah send Salah and Salam on the Prophet (saw), his family and
companions!