Ibn Baz on replacing the Shari’ah with man made laws
Ibn Baaz was asked: “Is replacement (of the Shari’ah) with the secular laws (tabdeel ul-qawaaneen) considered to be major kufr that expels from the religion?”
He replied: “When he makes it permissible (istibaaha). When he makes it permissible to judge with a law other than the Shari’ah he becomes a disbeliever with the major kufr – if he makes that permissible. As for when he does that for specific reasons, out of disobedience to Allah, for the sake of bribery, or pleasing somebody, and knows that this is haram, then this is kufr doona kufr (the minor kufr). As for when he does it while declaring it lawful (mustahillan lahu), then this is major kufr.
As Ibn ‘Abbaas said concerning the saying of Allah the Most High, “And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun (i.e. disbelievers – of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allah’s Laws).” (see at how they twist the meaning of Kafirun!!) (Al-Ma’idah 5:44) – so he said, “This is not like the one who disbelieves in Allah, but it is the minor kufr (kufr doona kufr).” Meaning, “when he declares it lawful (istahalla) to judge by the secular law, or declares it lawful to judge with such and such, and likewise, [when he makes it lawful] to judge with such and such Sharee’ah, then he is a kafir.”
Then the questioner said: “Is there a difference between replacement (tabdeel) and between ruling in a particular issue? Tabdeel O Shaikh?”
To which the Shaikh replied: “If he does not desire (lam yaqsud) Istihlaal (making it lawful) by that, but did it due to some other reasons, then this is kufra doona kufr (the minor kufr). As for when he says, ‘There is no harm in judging by what Allah has revealed’, even if he said that the Sharee’ah is better, however, he says, ‘there is no harm in this, it is permissible’, he is declared a disbeliever on account of that with the major kufr, regardless of whether he says that the Sharee’ah is still better, or it is equal to the Sharee’ah, or that it is better than the Sharee’ah, then all of this is (major) disbelief.”
The questioner said: “Meaning, this ruling (that you have explained) encompasses both tabdeel (replacement of the Sharee’ah) and other than tabdeel. It covers all of the types?”
The Shaikh replied: “It encompasses all of the forms, it is in all of the forms.” (Hiwaar Hawla Masaa’il it-Takfeer Ma’a Allaamah ash-Shaikh AbdulAzeez Ibn Baaz” and it is found also in al-Furqaan Magazine, no. 94)
Ibn Baaz on Ruling by other than Allah’s Law
Abdul-Azeez bin Baaz said: And whoever ruled by other than what Allah has revealed then he will not be in other than one of four situations:
1. The one who says: “I rule by this because it is superior to the Sharee’ah of Islam.” Such a one is a kafir in the sense of the major disbelief (i.e ejected from the Religion).
2. The one who says: “I rule by this because it is like the Sharee’ah of Islam, so ruling by it is permissible and ruling by the Sharee’ah is permissible.” Such a one is a kafir in the sense of the major disbelief.
3. The one who says: “I rule by this and ruling by the Sharee’ah of Islam is superior but ruling by other than what Allah has revealed is permissible. Such a one is a kafir in the sense of the major disbelief.
4. The one who says: “I rule by this” while he believes that ruling by other than what Allah has revealed is not permissible and who says that “the Sharee’ah of Islam is superior and it is not permissible to rule by other than it” but he is neglectful, or treats matters lightly, or does this action due to a reason that proceeds from his rulers, then he is a disbeliever in the sense of minor disbelief which does not eject from the Religion – and it is considered one of the greatest of major sins. [Al-Hukmu bi-Ghairi Maa AnzalAllahu wa Usool ut-Takfeer pp. 71/72]
Ibn Baz on voting in elections in countries that are ruled by man made laws
Question:
Is it permissible to vote in elections and nominate people for them? Please note that our country is ruled according to something other than that which Allah revealed?
The answer:
It is not permissible for a Muslim to nominate himself in the hope that he can become part of a system which rules according to something other than that which Allah has revealed and operates according to something other than the sharee’ah of Islam. It is not permissible for a Muslim to vote for him or for anyone else who will work in that government, unless the one who nominates himself or those who vote for him hope that by getting involved in that they will be able to change the system to one that operates according to the sharee’ah of Islam, and they are using this as a means to overcome the system of government, provided that the one who nominates himself will not accept any position after being elected except one that does not go against Islamic sharee’ah. (‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, ‘Abd-Allah ibn Ghadyaan, ‘Abd-Allah ibn Qa’ood; Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah 23/406, 407)
Ibn Baz on marriage with the intention of divorcing
This is a Syrian citizen who sent us the following message: “I am a Syrian citizen who is working in Saudi Arabia in Riyadh, and I want to marry with the intention of divorcing, so what is the Islamic rule of this? I want to divorce when I finish work and then travel.”
Bin Baz answered: There is a difference of opinion on this issue, but the majority say that it is permissible, because the intention is only in his heart and there is no condition made with the wife or her family, so it would not be regarded as Mutah. This is a legitimate marriage according to the majority of the scholars, and the fact that he intends to divorce in the future does not affect the legitimacy of the marriage. Divorce is allowed for him when he needs it as long as he doesn’t make it into a condition. If he makes a condition with the wife that he will divorce her after a specified period of time then this would become the forbidden Mutah. As long as the intention of divorce is only between himself and Allah and there is no announcement of this condition, then this is right according to the majority of the scholars.
Usama Bin Laden’s (who is himself a kafir) letter to Ibn Baaz
Usama Bin Laden wrote to Ibn Baaz, “When the king hung the cross upon his chest and appeared with it before the world, happy and smiling, you justified his action and permitted him his abomination, and permitted him although this act is clearly kufr. This is plain from the condition of the one who did it freely.
When the attacking Crusader and the Jewish Alliance – in collusion with the regime – decided in the Gulf War to occupy the country in the name of liberating Kuwait, you allowed this with an arbitrary Fatwa which justified this abominable action. This insulted the honour of the Ummah, sullied its dignity, and defiled its holy places, on the grounds of assisting the infidel in a case of necessity, disregarding the restrictions on assistance and the rules on necessity expressed in Islamic law.
When the ruling Saudi regime aided and supported the chiefs of Communist, Socialist apostasy in Yemen against the Muslim Yemeni people in the recent war, you kept silent. When these Communists suffered setbacks, you issued – on the recommendation of this regime – a word of advice! Summoning everyone to reconcile and shake hands, considering them all Muslims! Making people think that the Communists are Muslims means sparing their blood. When were the Communists ever Muslims? Aren’t you the one who previously issued a Fatwa on their apostasy and the necessity of killing them in Afghanistan? Or is there a difference between Yemeni Communists and Afghan Communists? Are the concepts of the faith and the precepts of Tawhid lost and confused to this extent?
The ruling regime continues to lodge these infidel nations in different cities of the country. We have not heard you disapproving. He, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said “Allah curses those who shelter an innovator.” Muslim relates it.
When the regime decided to attack Shaykh Salman al-‘Awdah and Shaykh Safar al-Hawali who proclaimed the truth and suffered for the sake of Allah, it obtained a Fatwa from you allowing all – the attacks and maltreatment to which the two Shaykhs and the preachers, Shaykhs and youth of the Ummah had been subjected. May Allah release them and save from them the wrong of the wrongdoers.
There are some other examples that we did not intend to omit, but it would take too much space to mention them. We have in our hands your recent Fatwa about something called slandering peace with the Jews. This is painful to Muslims, since you responded to the political wish of the regime which decided to present to the public a comedy of surrender to the Jews it had previously entered into. Therefore, you issued a Fatwa allowing peace both unrestrictedly and conditionally with the enemy. Who are the Prime Minister of the Zionist enemy and his parliament that they can be dealt with, and praised, when the Saudi regime announced the result of its intention for further normalization with the enemy?
It is as if you were not content to open up the land of the Two Holy Places to the Jewish and Crusader occupation forces. You added a third Holy Place by giving a veneer of legitimacy to the surrender documents that the treacherous and cowardly Arab tyrants signed.” (An open letter to Sheikh Bin Baz regarding his fatwa by Usama Ibn Laden- Dated: 27/7/1415 AH)