Ruling by other than Allah's Law

[Al hashimi]

Ruling by other than Allah's law is Kufr Akbar
Kufr Duna Kufr Argument is false as one must need to understand the context of the Hadith.
The Khawarij believed Ali RA was a kaffir as he reconciled with Muawiyah RA and they believed he was oppressive.
Tjey believed being an oppressive ruler was Kufr but Ibn Abbas said it was Kufr Less than Kufr.
When there is an ayah that is clear (Q 5.44) there is no need for ta'wil
Ibn Abbas wasnt referring to the ayah

 

[Khaemwaset]

So the Somali that also used Xeer are all kufr?

 

[ninoo]

Ruling by other than Allah's law is Kufr Akbar
Kufr Duna Kufr Argument is false as one must need to understand the context of the Hadith.
The Khawarij believed Ali RA was a kaffir as he reconciled with Muawiyah RA and they believed he was oppressive.
Tjey believed being an oppressive ruler was Kufr but Ibn Abbas said it was Kufr Less than Kufr.
When there is an ayah that is clear (Q 5.44) there is no need for ta'wil
Ibn Abbas wasnt referring to the ayah

how can you say "kufr duna kufr is false" when sh bin baz said that? one of the biggest scholars of our time? akhi start learning from the scholars instead of jumping to conclutions like that. The scholars have studied many years and their job is to explain the verses for us.

 

[Al hashimi]

So the Somali that also used Xeer are all kufr?

Anyone that Judges other than allah's law is a kafir just as anyone who kicks a quran is a kaffir

 

[Khaemwaset]

Anyone that Judges other than allah's law is a kafir just as anyone who kicks a quran is a kaffir

Every east london nigga in a thobe thinks he's a sheikh kkkk

 

[Al hashimi]

are you idrus?
btw give an actual refutation mate

 

[Al hashimi]

how can you say "kufr duna kufr is false" when sh bin baz said that? one of the biggest scholars of our time? akhi start learning from the scholars instead of jumping to conclutions like that. The scholars have studied many years and their job is to explain the verses for us.

I think all these Saudi Scholars u quote are doing Taqqiyah to not get killed by the Taghut Saudi Regime

 

[Khaemwaset]

are you idrus?

 

[Al hashimi]

Lowkey fye tho

 

[Haragwaafi]

Ruling by other than Allah's law is Kufr Akbar
Kufr Duna Kufr Argument is false as one must need to understand the context of the Hadith.
The Khawarij believed Ali RA was a kaffir as he reconciled with Muawiyah RA and they believed he was oppressive.
Tjey believed being an oppressive ruler was Kufr but Ibn Abbas said it was Kufr Less than Kufr.
When there is an ayah that is clear (Q 5.44) there is no need for ta'wil
Ibn Abbas wasnt referring to the ayah

Khawarah were crazy group of sect who commited henious crimes against the ummah and them takfiring Ali RA for just avodiding spilling muslim blood is an act that jahil who doesn't the deen does like Allah swt said in his holy book:

وَإِن طَائِفَتَانِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ اقْتَتَلُوا فَأَصْلِحُوا بَيْنَهُمَا ۖ فَإِن بَغَتْ إِحْدَاهُمَا عَلَى الْأُخْرَىٰ فَقَاتِلُوا الَّتِي تَبْغِي حَتَّىٰ تَفِيءَ إِلَىٰ أَمْرِ اللَّهِ ۚ فَإِن فَاءَتْ فَأَصْلِحُوا بَيْنَهُمَا بِالْعَدْلِ وَأَقْسِطُوا ۖ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُقْسِطِينَ

And if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah. And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.​

 

[Poets]

Ruling by other than Allah's law is Kufr Akbar
Kufr Duna Kufr Argument is false as one must need to understand the context of the Hadith.
The Khawarij believed Ali RA was a kaffir as he reconciled with Muawiyah RA and they believed he was oppressive.
Tjey believed being an oppressive ruler was Kufr but Ibn Abbas said it was Kufr Less than Kufr.
When there is an ayah that is clear (Q 5.44) there is no need for ta'wil
Ibn Abbas wasnt referring to the ayah

A few things:

1. Ibn 'Abbas was indeed referring to the ayah, as is evident by the narrations in the books of tafsiir. For instance, Ibn Jariir At-Tabari collects some of these narrations with their chains. You can look it up in the verse of Surah Ma'idah.

2. Would you be willing to accuse Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim of taqqiyya if I were to present there views showing that they believe not all ruling by other than Allah has revealed to be Kufr Akbar? If so, the please be my guest!

Ibn Qayyim writes in his work "Madaarij As-Saalikiin":

هذا تأويل ابن عباس وعامة الصحابة في قوله تعالى: ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافرون {المائدة: 44} قال ابن عباس: ليس بكفر ينقل عن الملة، بل إذا فعله فهو به كفر، وليس كمن كفر بالله واليوم الآخر، وكذلك قال طاووس، وقال عطاء: هو كفر دون كفر، وظلم دون ظلم، وفسق دون فسق

"This is the explanation of Ibn 'Abbas and all the other companions regarding the verse: "Whoever does not rule according to what Allah has revealed, indeed they are amongst the unbelievers" (Maa'idah, 55). Ibn 'Abbas said: "It is not disbelief that takes you out from the religion. Rather, it is kufr for whoever does it but is not like the one that disbelieve in Allah and the last day", and likewise said Tawuus (from the Taab'iin). 'Ataa said (also from the taab'iin): It is Kufr duna kufr, and Dhulm duna Dhulm, and Fisq duna fisq".

Ibn Qayyim then told what other had said in regards to the verse. He then concluded by saying:

والصحيح أن الحكم بغير ما أنزل الله يتناول الكفرين، الأصغر والأكبر، بحسب حال الحاكم، فإنه إن اعتقد وجوب الحكم بما أنزل الله في هذه الواقعة، وعدل عنه عصيانا، مع اعترافه بأنه مستحق للعقوبة، فهذا كفر أصغر، وإن اعتقد أنه غير واجب، وأنه مخير فيه، مع تيقنه أنه حكم الله، فهذا كفر أكبر، وإن جهله وأخطأه فهذا مخطئ، له حكم المخطئين.

"And the correct view is that ruling according to other than what Allah has revealed encompasses both types of Kufr, the smaller and the greater, in accordance to the state of the one ruling. If he believes that to rule according to what Allah has revealed is obligatory in this particular instance, but deviates from it as a sinner while admitting that he deserves punishment, then this is Kufr asghar. If he believes it is not obligatory, or that he has the choice (to not rule by it), while knowing that it is Allahs ruling, then this is Kufr akbar. If he does not know the ruling and is mistaken, then he is of the same ruling as the others that make mistakes".

3. This is not to say that ruling with other than Allah has revealed is not Kufr akbar in any instance. Indeen, the opposite is true. But it is Kufr akbar in all instances? If yes, do you agree at least that there is a difference of opinion seeing all these narrations from the Sahaba, Taabi'iin and the scholars after them?

 

[Poets]

A few things:

1. Ibn 'Abbas was indeed referring to the ayah, as is evident by the narrations in the books of tafsiir. For instance, Ibn Jariir At-Tabari collects some of these narrations with their chains. You can look it up in the verse of Surah Ma'idah.

2. Would you be willing to accuse Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim of taqqiyya if I were to present there views showing that they believe not all ruling by other than Allah has revealed to be Kufr Akbar? If so, the please be my guest!

Ibn Qayyim writes in his work "Madaarij As-Saalikiin":

هذا تأويل ابن عباس وعامة الصحابة في قوله تعالى: ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافرون {المائدة: 44} قال ابن عباس: ليس بكفر ينقل عن الملة، بل إذا فعله فهو به كفر، وليس كمن كفر بالله واليوم الآخر، وكذلك قال طاووس، وقال عطاء: هو كفر دون كفر، وظلم دون ظلم، وفسق دون فسق

"This is the explanation of Ibn 'Abbas and all the other companions regarding the verse: "Whoever does not rule according to what Allah has revealed, indeed they are amongst the unbelievers" (Maa'idah, 55). Ibn 'Abbas said: "It is not disbelief that takes you out from the religion. Rather, it is kufr for whoever does it but is not like the one that disbelieve in Allah and the last day", and likewise said Tawuus (from the Taab'iin). 'Ataa said (also from the taab'iin): It is Kufr duna kufr, and Dhulm duna Dhulm, and Fisq duna fisq".

Ibn Qayyim then told what other had said in regards to the verse. He then concluded by saying:

والصحيح أن الحكم بغير ما أنزل الله يتناول الكفرين، الأصغر والأكبر، بحسب حال الحاكم، فإنه إن اعتقد وجوب الحكم بما أنزل الله في هذه الواقعة، وعدل عنه عصيانا، مع اعترافه بأنه مستحق للعقوبة، فهذا كفر أصغر، وإن اعتقد أنه غير واجب، وأنه مخير فيه، مع تيقنه أنه حكم الله، فهذا كفر أكبر، وإن جهله وأخطأه فهذا مخطئ، له حكم المخطئين.

"And the correct view is that ruling according to other than what Allah has revealed encompasses both types of Kufr, the smaller and the greater, in accordance to the state of the one ruling. If he believes that to rule according to what Allah has revealed is obligatory in this particular instance, but deviates from it as a sinner while admitting that he deserves punishment, then this is Kufr asghar. If he believes it is not obligatory, or that he has the choice (to not rule by it), while knowing that it is Allahs ruling, then this is Kufr akbar. If he does not know the ruling and is mistaken, then he is of the same ruling as the others that make mistakes".

3. This is not to say that ruling with other than Allah has revealed is not Kufr akbar in any instance. Indeen, the opposite is true. But it is Kufr akbar in all instances? If yes, do you agree at least that there is a difference of opinion seeing all these narrations from the Sahaba, Taabi'iin and the scholars after them?

Any comment on this @Al hashimi ?

 

[Al hashimi]

This is just one opinion
There are many shuyukh such as ibn kathir who disagree

 

[Al hashimi]

Plus this opinion as you can see is primarily based on the Hadith of Kufr Duna Kufr which has been debunked

 

[hanif#]

This is just one opinion
There are many shuyukh such as ibn kathir who disagree

What does Ibn Kathir say?

 

[Al hashimi]

Ibn Kathir takfired the people who used al yaasiq for judgement and law. This book al yaasiq was made by genghis khan contained laws from the Quran aswell as other religions. They ruled with parts of sharia and other parts of other concepts.

 

[hanif#]

Ibn Kathir takfired the people who used al yaasiq for judgement and law. This book al yaasiq was made by genghis khan contained laws from the Quran aswell as other religions. They ruled with parts of sharia and other parts of other concepts.

Even Ibn Taymiyyah takfeered the Mongols who preferred yasak over the Islamic Sharia. This is a complicated topic and you seem to not have a proper understanding of it so I advise you to refrain from making judgements. Ibn Kathir believes what his teacher Sheikh Al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah believes.

 

[hanif#]

@Al hashimi
Do you also believe killing a Muslim is kufr akbar

Ibn Mas'ud (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: "The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "Reviling a Muslim is Fusuq (disobedience of Allah) and killing him is disbelief."

Riyad as-Salihin 1559 - The Book of the Prohibited actions - كتاب الأمور المنهي عنها - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (saws) in English and Arabic

sunnah.com

Imam Nawawi in his explanation of this hadith said:

وأما قتاله بغير حق فلا يكفر به عند أهل الحق كفرا يخرج به من الملة إلا إذا استحله​

"As for killing him unjustly, it is not considered disbelief(major kufr) by the people of haqq, unless he makes istihlal of it"

 

[Al hashimi]

سباب المسلم فسوق، وقتاله كفر
Abusing a Muslim is Fusuq and fighting him is Kufr

The view of the Ahl as-Sunnah is that committing a sin, such as murder or fighting, is not Kufr by itself. As evidence for that, consider e.g. the verse of the Quran:

وإن طائفتان من المؤمنين اقتتلوا فأصلحوا بينهم​

And if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two.
— Quran 49:9

In this verse Allah calls both parties who have fought each other as 'believers', which would be false if they had committed Kufr by fighting each other.

Similarly consider the verse:

كتب عليكم القصاص في القتلى ... فمن عفي له من أخيه شيء​

Prescribed for you is legal retribution for those murdered ... But whoever overlooks from his brother anything ...
— Quran 2:178

Here Allah calls the killer and the family of the victim as 'brothers'. This would be false if the killer had become a disbeliever by committing the murder. Similarly forgiving by the victim's family would not suffice to spare the life of the murderer rather it should have been contingent on him reverting to Islam.

Hence, the hadith وقتاله كفر has a meaning other than what you have inferred. It may mean either one of the following:

• It is implicitly talking about one who commits murder while considering it lawful to do so. Such a person has committed Kufr as he has denied the teachings of Islam.
• It means that fighting\killing a Muslim is like disbelief. Because it is a deed that is typically done by disbelievers. This is a warning about the severity of the deed, i.e. it is similar to the actions of the disbelievers.
• Kufr has meanings other than disbelief. Here it could be used in the meaning of 'being ungrateful' to Allah.

 

[Al hashimi]

The Hadith of Kufr Duna Kufr is not a strong one either