Clarification in the Takfīr of Modernists and Nationalists

Islamweb Fatwā no 195525

Question

It is mentioned in one of the fatwas of Shaykh ‘Alī bin Khuḍayr bin Fahd al-Khuḍayr that:

“He who loves democrats for the sake of democracy, and loves parliamentarians and legislators, and loves modernists, nationalists... and the like, for the sake of their views and beliefs, then this is a disbeliever due to kufr of tawallī. Allah the Exalted says: 

{يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ لَا تَتَّخِذُواْ ٱلۡيَهُودَ وَٱلنَّصَٰرَىٰٓ أَوۡلِيَآءَۘ بَعۡضُهُمۡ أَوۡلِيَآءُ بَعۡضٍۚ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُم مِّنكُمۡ فَإِنَّهُۥ مِنۡهُمۡۗ}

[O believers! Take neither Jews nor Christians as guardians—they are guardians of each other. Whoever does so will be counted as one of them...] 

And one of the meanings of “walī” (translated as "guardians" in the above) is Al-Muḥibb (i.e. the beloved). Ibn Al-Athīr stated this in Al-Nihāyah [5/228]. —End quote.

My question is that democracy, parliamentarianism, modernism and nationalism are all mentioned by the Shaykh, and these are not considered to be religions, but rather political trends and terminology that have nothing to do with religious content. And if he mentioned it as imitating the infidels, we would have found it correct, but what he made takfīr was of the one who loves democrats, parliamentarians... etc.

And in Islam, the issue of takfīr is a very sensitive issue. It should be referred to a penal (of scholars) before issuing fatwas on these topics recklessly. Because according to my opinion, it is not permissible to make takfīr based upon (a single person's) personal ijtihād. Rather, it is necessary to return to the jamā'ah (a body of scholars) in accordance with the words of the Messenger ﷺ: {Adhere to the Jamā'ah, beware of separation, for indeed Ash-Shaytān is with one, and he is further away from two.} Narrated by Aḥmed.

As takfīr is a legal ruling, which is attributed to Allah and His Messenger, just as the matters of ḥalāl and ḥarām and affirmation (in religion) being (exclusive) to Allah and His Messenger, so is the issue of takfīr. It is not permissible for us to declare takfīr except for those whom the Book and the Sunnah clearly indicate to its kufr. Mere suspicion and conjecture is not sufficient for that, because of the dangerous rulings that result from that.

As for the verse on which he relied: Allah ta'ālā said: 

{يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ لَا تَتَّخِذُوا۟ ٱلۡيَهُودَ وَٱلنَّصَٰرَىٰٓ أَوۡلِيَآءَۘ}

(O believers! Take neither Jews nor Christians as guardians) —you have mentioned on this website that it is based on what was said before, what is understood is that what is inferred from Wilāyah (awliyā'), is aiding them in victory and alliance, and some of them restricted it to only aiding (disbelievers) against the believers. From here it appears that the reasoning of the Shaykh the Muftī (’Alī al-Khuḍayr) with this verse, is invalid and erroneous?

What do you think of this fatwa issued by the Shaykh, is it correct or hasty?

Answer

الحمد لله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله وعلى آله وصحبه، أما بعد:

The ruling on something branches from what is perceived from it. The ideological sects mentioned in the question have denotations which are contrary to Islam. As for Modernism, it is an academic secular ideology, built on purely Western ideas and beliefs. And Modernism aims to eliminate the sources of religion and that which comes out of it in terms of doctrine and law. And it aims to destroy all religious, moral and human values, under the pretext that they are old and inherited, so as to build a life on obscenity and anarchy, obscure, devoid of logic, and upon the instincts of animals. All this in the name of freedom and to transpierce the depths of (worldly) life. Modernism is a summary of dangerous secular doctrines that appeared in Europe, such as Futurism, Existentialism, and Surrealism... It is a natural outcome of the removal of religion from the state in European society. And for the emergence of doubt and anxiety in people's lives, which had a great impact on drugs and sex. This is as stated in al-Mawsū‘ah al-Muyassarah fi’l-Adyān wa’l-Madhāhib wa’l-Aḥzāb al-Mu‘āṣirah (The Encyclopedia of Contemporary Religions, Doctrines and Groups).

It also defined Arab Nationalism as: “A fanatical intellectual political movement calling for the glorification of the Arabs, and to establish a unified state for them on the basis of their bond of blood, language and history — instead of the bond of religion. It is an echo of the nationalistic thought that had previously appeared in Europe.” End of quote.

Al-Shaykh Ibn Bāz in his risālah, Naqd al-Qawmiyyah al-‘Arabiyyah ‘alā Ḍaw’ al-Islām wa’l-Wāqi’ (Criticism of Arab Nationalism in the Light of Islam and Reality) says:

“One of the proofs of the corruption of the Arab Nationalism is that the call to and support of Nationalism will inevitably lead the whole society to rejecting the rulings set by the Holy Qur'an. This is because the non-Muslim nationalists will not accept to submit themselves to the judgment of the Qur'an, a matter that will oblige the leaders of Nationalism to adopt positive laws that oppose the judgments of the Holy Qur'an so that all nationalist societies can have equal laws. Many nationalists declared such a fact, as mentioned above. There can be no doubt that this is a great corruption, evident disbelief, and shameless apostasy. Allah (ta'ālā) says: 

{فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا} [النساء: 65]

But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad ﷺ) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission.

Allah (ta'ālā) says: 

{أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللَّهِ حُكْمًا لِقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ} [المائدة: 50]

Do they then seek the judgement of (the days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allâh for a people who have firm Faith. 

And: 

{وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ} [المائدة: 44]  

And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed, such are the Kāfirūn (i.e. disbelievers of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allâh’s Laws). 

And: 

{وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ} [المائدة: 45] 

And whosoever does not judge by that which Allâh has revealed, such are the Ẓālimūn (polytheists and wrong-doers - of a lesser degree).

Allah (ta'ālā) also says:

{وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ} [المائدة: 47]

And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fāsiqūn [the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree) to Allâh]. 

According to the verses mentioned above, a nation which does not judge by what Allah has revealed and is not satisfied with it, is an ignorant, wrongdoing and disbelieving nation. Other Muslim nations should hate such a nation and take it as an enemy for the sake of Allah. Moreover, other Muslim nations should not have close relations with such a nation until it has firm faith in Allah Alone, judges by His Laws and becomes satisfied with them. Allah (ta'ālā) says: 

{قَدْ كَانَتْ لَكُمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ فِي إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ إِذْ قَالُوا لِقَوْمِهِمْ إِنَّا بُرَآءُ مِنْكُمْ وَمِمَّا تَعْبُدُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ كَفَرْنَا بِكُمْ وَبَدَا بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةُ وَالْبَغْضَاءُ أَبَدًا حَتَّى تُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَحْدَهُ} [الممتحنة: 4]

Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibrāhīm (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: "Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you hostility and hatred for ever until you believe in Allâh Alone" — End quote.

As for democracy, we have already explained its reality and the contradiction of its Western philosophy with Islam, in several fatwas, including Fatwā No. 10238

This does not deviate from the fact that parliamentarians give themselves the authority to legislate in a way that contradicts the law of Allah ta'ālā, and they see that this is capable and is justified for them.

 And if this becomes clear... then know that these doctrines, in their (original) meanings, which are contradictory to Islam, are considered a religion for their adherents, which must be hated and denied, and it is never permissible for anyone ever to be loved for embracing these doctrines, and if love is actualized for this reason, this indicates the corruption of the belief of its owner. We have already clarified (in other fatāwā) : When is love for the kāfir considered kufr, and when is it not? And (we have also clarified) that the muwālah (guardianship) of the kuffār is what is considered kufr, and among it is what is less than that — so refer to the fatwas with the following numbers: 151751، 161841، 117416.

Shaykh Al-Islām Muḥammad bin 'Abdul Wahhāb stated in Nawāqiḍ Al-Islām (The Nullifiers of Al-Islām):

The 4th Nullifier: Whosoever believes that the guidance of someone other than the Prophet ﷺ is more complete than the Prophet’s guidance; or that the judgement of other than the Prophet ﷺ is better than his judgement – just like those who prefer the judgement of Aṭ-Ṭawāghīt (those who judge by other than that which Allāh has revealed) over [the Prophet’s ﷺ] judgement - such have disbelieved.

The 9th Nullifier: Whosever believes that some people are exempt from following the laws (sharīʿah) of Muḥammad ﷺ [just as al-Khaḍir was exempt from the laws (sharīʿah) of Mūsā], is a disbeliever. Based upon Allah ta'ālā's statement:

{وَمَنْ يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَنْ يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ} [آل عمران: 85].

Whoever seeks a way other than Islam,[[ i.e., full submission to the Will of Allah.]] it will never be accepted from them, and in the Hereafter they will be among the losers." —End quote.

Al-Shaykh Ibn Bāz said: “The 4th Nullifier includes: those who believe that man-made laws and constitutions are better than the Sharī`ah of Islam, equal to it, or that it is permissible to resort to them for judgment even if he believes that the judgment of Sharī`ah is better. Likewise, whoever believes that it is not correct to implement the Laws of Islam in the twentieth century, that this is a cause for the fall of Muslims, or that it is limited to relationship between the servant and his Lord and should not interfere in the other affairs of life. The fourth category also includes those who hold that carrying out Allah’s laws, such as cutting off the hand of a thief or stoning a guilty adulterer is not befitting for this modern era. This category includes those who believe that it is permissible to rule by something other than the Laws of Allah (Sharī’ah) in matters of transactions, Ḥudūd (prescribed penalties) and so on, even if he does not believe that it is better than ruling by the Sharī`ah.” —End Quote

As for the declaration of the questioner on the issue of takfīr, that "it is a very sensitive issue", this is true, and therefore it is not correct to speak on this matter except for the people of knowledge who are well-established to speak about it, whether it is a single person or a group, and therefore the questioner’s saying: (It is not permissible to make takfīr based on an ijtihād of a single person, rather one should refer the matter to a penal of scholars) — is not mandatory, and is an inaccurate saying. So there is nothing wrong with a single scholar speaking on this issue as long as he is qualified to do so. And see Fatwā No.: 14489.

Finally, we caution upon those who say: he loves democracy, modernity, nationalism or other doctrines that are contrary to Islam —such that you should not rush to judge him, until you are aware of how he defines this doctrine. He may be ignorant of its reality, or he has a special definition of it, and for this reason, Shaykh Ibn Bāz said in (Naqd al-Qawmiyyah al-‘Arabiyyah) :

“There is no doubt that the call to make Pan-Arabism the first tie among the Arabs is groundless. It is supported neither by Naql (primary Islamic source texts: Qur'an and Ḥadīth) nor by the use of reason. It is an atheistic call. Advocates of Pan-Arabism aim to fight Islam and escape its rulings and teachings. Such a call can be launched by some people who do not aim to realize such objectives, but they call for it, imitating and thinking good of others. If those people knew the target of such a corrupt call, they themselves would fight it and keep away from it.” — End quote.

And Allah Knows best.

[Translator's Note] Likewise in another fatwā (audio clip) of Shaykh 'Alī al-Khuḍayr which is being circulating with English subtitles, the same term were used, and I have come across many youth who were ignorant of the correct definitions of these terms, which lead them into reckless takfīr. May Allah guide them. In this clip, the shaykh says (transcript as-is) : “As for the words of ibn Saḥmān, it is regarding murtaddīn and kuffār. If the imām is a kāfir or murtadd or tāghūt or mulḥid or secularist or democrat or believer in parliaments or nationalist —from any of these types of disbelief and apostasy, then do not perform salāh behind him. It is not permissible to offer salāh behind him. Ibn Saḥmān, likewise 'Abdul-Laṭīf, mentioned the consensus that it is not permissible to offer salāh behind a Jahmī kāfir. By consensus, salāh is not valid behind a kāfir. And the Jahmī consists of various types. But what concerns us is the kāfir, whether from any category of kufr, whether he was a Jahmī or nationalist or Ba'athist (al-Baʿthīyah) or democrat or modernist or a tāghūt ruler, all are the same. Salāh behind them is not valid. And if someone offers salāh behind him, he must repeat it, unless the sultan forces you to offer salāh with his rod; then you would offer salāh and repeat it after.” End quote.