Kufr Duna Kufr

&
Madhkaliya Misguidance
And whoever does not judge by what Allah
has revealed - then it is those who are the
disbelievers [Al-Maida:44]

Hamzah Al Misri

Ibn Malik Al-Athari

@exposing_madhkaliya
 Firstly We advice Ahl Hawa that learn the Defination & Difference between
Terminologies Legislation & Judgment

What exactly is the word of Ibn `Abbas?’ To understand this, we need to understand
the time that it was said in. The era was when the dispute between Mu`awiya and `Ali
ibn Abi Taalib had arisen and dissenters from `Ali’s camp had classified `Ali, his
representative Abu Musa al Ash`ari, Mu`awiya and Mu`awiya’s representative `Amr ibn
ul `As as kuffar. The evidence quoted by the dissenters, later to be known as the
Khawaarij, was that in which Allah SWT says,

And whoever does not judge by what Allah revealed, then they are Kafirun.” [Maida:44]

Because of this, the four above-mentioned sahaba were classed as kuffar because the
Khawaarij believed that the Shari`a had not been applied, thus those who failed to
apply it were kuffar. In response to this and in defense of `Ali ibn Abi Taalib, Ibn
`Abbas made the statement that what occurred was kufr duna kufr [ A lesser form of
kufr that does not render the committer of that sin a kafir] and that the four members
mentioned were indeed still Muslim, and that the Khawaarij’s understanding of the
verse was not correct. Ibn `Abbas could not have know that from this simple
statement, that the evil tyrants and their supporters would use this as an excuse to
hinder those who are attempting to enjoin the right and forbid the evil by removing the
helpers of the Shaitan and demolishing their thrones indefinitely. This
misunderstanding of the statement of Ibn `Abbas will be corrected and its context will
be put forward and made manifest for those who have been confused, disoriented and
completely led away from the work of striving in the path of Allah against the wicked in
this era.
 From this we now proceed to the evidence of our short treatise.

[Note : Khawarij Joined The Matter Of Judgment With Legislation To Make takfir Of
Muslims & Today Murjiah/Madhkaliya Join these to matter declare muslims "Khawarij" &
Tawagheet "Muslims"]
In delicate situations such as these, we must be sure about what we are talking about. To
clarify any situation, we must know what is Hukm Shar`ii, fatwa and judgement. Only after
comprehending these can we put the matter in front of us in perspective.

Our first matter to be explained is Hukm Shar`ii. Hukm Shar`ii is what Allah SWT said about
a certain situation that was given judgement on in His Shari`a. With regard to the fatwa, it is
applying the rule of Allah SWT about a certain situation for a particular incident which
matches the context of that rule. For instance, we can not use the rule that fluids, which are
toxic, are Haraam when we talk about water, vinegar or things like this because these are
Halaal substances. The fatwa is only correct if the Hukm Shar`ii is correct and the reality is
correct.

The judgement goes a bit further than this. The judgement is making sure the Hukm Shar`ii
is correct, the reality that surrounds it is sound and correct and that the judgement actually
happened and took place.

It then becomes compulsory to act it (the judgement) out. This is what the work of a judge
is. Once he is sure that the Hukm Shar`ii is correct and the reality around it is correct, he
endorses the reality and makes sure the judgement takes place. The fatwa goes one step
ahead of Hukm Shar`ii and the judgement goes one step ahead
of the fatwa, which is application.
The reason for the introduction to the words of the Sahabi Ibn `Abbas, is that Ibn
`Abbas τ had the words of the Qur’an memorised. He then had the reality
around him, and he used his senses to issue his famous words ‘a
kufr of a lesser kufr,’ which is unfortunately used and abused out of its context in
a totally different environment, situation and a different purpose as well.

To focus more on the word ‘kufr of a lesser kufr,’ we have to understand the
actual word that was said and narrated by different scholars of tafsir and hadith.
It was actually said, “It is actually not the kufr, which you think it is.” And from
this it shows that this word was said in the context of a conversation. That
conversation took place between him and the Khawaarij of his time.

So his verdict was given according to what they had in mind. This is specifically
for them and their time. We can understand from this verse that he still called it
a kufr and he did not change the word, make it allowable, or
say it was okay, but he still called it a kufr. He also took in mind the reality of the
time, and what was happening with regard to the leaders of his time.

So he was answering the doubts of these people according to their situation,

i.e. he used the Hukm Shar`ii (“and who ever does not rule by what Allah sent
down, then they are Kafiru”), but the reality did not match that kind of kufr.
 Now focusing more on the reality of his time, we must also keep in mind the following:

1. That the leader these people are calling kafir is granted paradise by the Prophet ρ i.e. `Ali

2. Mu`awiya , who was given important jobs by the khalifas and was writing down the revelation
of the Qur’an from the Prophet

3. Both parties had enmity amongst themselves and at the same time they have more
knowledge than the ignorant people of their time, the Khawaarij, they didn’t even call one
another with that title.

4. That the shari`a was 100% intact and applied

SO, if any rule by other than Allah took place, it is down to the individual that did it, out of his
ignorance or corruption, which is what matters most. So these are the realities that are behind
the words of Ibn `Abbas that
it was a fatwa for his time. Now, Ibn Abbas himself made another statement in a general
situation with regard to those not ruling by Allah’s law. The statement is as follows,

It is narrated from Hasan ibn Abi ar-Rabi`a alJurjaani [His name is Ibn Yahya ibn Ja`j. He is
also trustworthy and truthful. The rest of the narration is all trustworthy and of the highest
narration] saying, “We heard it from `Abdur-Razzaaq from Mu`ammar from Ibn Tawus from his
father who said, ‘Ibn `Abbas was asked regarding the statement of Allah,
‘Whoever does not rule by what Allah has sent down, then they are Kafirun.’[Maida :44]

He (Ibn `Abbas) said, ‘It is enough kufr.’”

[Akhbar ulQadaa, V. 1 pages 40-45 by Imaam Waki`a]
When Ibn `Abbas made the statement that ‘it is enough kufr,’ this cannot be taken
to mean a small kufr. When he says enough, it can only be taken as a big kufr.
The reason why this is such an important issue goes directly to the rules of Tafsir
on Qur’anic ayat.

It is composed of 12 points that are to be elaborated on below,

First Point
Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah, all the schools of thought and the fuqaha’a
(the Islamic jurists) have consensus (ijma`) that the saying of one
sahabi or some sahaba is not sufficient enough to eliminate a general
verse from the Qur’an. This rule is called (la yaslaah mukhasis
lilqur’an),meaning that an ayah that is general in the Qur’an can not be
made specific by a Sahabi unless an ijma`a, an opposing ayah from
the Qur’an, a hadith or any other evidence exists.

This rule does not mean that Ibn `Abbas’s ruling, kufr duna kufr, was
wrong regarding the case and the fatwa of the time. No, this is not the
case. But it means he and the Sahaaba understood this (the fatwa)
from the reality of the time, which did not contradict the Qur’an or the
Sunna.
 Second Point
For the protection of the Qur’an, we should take into account the ijma`a of Ahl
us-Sunna walJama`ah on the methodology regarding Tafsir. The rule is that
the explanation of the ayat of the Qur’an must be from its outward meaning,
unless there is other evidence that we can use apparent meanings. This
happened in very rare instances.
Scholars of Tafsir have said, “If this rule is not preserved, then the door for
bid`a is wide open for the people of Baatini [Baatini people are those who say
that the outward meaning of the verses in the Qur’an are not obvious, but
there is a more secret, hidden meaning. Those who do this are the Sufiyya, the
Shi`a and the Baatiniyya] to take the meanings of the Qur’an from its apparent
meanings and give totally different presentation than what Ahl us-Sunnah
agreed upon.”

[Today these Madhkaliyah are on path of baatiniyah like other side of coin
Hazimiyah are on path of Mutazila ]

It is also important to understand that we should not play with the words or
apparent meanings of words in the ayat. If there is another meaning, there
must be independent evidence to substantiate it. For example, Ibn
Abbas understood that verse 44 of Surat ulMa’ida meant the kind of kufr
which he called a kufr, but he did not change the word kufr. But he knew that
there is other hadith from the Prophet which said,
There are three kinds of judges, two are in the fire and one in Jannah: The
one in Jannah is the one who knew the truth and he judged by it. The one
who judged amongst people in his ignorancy then he is in the fire, and the
man who knew the truth, but he deviated from his judgement, then he is in
the fire"
[Narrated by: The four and Al Hakim, on the authority of Ibn Umar]

That was independent evidence to keep Ibn `Abbas from making takfir on
participants from both `Ali and Mu`awiya’s camp. This is so because the
hadith of the judges applied more to that time than the ayah being used by
the Khawaarij. We can then see that the Khawaarij had an objection to
certain people, whereas the Mujahideen are against those replacing the
Shari`a with man made laws.

Third Point
The ayah Ibn `Abbas spoke about is not talking about people
replacing the Shari`a as Kuffar, but it is actually speaking about
those who just fail to use the revelation for judgement or ruling,
which is a major kufr, but less of a kufr than those who change
or modify any of the Shari`a.
 Fourth Point
Another point is that Ibn `Abbas differed with the Sahaba in
many issues, such as, at first he didn’t think Nikah al Mut`a
(temporary marriage for enjoyment) was Haraam, but
considered it Halaal until `Ali ibn Abi Talib said to him, “You
are a lost man.” Ibn Zubair τ also gave him words, “ If you keep
saying it is halal, I will stone you to death.” Ibn `Abbas was
also known to have given the ruling that Riba an-Nasi’a
(interest collected over a period of time) was Halaal, but
simultaneous Riba is Haraam altogether. He also once gave a
ruling that the `Eid sacrifice was wajib (compulsory), when
most of the Sahaba ruled that it is recommended.

Then if any person looks, they can see Ibn `Abbas differed with
Sahaba in many other issues. Why don’t the blind followers of
the issue of kufr duna kufr also blind follow his other specified
rulings?
 Fifth Point
The Ancient Mufassirin (scholars of Tafsir) such as Ibn Kathir, Ibn Taymiyyah
and Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyya (RHM) as well as the modern scholars of tafsir, such
as Ahmad Shaakir, Muhammad ibn Ibrahim and Muhammad Shaakir (RHM)
narrated the saying of Ibn `Abbas τ, and they knew the context and reality of
his time.

Why did they then differ from him in this issue and call some rulers of their
time Kuffar because of replacing the Shari`a? These scholars would not
narrate Ibn `Abbas’s opinion and then differ unless they knew the statement
and context. So why were those scholars not called Khawaarij but Mujahideen?

Ibn `Abbas when he differed with some Sahaba with regard to the sacrifice of
the lamb, he quoted ayat from the Qur’an and statements from the Prophet.
The other Sahaba said, “Abu Bakr and `Umar never said it or called it wajib
(compulsory).” He then said his famous statement, “I told you Allah SWTand the
Messenger
said, but you are saying Abu Bakr and `Umar said. Aren’t you afraid that the
heavens will drop on your head.”

Would he (Ibn `Abbas τ) then be happy now, to accept his name being used
against decisive ayat in the Qur’an?

[Continued in Story Highlight "Kufr Duna Kufr"]

[PDF Reader IgnoreThis]
 Sixth Point
We should also try to understand Ibn `Abbas’s other statement, “ It is not like the kufr in Allah or the
Angels.” But this version of his means that it can be a major kufr, but not directly in Allah SWT and
His angels, because associating with Allah makes one a kafir but their kufr is less than those who
deny Allah SWT or His angels altogether. It could still be taken as a major kufr if it touches the
right of Allah, such as legislation, loyalty or love. If it touches the right of people however, it is
minor.

In conclusion, the words of Ibn `Abbas can not be used for the tyrants who replace the Shari’a. For
them, the verse of the sword should be used, as Allah says, Kill the Mushriks wherever you find
them, take hold of them, encircle them and lie in wait to ambush them on each and every path.
Then if they repent, establish prayers and give zakah, then leave their way free.”[Tawba:5]

And also the verse narrated in Imam Ahmad Musnad, on the authority of Jabar Ibn Abdullah
Rasullullah ordered us to hit with this (and he pointed to his sword) whoever goes out of that” (and
he pointed to the Qur’an) [Imam Ibn Taymiyyah narrated the same hadith in his book Majmore Al-
Fatawa Volume 35]

That means exactly what Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah have said in regards to those ruling by other
than what Allah sent down, changing the Shari`a or legislate something, this is the big kufr (kufr
alAkbar). If they fail to apply it SOME instances, that could be taken as a kufr of a lesser kufr (kufr
al Asghar).

This is because the way of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah is to use all the verses available before
judgement, while the bid`ii people only use the verses that suit them. Supporting this fact, no one
will ever find a statement from Ibn `Abbas or anybody with regard to legislation (tashrii`) saying it is
‘a shirk of a lesser shirk’, as Allah said in the Qur’an,
 “Or do they have partners for them legislating a religion that Allah did not give
permission for. Had it not been for the word of decision and decree, the matter between
them would have been judged. And truly for the oppressors is a torturous punishment.”
[Shura:21]
We are very surprised that those calling themselves “Salafis,” who use the word ‘kufr
duna kufr’ from Ibn `Abbas τ, that they don’t use the other saying condemning ruling by
other than what Allah SWT sent down.

Seventh Point
To endorse what Ibn `Abbas τ has said as well, Ibn Mas`ud τ has said, mentioned
in the tafsir of Ibn Kathir regarding this ayah, when he was asked what is reshwa
(a bribe), he said, “It is is a suht (ill-gotten wealth).” They then said, “No, we
mean in judgement and ruling.” He said, This is the very kufr
[Tafsir Ibn Kathir Surah Al-Ma’ida 44. Also Akbar Alqdah vol. 1 pages 40-45]

This is in Tafsir Ibn Kathir as well as in Akhbar al Qadaa. Why didn’t Ibn Kathir
(RH) comment about this ayah and he only left the comments of the Sahaba and
those other than himself? The reality which people don’t focus on is that Ibn
Kathir (RH) is a knowledgeable faqih and most important was the reality of their
existing time, then they put their conclusion
[There are tens of quotations from big scholars regarding the Kufr and apostasy
of those who fail to rule by the Shari’a. We did not include them as this topic is
only discussing the word of IBN ABBAS Refer to My Post Tawheed Haakimiya &
My Archive Link For New Posts Or Read Book "Allah Governance on Earth"]
 This is exactly what Imam Ibn Kathir (RH) has done. The
Imam doesn’t just start from Surah Ma’ida, ayat 44,
45 and 47, but he begins the subject of ruling and
judgements start from ayah number 40 and finishing on
ayah number 50. Those ten ayat are as follows,
Know you not that to Allah (alone) belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth? He punishes
whom He wills and He forgives whom He wills; and Allah hath power over all things.”

“O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who race each other into unbelief; (whether it be) among
those who say, ‘We believe’ with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews
men who will listen to any lie and will listen even to others who have never so much as come to you.
They change the words from their (right) times and places; they say, ‘If you are given this take it, butif
not beware.’ If Allah intends anyone’s trial, you have no authority in the least for him against Allah. For
such it is not Allah's will to purify their hearts. For them there is disgrace in this world and in the
Hereafter a heavy punishment.”

They are fond of) listening to falsehood of devouring anything forbidden. If they do come to you either
judge between them or decline to interfere. If you decline they cannot hurt thee in the least. If you
judge, then judge in equity between them; for Allah loves those who judge in equity.”

How is it they come to you for decision when they have the Torah before them? Therein is the (plain)
command of Allah; yet even after that they would turn away. For they are not people of faith.”
 “It was We who revealed the Torah; therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the
Jews by the Prophet who were in submission by the Rabbis and the doctors of Law. For to them was entrusted the
protection of Allah's Book and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me, and sell not My
Signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed they are unbelievers.”

We ordained therein for them, ‘Life for life eye for eye nose for nose ear for ear tooth for tooth and wounds
equal for equal.’ But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any
fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed they are oppressors.”

And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary confirming the law that had come before him. We sent him the
Gospel; therein was guidance and light and confirmation of the law that had come before him, a
guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.”

“Let the people of the Gospel Judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by what
Allah hath revealed they are rebellious sinners.”

“To you We sent the Book in truth confirming the Book that came before it and guarding it in safety; so
judge between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their vain desires diverging from the truth
that has come to you. To each among you have We prescribed a Law and an Open Way. If Allah had so
willed He would have made you a single people but (His plan is) to test you in what He has given you, so
strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in
which you dispute.”

“And this (He commands): ‘Judge thou between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their vain
desires but beware of them lest they beguile you from any of that (teaching) which Allah has sent down to
you.’ And if they turn away be assured that for some of their crimes it is Allah's purpose to punish them.
And truly most men are rebellious.”

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 Allah?”
 Only then does Ibn Kathir (RH) insert his opinion according to the reality of his time, which
was the existence
of the Mongols, who are ruling by the book of Genghis Khan. These circumstances are
occurring in our time now. And what he, as well as Ahmad Shaakir (RH) has said is well
known. Usually the faqih, before he reaches his verdict and gives his ruling on a matter, he
puts all the relevant ayat and hadith regarding the ayah. Next come the statements and
rulings of the Sahaba, then the opinion of other scholars as well. Finally, at the end of the
subject he gives his verdict after all the evidence has been presented.
Ibn Kathir’s ruling is most serious indeed. We are able to appreciate its importance in every
single facet. Let us read the words of the great Sheikh,

“And as for the royal policies, which the Tartars were ruled by, which
were taken from their king, Genghis Khan, who laid down for them Al
Yaasiq, which is a book made up of laws which he took from different
shari`as. It is from Judaism, Christianity, the Islamic religion and others.
Also it contains many laws which he took from his sheer thinking and
desire. Thus, it became within his sons a followed law to which they
have been giving precedence over ruling by the Book of Allah and the
Sunnah of His Messenger r. Whoever does this is a kafir who must be
fought until he returns to the rule of Allah and His Messenger. So no
one other than He should neither rule in few nor many matters.
[Tafsir Ibn Kathir, V. 2, page 63-67]
 Also add what Ibn Kathir said in his book alBidaaya
wan-Nihaaya,
“Thus whoever left the wise Shari`a sent upon Muhammad ibn
`Abdullah, the Seal of the Prophets and makes judgements to
other than it from the abrogated shari`as has become a kafir. So
how is it for the one who makes judgment to al Yaasiq and makes
it superior over it(the Islamic Shari`a)? Whoever did that, then he
has already become a kafir by consensus (ijma`) of the Muslims
[AlBidaaya wan-Nihaaya, V. 13, p. 101 ]
In this section, of great utility are the words of the Imam of the Scholars of
hadith in this and the last century, al `Allamah Sheikh Ahmad Muhammad
Shaakir (RH). The great Qadi of Egypt had this to say,

“Is it then lawful with this in the Shari`a of Allah that he judge the Muslims in
their lands by the legislation of pagan, atheistic Europe? On the contrary, the
legislation comes from false and fabricated opinions. They change it and
replace it according to their whims.

No, its inventor is unconcerned or remote from the Shari`a or its violation.
The Muslims have not been tested by this, as far as we know of in their time,
except in that time, the time of the Tartars. And it was a wicked time, a
period of great oppression and darkness.
 Thus in these clearly invented laws, as clear as the sun, it is clear kufr, no
doubt about it. There is no persuasion and there is no excuse for any one
who is affiliated to Islam, being whoever it may, in acting on it, submission
to it or establishing it.”
[Hukm ulJaahiliyyah, page 28-29 also in Omdah Tafaseer Ayah 50 sura
Alma’ida]

Of use in this place as well is the words of Al `Allamah Muhammad ibn

Ibrahim (RH), the paternal cousin of Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhab
(RH) and previous Mufti of the Arabian Peninsula. He had this to say of
the replacement of the Shari`a,

“As far as the saying, kufr duna kufr, it is when the judge makes
judgement to other than Allah with firm conviction that it is disobedience.
He believes that the judgement of Allah is the truth, but he left from it in
one matter. As far as whoever made laws in succession and makes others
submit to it, then it is kufr, even if they said, ‘We sinned and the
judgement of the Revealed Law is more just.’ This is still kufr that removes
from the religion.”
[Fatawa of Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Aal ash-Sheikh, V. 12, page 280]
 The Sheikh expounded on this further in another place, regarding the replacement of the
Shari`a, "And it (the major kufr of replacing the Shari`a) is more enormous, more universal,
more distinct and more clear in its stubborn opposition to the Shari`a. And stubbornness
and arrogance to his judgements, being lax to Allah and His Messenger, making resemblance
to the Shari`a courts, arranging, setting up, preparing, establishing a foundation, making
applications and usage, shaping, forming and organising, of a mixture of various things and
themes in the process of modification (of the Shari`a), making judgement, making it
compulsory, and making judgements by turning to authorities.

Then just as the Shari`a courts turn to authorities, all of them (the authorities) returning to
the Book of Allah and the Sunna of His Messenger (SAW), then what the authorities turn to of
it (the false Shari`a) are concocted and trumped up laws from various Shari`as,several
differentlaw systems,such as French law, American law, British law and other laws and from
different schools of thought, some attributing bid`a and other things to the Shari`a.

Then these courts are now in most of the urban centres of Islam,[ This speech was written in
1380 AH (1960 CE), when these courts had first reared their evil heads. But now, in 1420 AH
(1999 CE), these courts are in all the Muslim lands.] prepared, perfect and complete, the
doors have been opened and people are swarming to them one after another, their rulers
judging between them by what is in direct opposition and contradiction to the judgement of
the Sunna and the Book, from the judgements of that law (the false Shari`a) and coercing
them to it and establishing it over the Shari`a (the true Shari`a of Allah) and imposing and
making it incumbent on them. Then which kufr is over and above (more amplified and
clearer) this kufr? And which opposition to the Shahada that Muhammad is the Messenger of
Allah is after this opposition and violation
[Tahkim alQawanin, p. 7]
 [Note : We need to also understand the urgency that
the Sheikh (RH) wrote this message with. This speech,
originally from a speech made on television in 1380
AH (1960 CE), was made as a warning of things to
come. It has been largely ignored in our era, which is
reason why it is so vital to revive its message. The
style of Arabic it was written in was of such high
quality, that it was indeed hard to translate, as well
as the poetic style it has in its original Arabic form.
With this, and the wealth of information present in
its simple eight pages, it stands not just as a set of
Fatawa, but as a wasiyya (a last will and testament) of
the Sheikh, as this was his last book before his death
in 1389 AH (1969 CE) at the age of 78. Here we are
shown the final position of one of the greatest
scholars of this era against the onslaught of Taghut
systems]
 Eighth Point
Not only have the scholars have called the people who are not ruling by Shari’a
Kafirs but also their scholars who are supporting their regimes. Allah SWT says,

Those who conceal Allah’s revelations in the Book, and purchase for them a
miserable profit – they swallow into themselves nothing but fire; Allah will not
address them on the Day of Resurrection, nor purify them: and for them there is a
painful punishment”
[Baqarah :174]

Sheikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (RH) Said:

“A scholar who abandons what has learnt from the Qur’an and the Sunnah and
follows a ruler who does not rule in accordance with the teaching of Allah SWT and
His Messenger is an apostate and a disbeliever who deserves punishment in this
world and in the hereafter [Fatawaa Volume 35 page 373]

Ninth Point
Ibn `Abbas τ died in his eighties. Ibn Abbas τ was in the time of al Hajjaj ibn Yusuf ath-
Thaqafi, so we can elaborate on that easily. If Al Hajjaj was in our time now, it would not be
wise at all to rebel against him, because that man was a Muslim applying the Shari`a in
full. He was waging jihad against the Mushriks and bringing a lot of wealth and benefit to
the Ummah, but his biggest sin was to kill people, Muslims and none Muslims, for his own
power, not his own fabricated Shari’a. The issue today is the rulers who are killing people
for their own fabricated Shari`a.
 Tenth Point
Ibn Abbas τ gave strong advice to AlHussain not to fight Bani Ummaya from `Iraq.
His advice to AlHussain was that if he wanted to rebel against Bani Ummaya, then
he should do so from Yemen, not from `Iraq, as narrated in many books of history.
Yet he did not tell AlHussain he would be Khawaarij if he went against Bani
Ummaya or alHajjaj.

Now another point must be discussed. We discussed before the difference

between Fatwa, Hukm Shar`ii and Judgement. We must distinguish between ruling
and judging.

Ruling is more comprehensive than judging, as judging is only a part of ruling. This
is why if a judge is not judging by Allah’s Shari`a, then the question for him to be a
Muslim or a Kafir goes to the other components of ruling. Ruling is legislating,
judging and executing the orders.

If the legislation is still for Allah, and the judging by other than the Shari`a is only
occasional, then it is a kufr of a lesser kufr. That also goes the same for executing.
If the legislation is intact, then the execution of not
Shari`a laws is kufr duna kufr. But if the legislation has been changed, then it is big
kufr. Ibn Abbas τ was asked about judging, which was not about ruling, as this was
not in the minds of the Khawaarij at the time.
 Eleventh Point
Ibn `Abbas , in his time, was talking about an incident that was not
repeated, but done only once. Yet in our case, we are talking about
someone’s insistence on judging by other than Allah’s Shari`a,
making laws to protect the one replacing the Shari`a, and laws to
punish those attempting to correct the evil rulers!

This is why the scholars of the time of the Sahaba said it was not an
issue, because no one had it in their mind that some one would
actually tamper with the Shari`a itself.

Twelve Point
Most of the man made laws are direct nullification for al Wala walBaraa, which
is a point of Tawhid. As it is, respect the person who obeys that law and class
him as a good, innocent citizen, even if he is an adulterer, kafir, or a drunkard
or even a pagan. As long as he does not contradict the man made laws, then
he is still a citizen in good standing, which believers enjoining good and evil is
classed as a criminal, wrongdoer, fanatics, terrorists and in some cases is
executed. So how is it that the word of Ibn Abbas can be used to protect such
people in principle.

Ibn Malik Al-Athari

@ibn_malik_al_athari