دار التوحيد Dr'ul Tawhd

Author Topic: THE RULING OF SEEKING JUDGEMENT FROM THE TGHT AND GETTING RID OF THE DOUBTS  (Read 5056 times)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


اَلْحَمْدُ لِلّٰهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ، وَالصَّلَاةُ وَالسَّلَامُ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ، وَعَلَى آلِهِ وَصَحْبِهِ أَجْمَعِينَ

Muqaddimah (Preface)

Bismillhir Rahmnir Rahm,

Our aim in this work with the permit of Allhu Tal is to bring forth the narrations with regards to seeking judgment from Tghts being in opposition to the Shahdah (testimony) of La ilaha illallh (There is no deity/god worthy of worship but Allh) which is the Aslud Dn (bases of the religion) itself.

There are many doubts and views concerning whether seeking judgment from Tght is something that nullifies the Aslud Dn or whether it is a matter of Fur (secondary matters of the Dn) which makes it merely a sin in which there is Ikhtilf (disagreement) amongst the Ulam (scholars) and contains unclear points concerning it.

In this work we will Inshllh (with the permit and will of Allh) refute all those views that claim seeking judgment from the Tght should not be considered -even if it is said partially- within Tawhd. We are going to start by summarizing the opposite views.

However before that, it needs to be underlined that the owner of these Btil (false) views and deviant creeds concerning the issue of seeking judgment from the Tght are some ignorant contemporary so-called scholars whose views cannot be taken in consideration. None of the views they bring forth can be quoted from any respected scholar.

The reason why we are going to mention these views in detail is not because we take them in consideration seriously, but to cause the Btil to be fully seen. It is because many people can only comprehend the issue after it is explained and clarified in detail and they will not be able to realize it being against the general principles which are also possessed by these Btil Usl (methodology) owners.

For the sake of hoping to be a Waslah (means) to Hidyah (guidance) for those who need explanation in detail, we are going to mention all of these Btil views and with the help of Allhu Tal we will establish that they are against the principle seeking judgment from the Tght nullifies Aslud Dn:

- According to some, seeking judgment from the Tght is not Kufr but Harm!.. Moreover, they assert that those who claim it to be Kufr are distanced from Ahlus Sunnah and are closer to the Khawrij!..

- According to others, some scholars have the view that seeking judgment from the Tght is Kufr and others have the view that it is Harm!.. In short, they claim that the ruling of seeking judgment from the Tght is a matter of Ikhtilf (disagreement) amongst the scholars. For them, the one who seeks the judgment of the Tght while believing it is Hall and preferring the ruling of the Tght is a Kfir with Ijm (consensus), however for those who seek the judgment of the Tght by appointing the Ahkm (pl. Hukm; rulings) of Shirk while not affirming it by the heart there is no Ijm concerning them and it is a matter of Ikhtilf!..

Those who claim that seeking judgement from the Tght is Kufr have divided into many groups amongst themselves:
 
- While some claim seeking judgment from the Tght is Kufr in matters that are in opposition with Islm, they claim it is not Kufr when the administrative laws are not in opposition with Islm. Continuing on this, they claim that a Muslim who has been taken to court in matters of administrative laws can defend himself and testify, and he does not have to reject the judgment. To give an example according to these individuals; while it is Kufr (disbelief) to seek judgment in matters that have clear Hukm in Islm such as divorce, inheritance, and to apply to laws that are characterized, to make Hall that which is Harm (impermissible) and to make Harm that which is Hall (permissible), there is no objection to those who seek judgment from the Kuffr (pl. Kfir; disbeliever) regarding Ahkm that do not oppose Islm. Some claim that if a Muslim is being sentenced by the Tght due to living his beliefs and making Dawah (call), he could request to be released and does not have to reject the trial/judgment. Since it is a right and obligation for a Muslim to live his Aqdah (creed) and to call towards it, it is claimed that there would be no inconvenience to ask the Kuffr to apply the laws they have that claim there is liberty in practicing ones religion because those laws do not oppose Islm.

- There are others who excuse the ignorant people, claiming that seeking judgment from the Tght has unclear points with regards to matters when the rule of the Tght is not opposing Islm, and most of the people may not be able to comprehend this; even though they state that seeking judgment from the Tght is Kufr in all of it. These people claim that, the yah an-Nis 4/60 which has direct relation with the ruling of seeking judgment of the Tght was descended in Madnah -when there was the Islmic State- concerning the people who turned their faces from the Hukm (ruling) of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and sought the judgment of the Tght willingly, therefore in the Lands of the Kuffr where there is no Islmic court with regards to the unclear matters of Islm it is not Dhann Dallat (speculative meaning) for those who seek judgment of the Tght in order to get his right!.. They also state that if two Muslims seek judgment from the Tght with regards to their dispute, it is definitely Kufr, however there are unclear points concerning seeking judgment of the Tght with regards to the state of a Muslim who seeks the judgment of the Tght concerning a dispute with a Kfir.

- Some of those who claim such as we have mentioned above assert that those who seek the judgment of the Tght cannot be declared Takfr (excommunication) of and others claim that such person can be declared Takfr only after the Iqmatul Hujjah (establishment of the proof i.e. proof is established to him)!.. They claim that -especially for the administrative rules- even though the Tashr (lawmaking) right is given to other than Allhu Tal, it seems that they (i.e. the administrative rules) are not in opposition to the laws of Islm then seeking the judgment of the Tght regarding this is not Kufr, or that it is from amongst the Khaf (unclear) matters and not Dhhir (apparent) even if it is Kufr, therefore whoever seeks the judgment of the Tght in such manner can only be declared Takfr of, after Iqmatul Hujjah!..

- Again, there are some who although accept that seeking judgment of the Tght is Kufr, they bring Btil exceptions to it and claim that the yah an-Nis 4/60 is not Dhann Dallat (speculative meaning) for those who live in Drul Harb (the Abode of War) and seek judgment of the Tght in order to get their right!.. They claim while pointing out that this yah is related with those who sought the judgment of the Tght while they were in Drul Islm (the Abode of Islm) where there was the  court of Islm, therefore those who live in Drul Harb and seek judgment of the Tght in order to get their right are not Kfir!.. And also according to them, those who appeal to the Tght and the laws of Kufr willingly are Kfir but those who appeal to get back their rights and also those who defend themselves when they are taken to court are not included in this Hukm (ruling), meaning they are not Kfir!..

- Amongst those who claim to be Ahlul Ilm (People of Knowledge) while they accept that seeking judgment from the Tght is Shirk, they claim that in those countries of the Kuffr where the Islmic court is not available, since people have no other choice and alternative to get their rights back, therefore their state will be evaluated as Dharrah (necessity). Since Dharrah makes Harm to be Mubh (permissible), there is no responsibility for those who seek judgment from the Tght while living in Drul Harb!..

- By taking the Dhhir of the statements and Fatw (pl. Fatw; verdicts) of the scholars concerning the loss of wealth and imprisonment being Ikrh (coercion), they allow seeking judgment from the Tght because when one does not go to court, these things may happen. This view is also similar to the previous view.

- There are also groups that claim that seeking judgment from the Tght is Kufr in all circumstances and all places and seem to be have a clear Aqdah concerning the issue in the Dhhir, yet they claim that things which are evaluated as seeking judgment from the Tght known by both reason and custom such as hiring a lawyer, appealing to the Higher (!) Court, participating in the judgment, and defending oneself against the court, to testify before the court etc. cannot be evaluated as seeking judgment from the Tght. Likewise, they also claim that the one who had been taken to the court by force does not need to reject the court. In order to eliminate the Sharah (İslmic law), these people use Hlai Shariyyah (a juristic trick that aims at circumventing the legislative intent behind a certain rule) and play with words.

- There are also others who give the Hukm of Kufr without distinction but claim that they take things that we have listed above as an acceptable Ikhtilf or at least a matter that one would be excused due to his Tawl (interpretation) therefore the principle of whoever does not declare Takfr of a Kfir is himself a Kfir aka. Silsilah Takfr; at-Takfr bit Tasalsul (Chain Takfr) shall not be applied to them!.. For this reason, it cannot be said that they accept that seeking judgment from the Tght is a matter of Aslud Dn. Likewise whoever excuses ignorance concerning seeking judgment from the Tght partially or as a whole cannot be said to have fulfilled the necessities of Aslud Dn.

These are all the Btil Madhhab (school of thought) and views (opinions) concerning seeking judgment from the Tght which we have gathered from amongst the most widely spread views.

Surely, there are many more views that can be found amongst the so-called Islmic groups and it will not be a mistake or exaggeration if it is said that -unfortunately- there are as many views as the quantity of people, as it was with other issues of Islm. Almost each person has his own view and Madhhab concerning the matter of seeking judgment from the Tght. Moreover, it is even possible to find people among the same Jamah to have different views and Madhhab with regards to the issue of seeking judgment from the Tght.

As we had stated above, it is not limited with the issue of seeking judgment from the Tght but almost every matter of Aqdah, people -even within the same Jamah- have different views and Madhhab. These dissidence and Ikhtilf are not Rahmah (mercy), but the source of Adhb (punishment) and Ghadhab (wrath) as Allhu Tal stated,

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُواْ دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُواْ شِيَعاً لَّسْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ إِنَّمَا أَمْرُهُمْ إِلَى اللّهِ ثُمَّ يُنَبِّئُهُم بِمَا كَانُواْ يَفْعَلُونَ
As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allh. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did. (al-Anm 6/159)

Ikhtilf concerning seeking judgment from the Tght which is such a clear matter is due to no other then following the Haw (desire) and turning away from the Nass (explicit text). Even though sometimes the owners of these views declare Takfr of each other when it is taken in consideration attentively, it is seen that they are all almost the same and differences are very inconsiderable. It is easily seen that all of these people who have such deviant beliefs concerning the matter do not decide and settle their views but because they are not able to make their mind up they rather defend one view and Madhhab one day and another view and Madhhab the next day so on so forth.

In the beginning they would defend that the matter of seeking judgment from the Tght is a matter of Ikhtilf amongst the Ulam right after their view is disproved they would start saying that seeking judgment from Tght is Kufr in general however there is Rukhsah (permission) for it in Drul Harb. Right after their (new) view is dis-proofed they would start saying that what they are allowing is not seeking judgment from the Tght but merely Talabun Nusr (request of help) and Himyah (protection) which are permissible in Islm!..

So all of these show how insincere those Jamah and people who bring such Btil exceptions to the matter of seeking judgment from the Tght are. It is because their aim is not looking for the Haqq (truth) but to legitimize the Kufr that they commit for the sake of Maslahatid Duny (worldly benefit). They just made all these theories up so that they can escape from the hardship of avoiding seeking judgment from the Tght.

There are other people who invent all these Btil theories -even though they do not perform it- just to not declare Takfr of those who perform such. What those who invent all these Btil theories have in common is that they do not comprehend the common Dawah (call) of all of the Rusul (pl. Rasl; messengers) which is Tawhd, due to not understanding it they do not take it as their Aqdah, even though they do not understand what seeking judgment from the Tght is, they do not ponder upon it.

They do not back up with any Shar Dall (evidence) while they are doing Takhss (allocating) the clear Nass of the Kitb (Book; Qurn) and the Sunnah (of the Prophet Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam). Their bases are either Mujarrad Haw (merely desire) and their own views or results that they extracted from the sayings of Ulam by their own views. This issue will be clearer Inshllh when we bring the Dalil (pl. Dall; evidences) for it.


The Haqq Aqdah concerning the matter of seeking judgment from the Tght according to what the Kitb (i.e. the Qurn) and the Sunnah (of the Prophet Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam) lead and the Salafus Slihn (Pious Predecessors) say and the Ulam amongst the Khalaf (later day scholars) who follow them in goodness state and all of the Muwahhidn amongst the Ahlul Qiblah (People of Qiblah i.e. Ka'bah in prayer) believe is:

In the opposition to all of these that we have listed above, seeking judgment from the Tght is Shirk and Kufr in all forms. Whoever does so whether believing it to be Hall or accepting the rules; whether believing it to be Harm and claiming that he has hatred towards it by heart he is Kfir.

Likewise, whether the matter of judgment is against the Islmic law or seems to suit Islm it does not matter; it is Kufr.

Also, whether it appears in the Islmic State or appears in Drul Harb wherein there is no Islmic court to get ones rights back, the Hukm (ruling) is the same; Kufr.

The ignorance of one that it is Kufr or having Tawl to do so is not an excuse and those who apply to the courts of Tght are all Kuffr in total.

Those who pause on the Takfr of these people or those who claim that ignorance or Tawl are excuses for not making Takfr, are Kfir and Mushrik as those who do not declare Takfr of the doer of other types of Shirk. Meaning, the principle of whoever does not declare Takfr of a Kfir is himself a Kfir is valid for all actions which are included in seeking judgment from the Tght.

The reason for all of these Ahkm is; seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr is a matter that is constant with Ijm, Dhhir and Muhkam (firm). It is a matter of Aslud Dn and one who seeks the judgment from the Tght destroys the Asl of mn (faith).
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


What does Seeking Judgment from the Tght is from the Aslud Dn Mean?

The issue "seeking judgment from the Tght" or any other being from Aslud Dn means that; the very issue itself is Shart (condition of) Sihhah (validity) and not Shartu Kaml (stipulation of perfection). So, seeking judgment from the Tght is not only Harm, but also Shirk. Shirk as it is known, is a sin that will never be forgiven as Allhu Tal said:


إِنَّ اللّٰهَ لاَ يَغْفِرُ أَن يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَلِكَ لِمَن يَشَاءُ وَمَن يُشْرِكْ بِاللّٰهِ فَقَدِ افْتَرَى إِثْماً عَظِيماً
Allh forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything lesser to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allh is to devise a sin most heinous indeed. (an-Nis 4/48)

For this reason, there is no benefit for uttering the Kalimah by tongue when one commits Shirk by seeking judgment from the Tght. This yah and its likes show that the one who violates Aslud Dn by committing Shirk cannot be evaluated as being excused due to his Jahl (ignorance), Tawl or anything else. The only excuse for this state is Ikrh (coercion). Allhu Tal has stated,

مَن كَفَرَ بِاللّٰهِ مِن بَعْدِ إِيمَانِهِ إِلاَّ مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالإِيمَانِ وَلَـكِن مَّن شَرَحَ بِالْكُفْرِ صَدْراً فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِّنَ اللّٰهِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمُ اسْتَحَبُّواْ الْحَيَاةَ الْدُّنْيَا عَلَى الآخِرَةِ وَأَنَّ اللّٰهَ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْكَافِرِينَ
Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allh, utters Unbelief, -except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith -but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allh, and theirs will be a dreadful Chastisement. This because they love the life of this world better than the Hereafter: and Allh will not guide those who reject Faith. (an-Nahl 16/106-107)

As the person who commits Shirk by seeking judgment from the Tght is a Mushrik, those who do not declare Takfr of him are Kfir and Mushrik as well. It is because with it he gives the attribute of Muslim to the one who committed Shirk in Hukm (ruling) and Tashr (lawmaking).

The Ulam (scholars) would never have Ikhtilf (disagreement) concerning Shirk. Allhu Tal would never ever permit committing Shirk whether it is in Drul Islm or Drul Harb. Allhu Tal stated,


وَلاَ يَأْمُرَكُمْ أَن تَتَّخِذُواْ الْمَلاَئِكَةَ وَالنِّبِيِّيْنَ أَرْبَاباً أَيَأْمُرُكُم بِالْكُفْرِ بَعْدَ إِذْ أَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ
Nor would he instruct you to take angels and prophets for Lords and patrons. What! Would he bid you to unbelief after ye have bowed your will (to Allh in Islm)? (li Imrn 3/80);

وَلَا يَرْضَى لِعِبَادِهِ الْكُفْرَ
...but He liketh not ingratitude from His servants. (az-Zumar 39/3)

It should be known that Nsikh (abrogating) and Manskh (abrogated) would never appear concerning a matter of Shirk. Matters such as seeking judgment from the Tght was Kufr in the Sharah of all of the prophets and in the Sharah of Muhammad Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam; whether it was during Makkah or Madnah. Since rejecting the Tght; those lawmakers other than Allhu Tal, is the common Dawah (call) of all the Rusul (prophets). Allhu Tal said,

وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولاً أَنِ اعْبُدُواْ اللّٰهَ وَاجْتَنِبُواْ الطَّاغُوتَ
For We assuredly sent amongst every People a Messengers, (with the Command), Serve Allh, and eschew Tght!.. (an-Nahl 16/36)

The one who has not rejected the Tght has no mn as Allhu Tal stated::

فَمَنْ يَكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيُؤْمِن بِاللّٰهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىَ
whoever rejects Tght (evil) and believes in Allh hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, which never breaks. (al-Baqarah 2/256)

Seeking judgment from the Tght is conflicting with the claim of Kufr bit Tght. Allhu Tal said:

أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ وَيُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا
Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght (Evil), though they were ordered to reject him. But Satan's wish is to lead them astray far away (from the right). (an-Nis 4/60)
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


What Does Seeking Judgment from the Tght Mean?

At this point, for the sake of clarifying the issue which we are discussing here so that it is understood more clearly, we would like to explain what seeking judgment from the Tght is, Inshllh. It is a compound of two words Tght and Muhkamah (trial).

Imm Mlik Rahimahullh described the term Tght as: Tght is that which is worshiped besides Allhu Tal.

Imm al-Qurtub Rahimahullh quoted this from him in his Tafsr of the yah an-Nis 4/51.

Ibnul Qayyim Rahimahullh gave the most detailed and comprehensive definition of the Tght where he said,

Tght is all that which causes the person to exceed the limits with regards to what is worshiped, followed, or obeyed.

So the Tght in any nation is whosoever turns to other than Allhu Tal and His Messenger for matters of judgment; or is pleased to be worshiped besides Allhu Tal; or is blindly followed without a clear proof from Allhu Tal; or is obeyed in that which is  not know to be a command from Allhu Tal.


So, these are the Tawght of this world. When attention is paid to what is included into the term Tght and the state of the people with them, it will be clearly seen that most of them (i.e. people) turned their faces from being slaves of Allh and became slaves of Tght; turned their faces from obedience to Allhu Tal and His Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and turned to obedience to the Tawght. (Ibnul Qayyim, Ilmul Muwaqqin, 1/40).

Accordingly, every authority and court which rules the people with the man-made laws and not with the Kitb and the Sunnah is a Tght.
The term Muhkamah is mentioned in a Hadth as a part of a prayer of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam during Night Prayer which both al-Bukhr and Muslim have transmitted. According to the narration, when the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam got up at night to offer the Night Prayer, he used to say:


وَإِلَيْكَ حَاكَمْتُ‏
And I take You as a Hkam (Judge to judge between us). (al-Bukhr, Thahajjud, Hadth no: 1)

Ayn explained this term in the following manner in his Sharh to the Sahh of al-Bukhr, Umdatul Qr,

I take You as a judge meaning, I left the Hukm (ruling) of all who reject the Haqq and I choose You (o Allh) as a judge between us and not other than You; which the Ahlul Jhiliyyah appeal to the Hukm from idol, soothsayer, fire and etc. ... Muhkamah, is taking the issue to the judge.

Quote from Badrud Dn al-Ayn ends here. (Umdatul Qr, 7/167)

The term
يَتَحَاكَمُوا yatahkam which is mentioned in the yah an-Nis 4/60 is taken from the word تَحَاكَم tahkum which has the same meaning with Muhkamah. Both of them are from Mushrakah (partnership, a cooperation, a collaboration) Bb (chapter) meaning at least the two parties asking for Hukm, to be trialed. According to these explanations, the meaning of being judged by the Tght is taking an issue of Ikhtilf to the Tght so that he resolves it.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


The Reason Why Seeking Judgment from the Tght is Kufr

Appointing the Tght as an arbitrator during an Ikhtilf (dispute) is in opposition to Allhu Tals command to take the Kitb and the Sunnah as an arbitrator while there is Ikhtilf. Allhu Tal stated,


فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا
But no, by thy Lord, they can have no (real) Faith until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction. (an-Nis 4/65)

Commenting on the same yah (an-Nis 4/65), Ibnu Hazm Rahimahullh stated,

Allh Subhnahu wa Tal has taken oath by Himself that one cannot be a believer until he seeks the judgment of the Prophet Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam in everything that he Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam came with, and then submits to it totally and bears no grudge against his Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam judgment. The mn (faith/belief) clarifies that seeking judgment and submitting the heart to the judgment are two separate issues, and that this is the mn which there is no mn for the one who does not put it forth. (Ibnu Hazm, al-Fisal fil Milal wal Ahwi wan Nihal, 3/109)

Allhu Tal stated,


يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللّٰهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللّٰهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّٰهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا
O ye who believe! Obey Allh and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority amongst you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allh and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allh and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination. (an-Nis 4/59)

When explaining this yah, Ibnu Kathr Rahimahullh says that this means, anyone who does not go to Allhu Tal and His Prophet Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam in times of dispute is not a believer in Allh and the Day of Judgment.

Ibnul Qayyim Rahimahullh stated,

Whoever takes his disputes to other than Allh and His Prophet Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam has definitely sought the judgment of the Tght, while he has been ordered to reject it, and that the person can never reject the Tght until he excludes all judgment for Allh Subhnahu wa Tal Alone. (Ibnul Qayyim, Tarqul Hijratayn, 37)

These explanations of the Ulam point out the Illah (reason) of seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr. The person who seeks judgment from the Tght does not appoint neither Allhu Tal nor His Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam as an arbitrator and then appoints the one (i.e. Tght) who is in opposition to Allh and His Rasl. It is Fardh (obligatory) in every time and place to take the dispute to Allh and His Rasl and it is a must for the slave to validate his mn.

No one can be exempt from this general Hukm (rule), there is no Dall (proof) for it and nothing indicates it. So all of these clearly show that; appointing a Tght as an arbitrator is an act that nullifies Aslud Dn, this will never happen to a slave that has mn in Allhu Tal and cannot be compared with some issues that are unclear in the Dn. However, we would like to quote some more statements from the Ulam so that the connection between this matter and Aslud Dn becomes clearer Inshllh.

Imm ash-Shawkn stated in the Tafsr of an-Nis 4/60,

In the statement, Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam asked to be astonished of those whom claim to have mn in Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and all of the prophets then do something that contradicts their claim yet it (i.e. the act) destroys the claim of mn from its bases.

So this statement of Allhu Tal explains that they have none of the Asl of mn. (The act that destroys their mn) is their wish of seeking judgment from the Tght.
Whereas they were commanded to reject the Tght in that which was revealed upon Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and revealed upon those who were before him.
(ash-Shawkn, Fathul Qadr)

Fakhrud Dn ar-Rz stated the following as the explanation of an-Nis 4/60:

Know that the Mufassirn (Tafsr Scholars) made Ittifq (agreement) that this yah had been revealed concerning a Munfiq (hypocrite). And then Ab Muslim said:

The Dhhir (apparent) of this yah is about a man amongst the Ahlul Kitb (People of the Book) who used to be a Jew and hypocritically (as a Munfiq) became Muslim. Since Allhu Tals statement, Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Would only suit a Munfiq who is in that state.

The purpose of this statement is that some individuals had sought judgment from the Ahlut Tughyn (i.e. Tght) and did not want to be trialed by Muhammad Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. Al-Qdh stated,

It is necessary that just as it is Kufr to be judged by this Tght, the absence of consent to the Hukm of Muhammad Alayhis Saltu was Salm is also a Kufr.

These indicate the following:

a) Allhu Tal stated, Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght, though they were ordered to reject him! and accepted being trialed in the presence of the Tght to be mn in him (i.e. the Tght). Whereas there is no doubt that when the rejection of the Tght means mn in Allhu Tal, mn in the Tght will mean the rejection of Allhu Tal.

b) Haqq (i.e. Allh) Tal had stated, But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) faith until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.
(an-Nis 4/65) This is a Nass (clear proof) that those who are not consent to the Hukm (ruling) of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam will be accounted as Kfir.

c) Allhu Tal stated, Then let those beware who withstand the Messengers order, lest some trial befall them, or a grievous penalty be inflicted on them. (an-Nr 24/63) This yah shows that it is a great sin to oppose the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam.

In all of these yah there is evidence which show the Hukm given regarding an individual who rejects any command of Allhu Tal or His Messenger Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam regardless of the reason whether it is because of a doubt, or out of stubbornness he will depart from Islm and it shows how correct the Hukm that was given by the Sahbah when they gave the ruling of Murtad to the ones who did not pay the Zakh, that they must be killed and their children must be taken as prisoners. Quote from ar-Rz ends here. (Fakhrud Dn ar-Rzi, Tafsr)

We must mention here that ar-Rz was amongst the Ashariyyah and had been occupying himself with Kalm (theology). He opposed the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamah in matters like his Tawl of the Asm was Sift (Names and Attributes) of Allhu Tal. However, he being a man of Kalm does not necessitate him being mistaken in the matters of Aslud Dn. Rather, the statement he quoted from Qdh -and it is said that he is Qdh Ab Yal al-Hanbal- is one of the clearest statements from the Ulam concerning seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr.

This is because even though some comprehend that it is Kufr to oppose the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam, they cannot comprehend the fact that it is Kufr to seek judgment from the Tght. For this reason, they cannot comprehend that those who seem to affirm Raslullh in the Dhhir become a Kfir only because of seeking judgment from the Tght.

Whereas as ar-Rz stated, a person seeking judgment from the Tght shows his mn in the Tght. The one who does not believe in the Tght would never accept his Hukm. mn in the Tght could not be present with mn in Allh. Therefore, the one who sought judgment from the Tght proved that he does not have mn in Allhu Tal, meaning he proved himself being a Kfir. Explanations of ar-Rz are also well coordinated with the statements of the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah.

Shaykh Sulaymn bin Abdillh lush Shaykh, in his Sharh to the book his grandfather Shaykhul Islm Muhammed bin Abdil Wahhb Rahmatullhi Alayh wrote Kitbut Tawhd said the following concerning the Bb (Chapter) regarding the yah an-Nis 4/60: Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght (Evil), though they were ordered to reject him. But Satans wish is to lead them astray far away (from the right). (an-Nis 4/60)

Tawhd, which is the meaning of the Shahdah of La ilaha illallh, also includes and necessitates mn in Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam -so both of these compose the Kalima-i Shahdah- the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam explained both of these Shahdt as one Rukn (pillar). As it was in this Hadth, Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam said:


بُنِيَ الإِسْلاَمُ عَلَى خَمْسٍ شَهَادَةِ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللّٰهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللّٰهِ، وَإِقَامِ الصَّلاَةِ، وَإِيتَاءِ الزَّكَاةِ، وَالْحَجِّ، وَصَوْمِ رَمَضَانَ‏
Islm is based on (the following) five (principles): To testify that there is no deity worth of worship except Allh and that Muhammad Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam is Raslullh, to establish the Salh (compulsory congregational prayers), to pay the Zakh (i.e. obligatory charity), to perform Hajj (i.e. Pilgrimage to Makkah), and to observe fast during the month of Ramadhn.

For this reason the Musannif (i.e. Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb) under this heading points out the matter of appointing the Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam as a judge which includes and necessitates Tawhd. Since this is both the Muktaz (requirement) and Lzim (requisite) of the Shahdah of La ilaha illallh, then every Mumin should fulfill it. It is a condition for those who know the meaning of La ilaha illallh to submit to the Hukm of Allhu Tal and to surrender to everything which comes from Him by the way of His Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam.

The one who testifies that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allh becomes a liar if he appoints anyone other than Allhu Tal and His Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam when there is Ikhtilf.

Then he said, The statement of Allhu Tal, Though they were ordered to reject him means that seeking judgment from the Tght destroys mn and it is the opposite of it. This is because the mn of the one who does not reject the Tght and the one who does not reject seeking judgment from it will not be Sahh (sound) and valid. The one who does not reject the Tght cannot be considered as one who has mn in Allhu Tal.

The following are understood from the statements of the Ulam:

1- Seeking judgment from the Tght contradicts the first Rukn of the Kalima-i Shahdah which is La ilaha illallh, since this Kalimah (statement) contains the meaning of rejecting all lawmakers other than Allhu Tal. The one who seeks judgment from the Tght is committing Shirk to Allhu Tal in his Hukm (rule).

2- The one who seeks judgment from the Tght also contradicts the second Rukn of the Shahdah which is Muhammadun Raslullh, since this Kalimah contains the meaning that appointing the Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam as a judge in every Ikhtilf and submitting to every Hukm that he passed on.

3- The one who seeks judgment from the Tght has not rejected the Tght. The one who does not reject the Tght meaning those who claim Ulhiyyah (Lordship) other than Allhu Tal is not considered to believe in Allhu Tal.


The one who ponders upon these three matters which were mentioned by the Ulam would easily see that the one who seeks judgment from the Tght has no mn because the act he commits contradicts with mn and therefore as the claim of mn is not accepted from those who make fun with the Dn of Islm, the claim of mn would not be accepted as well from those who seek judgment from the Tght.

It is crystal clear that excuses such as Jahl (ignorance), Tawl, or that he does not make Istihll (permitting the unlawful) would not change the reality that the doer of seeking judgment from the Tght is a Kfir.

Likewise, every person who has intelligence would see that the Hukm of the one who nullifies Aslud Dn by seeking judgment from the Tght whether he is in Drul Islm or Drul Harb is the same.

After it is clarified that seeking judgment from the Tght is an act that contradicts with Tawhd itself, this leaves one issue: Why is seeking judgment from the Tght Kufr? Essentially the three matters mentioned above give the reason for seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr. However, the following statements of the Ulam gather all the reasons in one and it is:

The one who seeks judgment from the Tght meaning other than the Sharah of Allhu Tal and His Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam with this turns his face from the Sharah of Islm, rejects submitting and Iltizm (favoring) to it (i.e. the Sharah) and subjects to a Dn other than the Dn of Allhu Tal and a Sharah other than the Sharah of Muhammad Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. It is constant with Ijm (consensus) that this is Kufr and there is no Ikhtilf of the Ulam concerning it.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


It is Constant with the Ijm (Consensus) of the Ulam (Scholars) that Seeking Judgment from the Tght is Kufr (Disbelief)

Now, with the permit of Allhu Tal, we would like to mention the statements of the Ulam with regards to; the Ittifq (agreement) between the Ulam that appealing to the judges and the courts who/which rule with man-made laws being Kufr and Shirk that takes one out of fold of Islm and that it is a matter which is Malm minad Dni bidh Dharrah meaning necessarily known to be part of the religion.

Ibnu Hazm al-Andals Rahimahullh (d456H) said,

There is no Ikhtilf amongst two Muslim that whoever rules by the Injl (Gospel) in issues where there is no Nass (text) or Wahy (revelation) in the Sharah of Islm is a Kfir and Mushrik who goes out of fold of Islm. (Ibnu Hazm, al-Ihkm f Uslil Ahkm, 5/173)

Shaykhul Islm Ibnu Taymiyyah Rahimahullh said,

It is not permissible to perform according to the copies of the Tawrh (Torah) which are manipulated. Whoever performs according to the Ahkm of the Tawrh today which are changed and Naskh (abrogation) is applied to them, then he is Kfir. (Ibnu Taymiyyah, Majmul Fatw, 35/200)

Hfidh Ibnu Kathr Rahmatullhi Alayh in his al-Bidyah wan Nihyah said the following concerning the Tatars and their king Genghis Khan,

When it comes to his book al-Ysaq, it is two volume books which was written in bold. This voluminous two volume book was carried by a camel. According to some, Genghis Khan would go to the mountain then came back and he would repeat this going up (to the mountain) and coming back many times until he would get tired and faint and fell down. In the meantime, he would dictate to the scribe near him to write what he says as laws.

If it was like that, then the Shaytn (satan/devil) would narrate what is in it (the Yasq) upon his tongue. (13/139, Ihyaut Turath). According to what (Imm) al-Juwayn narrated, one man amongst the Tatar would go to the mountain for the sake of Ibdah (worship) during the extreme cold weather. Once when he was on the mountain, he heard a voice out of nowhere stating to him, We made Genghis Khan and his sons dominant to the earth. The elder Mongols and their scholars would affirm this and took it as sound.

After this, Imm al-Juwayn mentioned a section of al-Ysaq (Tght law at the time of the Tatars), some of which judged that;

The adulterer should be killed regardless of him being married or not, likewise homosexuals should be killed, anyone who lies deliberately should be killed.

Performers of witchcraft should be killed.

The one who spies should be killed. If someone intervenes between two disputants and aid one against the other, he should be killed.

If one sees a fugitive and does not inform him to his owner or the state, should be killed.

The one who urinates in still water; should be killed.

If one gives a captive food, drink or clothes, without the permission of the masters, should be killed.

If one feeds a captive or throws food to him; should be killed, rather he should hand it to him.

And if one feeds someone, then he should taste the food first regardless of the fact that his guest is an Amr (i.e. nobleman) and he should not let the slave eat.

And if one eats by himself and does not feed the people with him, he should be killed.

The person who slaughters an animal should be slaughtered as he slaughtered the animal. He should not slaughter the animal, rather he first should split the animals stomach and pull out its heart from its stomach with his hands

And all of these laws completely contradict all the Shari (legislations) Allhu Tal has revealed to His slaves the Prophets. So whoever leaves the clear Sharah, which was revealed to Muhammad bin Abdillh, the Seal of the Prophets, Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and takes the Hukm to other than it from the laws of Kufr which are abrogated, he has disbelieved. So how about a person who is judged by the Ys (laws of Genghis Khan) and puts it before it?! Whoever does this has disbelieved by the Ijm of the Muslimn.
Since Allhu Tal stated,


أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّٰهِ حُكْماً لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ
Do they then seek after a judgment of (the days of) ignorance? But who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allh? (al-Midah 5/50)

فَلاَ وَرَبِّكَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىَ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لاَ يَجِدُواْ فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَجاً مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُواْ تَسْلِيماً
But no, by thy Lord, they can have no (real) Faith until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction. (an-Nis 4/65)

Allhu Tal has said the truth. (Ibnu Kathr, al-Bidyah wan Nihyah, 13/139)

Allhu Tal stated,


أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّٰهِ حُكْماً لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ
Do they then seek after a judgment of (the days of) ignorance? But who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allh? (al-Midah 5/50)

Ibnu Kathr Rahmatullhi Alayh said the following in the Tafsr of the yah al-Midah 5/50,

Allhu Tal makes Inkr (i.e. vehemently objects to, criticizes) those who ignore Allhs Sharah (i.e. commandments), which includes every type of righteous good thing and prohibits every type of evil, but they refer instead to opinions, desires, and customs that people themselves invented, all of which have no basis in Allhs religion.

Allh also makes Inkr of the ignorance and misguidance of the ruling of the time of Jhiliyyah which was built by the hands of the people, which was not based upon the Sharah of Allh. He Tal informs that these misguidances were invented by sheer opinion and lusts.

The Tatar (Mongols) we were speaking about abide by the law that they inherited from their king -known as Genghis Khan- who wrote al-Ysaq, for them. This book contains some rulings that were derived from various religions, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islm. However, many of these rulings were derived from his own opinion and desires. He made these rulings the followed law amongst his children, who preferred it to the Law of the Book of Allh and the Sunnah of His Messenger.

Therefore, whoever does this from amongst them is a Kfir who deserves to be fought against, until he reverts to Allh's and His Messenger's decisions, none can be referred to other than Him be it minor or major. Allhu Tal stated,


أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَـهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ
Do they then seek the judgement of (the days of ignorance).

وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللَّهِ حُكْماً لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ
And who is better in judgement than Allh for a people who have firm faith.

Who is more just in decision than Allh for those who comprehend Allh's Law, believe in Him, who are certain that Allh is the best among those who give decisions, and that He is more merciful with His creation than the mother with her own child. Allh has perfect knowledge of everything, is able to do all things, and He is just in all matters. (Ibnu Kathr, Tafsrul Qurnil Adhm, 3/131, Tahqq: M. Salmah, Dru Tayyibah 1420 / 1999H)

Shaykhul Islm Ibnu Taymiyyah said while mentioning the Mongols,

As it is known by necessity from the Dn of the Muslimn and also with the Ittifq of the Muslimn; whoever permits to submit to a religion other than Islm or a Sharah other than the Sharah of Muhammad Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam he is Kfir. And the Kufr of his is as same as the Kufr of the one who accepts a part from the Kitb and rejects a part of it.

He Rahimahullh continues and said in the same Fatw regarding the Tatars:

They, meaning the Tatars do not rule between them with the Ahkm of Allh, rather they rule with some made up/invented laws which belongs to them and sometimes it suits with Islm and sometimes not.

Then Ibnu Taymiyyah Rahimahullh said,

It is Wjib (obligatory) to fight with them with the Ijm of the Muslimn. The one who knows the religion of Islm and knows their interior state will not have doubts concerning this (ruling). (Ibnu Taymiyyah, Majmul Fatw, 28/501-553)

Allhu Tal said,


وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللّٰهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allh hath revealed, they are unbelievers. (al-Midah 5/44)

Ibnu Kathr Rahmatullhi Alayh said the following in the Tafsr of this yah,

The correct opinion is that this yah was revealed about two Jews who committed adultery. The Jews changed the Book of Allh with their own hands regarding the matter of punishment for adultery for the one who is married from stoning to death to a hundred flogs and making the offenders ride a donkey facing the back of the donkey while their faces are painted black. (Ibnu Kathir, Tafsir)

According to what Ibnu Hajar quoted from Isml al-Qdh amongst the Mlik scholars, he said the following concerning this yah,

The Dhhir of the yah indicates that whoever commits what they (i.e. the Jews) did and invents a Hukm which is in opposition to the Hukm of Allhu Tal and makes it a Dn (law) which is performed (accordingly) then the same threat is valid for him as well. No matter if it is the governor or someone other than him. (Ibnu Hajar, Fathul Br, 13/120)

If the reason of the revelation of this yah is to be investigated and pondered upon the following would be seen clearly:

Those Jews who did forgery of the Hukm of Rajm (stoning to death) were a community of the past. The same Hukm of Kufr also continued for the generation after them even though they did nothing but show consent to this Btil and to follow it. This situation is the same as the situation of the Ahlul Kitb who obeyed the Btil laws of their Rabbis and Monks as mentioned in the yah at-Tawbah 9/31.

Adiy bin Htim Radiyallhu Anh said that I heard Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam reciting this yah,


اتَّخَذُواْ أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَاباً مِّن دُونِ اللّٰهِ
They took their Rabbis and their Monks to be their Lords besides Allh. (at-Tawbah 9/31)

And I said, We did not worship them. Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam said, Did you not obey them when they (i.e. the Rabbis and Monks) prohibited what Allh had allowed them (Christians and Jews) and allowed what Allh had prohibited? I said, Yes! Then Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam said, This is how they worshiped them. (at-Tirmidh, Tafsr, Hadth no: 10; at-Tabar, 14/210, Hadth no: 61632-61634)

This is what was meant by Muhkamah. Meaning submitting to the Btil laws of the Tght is the same as Muhkamah. Seeking judgment from the Tght means worshiping the Tght who claims his Lordship beside Allh while making laws in the opposition of Sharah. We can summarize the indications of the statements of the Ulam in the following manner:

1- The one who acts according to the laws whether it is an abrogated Sharah such as the Tawrh (Torah) and Injl or man-made invented laws such as the al-Ysaq of Genghis Khan or laws of todays states other than the laws of the Islmic Sharah are three types:

a) Musharri meaning the law maker.

b) Those Judges and administrators who rule with these laws.

c) Those who are trialed and perform accordingly to with these laws meaning the public.

The Kitb (Book i.e. the Qurn), Sunnah and Ijm indicates that all these three types are Kfir.

Those who declare Takfr of the first two types of people without any differentiation and believe that there should be Tafslt (details) and differentiates the Hukm of the third type have no basis other than their own Haw (desire) and personal thoughts; they have no Dall (evidence) for their acts and these people are in a contradiction. Since consent to Kufr is Kufr.

There is no difference between those who invent and apply the laws of Kufr and those who are trialed with it. As an example, those who make laws in the parliament without looking at whether the laws are suitable to Islm or not would be declared Takfr of.

Most of those who claim that there are exceptions for Muhkamah would declare Takfr of those lawmakers without looking at their Jahl or Tawl. It is the same for the judge who rules with this law.  This is because they accept a source of Tashr (lawmaking) and Hukm other than Allhu Tal and His Rasl Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam.

The reason of their falling into Kufr is -before its being in the opposition of Islm- their reliance upon the peoples sovereignty as a source of law and not the sovereignty of Allhu Tal. When it is like that, then how can one look for details and differentiate those who are trialed in court with the Kufr laws invented by such people meanwhile (at least) in the Dhhir they publicly accept the Btil laws? This is because in these courts everyone who is trialed willingly or not submits to the laws that had been invented with sovereignty given to other than Allhu Tal. Even if it suits the Islmic ruling, the Illah (reason) of accepting the Tashr (lawmaking) and Hukm right of other than Allhu Tal remains existent.

2- All of these quotes we have narrated from Ibnu Kathr and scholars other than him indicate that; seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr is amongst the issues of Malm minad Dni bidh Dharrah meaning necessarily known to be part of the religion, just as mn in Allh, His Angels, and His Books are amongst the issues of Malm minad Dni bidh Dharrah so it is a matter of Dhhir and the Ulam do not have Ikhtilf (disagreement) regarding it, rather there is Ittifq (agreement) concerning it. This reality being forgotten by the later generations does not change the fact that this is a Hukm of Malm minad Dni bidh Dharrah.

al-Ysaq which Hfidh Ibnu Kathr mentioned was a man-made law which was not based upon Wahy (revelation). (Even today it is possible to see the same words in some of the so-called Islmic countries referring to the law and the constitution of the state. As seen in the Turkey such that Mustafa Kemal changed the laws of the Sharah and called his made up Kufr laws as yasa/anayasa.) Where the Illah (reason) is the same, the Hukm would be the same as well. So as those who were trialed by the al-Ysaq of the past were Kfir, those who are trialed with todays al-Ysaq (man-made laws) are also Kfir. Whereas, al-Ysaq of the past used to contain some Islmic rulings in it, however, none of the scholars ever got into details of the issue and said that those who are trialed to al-Ysaq with regards to the laws that suit Islm are not Kfir, yet those who are trialed to al-Ysaq with regards to the laws that do not suit the Islmic law are Kfir.

It is very beneficial and meaningful to see that Ibnu Kathr is referring to the Ijm which Ibnu Hazm narrated due to proving the Kufr of those who were trialed to the Laws of Genghis Khan. This is very important in order to comprehend the reason the Hukm had been given.

If someone today claims that it is permissible to rule with those laws that suit Islm from the manipulated forms of the Tawrh and Injl available to us today; anyone who has intelligence would not doubt this to be Kufr.

But unfortunately, many people while making Takfr of those who are trialed to the abrogated Sharah of Allhu Tal do not declare Takfr of those who are trialed to the man-made laws and they claim that one can submit to the administrative laws of these man-made laws which are not based upon the Wahy (revelation) when they are not in opposition with the Islmic law. Yet it is not important whether or not the laws suit Islm.

Ibnu Taymiyyah Rahimahullh while speaking about the state of the Tatars refers to this fact. This is because these laws -whether or not suiting the Islmic law- are made while giving the right of Tashr (lawmaking) to other than Allhu Tal. Even if they do somehow suit the Islmic law or even if they are %100 suitable to Islmic laws, they are still the laws of the Tght. None of the Ulam made such distinction amongst those who were trialed with such laws.

When it comes to the claim that this is an unclear matter, there is no difference between the one who doubts the Kufr of a person who is trialed with the man-made laws and the one who doubts the Kufr of a person who is trialed with the Tawrh and Injl. Both of them (i.e. the doubters) are persons who cannot differentiate between Kufr and mn. And also both of them are persons who cannot comprehend the fact that in order for one to be Muslim, he needs to distant hımself from all the Btil Shari and needs to submit to the Sharah of Muhammad Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. Therefore, such a person is unaware of the Asl of Islm and a man who cannot fulfill the requirements of being a Muslim.

It does not fit to compare this issue with other Khaf (unclear) matters such as Khalqul Qurn (claim that the Qurn is created) or Istiw upon the Arsh (Allhs rising upon the Mighty Throne in a manner that suits His Majesty, since seeking judgment from the Tght is a matter related with Tawhd itself which is amongst the Dhhir matters. On the other hand, the Itiqd of Ahlul Bidah such as the latter matters (i.e. Khalqul Qurn and Istiw upon the Arsh) and their likes -even though they are related with the Kaml (perfection) of Tawhd- are not related with the Asl of Tawhd.

How can Muhkamah to the Tght be evaluated amongst the secondary matters of Dn while it is constant that it is an act that indicates mn in the Tght by the Nass of the Qurn itself?

So, the Muhkam Nass of the Kitb and Sunnah and the explanations of the Ulam of these Nass bring out the fact that Muhkamah to the Tght in all types is Kufrul Akbar which takes one completely out of the religion of Islm and that this reality is constant with the Ittifq of all of the Ulam. After all these quotes and the Ijm of the Ulam, it also became clear that the claim concerning seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr is a matter of Ikhtilf amongst the Ulam is also Btil.

These Dalil (evidences) concerning seeking judgment from the Tght being an act that nullifies the Aslud Dn have disproved all the views of those who bring -some more some less- exceptions and also those who claim that Jahl or Tawl would be an excuse. In the light of these, we also want to add the following:

First of all, the Asl for the Ahkm of the Sharah is not the name of this Hukm but the Illah (reason) which it is based upon. Therefore, whatever the Illah is that makes an act Kufr or Harm, as long as the Illah continues the Hukm also will continue. With this regard, Shaykh Ab Butayn Rahmatullhi Alayh, who is from amongst the Ulam of Najd, said the following in his priceless book al-Intisr li Hizbillhil Muwahhidn,

If the human being knows and verifies the meaning of al-Ilah (deity) and that it means al-Mabd (the one who is worshiped), then he will recognize the reality of Ibdah. It becomes clear for him that whoever directs anything from Ibdah to other than Allh becomes a slave of whatever he took as an Ilah. Whether he refrains from naming it as a Mabd or an Ilah and names the act that, he commits it as Tawassul (mediation), Shafah (intermediary), Iltij (seeking refuge), and its likes.

The Mushrik is a Mushrik whether he wants (to have this attribute) or not. Just as the usurer is an usurer whether he wants (to have this attribute) or not and even if he does not name his act as Rib (interest); or as the Khamr (alcoholic beverages) drinker is a drinker of Khamr even if he names it as something other than its name. It is stated in the Hadth narrated from the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam,


يَأتِي نَاسٌ مِنْ أُمَّتِي يَشْرِبُونَ الْخَمْرَ يُسَمُّونَهَا بِغَيْرِ اِسْمِهَا
A people of my Ummah (nation) will drink Khamr (wine and other alcoholic drinks), calling it by another name. (Ab Dwd, Hadth no: 3688 and others)

As change in the name does not change the reality of the Musamm (the thing that is named), it will also not lift its Hukm (ruling). As the Bedouins named their Btil traditions as Haqq and named what they wrongfully took with something other than its name (such as tax etc. that does not change its reality, it is the same).

For example, the reason Khamr (alcohol) is Harm is due to it making one drunk, it conceals intelligence and sweeps it away. As it was mentioned in the Ahdth, if much intoxicates, then even a little is Harm. If one claims that whatever he drinks is not Khamr but soda pop and if there is alcohol in it; even if it is named as soda pop and not wine, it is still the same, its Hukm is the same, Harm.

In the matter of Tahkum ilat Tght; the reason it is Kufr is because -as we have quoted from the Ulam before in the previous pages- due to giving the Tashr right to other than Allhu Tal. Therefore, as long as it is Kufr; to take the laws of Jhiliyyah such as al-Ysaq as a main source of law, honoring it, accepting it even if it is only outwards, and performing in accordance to these laws then as long as these acts continue, the Hukm of Kufr will continue as well.

If this point is comprehended, then it will become clear how big the Dallah (heresy) and confusion are of those who quit giving the Hukm of Kufr due to the change in the names. For example, the state of those who claim that appealing to the High court and hiring an advocate is Jiz (permissible) and the claim that one cannot seek the judgment from the Tght but if a trial is started for him then he can defend himself and testify before the court, is this. Since the Illah of seeking judgment from the Tght is Kufr, meaning taking the Ahkm of Shirk as a main source of law and performing accordingly continues. As long as this Illah is not lifted, there is no need for additional Dall (proof) to name these acts with the attribute of Kufr.

Likewise, there is no need for additional Dall (proof) for the one does not reject the court when he was taken to court, to be Kfir. Those who do not disapprove it, should have to explain how they gave the ruling Kufr to seeking judgment from the Tght. For those who fulfill the general principles with regards to Tahkum ilat Tght, there is no need for them to explain every matter that is under this heading in detail.

This should be taken in consideration while bringing forth evidences for the matter. Actually, in such a matter which is Malm minad Dni bidh Dharrah meaning submitting to the Ahkm of Shirk being Kufr; no one whether an lim (scholar) or a Jhil (ignorant) has the right to bring exceptions. It is even worse when he who brings exceptions is not on the level of a Mujtahid (one who has the ability to extract Hukm from the Nass), to extract Hukm from the Nass, meaning not having any right to speak about it. (Here we do not extract Hukm from the Nass meaning making Ijtihd -i.e. extracting Hukm from the Nass- but to remind the Hukm of a matter which is Malm minad Dni bidh Dharrah).

Those who have no right to make Ijtihd should leave the Dhhir Nass aside and extracting Hukm by their own views from the Nass that are not Dhhir such as the Qissah (story) of Ysuf Alayhis Salm or the story of Negus and make Takhss over the general principles of Islm is wrong from the bases and it is even worse and wrong above another wrong to take the Nass independently from one another and clashing them.

As an example; claims are made that since it is Shirk to accept the Hukm other than Allhu Tal, Ysuf Alayhis Salm while asking his prison mates to mention himself in the presence of the king, committed Shirk and therefore this is introduced as an exception to perform Shirk!.. If the will of Ysuf Alayhis Salm has nothing to do with Tahkum -surely it has nothing to do with Tahkum- then there is nothing to worry about. If those who bring this as a Dall had any Khayr (goodness), they would never clash the Nass by claiming that Tahkum ilat Tght is Jiz in some cases.

In short, the one who is to criticize and oppose what we have written is to prove both sides of the matter by Aql (intelligence) and Naql (narration) that their action/belief is not seeking the Hukm of Tght.


فَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلُواْ وَلَن تَفْعَلُواْ فَاتَّقُواْ النَّارَ الَّتِي وَقُودُهَا النَّاسُ وَالْحِجَارَةُ أُعِدَّتْ لِلْكَافِرِينَ
But if ye cannot -and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones -which is prepared for those who reject Faith. (al-Baqarah 2/24)
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


thr (Sayings, Actions, and Consent of the Sahbah) and Akhbr (Narrations and Reports) Regarding the Hukm (Ruling) of Seeking Judgment from the Tght

With the permit of Allhu Tal, we have provided evidence with Dalil (evidences) from the Kitb (Book; Qurn), Sunnah and Ijm regarding the fact that Muhkamah bit Tght (seeking judgment from the Tght) nullifies the Aslud Dn (essence of the religion; Islm).

Now, we will take in hand various claims about seeking judgment from the Tght, Inshllh (with the permit and will of Allh). However, in order to verify the Btil (falseness and invalidity) of these claims and so that the issue of seeking judgment from the Tght, is generally understood well, wed like to mention the Asbbun Nuzl (reasons and occasions of revelation) for the yah (verse) an-Nis 4/60 and its Tafsr (exegesis) by the Salaf (predecessors) which is amongst the greatest evidences for this matter.

If we are going to comprehend the Kitb and the Sunnah with the Fahm (comprehension) of the Salaf and not with our Haw (desires); the Salafus Slihn, who are the first three generations of Islm which Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam had praised on many occasions, made Takfr of those who seek judgment from the Tght without any exception. This is understood better once the following narrations are read Inshllh.

The Imm of the Mufassirn (Tafsr scholars) Ibnu Jarr at-Tabar Rahmatullhi Alayh, started the Tafsr of the yah an-Nis 4/60 -as he usually does- by explaining the meaning of the yah briefly:


الْقَوْلُ فِي تَأْوِيلِ قَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ وَيُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا.} [النساء: 60] يَعْنِي بِذَلِكَ جَلَّ ثَنَاؤُهُ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ.} [البقرة: 243] يَا مُحَمَّدُ بِقَلْبِكَ فَتَعْلَمَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ صَدَّقُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ، وَإِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَلْبِكَ مِنَ الْكُتُبِ {يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا.} [النساء: 60] فِي خُصُومَتِهِمْ {إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء: 60] يَعْنِي:" إِلَى مَنْ يُعَظِّمُونَهُ، وَيَصْدُرُونَ عَنْ قَوْلِهِ، وَيَرْضَوْنَ بِحُكْمِهِ مِنْ دُونِ حُكْمِ اللّٰهِ، {وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ.} [النساء: 60] يَقُولُ: "وَقَدْ أَمَرَهُمُ اللّٰهُ أَنْ يُكَذِّبُوا بِمَا جَاءَهُمْ بِهِ الطَّاغُوتُ الَّذِي يَتَحَاكَمُونَ إِلَيْهِ، فَتَرَكُوا أَمْرَ اللّٰهِ، وَاتَّبَعُوا أَمْرَ الشَّيْطَانِ. {وَيُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا.} [النساء: 60] يَعْنِي أَنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَصُدَّ هَؤُلَاءِ الْمُتَحَاكِمِينَ إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ عَنْ سَبِيلِ الْحَقِّ وَالْهُدَى، فَيُضِلَّهُمْ عَنْهَا ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا، يَعْنِي: فَيَجُورُ بِهِمْ عَنْهَا جَوْرًا شَدِيدًا، وَقَدْ ذُكِرَ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ نَزَلَتْ فِي رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْمُنَافِقِينَ دَعَا رَجُلًا مِنَ الْيَهُودِ فِي خُصُومَةٍ كَانَتْ بَيْنَهُمَا إِلَى بَعْضِ الْكُهَّانِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ وَرَسُولُ اللّٰهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بَيْنَ أَظْهُرِهِمْ ذِكْرُ مَنْ قَالَ ذَلِكَ:

Hast thou not turned thy?

This addressing is the same as in the yah, Didst thou not turn by vision? (al-Baqarah 2/243) meaning: you know. Meaning: You know those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee.

In their disputes they resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght.

By Tght meaning: those who they revere and respect their statements and consent to their rulings, which are rulings that are other than Allhs.

Though they were ordered to reject him (i.e. Tght)

Meaning, He says: Allhu Tal commanded them to reject whatever the Tght -which they seek judgment from- bring. Whereas they leave the command of Allh and submit to the command of the Shaytn. But Satan's wish is to lead them astray far away (from the right) meaning: Shaytn wishes to withhold those who seek the judgment from Tght from the way of truth and Hidyah (guidance) and misguide them with far misguidance meaning turning them away harshly.

It was said that this yah had been revealed due to a Munfiq (hypocrite) and a Jew. The Munfiq -even though Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam was with them- called the Jew for the judgment of a soothsayer and for that instance the yah had been revealed. In this regard, the following was narrated:


حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، قَالَ: ثنا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ، قَالَ: ثنا دَاوُدُ، عَنْ عَامِرٍ، فِي هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء: 60] قَالَ: " كَانَ بَيْنَ رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْيَهُودِ وَرَجُلٍ مِنَ الْمُنَافِقِينَ خُصُومَةٌ، فَكَانَ الْمُنَافِقُ يَدْعُو إِلَى الْيَهُودِ لِأَنَّهُ يَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُمْ يَقْبَلُونَ الرِّشْوَةَ، وَكَانَ الْيَهُودِيُّ يَدْعُو إِلَى الْمُسْلِمِينَ لِأَنَّهُ يَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُمْ لَا يَقْبَلُونَ الرِّشْوَةَ، فَاصْطَلَحَا أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمَا إِلَى كَاهِنٍ مِنْ جُهَيْنَةَ، فَأَنْزَلَ اللّٰهُ فِيهِ هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ.} [النساء: 60] حَتَّى بَلَغَ: {وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا.} [النساء: 65]

(Chain of the narration) mir ash-Shab Rahimahullh said, One certain Munfiq had a dispute with a Jewish man. The Munfiq called the Jewish man to take their dispute to their own (i.e. Jew) arbitrators because he knew that they took bribery for the judgments they issued. The Jew, on the other hand, invited the hypocrite to take their dispute to the Muslimn because he knew that they did not accept bribery. (When they both rejected each other's choice,) they made a compromise and decided to take their dispute to a soothsayer from Juhaynah. Therefore, Allhu Tal revealed this yah regarding this.

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، قَالَ: ثنا عَبْدُ الْأَعْلَى، قَالَ: ثنا دَاوُدُ، عَنْ عَامِرٍ، فِي هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ.} [النساء: 60] فَذَكَرَ نَحْوَهُ، وَزَادَ فِيهِ: فَأَنْزَلَ اللّٰهُ {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ.} [النساء: 60] يَعْنِي الْمُنَافِقِينَ {وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ.} [البقرة: 4] يَعْنِي الْيَهُودَ {يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء: 60] يَقُولُ: "إِلَى الْكَاهِنِ {وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ.} [النساء: 60] أَمَرَ هَذَا فِي كِتَابِهِ، وَأَمَرَ هَذَا فِي كِتَابِهِ أَنْ يُكْفَرَ بِالْكَاهِنِ .

In another report from ash-Shab Rahimahullh the following was given as additional information:

In the yah Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? refers to the Munfiq who claims to have mn (belief). (The yah) to those before thee is in reference to the Jew who claims mn. The Tght referred to in (the yah) Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght is the soothsayer. though they were ordered to reject him since both the (holy) books of the Munfiq and the Jew had commanded them to reject the soothsayer.


حَدَّثَنِي يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عُلَيَّةَ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ قَالَ: كَانَتْ بَيْنَ رَجُلٍ مِمَّنْ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ مُسْلِمٌ، وَبَيْنَ رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْيَهُودِ خُصُومَةٌ، فَقَالَ الْيَهُودِيُّ: أُحَاكِمُكَ إِلَى أَهْلِ دِينِكَ، أَوْ قَالَ: إِلَى النَّبِيِّ؛ لِأَنَّهُ قَدْ عَلِمَ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللّٰهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَا يَأْخُذُ الرِّشْوَةَ فِي الْحُكْمِ. فَاخْتَلَفَا، فَاتَّفَقَا عَلَى أَنْ يَأْتِيَا كَاهِنًا فِي جُهَيْنَةَ قَالَ: فَنَزَلَتْ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ.} [النساء: 60] يَعْنِي: "الَّذِي مِنَ الْأَنْصَارِ {وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ.} [البقرة: 4] يَعْنِي: "الْيَهُودِيَّ {يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء: 60] إِلَى الْكَاهِنِ {وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ.} [النساء: 60] يَعْنِي: "أَمَرَ هَذَا فِي كِتَابِهِ، وَأَمَرَ هَذَا فِي كِتَابِهِ. وَتَلَا: {وَيُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا.} [النساء: 60]، وَقَرَأَ: {فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ.} [النساء: 65] إِلَى: {وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا.} [النساء: 65]

Again, in another report from ash-Shab Rahimahullh it stated,

There was a dispute between a man who claimed to be Muslim and a Jew. The Jew said, I will seek judgment of those in your Dn. Or he said, I will seek judgment of your Nab. Since he knew that Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam did not take bribery for the judgments (he issued). They disagreed then agreed to take it (the dispute) to a soothsayer in Juhaynah. Therefore, the yah, Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? had been revealed. In the yah:

that have come to thee referred to a man from the Ansr. With (the statement in the yah),

to thee and to those before thee in reference to the Jew. The Tght referred to in (the yah):

Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght is the soothsayer.

Though they were ordered to reject him since both the (holy) books of the Munfiq and the Jew had commanded them to reject the soothsayer. After stating, this ash-Shab recited the end of the yah, But Satan's wish is, to lead them astray far away (from the right) and then recited the yah an-Nis 4/65, reciting from,

But no, by thy Lord, they can have no (real) mn (faith) until they make thee judge in all disputes between them (...)

up to (the end of the yah),

() with the fullest conviction. (an-Nis 4/65)


حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْأَعْلَى، قَالَ: ثنا الْمُعْتَمِرُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، قَالَ: زَعَمَ حَضْرَمِيُّ أَنَّ رَجُلًا، مِنَ الْيَهُودِ كَانَ قَدْ أَسْلَمَ، فَكَانَتْ بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْيَهُودِ مُدَارَأَةٌ فِي حَقٍّ، فَقَالَ الْيَهُودِيُّ لَهُ: انْطَلِقْ إِلَى نَبِيِّ اللّٰهِ. فَعَرَفَ أَنَّهُ سَيَقْضِي عَلَيْهِ. قَالَ: فَأَبَى، فَانْطَلَقَا إِلَى رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْكُهَّانِ، فَتَحَاكَمَا إِلَيْهِ. قَالَ اللّٰهُ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء60 : ] "

(...) Hadram claimed that a man from the Jews became Islm (i.e. Muslim). There was a dispute between him and a Jew regarding the rights. The Jew said, Lets go to the Nab of Allh. Since he (the Jew) knew that, he (Raslullh) would rule against the other one (the Munfiq). (For this reason,) the other man (the Munfiq) did not want it. They both went to a soothsayer and they both sought the judgment of him. Allh said,

Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght. (an-Nis 4/60)


حَدَّثَنَا بِشْرُ بْنُ مُعَاذٍ، قَالَ: ثنا يَزِيدُ، قَالَ: ثنا سَعِيدٌ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، قَوْلُهُ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ.} [النساء: 60]:  الْآيَةُ، حَتَّى بَلَغَ: {ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا.} [النساء: 60] ذُكِرَ لَنَا أَنَّ هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ نَزَلَتْ فِي رَجُلَيْنِ: رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْأَنْصَارِ يُقَالَ لَهُ بِشْرٌ، وَفِي رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْيَهُودِ فِي مُدَارَأَةٍ كَانَتْ بَيْنَهُمَا فِي حَقٍّ، فَتَدَارَءَا بَيْنَهُمَا فِيهِ، فَتَنَافَرَا إِلَى كَاهِنٍ بِالْمَدِينَةِ يَحْكُمُ بَيْنَهُمَا، وَتَرَكَا نَبِيَّ اللّٰهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ. فَعَابَ اللّٰهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ ذَلِكَ. وذُكِرَ لَنَا أَنَّ الْيَهُودِيَّ كَانَ يَدْعُوهُ إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمَا، وَقَدْ عَلِمَ أَنَّ نَبِيَّ اللّٰهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَنْ يَجُورَ عَلَيْهِ، فَجَعَلَ الْأَنْصَارِيُّ يَأْبَى عَلَيْهِ وَهُوَ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ مُسْلِمٌ وَيَدْعُوهُ إِلَى الْكَاهِنِ، فَأَنْزَلَ اللّٰهُ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى مَا تَسْمَعُونَ، فَعَابَ ذَلِكَ عَلَى الَّذِي زَعَمَ أَنَّهُ مُسْلِمٌ، وَعَلَى الْيَهُودِيِّ الَّذِي هُوَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ، فَقَالَ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ.} [النساء: 60] إِلَى قَوْلِهِ: {صُدُودًا.} [النساء: 61] "

According to the narration from Qatdah Rahimahullh,

This yah, Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? up to (the end of the yah) astray far away (from the right) was revealed about two men. One was from the Ansr and it was said that his name was Bishr. And regarding a man from the Jews who had a dispute regarding the rights of a certain property in which both were involved. They took their dispute to a soothsayer in Madnah to judge between them while leaving (the judgment of) the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. Allh Azza wa Jalla rebuked them for doing so. In fact, the Jew was urging (the Muslim) to take their dispute to the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam, because he knew the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam will not wrong him. But (the Munfiq from the) Ansr refused to, even though he claimed to be a Muslim, and insisted to go to the soothsayer. So Allh Tabraka wa Tal revealed this yah censoring the person who was pretending to be Muslim as well as the Jew who belonged to Ahlul Kitb (the People of the Book i.e. Jews and the Christians), saying,

Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee (an-Nis 4/60) up to (the end of the next yah), Thou seest the hypocrites avert their faces from thee in disgust. (an-Nis 4/61)


حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ، قَالَ: ثنا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُفَضَّلٍ، قَالَ: ثنا أَسْبَاطٌ، عَنِ السُّدِّيِّ: {أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء: 60]:  قَالَ:" كَانَ نَاسٌ مِنَ الْيَهُودِ قَدْ أَسْلَمُوا وَنَافَقَ بَعْضُهُمْ، وَكَانَتْ قُرَيْظَةُ وَالنَّضِيرُ فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ إِذَا قُتِلَ الرَّجُلُ مِنْ بَنِي النَّضِيرِ قَتَلَتْهُ بَنُو قُرَيْظَةَ قَتَلُوا بِهِ مِنْهُمْ، فَإِذَا قُتِلَ الرَّجُلُ مِنْ بَنِي قُرَيْظَةَ قَتَلَتْهُ النَّضِيرُ، أَعْطُوْا دِيَتَهُ سِتِّينَ وَسَقًا مِنْ تَمْرٍ. فَلَمَّا أَسْلَمَ نَاسٌ مِنْ بَنِي قُرَيْظَةَ وَالنَّضِيرِ، قَتَلَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ بَنِي النَّضِيرِ رَجُلًا مِنْ بَنِي قُرَيْظَةَ، فَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، فَقَالَ النَّضِيرِيُّ: يَا رَسُولَ اللّٰهِ، إِنَّا كُنَّا نُعْطِيهِمْ فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الدِّيَةَ، فَنَحْنُ نُعْطِيهِمُ الْيَوْمَ ذَلِكَ. فَقَالَتْ قُرَيْظَةُ: لَا، وَلَكِنَّا إِخْوَانُكُمْ فِي النَّسَبِ وَالدِّينِ، وَدِمَاؤُنَا مِثْلُ دِمَائِكُمْ، وَلَكِنَّكُمْ كُنْتُمْ تَغْلِبُونَنَا فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ، فَقَدْ جَاءَ اللّٰهُ بِالْإِسْلَامِ فَأَنْزَلَ اللّٰهُ يُعَيِّرُهُمْ بِمَا فَعَلُوا. فَقَالَ: {وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ.}  [المائدة: 45] فَعَيَّرَهُمْ، ثُمَّ ذَكَرَ قَوْلَ النَّضِيرِيِّ: كُنَّا نُعْطِيهِمْ فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ سِتِّينَ وَسَقًا وَنَقْتُلُ مِنْهُمْ وَلَا يَقْتُلُونَ، فَقَالَ: {أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ.} [المائدة: 50]: وَأَخَذَ النَّضِيرِيَّ فَقَتَلَهُ بِصَاحِبِهِ. فتَفَاخَرَتِ النَّضِيرُ وَقُرَيْظَةُ، فَقَالَتِ النَّضِيرُ: نَحْنُ أَكْرَمُ مِنْكُمْ، وَقَالَتْ قُرَيْظَةُ: نَحْنُ أَكْرَمُ مِنْكُمْ، وَدَخَلُوا الْمَدِينَةَ إِلَى أَبِي بَرْزَةَ الْكَاهِنِ الْأَسْلَمِيِّ، فَقَالَ الْمُنَافِقُ مِنْ قُرَيْظَةَ وَالنَّضِيرِ: انْطَلِقُوا إِلَى أَبِي بَرْزَةَ يُنَفِّرُ بَيْنَنَا. وَقَالَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ مِنْ قُرَيْظَةَ وَالنَّضِيرِ: لَا، بَلِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُنَفِّرُ بَيْنَنَا، فَتَعَالَوْا إِلَيْهِ. فَأَبَى الْمُنَافِقُونِ، وَانْطَلَقُوا إِلَى أَبِي بَرْزَةَ فَسَأَلُوهُ، فَقَالَ: أَعْظِمُوا اللُّقْمَةَ. يَقُولُ: أَعْظِمُوا الْخَطَرَ. فَقَالُوا: لَكَ عَشَرَةُ أَوْسَاقٍ قَالَ: لَا، بَلْ مِائَةُ وَسَقٍ دِيَتِي، فَإِنِّي أَخَافُ أَنْ أُنَفِّرَ النَّضِيرَ فَتَقْتُلَنِي قُرَيْظَةُ، أَوْ أُنَفِّرَ قُرَيْظَةَ فَتَقْتُلَنِي النَّضِيرُ فَأَبَوْا أَنْ يُعْطُوهُ فَوْقَ عَشَرَةِ أَوْسَاقٍ، وَأَبَى أَنْ يَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ، فَأَنْزَلَ اللّٰهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: {يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء: 60] وَهُوَ أَبُو بَرْزَةَ، وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ، إِلَى قَوْلِهِ: {وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا.} [النساء: 65]

According to the narration of as-Sudd, this yah had been revealed regarding the Munfiqn (pl. Munfiq; hypocrites) who were from the Jews of the Quraydhah and Nadhr and claimed to be Muslim and people amongst these two clans (i.e. Nadhr and Quraydhah) who became Muslim in real sense. The hypocrites wanted to seek judgment of a soothsayer namely Ab Barzah al-Aslam, however, the Muslimn wanted to seek the judgment of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. For this instance, this yah was revealed and rebuked the hypocrites. As-Sudd said,

Some Jewish people had embraced Islm while others had Nifq (hypocrisy) in them. In Jhiliyyah (the pre-Islmic period), the custom between the clans of Quraydhah and Nadhr was that if a man from Banun Nadhr was killed, the killer was killed in retaliation. However, when a man from Ban Quraydhah killed another from Nadhr, the killer was not killed in retaliation and only sixty Wasq (about hundred and eighty kg) of fruits were paid as blood money.

After some people amongst the clans of Ban Quraydhah and an-Nadhr became Muslim, then it happened that a man from Banun Nadhr killed a man amongst Ban Quraydhah. Both parties sought the judgment from the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. (The Clan of) Nadhr said, In (the era of) Jhiliyyah we were paying Diyah (blood money) in a day like this (similar occasions). Therefore, Quraydhah said, No we do not accept it. We are brothers with you in both Nasab (genealogy) and Dn (religion). Our blood is the same as yours. However, you had dominated over us (since you were greater in number and we were few) during the Jhiliyyah. Allh brought Islm, therefore Allh revealed (this yah) to rebuke what they did. So (Allh) stated,


وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ
We ordained therein (the Tawrh; Torah) for them: Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose... (al-Midah 5/45)

Allhu Tal rebuked them (for taking Diyah and not perform Qiss) then said regarding the statement of Nadhr,

أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ
Do they then seek after a judgment of (the days of) ignorance? (al-Midah 5/50)

And, (Raslullh) killed the one amongst Nadhr who was the murderer. Then both the Nadhr and Quraydhah (clans) praised themselves. The Nadhr said, We are better then you so the Quraydhah they said, We are better then you. (The Hypocrites) went into Madnah to Ab Barzah al-Aslam the soothsayer. The Munfiq amongst the Quraydhah and the Nadhr said, Let us go to Ab Barzah al-Aslam, to judge between us. The Muslimn amongst the Quraydhah and the Nadhr said, No, but rather let us go to the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam to judge between us. The hypocrites refused and went instead to Ab Barzah to ask him to judge between them. He said, Increase the mouthful (i.e. bribe). They said, We will give you ten Awsuq (pl. Wasq). He (i.e. Ab Barzah) said, No, rather I will take a hundred as a Diyah for I fear if I judge in favour of the Nadhr, Quraydhah will kill me or if I judge in favour of the man from Quraydhah, the Nadhr will kill me. However, they (hypocrites) refused to give him more than ten Awsuq, he refused to judge between them. Therefore Allh Azza wa Jalla had revealed,

Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght (an-Nis 4/60) which is Ab Barzah and though they were ordered to reject him up to (the end of yah) with the fullest conviction. (an-Nis 4/65)


وَقَالَ آخَرُونَ: الطَّاغُوتُ فِي هَذَا الْمَوْضِعِ: هُوَ كَعْبُ بْنُ الْأَشْرَفِ ذِكْرُ مَنْ قَالَ ذَلِكَ: حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ، قَالَ: ثني أَبِي قَالَ: ثني عَمِّي قَالَ: ثني أَبِي عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قَوْلُهُ: {يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ.} [النساء: 60] وَالطَّاغُوتُ: رَجُلٌ مِنَ الْيَهُودِ كَانَ يُقَالَ لَهُ كَعْبُ بْنُ الْأَشْرَفِ، وَكَانُوا إِذَا مَا دُعُوا إِلَى مَا أَنْزَلَ اللّٰهُ وَإِلَى الرَّسُولِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ قَالُوا: بَلْ نُحَاكِمُكُمْ إِلَى كَعْبٍ؛ فَذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُ: {يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ.} [النساء: 60] الْآيَةُ

Others said: The Tght mentioned in this (yah) is Kab Ibnul Ashraf. (Chain of the narration ...) Ibnu Abbs Radiyallhu Anhum Ajman said: The Tght (in the yah) Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght, though they were ordered to reject him. (an-Nis 4/60) is a man amongst the Jews called Kab Ibnul Ashraf. When they were called to seek judgment of Allh and His Rasl, rather they sought the judgment of Kab (Ibnul Ashraf) and this yah had been revealed, though they were ordered to reject him. (an-Nis 4/60)

At-Tabar then narrated this yah had been revealed regarding those who sought judgment from Kab Ibnul Ashraf; from Mujhid, Rab bin Anas, and ad-Dahhk. The Ikhtilf (disagreement) at-Tabar narrated is merely an Ikhtilf regarding which Tght the judgment was sought from. The essence of the matter is that all the narrations and the statements the yah points to the fact that; some of the hypocrites sought judgment from the Tght instead of the Nab Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية

Getting Rid of the Doubts with Regards to Seeking Judgment from the Tght

After narrating from the Book and the Sunnah and from the Mujtahid scholars regarding seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr and Shirk, we are going to take the doubts which are related with this matter in hand as our Ilm suffices, in the same manner and Usl (methodology).

Even though seeking judgment from the Tght, requesting judgment from him is a nullifier of mn and it is an act that contradicts the Kalima-i Shahdah (statement of testimony: I bear witness that there is no god worthy of worship but Allh, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and His Messenger) per se; people amongst the misguided sects have been cultivating various doubts. The reason for this is that they -with no doubt- refrain from living according to Islm and Tawhd in order to insure their luxury in the Duny (worldly life).

As we have mentioned in the beginning of our Rislah, some of these misguided groups claim that; the Kufr of seeking judgment from the Tght is limited within Drul Islm (Abode of Islm) and that it is Jiz (permissible) when there is no Islmic court since it is Dharrah (necessity).

And some of them accept seeking judgment from the Tght as a general principle in Drul Harb (the Abode of War).

Some of them claim that two Muslimn cannot take their dispute to the Tght but a Muslim can seek judgment from the Tght to take his rights back from a Kfir.

And others collect all these doubts together.

There are people who seem to oppose these doubts, but bring forth many other doubts such as there being no problem if the laws of the Tght does not conflict with the Islmic laws.

There are also others claiming that seeking judgment from the Tght is prohibited however, it is Harm and not Shirk.

In addition, others claim appealing to the high court is different from seeking judgment from Tght, which is against both sanity and the religious narrations.

We can add those who claim that a Muslim cannot take his dispute to the Tght but if someone else took the dispute to the court of the Tght, he can defend himself as well.

Moreover, we can mention others who claim that seeking judgment from the Tght is Kufr; however, one can hire an attorney for him and defend himself if the other party takes the dispute to the court of the Tght.

There are many more doubts that had been innovated in this regards -some of them which comes to our minds and others which do not. Recently the doubt, which is based upon the word
يُرِيدُونَ yurdna meaning wish in the yah an-Nis 4/60, had been added to the doubts. In the yah an-Nis 4/60, where Allhu Tal stated, Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght. They claim that due to the word يُرِيدُونَ yurdna (wish) used in the yah, the one who wishes to seek judgment from the Tght will be Kfir but the one who seeks judgment from the Tght without wishing wont be Kfir.

These people who innovated such doubt mentioned this doubt as an additional doubt on top of other doubts -especially the claim that seeking judgment from the Tght is not Kufr if he is in Drul Harb- which we had listed above. This doubt that is based upon the word "
يُرِيدُونَ yurdna (wish)" is a Bidah which was innovated recently and we have not come across any one amongst the Salaf nor the Khalaf not even the contemporaries that made Tafsr of the yah in this manner. This argument which nobody had done Tafsr of the yah in this manner for more than fourteen hundred years is alone sufficient to prove their delusion. Since any view that has no (base, example) Salaf is condemned in the following Hadth,

إِنَّ أُمَّتِي لَنْ تَجْتَمِعَ عَلَى ضَلاَلَةٍ
My nation will not unite upon Dallah (misguidance). (Ibnu Mjah, Hadth no: 3950)

Let alone, this is not a discussion of Tafsr but beyond it, it is a claim that nullifies the Asl of Tawhd.

The common point of all these doubts and doubters is the ignorance in the meaning of both the Tght and the meaning of seeking judgment and also their ignorance of Tawhd -the call of the Prophets. Before we start refuting all these claims in detail, we want to give a concise and brief response towards all of them and it is as follows:

As it is known by all those who attribute themselves to Tawhd; one of the principles that the Shahdah La ilaha illallh comprises is the reality that none other than Allh has the right of judgment and Tashr (law making). Those who commit acts such as seeking judgment from the Tght which means giving this right to other than Allh, worshiping other than Allh and taking a second Ilah (deity) similar to those Ahlul Kitb who worship other than Allh by giving the right of Tashr to their Rabbis (priests) and Monks (anchorites).

In short, those who seek judgment from the Tght, those who submit to the ruling of the Tght are Mushrikn who associate partners to Allh. Shirk is a sin that Allh will never forgive. Since Allhu Tal commands,


إِنَّ اللّٰهَ لا يَغْفِرُ أَنْ يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَلِكَ لِمَنْ يَشَاءُ وَمَنْ يُشْرِكْ بِاللّٰهِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلالاً بَعِيداً
Allh forgiveth not (the sin of) Shirk (joining other gods) with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allh, hath strayed far, far away (from the right). (an-Nis 4/116);

إِنَّهُ مَنْ يُشْرِكْ بِاللّٰهِ فَقَدْ حَرَّمَ اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ الْجَنَّةَ وَمَأْوَاهُ النَّارُ وَمَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ مِنْ أَنْصَارٍ
Whoever joins other gods with Allh, Allh will forbid him the Garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help. (al-Midah 5/72);

لَئِنْ أَشْرَكْتَ لَيَحْبَطَنَّ عَمَلُكَ وَلَتَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ
If thou wert to join (gods with Allh), truly fruitless will be thy work (in life), and thou wilt surely be among the Losers. (az-Zumar 39/65)

The sole exception for Shirk to be forgiven is Ikrh; meaning coercion, which is the opposite of will. The statement: If seeking judgment from the Tght takes places without the will then it is not Kufr is correct if Ikrh is intended with it and we speak according to the Shar Istilh (literature), not in accordance to our Haw (desire). The person cannot claim that his will is taken from him unless he is under Ikrh (compulsion, duress). Allhu Tal stated concerning Ikrh,

مَنْ كَفَرَ بِاللّٰهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِيمَانِهِ إِلَّا مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالْإِيمَانِ وَلَكِنْ مَنْ شَرَحَ بِالْكُفْرِ صَدْرًا فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِنَ اللّٰهِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ
Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allh, utters Unbelief, -except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith- but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allh, and theirs will be a dreadful Chastisement. (an-Nahl 16/106)

As it is seen, the sole exception for the doer of Kufr to receive the wrath of Allh is Ikrh. If we had agreed with all our opponents by submitting to the ruling of this yah, many Ikhtilf (disagreements) would have been solved.

This is because almost all of the groups of Dallah (misguidance) bring other exceptions such as the Dhahrah (necessity), Maslahah (benefit), being in Drul Harb, being a spy etc. and permit committing Kufr for the one who is not under Ikrh. Even those who claim to have Ilm like Ebu Hanzala (of Turkey) who states in his tape recording named Ehli Snnetin Vela-Bera anlayışı (The Ahlus Sunnahs Understanding of al-Wal wal Bar)  that seeking judgment from the Tght is taking the Tght as a Wal, that it nullifies Kalima-i Shahdah, that such person does not reject the Tght in an extremely long way, then gives a Fatw that in Drul Harb, seeking judgment from the Tght is not Kufr based on the word يُرِيدُونَ yurdna (wish) which was mentioned in the yah an-Nis 4/60 and by narrating some statements of Sarahs and other scholars while explaining them with his own Ray (opinion).

According to this claim, while Allh obligated both humanity and the Jinn with Tawhd in Drul Islm, He permitted them (seeking refuge from this view of Dallah) to commit Shirk in Drul Harb. Therefore, according to this, it is not Wjib (obligatory) to reject the Tght -those (fake) deities who deemed to have the right to lawmaking other than Allh- in Drul Harb.

We seek refuge in Allhu Tal from all of these claims and views What kind of Ilm and Fiqh is this that they bring exceptions to Tawhd, which is the reason for all humanity and the Jinn to be created and they also permit committing Shirk with a few unclear statements of the Ulam?

When would the hearts of these contenders with this view or others that direct to the doubt, tremble with the fear of Allh?

When would the hearts of these contenders of this view or others that direct to the doubt, leave speaking regarding Allh without knowledge?

Everyone should check their condition and make sincere Tawbah before the wrath of Allh reaches.


There is more that could be said but even those who solely ponder upon the Kalimatut Tawhd; La ilaha illallh would understand all these views and doubts are Btil (false). Since all of these contenders bring exceptions after accepting the fact that seeking judgment from the Tght nullifies the Asl of Tawhd.

Actually, both these doubters and their opponents who try to refute them have not comprehended the Asl of Tawhd. This is because most of the time their debate is about the yah an-Nis 4/60: its Tawl as seeking judgment from the Tght was not Kufr before the mentioned yah had been revealed. Whereas this yah is not of those yt that bring a new ruling, rather it is of the kind informative which informs the ruling that already exists.


أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ وَيُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا
Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght, though they were ordered to reject him. But Satan's wish is to lead them astray far away (from the right). (an-Nis 4/60)

Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh -if the narration is correct- killed those who sought the judgment of the Tght before this yah was revealed. He -no doubt- ruled this act to be Kufr from the Kalimah, La ilaha illallh. The statement: though they were ordered to reject him (i.e. Tght) mentioned in the yah also indicates this.

In short, those who claim that seeking judgment from the Tght is not Kufr have to explain the Asl of Tawhd and not the yah an-Nis 4/60. The state of, those who defend judgement to the Tght and their opponents who try to refute them on the internet, by publishing books etc. shows that there is no Khayr (good) in them. This is because none of them debate the issue from the right point of view; meaning Tawhd.

After this Mujmal (concise) response, we are going to try to give detailed answers to the doubts regarding the matter of seeking judgment from the Tght Inshllh.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


The First Doubt: The View of Those Who Claim that Seeking Judgment from the Tght Regarding Administrative Laws When the Laws of the Tght are not Against Islm, is not Kufr or the View of Those Who Claim it is not an Open Issue and that There is Tafslt (Details) and Ambiguousness on the Takfr of Those Who Commit Seeking Judgment from the Tght

The owner of these claims say:


Quote
The Dalaalat of the Ayah Nisa 60 especially concerning the Muslim who lives in Daarul-Harb where there is no Islamic court and who is oppressed and rights were taken by the Kuffaar is Dhanni and not Qati. It is because this Ayah was revealed regarding those who prefer the courts of the Taghout while there was an Islamic court in Madinah. We learned it was Kufr with research and verification however there is no need to make Takfeer of our past when we did not rule with Kufr. We can not make Takfeer of a person who accepts Tawheed while not realizing such detailed matter was Kufr without Iqaamatul-Hujjah. As the Ulamaa did not perform Takfeer against those sects of Dalaalah such as, those claiming the Quran was created and those who denied that Allah is above Arsh. We also cannot perform Takfeer against those who believe that it is not Kufr since they apply to the court of Taghout such that the ruling of a matter does not oppose the Islamic Shareeah without establishing the proofs and the statements of the Ulamaa to them. On the other hand we will make Takfeer of such person who applies to the courts of the Taghout so that the ruling of a matter is in opposition with the Islamic Shareeah even if he is Jaahil since he wanted to seek judgment of Taghout who ruled a Halaal as Haraam or vice verse. In the same manner, we will make Takfeer of those Muslimeen who took their dispute to the court of the Taghout and made him judge between them, without looking over the Tafseel. However, the Kufr of the Muslim who took his dispute with a Kaafir to the court of the Taghout is not as clear as the first scenario where both the parties are Muslim. It is because in the Ayah Nisa 65, Allah addressed the Mumineen by stating: (...) they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them (...). (Nisa 65) However, the Kaafir does not accept the ruling of Islam.

With the Idhn (permit) and Karam (beneficence) of Allh, we want to respond to and refute the owner of such claim in the light of the quotations from the Ulam that we had narrated before.

They claim that the yah an-Nis 4/60 had been revealed in Madnah regarding those who turned away from the Hukm of Raslullh by preferring the court of the Tght while there was an Islmic court existing; the Dallat (indication) of the yah an-Nis 4/60 concerning the Muslim who lives in Drul Harb where there is no Islmic court since he applies to the court of Tght such that the ruling of a matter does not oppose the Islmic Sharah is Dhann (speculative) and not Qat (decisive). We can say the following regarding the owner of such claims:

1- First of all, none amongst the Ulam have stated that the ruling of this yah is restricted within the Islmic state and restricted with the availability of the court of the Islmic state and also seeking judgment from the Tght in Drul Kufr is not Kufr and there is Tafsl on the Takfr of person who sought the judgment of Tght in Drul Kufr while the court of Islmic State in not available.

This is stated and claimed merely by some of the ignorant of today. One of the greatest Qarnah (indication) of such claim being Btil (false) is its having no roots and Salaf (predecessor) in the Ummah (nation i.e. Islm)...

2- The indication of the yah is clear in regards to seeking judgment from the Tght is -without bringing any exception- the opposite of mn. Statements of the scholars, as we quoted above also indicate it being Kufr without any exception. There is no base to reckon without the clear indication regarding the Hukm of the yah by using the argument that the yah had been revealed in Madnah about those who turned away from the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam nor to restrict the ruling of the yah with incidents like Asbbun Nuzl of the yah or similar incidents.

Indeed there is no difference between such person and the one who claims that all yt (pl. yah; verses) which inform the Ahkm (pl. Hukm; rulings) that had been revealed in Madnah (period) shall be applied only in the Islmic State.

As it is impossible to claim that the Hijb of the Muslim womenfolk is Fardh (obligatory) in Drul Islm and it is not Fardh in Drul Harb due to the fact that the Ahkm concerning the matter had been revealed in Madnah while the Muslimn had the power; it is impossible to claim that keeping distance from the court of Tght is only Fardh in Drul Islm.

The Illah (reason) being Khuss (particular) does not prevent the Hukm being Amm (general).

Asbbun Nuzl is a mean and a Qarnah to understand the yah and it is not to devote, to restrict the ruling with the particular incident.

While reckoning without all the evidences regarding the matter and making Tafsr of the yah only with the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah is a great ignorance. The aforementioned yah openly informs that the absolute reason for their Kufr is their wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght as it was stated in the yah. If the reason for their Takfr which was informed in the yah was only turning away from the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam, the yah would have stated it clearly, rather the Kufr which was informed in the yah is seeking judgment from the Tght.

Ibnu Kathr Rahmatullhi Alayh said the following in the Tafsr of the yah,

Allh chastises those who claim to believe in what Allh has sent down to His Messenger and to the earlier Prophets, yet they refer to other than the Book of Allh and the Sunnah of His Messenger for judgment in various disputes.

It was reported that the reason behind revealing this yah was that a man from the Ansr and a Jew had a dispute, and the Jew said, Let us refer to Muhammad to judge between us. However, the Muslim man said, Let us refer to Kab Ibnul Ashraf (a Jew) to judge between us.

It was also reported that the yah was revealed about some hypocrites who pretended to be Muslims, yet they sought to refer to the judgment of Jhiliyyah (days of ignorance; pre-Islmic era). Other reasons were also reported behind the revelation of the yah.

However, the yah has a general meaning, as it chastises all those who refrain from referring to the Qurn and Sunnah for judgment and prefer the judgment of whatever they chose of falsehood, which befits the description of Tght here.
(Ibnu Kathr, Tafsr)

As Ibnu Kathr Rahimahullh stated, even if it is pretended that the yah had been revealed for a particular case, the condemnation in the yah for seeking judgment from all other Btil Shari (pl. of Sharah) other than the Sharah of Islm is general. None of the Ulam amongst this Ummah had stated the opposite.

Moreover, there are many narrations concerning the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah an-Nis 4/60 and there is no agreement between the scholars concerning the soundness of many of these reports.

Even, one of the famous incidents concerning the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah an-Nis 4/60, the incident of Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh which some try to make Btil Istidll (the methodology of the evidencing) with, is a weak report. As much as we verified, it is the weakest of all the reports concerning the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah an-Nis 4/60. Even though this incident and others had been related with different Turuq (pl. Tarq; means of transmission) and Matn (text), the report that stated Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh had said, This is how I judge for he who does not accept Allhs judgement and the judgement of His Messenger is related with the Isnd (chain of narration) of Kalb - Ab Slih - Ibnu Abbs Radiyallhu Anhum Ajman. This Riwyah (narration) related with this chain of narration and the text by Thalab in his Tafsr and Whid in his Asbbun Nuzl. This very Riwyah (narration) is not presented in any of the esteemed Hadth books.

Muhammad bin Saib bin Bishr al-Kalb, one of the narrators of the report of Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh, as Ibnu Hajar mentioned, was condemned to be a liar and amongst the Rfidhah. Ibnu Hajar in his book Tahdhbut Tahdhb quoted the critique of the Ulam regarding al-Kalb. It seems there is none amongst the Ulam who praised him. Ab Htim said regarding him,

People made Ijm (agreement) regarding leaving his hdith (narrations that he reported).

Moreover, Ibnu Hajar quoted from some of the Ulam that they declared Takfr of him. Those who declare Takfr of him condemned him that he had the belief that when Jibrl Alayhis Salm brought the Wahy (revelation) to Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and was not able to find him so Jibrl Alayhis Salm gave the Wahy to Al Radiyallhu Anh.

Ibnu Hajar mentioned that al-Kalb -who was from Kfa- confessed that he himself, was one of the followers of Abdullh bin Saba the Jew who established the Shiite sect. Ibnu Hajar also quoted from Sufyn ath-Thawr that al-Kalb said,

All the reports that I narrated by the way of Ab Slih from Ibnu Abbs Radiyallhu Anhum Ajman are lies and do not ever narrate anything from me. (Ibnu Hajar, Tahdhbut Tahdhb, 9/152-154)

Therefore, this very incident of Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh and the Munfiq had not reached with us an Isnd that Istidll can be made out of it or to extract Hukm out of it. This incident in some books is mentioned as a witness and as an extra Qarnah. For this reason, many lim (scholar) who placed this incident in their books narrated it while stating qla (it is said) or yurw (it was narrated) which indicates its Isnd being not esteemed.

One of them is Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb Rahmatullhi Alayh. In his book Kitbut Tawhd, under the Bb (chapter) of the yah an-Nis 4/60 he quoted a Riwyah from ash-Shab as an Asbbun Nuzl of the yah first and then mentioned this Riwyah -by stating qyla (it is said)- of Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh,

It was also claimed that the verse was revealed in connection with two disputants, one of whom said, Let us have Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam arbitrate between us! And the other said, Let us go to Kab Ibnul Ashraf for that purpose. Finally, they went to Umar Radiyallhu Anh to adjudicate between them. Umar Radiyallhu Anh asked if it is true that one of them rejected the arbitration of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. When the disputant in question answered in the affirmative, Umar Radiyallhu Anh had him executed on the spot. (Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb, Kitbut Tawhd, 184-185)

Shaykh Muhammad Rahimahullh did not even mention the famous statement attributed to Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh This is how I judge for he who does not accept Allh's judgement and the judgement of His Messenger.

Indeed not all of the scholars of Tafsr placed this statement that is attributed to Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh in their books. (For example,) Hfidh Ibnu Kathr mentioned this incident as Asbbun Nuzl of the yah an-Nis 4/65, which he narrated it from Ab Htim and others however; he had not quoted this part of the statement.

Some of the scholars of Tafsr mentioned that while Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh explained to Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam the reason that he killed the Munfiq (hypocrite), he said, (O Raslullh!) He rejected your Hukm!.. I did not find a Sanad for this particular Riwyah. Only some of the Tafsr had quoted this Riwyah by stating with yurw (it was narrated) (Zajjj, Manil Qurn; ar-Rghib al-Asfahn, Tafsr; Ibnul Arab, Ahkmul Qurn etc.).

Ar-Rz added, many of the Mufassirn (pl. Mufassir; Tafsr scholars i.e. commentators of the Qurn) said to the beginning of the Riwyah without attributing it to anyone.

Even though they based their claim upon these incidents that the yah had been revealed, they do not understand these incidents. There is nothing in these incidents to be taken as evidence in their part. Even if it is constant that Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh accounted the Munfiq to be killed because he (the Munfiq) was not content with the Hukm of Allhu Tal and Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam, this reason is not sufficient to restrict the Kufr that was mentioned in the yah only for those who turn away from the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh might have said this statement due to turning away from the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam being a second Kufr in the yah aside from the first Kufr which is seeking judgment from Tght.

Also, some of the Mufassirn mentioned the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah for those who went to the soothsayer and others mentioned Asbbun Nuzl of the yah for those who went to fortune arrows and others mentioned Asbbun Nuzl of the yah for those who went to the guards of the idols.

Moreover, many others mentioned the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah for those who went to Kab Ibnul Ashraf to seek his judgment as it was stated in the incident of Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh. (Refer back to the Tafsr of ar-Rz for his listing of many different incidents as Asbbun Nuzl of the yah.)

As far as we know, the soundest report concerning being the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah is the incident that those who sought judgment from the Jewish soothsayer Ab Barzah al-Aslam and it was related by at-Tabarn. Haythm stated that its Rijl (pl. Rajul; reporters) is sound. (Haythm, Majmuz Zawid, 7/6)

Taking only one incident from those related as being the Asbbun Nuzl of the yah, then picking a statement from it which Umar Ibnul Khattb Radiyallhu Anh claimed to have said, This is how I judge for he who does not accept Allh's judgment and the judgment of His Messenger to restrict seeking judgment from Tght to only turning away from the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam while reckoning with the yah an-Nis 4/60 and the yt continuing also clear Nass (textual proof) of the Qurn shows the concealed thoughts or at the best the Jahl (ignorance).

From what part of this incident do they deduct that the Hukm of the yah is restricted with those who turn away from the Hukm of Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam. Which lim had ever said so? Is there a base for this claim from the Ulam amongst the Salaf?

By Allh! This is a statement that was uttered by Ray (opinion) and Jahl. Whereas Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam said,


مَنْ قَالَ فِي القُرْآنِ بِرَأْيِهِ فَلْيَتَبَوَّأْ مَقْعَدَهُ مِنَ النَّارِ
Whoever says (something) about the Qurn according to his (own) opinion, then let him take his seat in the Fire. (at-Tirmidh, Tafsr: 1, Hadith no: 2951; at-Tirmidh said, حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ This is a Hasan Hadth.)

As a fact, many narrations that reached us in the books of Tafsr do not reach us with a Sahh (sound) Isnd (chain of narration), they are not available to deduct Hukm from. For this reason, Shaykhul Islm Ibnu Taymiyyah Rahmatullhi Alayh said the following,

It is well known that most of what was reported in aspects of Tafsr (commentaries on the Qurn) is similar to narrations reporting Maghz (or Srah) and battles, promoting Imm Ahmad to state that,

Three matters do not have Isnd: Tafsr, Malhim (i.e. great battles), and Maghz.

This statement was also narrated as do not have a source meaning Isnd.

This is because most of their narrations are of the Marsil (pl. Mursal; missing link on the Sahbah) type, such as narrations reported by Urwah Ibnuz Zubayr, ash-Shab, az-Zuhr, Mus bin Uqbah, and Ibnu Ishq and those came later them; Yahy al-Umayyid, al-Wald bin Muslim, al-Waqdh and others. (Ibnu Taymiyyah, Majmul Fatw, 13/346)

Therefore, it is not possible to make Istidll with many of the narrations that are narrated in the books of Tafsr and Siyr, since most of them do not have Muttasil Sanad (continuous; uninterrupted narration chain) reaching up to the Sahbah. Even though the status of the Tafsr and Siyr books are like that, we witness many people who based their religiously life even their Aqdah upon the information in the books of Tafsr and Siyr.

Whereas, the primarily sources for us shall be the Sahh Hadth books which have unbroken narration chains up to Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and esteemed verifier Ulam that wrote their books of Aqdah and Fiqh books in accordance to the Sahh Hadth books. Narrations that are narrated in the books of Tafsr, only those that are determined as Sahh by the scholars of Hadth can be used as an evidence. The rest of them can only be used as reports, which are taken as a witness or supportive evidence to Sahh evidence. All these are known by those who have knowledge of it.

3- The sole Dall for seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr is not the yah an-Nis 4/60. Rather this yah had been revealed in an informative manner to show that the Munfiqn performed against this known principle of Tawhd and not to build a new ruling that the Muslimn had not known. The statement of though they were ordered to reject him which is mentioned in the yah points out this reality. This is because even though the Munfiqn knew that judgment belongs to Allh; by seeking judgment from Tght they nullify Aslut Tawhd.

In short, seeking judgment from the Tght being Kufr is known with the Kalima-i Tawhd per se, since rejecting other (fake) gods includes rejecting at-Tawght (pl. Tght) that pass judgment other than Allh. Those who claim to explain the issue of seeking judgment from Tght by bringing explanation that does not fit the yah an-Nis 4/60,

How could they explain the matter in regards to Tawhd which is Aslud Dn? Lets say you restricted the yah with its Asbbun Nuzl,

How could you explain Nass related with rejecting the Tght while there is ascription to these Nass in the yah an-Nis 4/60 itself? Likewise,

How could you restrict all the Nass in regards to being the right of Tashr (lawmaking) and passing Hukm to belong to Allh?

In conclusion: seeking judgment from the Tght, appealing to the courts that are managed according to the man-made laws is a type of deed that nullifies Aslud Dn and a deed that opposes Aslud Dn. No matter what the intention or state of the doer was, this Hukm does not change.

Likewise, the ruling of the matter that one appeals for being the same with the Sharah of Islm or the person who sought the judgment from the Tght being in Drul Harb and there was no Islmic court being available does not change this Hukm. The person who makes differentiation regarding seeking judgment from the Tght or the one, who restricts the Hukm, does not understand Tawhd and he shall make Tawbah from this Kufr to salvation. Any view that we had at the past that opposes this, we declare -once more- that we made open Tawbah (repentance) and asked for Istighfr (seek for forgiveness).
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


The Second Doubt: The Doubt of the Two Courts, the View of Those Who Claim that; In Drul Harb one May Seek Judgment from the Tght if There is no Islmic Court Available

We previously explained that the statements of those who claim that seeking judgment from the Tght is Shirk, however, it is Jiz (permissible) in Drul Kufr means: giving permissibility to have other deities in Drul Kufr and we mentioned those who claim such with the yah being revealed in Madnah as a base for their claims. It is very clear that those people, who claim such, oppose the Shahdah of La ilaha illallh and they claim such a view that does not fit in any Usl (methodology) or Qidah (principle) in the Sharah.

Those who claim that it is permissible to seek judgment from the Tght in Drul Kufr just try to support their claim narration wise because their claim is very weak from the Usl point of view. For this, they are trying to take advantage of some of the Nass and the statements of the Ulam insomuch that for the sake of gaining worldly benefit they accuse Raslullh Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam and his Ashb. These Maln (cursed) ones subordinate themselves by commenting the Nass with their Ray (view) and accused some of the Prophets to seek judgment from the Tght in Drul Kufr, Hsh (god forbid)!..

We are going to get rid of this doubt first, since it includes accusation against the Prophets of Allh and Kitbullh.

We are going to give a Mujmal (concise) respond first and it is: The Kalimah La ilaha illallh which includes rejection of all the lawmakers other than Allh is the common Dawah (call) of the Prophets: As Allhu Tal informs,


وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ قَبْلِكَ مِنْ رَسُولٍ إِلَّا نُوحِي إِلَيْهِ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنَا فَاعْبُدُونِ
Not a messenger did We send before thee without this inspiration sent by Us to him: that there is no god but I; therefore worship and serve Me. (al-Anbiy 21/25);

وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَسُولًا أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللّٰهَ وَاجْتَنِبُوا الطَّاغُوتَ
For We assuredly sent amongst every People a Messengers, (with the Command): Serve Allh, and eschew Tght. (an-Nahl 16/36)

As seen, the matters concerning Tawhd and Shirk are the same in all religions of the Rusul (pl. of Rasl) and that rejecting the Tght is the mutual principle in the call of all the prophets and the messengers. Seeking judgement from the Tght is an action which contradicts the Fardh (obligatory act of) rejecting the Tght. This is why in the yah which condemns those who seek judgement from the Tght, it is stated,

أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ وَيُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا
Hast thou not turned thy though to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght, though they were ordered to reject him. But Satan's wish is to lead them astray far away (from the right). (an-Nis 4/60)

Even it is not possible for an ordinary Muslim to oppose the first Rukn (pillar) of Tawhd which is rejection of Tght by seeking judgment from the Tght, how could it be possible for the Prophets who are the callers of this Aqdah, to give Hsh wa Kall (never ever, god forbid) the right of lawmaking to other than Allh by seeking judgment from the Tght?

These people speak a word -which they are not aware how much misguidance it is- would take them into the fire meaning Jahannam (Hell). The claims of these people regarding the Prophets Alayhimus Salm are weaker than the spider web but we want to explain the matter in summary, in order to make the ignorant people aware who do not know the Dn and fooled with such claims.

These distorters in regards to the courts evaluated the speech of Prophets such as Ms Alayhis Salm and Ysuf Alayhis Salm against the Tght of the day as seeking judgment Hsh deemed that these Prophets sought the judgment of Tght.

Similar doubts brought by them are regarding the Sahbah who migrated to Habash (Abyssinia; modern-day Eritrea and Ethiopia) who spoke in front of Najsh (Negus).

They also bring statements of Sarahs Rahimahullh regarding the Muslimn who asked for their rights from the Kuffr as a proof for defending ones rights by seeking judgment from Tght is permitted in Drul Kufr.

The common point for all these doubts is that those who claim such do not know what seeking judgment from the Tght is. They do not even know what the meaning of seeking judgment is in the dictionaries. For this reason, they deem that any speech of a Muslim in the presence of the Tght regarding himself or for other Muslimn, is seeking judgment from the Tght.

Whereas, we quoted the statements of the Ulam in the beginning of the Rislah concerning what Muhkamah (trial) is taking the dispute to the judge. Where does taking the dispute to the judge take place in these events brought as proof for seeking judgment from the Tght being permissible in Drul Kufr? The Muslim is obligated to explain -regarding the matters of religion and worldly life- what truth and justice necessitates to speak in every gathering including the gatherings of the Tght. This has nothing to do with seeking judgment from the Tght.

Moreover, as we had stated in the beginning, the reason why seeking judgment from the Tght is Kufr is because it is giving the right of lawmaking to other than Allh. For this reason, the person who seeks judgment from a Sharah other than the Sharah of Allh is a Kfir and a Mushrik.

All these events that they mentioned -while keeping the Prophets and the Ashb distant from their claims- there is not a single evidence indicating them being judged with or them having accepted to be judged with any other Btil religion other than Islm let it be the religion of Firawn (Pharaoh) or religions that have falsified Sharah: Christianity or Judaism.

Both Ysuf Alayhis Salm and the Sahbah in the leadership of Jafar bin Ab Tlib Radiyallhu Anh who spoke in the presence of Negus are distant from all the Kufr and Shirk including the Kufr and Shirk of seeking judgment from the Tght. May Allhs Lanah (curse) be upon those who accuse them with seeking judgment from the Tght.

Those who have no fear of Allh, accuse the Prophets and the prominent Sahbah in order to legalize their own deeds. These people do these without observance of any db (manner) of the Ilm (knowledge), by straight reasoning and clinging to the apparent and by using similarities in the appearance as a fact to fool those amongst the lay people who do not have Ilm and whose reasoning is limited.

Whereas, there is a great difference between Ysuf Alayhis Salm rejecting the accusation of Zin (fornication) and proving his innocence and one of the contemporaries to seek judgment from the Tght while accepting to be judged accordingly to the laws of the Tght and defends himself in the same manner.

Likewise, the situation of the one who exclaims the truth and Tawhd in the presence of Negus and the one who begs freedom from the laws of the Tght is completely different.

The greatest difference is, those who defend themselves in the courts of Tght is doing this in a court environment and accepting with it that the Tght has a right over him to judge him accordingly by his laws of Kufr. The one whom the Kuffr slandered would obviously defend himself. Nevertheless, the Kufr in defending oneself against the slander is, doing it while accepting the court, accepting to be judged as a defendant in the presence of the Tght. Just because both of these acts are called defense does not mean that both incidents are the same in Hukm (ruling).

In addition, none is able to prove that both the situation of Ysuf Alayhis Salm and the Muhjir (emigrants) in Habash had their speech in the same manner as the courts of today which are generated with the Btil laws and there is no evidence for it. Since this cannot be proven, it becomes clear that comparing these events with todays reality is Btil.  This is because two things that are compared must have the same Illah (reason).

Whereas, every gathering that the Tght speaks at is not a gathering of Muhkamah. Muhkamah to the Tght is the gathering where the Tght judges according to his Btil Sharah and none of the two examples we have taken in hand carry this characteristic.

Even if we supposedly accept that there occurs Qiys (analogy), Qiys is a duty of a Mujtahid (expert of Islmic law). None of the Ulam from the past had deducted from these events that one could defend himself in a court that was arranged by the laws of Kufr. There is not a single narration regarding this that could be found. This is a Btil view which the ignorant of today have innovated according to their own Haw (desires).

In short, those who perform Qiys between these events and todays reality do not have the license to make Qiys or Ijtihd; rather they are amongst the Awm (laypeople). To reject such claim, merely knowing that this view belongs to the ignorant people is sufficient.

In addition, this view includes the claim that seeking judgment from the Tght is permissible, therefore, it opposes the first Rukn of Tawhd which is the rejection of the Tght, which every Muslim knows is Btil.

This is our concise response for the claims against the Prophets and the Sahbah. For the owners of intellect, even this concise explanation is sufficient but we will still take these events in hand one by one and respond to each of them in brief Inshllh.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


Getting Rid of the Doubt that Ms Alayhis Salm Sought Judgment of the Tght

Allhu Tal stated in Sratul Arf,


وَقَالَ مُوسَى يَا فِرْعَوْنُ إِنِّي رَسُولٌ مِّن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ. حَقِيقٌ عَلَى أَن لاَّ أَقُولَ عَلَى اللّٰهِ إِلاَّ الْحَقَّ قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِبَيِّنَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ فَأَرْسِلْ مَعِيَ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ
Ms said: O Firawn (Pharaoh)! I am a messenger from the Lord of the Worlds. One for whom it is right to say nothing but truth about Allh. Now have I come unto you (people), from your Lord, with a clear (Sign): So let Ban Isrl (the Children of Isrl) depart along with me. (al-Arf 7/104-105)

In this group of yt, Ms Alayhis Salm asked Firawn to let the Children of Isrl depart along with him. This causes a great Fitnah (trial) for some people as they bring this passage of the Qurn to their claim that there is no problem for asking the Tght to pass a judgment. Ms Alayhis Salm is far from such guilt of seeking judgment from the Tght and we keep him and all of the Prophets of Allh distant from such claim.

Speaking with a Tght and asking him for things is not seeking judgment from the Tght. One can only fall into such Kufr when/if he asks the judgment of the Tght who passes judgment which opposes the Sharah of Allh, or even if he does not ask but keeps silent in order to be judged with the Btil laws of Tght and shows consent to it.

In this event, Ms Alayhis Salm had not attended the court of Firawn nor had he asked Hukm according to the court of Firawn which judges accordingly to the Btil laws of Firawn. Firawn enslaved Ban Isrl and settled his sovereignty over them by the way of oppression. As it is permissible to ask a Kfir or a Dhlim (oppressor) to free his Muslim slave, it is also a permissible act for Ms Alayhis Salm to ask Firawn to free his slaves amongst the Ban Isrl.

This Hukm cannot be compared to seeking judgment from the Tght while applying to his Btil laws in order to free the one in prison or the one who is enslaved. This is because in the latter there is the crime to take the laws of Shirk to a judge between the parties, however, the first scenario is merely asking a Kfir to help. Actually, in this scenario, there is nothing related to the court and making Istidll with this event to the issues of court is an act of Btil upon Btil.

If these distorters had not brought this as a proof and had not caused Fitnah with the doubts, we would have never taken this matter into hand. Wallhul Mustan (Allh is the One whose help is sought)!..
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • أنصار المل الحنيفية وحماة الشرع المحمدية


Getting Rid of the Doubt that Ysuf Alayhis Salm Sought Judgment from the Tght

Allhu Tal said,


قَالَ هِيَ رَاوَدَتْنِي عَنْ نَفْسِي وَشَهِدَ شَاهِدٌ مِنْ أَهْلِهَا إِنْ كَانَ قَمِيصُهُ قُدَّ مِنْ قُبُلٍ فَصَدَقَتْ وَهُوَ مِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ
He (Ysuf) said: It was she that sought to seduce me -from my (true) self. And one of her household saw (this) and bore witness, (thus) If it be that his shirt is ripped from the front, then is her tale true, and he is a liar! (Ysuf 12/26)

Some people claim that some of the Tafsr scholars evaluated this witnessing as passing Hukm while bringing the above mentioned yah related with the accusation of Ysuf Alayhis Salm with Zin (fornication) and witnessing the witness and also some of the statements of the Mufassirn. As an example, at-Tabar said the following in the Tafsr of the yah Ysuf 12/26:

وقيل: معنى قوله: (وشهد شاهد) : حكم حاكم.
19129- حدثت بذلك عن الفراء، عن معلي بن هلال، عن أبي يحيى، عن مجاهد.

It is said that the meaning of the statement bore witness is; a judge passed judgment. This was narrated to me by the way of al-Farr -Muall bin Halll - Ab Yahy from Mujhid.

After mentioning that meaning of witnessing in the yah is judging, al-Mward then mentioned four statements with regards to the characteristics of the witness or the judge:

1- This witness is a baby in swaddle.

2- A creature amongst the creatures of Allh other than a man or Jinn.

3- A wise person amongst the family of the woman or her cousin.

4- It is the ripped shirt itself.


For the details of these statements, refer back to the Tafsr of the yah Ysuf 12/26 by al-Qurtub.

Our intention is not to discuss these details, however, we believe at least the following question should be asked -Usl wise-: How could this statement in the yah And one of her household saw (this) and bore witness (Ysuf 12/26) and its explanation by some of the Ulam as a judge passed a judgment be taken as evidence to the permissibility of seeking judgment from the Tght? From which Usl did this person who keeps talking pretentiously about the Usl and Qawid (the Rulings) deduct that defending oneself in the court of the Tght is Jiz?

Do these people evaluate themselves as Mujtahid? If they do -then this is nothing but delirium- then they should know -as all the Mujtahid know- that all evidences for a matters Dallat (indication) should be Qat (definite) and if there is possibility then Istidll with such Dall (evidence) is Btil.

In the above-mentioned yah, there are many different views concerning the witness to be a baby or an adult or a shirt. Moreover, this is only one of the views concerning the matter. This is a sufficient proof that the Dall is problematic (doubtful), and with such a problematic Dall, Hukm cannot be given. Even if we evaluate that she passed judgment as a judge with following statement: (thus) If it be that his shirt is ripped from the front, then is her tale true, and he is a liar! (Ysuf 12/26) then we need to define what kind of Hukm is intended with this.

As an example, amongst the scholars of Lughah, al-Akhfash in his Manil Qurn mentions that this person made a Sulh (mediator-ship) between them. Sulh is different from passing judgment and Muhkamah. Details regarding this matter will be given later Inshllh.

At this point, the following questions must be asked:

Is there any indicator in the yah or the statements of the Mufassirn that this gathering -Hsh- is a gathering of court that settled according to the Ahkm of Shirk?

Would they be able to bring a single scholar from the past other than these ignorant contemporaries that by making Istidll with this yah stated that seeking judgment from Tght is permissible?

Also, what is the description of this judge? If this judge which is mentioned in the story is a baby or a shirt then how could they take the qualification of Tght?

If this judge is a relative of the woman, then is there any evidence that this relative of the woman did the witnessing or judgment not as a mediator but with the qualification of being Tght who passed Hukm according to Ahkm of Shirk?

All of these even from the Usl point of view show that their Istidll is Btil. Yet, these people who bring this parable as a doubt might know the reality they just throw doubts -as usual- at the ignorant laypeople without explaining or verifying the narration.

Moreover, they do not even explain how this yah could be a Dall in their favor. This is because if they verify the issue Ilm wise then it will appear that it cannot be a Dall for anything. Such things do happen due to not having the intention of finding the truth but gilding the pill of the laypeople with some good fashion of speech.

In short; the accusation that Ysuf Alayhis Salm sought judgment of the Tght is the same as all other accusations it has no basis and it is gilding the pill of the laypeople with similarities. There is no evidence indicating that Ysuf Alayhis Salm showed consent to the judgment as it happens today in the courts of the Tght judging with the laws of the religion of the Kuffr (pl. Kfir; disbelievers).

Those who claim this have proved their ignorance regarding Tawhd and have spoken ill of the innocence of the Prophets.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Izhr'ud Dn

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 273
  • فَفِرُّوا إِلَى اللَّهِ


Refuting the Slander Made to the Sorcerers/Magicians Who Believed and Ibrhm Alayhis Salm Regarding Muhkamah Bit Tght

Previously, we tried to respond to the defamation of the prophets of Allh. In reality, these are deliriums not even worthy of response. However, because ignorance is on the rise today and the fear of Allh has decreased, some individuals do take these serious and fall into doubt. For this reason, we would like to respond to these slanders.

First, we need to emphasize that those who bring forth such claims are indeed those who do not comprehend the mutual call of all of the prophets and the messengers. If it was the other way around, meaning, if they had comprehended Tawhd, then they would have comprehended the reality that a matter as evident as Muhkamah Bit Tght (seeking judgment from the Tght) would never be permitted in any Sharah. They would also comprehend that the prophets and the messengers especially and their Ashb (those who submit to them and their call during their era including others) are far distant from an act of Shirk namely Muhkamah Bit Tght. How is this possible, while you claim that you believe in the reality that all of the Messengers came with the command, Serve Allh, and eschew Tght! (Refer back to the yah, an-Nahl 16/36) you also claim that all of these Messengers (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their disputes) to the Tght, although they were ordered to reject him. (Refer back to the yah, an-Nis 4/60) Hsh wa Kall (never ever Allh forbid)!

The person whom claims that anyone from amongst the Aimmah (pl. Imm) of Islm including the prophets and the messengers performed Muhkamah bit Tght, will be asked, what is the Hukm of Muhkamah Bit Tght? If he responds and says, It is Kufr then he is replied to, Do you attribute Kufr to the prophets and the messengers? If he says, we believe that Muhkamah Bit Tght is Kufr, however, we believe that defending oneself in the court of the Tght is not Kufr. Then he is asked, What is it that separates defending oneself in the court of the Tght from seeking judgment from the Tght? What difference therein between this two? They would have no acceptable response to this question since defending oneself in the court is a process that is an element of seeking judgment.

Thus, they would have to claim that these messengers and Aimmah sought judgment from the Tght, which is ascribing Kufr to them. Otherwise, they would allege Muhkamah Bit Tght is permissible in some cases which is in opposition to the principle the only exemption to Kufr is coercion consequently this would be claiming that Aqdah could change according to time and place. Alternatively, they would just have to admit they did not perform the act of Muhkamah Bit Tght, which will leave no difficulty.

Things such as; debating with the Kuffr, bringing Hujjah against them, requesting they expel the persecution etc. does not mean Muhkamah bit Tght. The definition of Muhkamah bit Tght is clear. As mentioned before, Muhkamah bit Tght is to present conflict and demand judgment from it.

Now, in the mentioned parables of the sorcerers who believed or that of Ibrhm Alayhis Salm where conflict occurs in his debate with the pagans, when is the Tght appointed as an arbitrator and when is animosity resolved under the laws of shirk, when are the shirk laws taken as foundation? It seems that in order to satisfy their conscience, and to find a sheath to their Btil, these men attempt to bring evidence for their Shirk actions they accrue today without verifying whether or not it is giving someone other than Allh the power of legislating and give judgment, due to acting upon shapely similarities, by implanting everything in question regarding presenting evidence and making a witness available into the scope of Muhkamah.

If the sorcerers or Ibrhm Alayhis Salm did not give the rights of Tashr to other than Allh -and we consider them to be free of such claims- then it is Btil to compare this to the situation of the procedure of Muhkamah of our day wherein a person gives the right of judging to other than the Lord of the Worlds. But if these people claim that these leaders of Tawhd sought judgement from their Btil laws while ascribing partners to Allh in His Kingship due to Maslahah (benefit), then we do not have anything other to say to such people, May the curse of Allh be upon the likes of you!..

In short, the answer to give these people is in Aslud Dn which is Tawhd. The Kalimah La ilaha illallh is the mutual call of all Rusul and rejecting those who claim rulership other than Allh is also included in this. The Rusul are not to call to this Dn and then do something which is in opposition to this, for Allh has preserved them from this.

Another question to ask these people from an Usl angle is, Who is your Salaf in these claims?, which means Which Rabbn (learned religious) lim -before these claimants- made Istidll from these yt claiming seeking judgement from the Tght is Jiz in some circumstances? It is out-of-sight for the Rabbn Ulam to say such and the issue that these Juhhl do not bring anything to support their views except for their personal arguments is a Qarnah on its own which shows how Btil these claims are.

As for the Tafslt of the yt we have mentioned, the parable of the sorcerers of Firawn, mentions that they said to Firawn after having believed,


قَالُوا لَنْ نُؤْثِرَكَ عَلَى مَا جَاءَنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالَّذِي فَطَرَنَا فَاقْضِ مَا أَنْتَ قَاضٍ إِنَّمَا تَقْضِي هَذِهِ الْحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا
They (the magicians) said: Never shall we prefer thee to what has come to us of the Clear Signs, Him Who created us! So decree whatever thou desirest to decree: for thou canst only decree (touching) the life of this world. (T-H 20/72)

The statement which these Juhhl make Istidll out of So decree whatever thou desirest to decree is explained by many Mufassirn -firstly Ibnu Abbs Radiyallhu Anhum- as Do whatever you are to do. It is known that this statement is a statement said to challenge Firawn. Where is the similarity between this statement and seeking judgement and forgiveness from the Tght in a state of humility? Whereas, this is just like what Nh Alayhis Salm said to his people,

وَاتْلُ عَلَيْهِمْ نَبَأَ نُوحٍ إِذْ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِ يَاقَوْمِ إِنْ كَانَ كَبُرَ عَلَيْكُمْ مَقَامِي وَتَذْكِيرِي بِآيَاتِ اللَّهِ فَعَلَى اللَّهِ تَوَكَّلْتُ فَأَجْمِعُوا أَمْرَكُمْ وَشُرَكَاءَكُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَكُنْ أَمْرُكُمْ عَلَيْكُمْ غُمَّةً ثُمَّ اقْضُوا إِلَيَّ وَلَا تُنْظِرُونِ
Relate to them the story of Nh (Noah). Behold! he said to his People, O my People, if it be hard on your (mind) that I should stay (with you) and remind (you) the signs of Allh -yet I put my trust in Allh. Get ye then an agreement about your plan and among your partners, so your plan be on to you dark and dubious. Then pass your sentence on me, and give me no respite. (Ynus 10/71)

Al-Baghaw Rahimahullh said the following in his Tafsr,

فَاقْضُوا مَا أَنْتُمْ قَاضُونَ، وَهَذَا مِثْلُ قَوْلِ السَّحَرَةِ لِفِرْعَوْنَ: فَاقْضِ مَا أَنْتَ قاضٍ [طَهَ: 72] ، أَيِ: اعْمَلْ مَا أَنْتَ عَامِلٌ، وَلا تُنْظِرُونِ، وَلَا تُؤَخِّرُونَ وَهَذَا عَلَى طَرِيقِ التَّعْجِيزِ، أَخْبَرَ الله عن نوح [صلاة الله وسلامه عليه] أَنَّهُ كَانَ وَاثِقًا بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى غَيْرَ خَائِفٍ مِنْ كَيْدِ قَوْمِهِ، عِلْمًا مِنْهُ بِأَنَّهُمْ وَآلِهَتَهُمْ لَيْسَ إِلَيْهِمْ نَفْعٌ وَلَا ضُرٌّ، إِلَّا أَنْ يَشَاءَ اللَّهُ.

Then pass your sentence on me. This is just like the statement of the sorcerers to Firawn, So decree whatever thou desirest to decree, which means Do whatever you are to do! Do not consider, nor delay (the punishment you are to give us)! This is upon helplessness. Allh mentioned Nh Saltullhi wa Salmuhu Alayh that he used to be confident in the Help of Allhu Tal without fearing the plot of his people because he knew that neither they nor their deities can benefit nor harm without the will of Allh.

As seen, the statement Then pass your sentence on me; So decree whatever thou desirest to decree in the both incidents meaning in the incident of the sorcerers of Firawn and in the incident of Nh Alayhis Salm saying this to his people are statements which depict challenging the Kuffr, the Tawakkul of the one who said the statement, and that he does not fear the Kuffr. It is clear that this has no relation with the Zandiqah (pl. of Zindq; heretics) of our day seeking judgement from the Kuffr and seeking judgement from his laws.

As for the incident of Ibrhm Alayhis Salm, Allhu Tal narrated in Sratul Anbiy what he said to the Kuffr after breaking their idols,


قَالُوا مَنْ فَعَلَ هَذَا بِآلِهَتِنَا إِنَّهُ لَمِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ. قَالُوا سَمِعْنَا فَتًى يَذْكُرُهُمْ يُقَالُ لَهُ إِبْرَاهِيمُ. قَالُوا فَأْتُوا بِهِ عَلَى أَعْيُنِ النَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْهَدُونَ. قَالُوا أَأَنْتَ فَعَلْتَ هَذَا بِآلِهَتِنَا يَاإِبْرَاهِيمُ. قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَذَا فَاسْأَلُوهُمْ إِنْ كَانُوا يَنْطِقُونَ
They said, Who has done this to our gods? He must indeed be one of the unjust! They said, We heard a youth talk of them: he is called Ibrhm. They said, Then bring him before the eyes of the people, that they may bear witness. They said, Art thou the one that did this with our gods, O Ibrhm. He said: Nay, this was done by this, the biggest one! Ask them, if they can talk! (al-Anbiy 21/59-63)

In the Tafsr of al-Qurtub, there is no statement referring to Ibrhm Alayhis Salm defending himself in the court of the Kuffr. What is narrated in Qurtubs Tafsr is as follows,

قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى: (قالُوا فَأْتُوا بِهِ عَلى أَعْيُنِ النَّاسِ) فِيهِ مَسْأَلَةٌ وَاحِدَةٌ، وَهِيَ: أَنَّهُ لَمَّا بَلَغَ الْخَبَرُ نمروذ وَأَشْرَافَ قَوْمِهِ، كَرِهُوا أَنْ يَأْخُذُوهُ بِغَيْرِ بَيِّنَةٍ، فَقَالُوا: ائْتُوا بِهِ ظَاهِرًا بِمَرْأًى مِنَ النَّاسِ حَتَّى يَرَوْهُ (لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْهَدُونَ) عَلَيْهِ بِمَا قَالَ، لِيَكُونَ ذَلِكَ حُجَّةً عَلَيْهِ. وَقِيلَ:" لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْهَدُونَ" عِقَابَهُ فَلَا يُقْدِمُ أَحَدٌ عَلَى مِثْلِ مَا أَقْدَمَ عَلَيْهِ. أَوْ لَعَلَّ قَوْمًا" يَشْهَدُونَ" بِأَنَّهُمْ رَأَوْهُ يُكَسِّرُ الْأَصْنَامَ، أَوْ" لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْهَدُونَ" طَعْنَهُ عَلَى آلِهَتِهِمْ لِيَعْلَمُوا أَنَّهُ يَسْتَحِقُّ الْعِقَابَ. قُلْتُ: وَفِي هَذَا دَلِيلٌ عَلَى أَنَّهُ كَانَ لَا يُؤَاخَذُ أَحَدٌ بِدَعْوَى أَحَدٍ فِيمَا تَقَدَّمَ، لِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى:" فَأْتُوا بِهِ عَلى أَعْيُنِ النَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْهَدُونَ" وَهَكَذَا الْأَمْرُ فِي شَرْعِنَا وَلَا خِلَافَ فيه.

Their is one issue in the statement of Allhu Tal, They said, Then bring him before the eyes of the people, and it is that when the news regarding this (the breaking of the idols) reached Namrd and the nobles from amongst his people, they disliked to take him (to question him) without any proof. So they said, Bring him in a clear manner to an eyes distance from the people, until they see him that they may bear witness against what he said, so that this may be a Hujjah (proof/evidence) against him.

It was also said that that they may bear witness to his punishment so that nobody does what he did. Or that the people may bear witness that they saw him breaking the idols, or that they may bear witness his defaming of their gods so that they know that he deserves the punishment.

I say: in this is an evidence that nobody was held responsible with a mere claim by another, this is due to Allhu Tals statement, Then bring him before the eyes of the people, that they may bear witness. The issue is also like this in our Sharah and there is no Ikhtilf regarding it.

We think that these claimants say this because of what Qurtub mentions of the Kuffr gathering evidences and witnesses regarding whether Ibrhm broke the idols or not and them not giving a ruling with only one claim and investigating about the issue -which is only one of the explanations of the yah- and they claim that the people who asked Ibrhm Alayhis Salm these questions were judging him.

Firstly, Qurtub did not mention that this Majlis (gathering) was a Majlis of judgement. He only mentioned that they looked for evidences and witnesses against Ibrhm Alayhis Salm. So the claim that Ibrhm Alayhis Salm went to the court of the Tght and defended himself is only an interpretation which these claimants have made-up.

As we have mentioned many times above, all of the Ahkm (pl. of Hukm) given in Islm is tied to the Illah (Reason) of it being in terms of presence and absence.

The Illah of seeking judgement from the Tght is giving the right of Tashr to other than Allhu Tal. This only happens when these people give judgement in the name of their deities, idols, or laws they establish by their own Haw.

Now, where in the occurrence of Ibrhm Alayhis Salm is the acceptance of judgement from or giving the right of Tashr to other than Allh? By no means did Ibrhm Alayhis Salm accept such a Shirk. The issue here is what can arise in daily life, amongst the Muslimn or the Kuffr. Without taking the issue to court people can verify occurrences in daily life, incidences such as theft, broken things, or wasting an item etc. theyll investigate whether anyone saw it and with this they try to find out who did it.

There is no problem in regards to a Muslim to speak some words to make the Btil of the Dn of the Mushrikn explicit, just as Ysuf Alayhis Salm responded to the claim of Zin thrown upon him or Ibrhm Alayhis Salm speaking to silence the Kuffr. This is because this is not seeking judgement from the Tght, since these are not gatherings of Muhkamah Bit Tght and are not binding.

Whereas, the courts of today see themselves as the divine ruling authority and the person who is charged with an offense or the claimant who opens the case has -without doubt- subjected his Ikhtilf to the Tght who resolves the conflict according to the present Shirk laws.

The defendant who is charged with an offense also defend themselves against the claimant who has filed a lawsuit/opened the case against them -whether it is the state or individuals- defend themselves according to the Shirk Ahkm and with this, they again present their Ikhtilf to the Tght.


With this, the action of Shirk cannot be claimed to be Mubh (permissible to do) according to some possible statements in the yah and with some statements of the scholars which does not have anything to do with the matter. This means that while dependent upon such Mutashbih (unclear) evidences, seeking judgement from the Tght, which is Kufr according to many Muhkam (clear) Nass, cannot be claimed to be Mubh. Similarly, making some acts which are Kufr, Mubh with some Mutashbih statements of the scholars is only a description possessed by those with warped hearts. Moreover, the statements of the scholars cannot be a Hujjah (evidence) in regards to Uslud Dn.

This is our brief answer to this matters in question. You may refer back to the answer we previously gave regarding the issue of Ysuf Alayhis Salm. Wallhu Alam!
Shaykh'ul Islm Ibnu Taymiyyah (Rahimahullh) stated,

والعالم يعرف الجاهل؛ لأنه كان جاهلا، والجاهل لا يعرف العالم لأنه لم يكن عالما

"The lim (scholar) recognizes the Jhil (ignorant) since he was once a Jhil. The Jhil does not recognize the lim since he has never been an lim." (Shaykh'ul Islm Ibnu Taymiyyah, Majm'ul Fatw, 13/235)

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
598 Views
Last post 02.05.2016, 08:40:39 PM
by Uswat'ul Hasana
0 Replies
588 Views
Last post 15.10.2017, 05:01:04 PM
by Ummah
3 Replies
840 Views
Last post 14.01.2018, 06:25:48 PM
by Ummah