This opinion is basedon the Kufr duna Kufr Hadith which I will refute.
Ruling by other than Allah's Law
- Thread starter Al hashimi
- Start date
@Al hashimi
You are conflating many topics here. Let´s take one step at a time.
1. In your original post you said that the statement of Ibn 'Abbas "Kufr duna kufr" was not in relation to the verse. I assume you know arabic, have you looked at the Tafsiir books in regards to that verse? Take Ibn jariir for instance, he explicitly says that the verse was interpreted by Ibn 'Abbas to mean a lesser kufr unless it comes with جحود, then it is kufr akbar. So, on this point you were mistaken.
2. You have also asserted that Ibn Kathir and others deemed it to be Kufr akbar, which is you conflating two different things. Saying a specific instance of ruling with other than Allahs ruling is Kufr akbar and saying every ruling with other than Allahs ruling is Kufr akbar is two different things. Not all of it are the same, and as you saw in the statement of Ibn Al-Qayyim, sometimes it is kufr akbar and the mongols and their yaasiq is from those instances (called tabdiil in the language of the scholars).
3. You have repeated many times that the words of Ibn 'Abbas "Kufr duna kufr" is a weak narration. Let us put that to the test. Name ONE scholar from the early salaf all the way to befor the last 3 centuries that deemed that narration weak. You will not find, because they all agreed upon its authenticity. For instance, Imam Ahmad, Al-Marwazi, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim all used that narration as an evidence, indicating them accepting it as reliable.
But if you want a more academic discussion about the narration and why the links you sent are mistaken, I will do so in shaa Allah. A little hint: the precent scholars that deem the narration weak all say so because of Hishaam ibn Xujayr being in one of the chains. As it happens, Sufyaan Ath-Thawri (labeled Amiirul Mu'miniin fil Xadiith) narrates similar from Ibn 'Abbas, and the opposing narration from 'Abdarrazzaaq As-San'aani simply cannot be used as a counter because Sufyaan was much stronger in regards to hadith. In fact, he was in his time what Bukhari was in his time. So much so that Shu'bah said: if anyone disagrees with me I do not care, except for Sufyaan.
So, @Al hashimi, please comment on what I mentioned point by point. What do you disagree with?
Another question you could ask yourself: is there any scholar from the salaf that deemed all ruling by other than what Allah revealed to be Kufr Akbar? If you do not find anyone, are you upon their way?
You are conflating many topics here. Let´s take one step at a time.
1. In your original post you said that the statement of Ibn 'Abbas "Kufr duna kufr" was not in relation to the verse. I assume you know arabic, have you looked at the Tafsiir books in regards to that verse? Take Ibn jariir for instance, he explicitly says that the verse was interpreted by Ibn 'Abbas to mean a lesser kufr unless it comes with جحود, then it is kufr akbar. So, on this point you were mistaken.
2. You have also asserted that Ibn Kathir and others deemed it to be Kufr akbar, which is you conflating two different things. Saying a specific instance of ruling with other than Allahs ruling is Kufr akbar and saying every ruling with other than Allahs ruling is Kufr akbar is two different things. Not all of it are the same, and as you saw in the statement of Ibn Al-Qayyim, sometimes it is kufr akbar and the mongols and their yaasiq is from those instances (called tabdiil in the language of the scholars).
3. You have repeated many times that the words of Ibn 'Abbas "Kufr duna kufr" is a weak narration. Let us put that to the test. Name ONE scholar from the early salaf all the way to befor the last 3 centuries that deemed that narration weak. You will not find, because they all agreed upon its authenticity. For instance, Imam Ahmad, Al-Marwazi, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim all used that narration as an evidence, indicating them accepting it as reliable.
But if you want a more academic discussion about the narration and why the links you sent are mistaken, I will do so in shaa Allah. A little hint: the precent scholars that deem the narration weak all say so because of Hishaam ibn Xujayr being in one of the chains. As it happens, Sufyaan Ath-Thawri (labeled Amiirul Mu'miniin fil Xadiith) narrates similar from Ibn 'Abbas, and the opposing narration from 'Abdarrazzaaq As-San'aani simply cannot be used as a counter because Sufyaan was much stronger in regards to hadith. In fact, he was in his time what Bukhari was in his time. So much so that Shu'bah said: if anyone disagrees with me I do not care, except for Sufyaan.
So, @Al hashimi, please comment on what I mentioned point by point. What do you disagree with?
Another question you could ask yourself: is there any scholar from the salaf that deemed all ruling by other than what Allah revealed to be Kufr Akbar? If you do not find anyone, are you upon their way?
1. The Hadith Kufr Duna Kufr is used in the Tafsir. I know this. However, the context of the Hadith is when the Khawaarij takfired Ali and Muawiyah for fighting and said this is Kufr Akbar. To which Ibn Abbas said no it is Kufr less than Kufr.
2. All the "Muslim" Leaders mix a bit of Shari'a with some Democracy and Western Governmental Concepts, which are foreign to the deen. Just as the Tartars did.
3.
What has reached us from Ibn Abbas from his saying "Kufr Duna Kufr" is not reliable. It is narrated in Al- Haakim in his Mustadraaq (Vol. 2/313) by the way of Hisham Ibn Hujaayr on the
authority of Tawoos who heard it from Ibn Abbas. However, Hisham is declared Da'eef by Yahya
Ibn Ma'een and Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. On the other hand it is narrated to us from Abdur-Razaaq in his Tafseer on the authority of Mu'aamr who heard from Ibn Tawoos that his father
said he asked Ibn Abbas about Allah's saying: ("And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed such are the Kafirun.")
2. All the "Muslim" Leaders mix a bit of Shari'a with some Democracy and Western Governmental Concepts, which are foreign to the deen. Just as the Tartars did.
3.
What has reached us from Ibn Abbas from his saying "Kufr Duna Kufr" is not reliable. It is narrated in Al- Haakim in his Mustadraaq (Vol. 2/313) by the way of Hisham Ibn Hujaayr on the
authority of Tawoos who heard it from Ibn Abbas. However, Hisham is declared Da'eef by Yahya
Ibn Ma'een and Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. On the other hand it is narrated to us from Abdur-Razaaq in his Tafseer on the authority of Mu'aamr who heard from Ibn Tawoos that his father
said he asked Ibn Abbas about Allah's saying: ("And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed such are the Kafirun.")
techsamatar
I put Books to the Test of Life
Please avoid this Khawarij sitter. Simply go to my Khawarij thread to see him and his fellow Keyboard Khawarij get schooled, as well as my educational thread on Khawarij history and their characteristics and traits of twisting verses to suit their desires and whims while turning a blind eye to the Quran and Sunnah and understanding of salaf on the rulers.
Keep quiet you little Murji'i
You didn't give any daleel and just yapped on about the accursed group the Khawaarij and then ran away lol
You didn't give any daleel and just yapped on about the accursed group the Khawaarij and then ran away lol
1. You are still mistaken. There are narrations where Ibn ’Abbas says it in response to the khawarij, but in this narration he explicitly is explaining the verse. From Tafsir ibn Jariir;
١٢٠٥٣ - حدثنا هناد قال، حدثنا وكيع= وحدثنا ابن وكيع قال، حدثنا أبي= عن سفيان، عن معمر بن راشد، عن ابن طاوس، عن أبيه، عن ابن عباس:"ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافررن"، قال: هي به كفر، وليس كفرًا بالله وملائكته وكتبه ورسله.(٤٠)
He explicitly explains the verse saying “It is kufr, but not a kufr of Allah, His angels, books, and messengers”. Not replying to khawaarij. Rather, giving tafsiir.
2. You could argue that what is done is similar to what the tatar did, and some would object. However, this does not mean that all Hukm with other than what Allah has revealed is kufr akbar. Are you saying that it is not always kufr akbar, rather it depends? Or are you making a blanket statement that all of it is kufr akbar? If it is the former, I agree and there is no dispute. If it is the latter than bring ONE scholar from the salaf saying that. I have already brought a few saying the opposite.
3. I already answered that objection earlier. The narration has a few chains:
* Sufyaan —> Ma’mar —> Ibn Tawus —> Tawus —> Ibn Abbas
* * Sufyaan —> Ibn Tawus —> Tawus —> Ibn Abbas
*** Hisham Bin Xujayr —> Tawus —> Ibn Abbas
**** Abdurrazzaaq —> Ma’mar —> Ibn Tawus —> Tawus —> Ibn Abbas
Lets accept for the sake of argument that the chain including Hisham is weak. You still have two chains of Sufyaan (see the arabic version above for one of them). So, Abdurrazzaaq is contested by Sufyaan who is much stronger, thus it is the narration of Abdurrazzaaq that is the weak one. Add to this that the narration of Hisham is similar to that of Sufyan, adding to its strength (weak hadiths are used in instances of corroboration, see الشواهد والمتابعات in the books of Mustalah)
Secondly, you have failed to mention ONE from the scholars during 1200 years of islam saying the narration is weak, while I have given you many that have said it is authentic. Bring me ONE, anyone. And if you cannot, maybe you should reevaluate your position. Are you really following the salaf?
1. Ibn Abbas was sent to the Khawarij who believed Ali RA did not rule by Allah's law due to the arbitration. Ibn Abbas said ruling by other than Allah's Law is Kufr. But Judging with men during an argument is permitted in the Qur'an. See Q 5:95. Yes Ibn Abbas was giving tagsir for Ayah 5:44 but he never said it was minor Kufr.
2.
It is clear from Ibn Abbas's words that Kufr Al-Akbar is of different classifications, and some forms are more severe than others. For example, the Kufr of the one who doesn't believe in Allah and the Last Day, is more extreme than the Hakim [Ruler] who doesn't rule by what Allah revealed. It is clear that Kufr of the Hakim who 'Rules by other than what Allah revealed' is less severe than the one who doesn't believe in Allah and the Last day. Still, we cannot say that this Hakim remains a Muslim and that his ruling is simply Kufr Al-Asghar. We say he has left the religion because of putting aside and removal of the Sharee'ah, and according to Ibn Katheer, there is Ijmaa about this. See "Al-Bidayah Wa-Nihayah" (Vol. 13/119) [At-Tibyan Sharh' Nawaqidh Al-Islam by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab; explanation and footnotes by Sulmayman al- Alwaan, Pg. 38]
3.
Read this regarding the Hadiths.
islamicthinker.wordpress.com
2.
It is clear from Ibn Abbas's words that Kufr Al-Akbar is of different classifications, and some forms are more severe than others. For example, the Kufr of the one who doesn't believe in Allah and the Last Day, is more extreme than the Hakim [Ruler] who doesn't rule by what Allah revealed. It is clear that Kufr of the Hakim who 'Rules by other than what Allah revealed' is less severe than the one who doesn't believe in Allah and the Last day. Still, we cannot say that this Hakim remains a Muslim and that his ruling is simply Kufr Al-Asghar. We say he has left the religion because of putting aside and removal of the Sharee'ah, and according to Ibn Katheer, there is Ijmaa about this. See "Al-Bidayah Wa-Nihayah" (Vol. 13/119) [At-Tibyan Sharh' Nawaqidh Al-Islam by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab; explanation and footnotes by Sulmayman al- Alwaan, Pg. 38]
3.
Read this regarding the Hadiths.
Research for the Athar ‘Kufr Duna Kufr’ of ibn ‘Abbas
CONCERNING THE TAFSEER ATTRIBUTED TO IBN ‘ABBAS “And whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers” Is The Kufr In This Ayah, Kufr Akbar Or Kufr Asghar A beginning …
islamicthinker.wordpress.com
1. I literally proved that Ibn 'Abbas made tafsir of the verse and what he said. If someone is not disbelieving in Allah and his angels, how is he falling in Kufr Akbar? All Kufr Akbar renders the person a disbeliever in Allah. Secondly, no one is denying that Kufr Akbar is of different degrees, however to interpret "Kufr duna Kufr" in ligth of that is unprecedented until the last few decades (as will be shown below). Again, if that is not the case, bring me ONE scholar from the period 0 AH - 1200 AH that said what you are asserting. Stop beating around the bush.1. Ibn Abbas was sent to the Khawarij who believed Ali RA did not rule by Allah's law due to the arbitration. Ibn Abbas said ruling by other than Allah's Law is Kufr. But Judging with men during an argument is permitted in the Qur'an. See Q 5:95. Yes Ibn Abbas was giving tagsir for Ayah 5:44 but he never said it was minor Kufr.
2.
It is clear from Ibn Abbas's words that Kufr Al-Akbar is of different classifications, and some forms are more severe than others. For example, the Kufr of the one who doesn't believe in Allah and the Last Day, is more extreme than the Hakim [Ruler] who doesn't rule by what Allah revealed. It is clear that Kufr of the Hakim who 'Rules by other than what Allah revealed' is less severe than the one who doesn't believe in Allah and the Last day. Still, we cannot say that this Hakim remains a Muslim and that his ruling is simply Kufr Al-Asghar. We say he has left the religion because of putting aside and removal of the Sharee'ah, and according to Ibn Katheer, there is Ijmaa about this. See "Al-Bidayah Wa-Nihayah" (Vol. 13/119) [At-Tibyan Sharh' Nawaqidh Al-Islam by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab; explanation and footnotes by Sulmayman al- Alwaan, Pg. 38]
3.
Read this regarding the Hadiths.
Research for the Athar ‘Kufr Duna Kufr’ of ibn ‘Abbas
CONCERNING THE TAFSEER ATTRIBUTED TO IBN ‘ABBAS “And whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers” Is The Kufr In This Ayah, Kufr Akbar Or Kufr Asghar A beginning …
2. Ibn Katheer said there is Ijmaac that Yasiq was Kufr Akbar. To say "therefore, X is kufr akbar" is an analogy, i.e. Qiyaas, NOT Ijmaac. A simple point, I don´t see how you cannot understand it.
3. What strikes you as good in that link? Please mention what you consider their strongest argument is and I will respond. They do the mistake as every other person does trying to weaken a hadith the scholars unanimously throughout history have said is authentic. They take the hadith of Abdurrazzaaq over Sufyaan, which is unbelievably erroneous. Sufyaan is much stronger and his narration is the correct one. You cannot say "Sufyan made Idraaj because of the narration of Abdurrazzaaq" because that is a case of the two narrating differently, and only the stronger one can be used to know if there is idraaj or not. Have you guys not studied Mustalah Al-Hadith?
4. Let me, for the sake of the silent readers, give the quotes of some of the earlier scholars so they know the scholars behind this position. Then, they may ask themselves, are there any scholars during that time period (first few hundred years of islam) that said what @Al hashimi is saying?
* 'Ataa Al-Khurasaani (A taabi'i, born year 60 AH) said: "Kufr duna kufr, Fisq duna fisq, Dhulm duna dhulm" (Tafsir Ibn Jariir)
* Tawuus (Taabi'i, student of Ibn 'Abbas) said: "It is a kufr that does not remove one from the religion" (Tafsir Ibn Jariir)
* Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal was asked by Ismaa'iil bn Sa'd regarding the verse in Surah Maa'idah "what is this Kufr?", he replied "Kufr that does not remove from the religion" (Su'aalat Ibn Haani')
Ibn Qayyim mentiones a similar narration in his book "Hukm Taarik As-Salah" that Imam Ahmad said "Kufr that does not remove from the religion, just as Iman, some of it is lower than other until there comes something of which there is no dispute"
* Imam Al-Marwazi said (which ironically also shows the understanding of these words by the earlier scholars, i.e. that it is not Kufr Akbar. Not as @Al hashimi tries to paint it: it is kufr akbar but not the greatest kufr akbar!) after narrating the narration of 'Ataa above: "'Ataa has indeed spoken the truth, the disbeliever can be called a Dhaalim and the muslim can be called it, but one takes him out from the religion but not the other one" (Ta'dhim Qadr As-Salah)
* Imam As-Sam'aani said regarding this verse in his tafsiir: "You should know that the khawaarij use this verse as evidence and say: "whomever does not rule with Allahs ruling is a disbeliever", while the Ahl As-Sunnah said: he does not disbelieve by leaving the ruling.
Garaad Awal
Former African
They all belong on a security watchlistEvery east london nigga in a thobe thinks he's a sheikh kkkk
Some Kufrs are different than others.
There is no disputing that, as I am sure you are aware of.
The way of the salaf and the early scholars apparently does not suffice you, but to each his own I guess. My advice to you as your brother in faith is to follow the evidences wherever they lead you, irrespective if that is the position you wanted or not. We will all stand alone before Allah.
With regards to anyone asserting with what I am saying from 0 AH to 1200 AH
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.” 17[17]
Also Ibn Kathir says
“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.”
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.” 17[17]
Also Ibn Kathir says
“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.”
Sheikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (RH) said
ومتى ترك العالم ما علمھ من كتاب االله واتبع الحاكم الذي یحكم بغیر ما أنزل االله فھو كافر مرتد یستحق العقوبة في الدنیا والآخرة
“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 r is an apostate and a disbeliever who deserves punishment in this world and in the hereafter ”
ومتى ترك العالم ما علمھ من كتاب االله واتبع الحاكم الذي یحكم بغیر ما أنزل االله فھو كافر مرتد یستحق العقوبة في الدنیا والآخرة
“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 r is an apostate and a disbeliever who deserves punishment in this world and in the hereafter ”
As far as the fataawa of Ibn Taymia is concerned, it is his saying, may Allah have mercy on him, in his Fataawa regarding the Tartars : "And it is known from the religion (of Islam) by necessity and by the consensus of all Muslims that whoever legalizes to follow other than the religion of Islam or a Sharia other than the Sharia of Muhammad (SAW), he is a Kafir. And his kufr is similar to that of the one who believes in some part of the book (Quran) and reject some of it", as He Ta'ala said: "Verily, those who disbelieve in Allah and his Messengers and wish to make a distinction between Allah and his Messengers (by believing in Allah and disbelieving in his Messengers) saying, "we believe in some but reject others", and wish to adopt a way in between, they are in truth disbelievers. And we have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating torment". An-Nisa, Verse 150-151. [Majmua' Al-Fataawa, Vol 28, p. 524].
In addition, in other places in his fataawa, Sheikh-ul-Islam related the Ijama' on the kufr of the one who rules by laws which contain the legalizing of haram and the forbidding of halal, or the abolition of the enjoining and forbidding of the Shariah, and all of these characteristics apply to the present laws. Part of this is his saying, may Allah have mercy on him : "And whenever a person legalized the haram - that is agreed upon - or forbids the halal - that is agreed upon - , he is a Kafir by the consensus of the Fuqaha". [Majmua' Al Fataawa, Vol 3, p.267.] He also said : "it is known that whoever abolishes the enjoining and forbidding with which Allah sent his messengers, he is a Kafir by the consensus of the Muslims, the Jews and the Christians". [Majmua' Al-Fataawa, Vol 1, p.106.]
Soul Kaizer
🇸🇴🇦🇫🇵🇰🇧🇩🇱🇰🇨🇳🇯🇵🇰🇷🇰🇵🇵🇭🇮🇩🇲🇾
Do you think a person playing sports is committing kufr as they are using rules that are not related to the sharia?
no, what kind of dumb question is this?
You live in the West at your hooyos crib sleeping on the bottom bunk paying taxes to the Kaffir government.
Your not that guy pal. Chill before you Takfir yourself
Your not that guy pal. Chill before you Takfir yourself
