What Makes Ruler a Disbeliever

[techsamatar]

@Cush The summary I was alluding to distinguishes between falling short or being disobedient and, on the other hand, committing major Kufr. If an individual believes with certainty that man-made laws are superior to Sharia, it constitutes a major act of Kufr, taking them out of Islam. However, the Khariji approach involves declaring someone as not ruling by Sharia and in need of replacement even if they fall short or do not adhere to their 100% policy.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

According to some people, only a clear statement of disbelief. Anything else is technically permissible, even if it’s borderline shirk. This weak mindset is how the Kuffar are able to masquerade & hide amongst us. As long as they only make vague statements & avoid directly stating their disbelief, they know gullible Muslims will defend them.

 

[Omar del Sur]

 

[Omar del Sur]

 

[Omar del Sur]

 

[Omar del Sur]

 

[Omar del Sur]

 

[Omar del Sur]

 

[Omar del Sur]

 

[Grey Alien]

Few questions;

If a ruler implements sharia law and man made laws at same time, wouldn't it be a minor kufr? Or is it haram?

If a ruler practices system of democracy while implementing sharia law, is he a believer? I know Shura aka limited democracy is possible but I meant modern system of democracy aka multi parties system.

Is it possible to implement Sharia laws while there is no government? I'm talking about anarchy-like government?

 

[Omar del Sur]

If a ruler practices system of democracy while implementing sharia law, is he a believer?

I don't think that's actually possible. According to Sheikh Uthaymeen, if the ruler legalizes alcohol, then this is kufr (kufr akbar). But under democracy, if the majority of the people say it's legal then it's made legal....

these are two rival, competing systems.... under shariah, the authority, the hukm belongs to Allah... according to democracy, the hukm belongs to whatever the majority of the people think (btw look how fake Western democracy is.... these leaders are massively unpopular and what they do doesn't even follow what the majority thinks)....

so how can there be shariah and democracy? those are two different contradicting things.

 

[Grey Alien]

I don't think that's actually possible. According to Sheikh Uthaymeen, if the ruler legalizes alcohol, then this is kufr (kufr akbar). But under democracy, if the majority of the people say it's legal then it's made legal....

these are two rival, competing systems.... under shariah, the authority, the hukm belongs to Allah... according to democracy, the hukm belongs to whatever the majority of the people think (btw look how fake Western democracy is.... these leaders are massively unpopular and what they do doesn't even follow what the majority thinks)....

so how can there be shariah and democracy? those are two different contradicting things.

I see.

If sharia law is unchangeable, in which alcohol is illegal as well as other issues that are haram. Therefore majority of Muslims cant promote it.

Let's say, legislation is sharia law but whats about administration ruling? In the sense, it I'd man made law in response to modern times such as public law?

In islam, there's no clear government system, but rather it is way of life. So we need to find a good system along with unchangeable Sharia law.

 

[Omar del Sur]

I see.

If sharia law is unchangeable, in which alcohol is illegal as well as other issues that are haram. Therefore majority of Muslims cant promote it.

Let's say, legislation is sharia law but whats about administration ruling? In the sense, it I'd man made law in response to modern times such as public law?

In islam, there's no clear government system, but rather it is way of life. So we need to find a good system along with unchangeable Sharia law.

shariah is one hundred percent perfect and suitable for all times and places.

insha'Allah, all of us as Muslims try to adhere to the shariah.

however, the shariah allows us a certain amount of leeway in how we do things. we have all our own unique personalities, our own style in how we do things. that's fine, we can do things in our own way but we must adhere to the shariah.

so on a personal level, two people following the shariah... or on a state level, two rulers following the the shariah... they may have some legitimate differences. differences that are perfectly fine like culture, language, personality, etc.... but the important thing is that we are not going against the shariah. so there is room for different styles. maybe one ruler follows the Shafi'i' madhhab, maybe one is Maliki... there may be some minor differences, there is room for permissible differences definitely but the shariah has to be followed and implemented, no question

 

[Omar del Sur]

that being said... if we want to get into the very specifics when it comes to how things should be governed... and there is room for different viewpoints... what should we do on this issue, on that issue.... but the first thing is we have to deepen our understanding of Islam and of the blessed shariah of Allah as this will guide us when it comes to making the various decisions