One who denies a belief while believing that this belief came from Allah and His Messenger is a disbeliever, unlike one who held that belief due to error.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Now, let us get to the heart of the matter. One who denies a belief while believing that this belief came from Allah and His Messenger is a disbeliever. We do not merely call him a stubborn Jahmi; he is a disbeliever who has apostatized from his religion. However, if it is not predominant in our opinion, at least, that when he fell into this denial and this rejection of an attribute of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), he did so out of error and misconception rather than intent, then it does not follow from our calling him a stubborn Jahmi that he is a disbeliever. Conversely, if we say of someone that he is a disbeliever, a stubborn Jahmi, this admits of no other meaning except declaring him a disbeliever. But merely calling him a stubborn Jahmi does not mean he is a disbeliever. Perhaps you have reached the answer to your question.
The questioner : Shaykh, now we have the Jahmiyyah...
The Shaykh : I asked you.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Fine, you have relieved me. May Allah reward you with good. Now, make whatever correction you wish.
The questioner : Now, Shaykh, we have the Jahmiyyah. They did not go to what they went to except for the sake of figurative interpretation and error, and when they denied the names and attributes.
The Shaykh : Except for the sake of figurative interpretation and error. You added something to my statement.
The questioner : No...
The Shaykh : Consider. You added something to my statement.
The questioner : No, I did not add anything.
The Shaykh : So, what is the grammatical status of that correction?
The questioner : The correction was that your first statement was directed at Ibn Hazm, and my statement was directed at the Jahmiyyah.
The Shaykh : Fine, meaning you followed me and widened the circle, is that so?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Fine, I will say it in general terms. Anyone who falls into Jahmiyyah after the proof has become clear to him that he is on misguidance, and he persists, is a disbeliever. But specifying that this particular person is a disbeliever is a matter of independent legal reasoning. Does a Muslim researcher who knows the value of this imam, his knowledge, and his virtue, and so on, equate him with a stubborn Jahmi like al-Ja'd? From that, you take the difference. You cannot measure and say, for example, why is al-Ja'd called a disbeliever and killed or slaughtered for his disbelief, while Ibn Hazm is an imam among the imams of the Muslims and shares that with him?
That is because this one is distinguished by his knowledge and virtue through the Book and the Sunnah from that one, even if he shares with him in one of the misguidances. But this does not obligate us to rule upon him with the same ruling that was issued regarding others who are not known to have a struggle in knowledge of the Book and the Sunnah. That is what I have as an answer to that question. Please, go ahead.
The questioner : Your Eminence, what reference do you advise referring to regarding the topic?
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
The questioner : Shaykh, now we have the Jahmiyyah...
The Shaykh : I asked you.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Fine, you have relieved me. May Allah reward you with good. Now, make whatever correction you wish.
The questioner : Now, Shaykh, we have the Jahmiyyah. They did not go to what they went to except for the sake of figurative interpretation and error, and when they denied the names and attributes.
The Shaykh : Except for the sake of figurative interpretation and error. You added something to my statement.
The questioner : No...
The Shaykh : Consider. You added something to my statement.
The questioner : No, I did not add anything.
The Shaykh : So, what is the grammatical status of that correction?
The questioner : The correction was that your first statement was directed at Ibn Hazm, and my statement was directed at the Jahmiyyah.
The Shaykh : Fine, meaning you followed me and widened the circle, is that so?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Fine, I will say it in general terms. Anyone who falls into Jahmiyyah after the proof has become clear to him that he is on misguidance, and he persists, is a disbeliever. But specifying that this particular person is a disbeliever is a matter of independent legal reasoning. Does a Muslim researcher who knows the value of this imam, his knowledge, and his virtue, and so on, equate him with a stubborn Jahmi like al-Ja'd? From that, you take the difference. You cannot measure and say, for example, why is al-Ja'd called a disbeliever and killed or slaughtered for his disbelief, while Ibn Hazm is an imam among the imams of the Muslims and shares that with him?
That is because this one is distinguished by his knowledge and virtue through the Book and the Sunnah from that one, even if he shares with him in one of the misguidances. But this does not obligate us to rule upon him with the same ruling that was issued regarding others who are not known to have a struggle in knowledge of the Book and the Sunnah. That is what I have as an answer to that question. Please, go ahead.
The questioner : Your Eminence, what reference do you advise referring to regarding the topic?
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.