Regarding shura, does it have a relation to the majority or the minority?

The questioner: A question also related to this, or close to it, is the issue of shura. For example, to give you the background, may Allah will it, regarding this topic, there was a specific group that had elections. One of them did not win the election. Initially, the election issue was agreed upon, and he was elected and assumed a certain leadership. They held elections, but he did not win; he was not successful. He split off and adopted an individual methodology and things like that. Afterwards, he wrote a book on shura proving that there is nothing in Islam called a majority, and that shura is binding, meaning in this sense that one opinion may suffice and the opinion of the group is not taken. This is of the kind that the issue of the majority in Islam, in shura, is not considered at all. So I do not know, regarding shura and the background of shura, is there an issue of majority or minority?

The Shaykh: In Islam, there is no majority whose opinion must be followed, neither in fiqh nor in the pledge of allegiance. Rather, one follows either the evidence in fiqh, or the opinion of the one who pledged allegiance to, who is the Caliph alone. The Caliph consults, gathers opinions, and considers them; he has an opinion and thought, and then he seeks guidance from the Lord of the Worlds and chooses an opinion from these opinions, whether it is his own opinion, the opinion of the majority, or the opinion of the minority.

The questioner: Because he is the Caliph.

The Shaykh: Because he is the Caliph. Yes, that is it, because we have no binding consultation except the consultation of the Caliph. The Caliph must consult, but his consultation is not binding on him. As Hassan al-Banna (may Allah have mercy on him) said, is it binding or indicative? It is indicative, not binding. Yes, and it is not reasonable that the Caliph, who is to manage the entire Islamic state, be a slave to shura. It is not reasonable, especially when the circle of shura expands and gathers many opinions, and no one can encompass the reality of the Islamic community and give the correct answer and the truth for the matter that occurred and for which he consulted in his council, except he. Because he is the one who encompassed the subject from all its sides, while any other individual has some degree of encompassing, so he advises within the limits of that degree of encompassing. So, as we said, he gathers and considers from these individuals, so he will undoubtedly benefit, but this does not bind him at all, except what his conscience and his inner self are convinced of, fearing Allah in that. So when you resolve, then rely upon Allah. And I believe, Professor, that the reason some Islamic writers insist on claiming that shura is binding is their true feeling that there is no person who can be trusted.

The questioner: Meaning it did not come for nothing.

The Shaykh: But when there is a person who fills his place, then they will find themselves submitting to his opinion, whether they wish it or not.

The questioner: Meaning the issue became a very strong discussion regarding what they call the pledge and the covenant. I said to them, give me one piece of evidence proving the existence of a pledge. They said, why should we pledge? It is not based on preserving the Qur'an. I said, it is not my concern what you pledge to, whether it is right or wrong. Is there in Islam, in what is called a pledge and covenant, that I commit to you, and I come to tell you at the end of the month, this is a report of what I read and what I studied and what I memorized? Is there such a matter? It became a sharp discussion until he almost got angry and slammed the table. I said, absolutely, O son of the noble, I am discussing with you an academic discussion. Give me evidence. Is it established that the Companions pledged to anyone other than the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) regarding prayer and preserving the Qur'an? He said, I do not know about these matters... Even with the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), they did not do it, O our Shaykh.

The Shaykh: ... The Bedouin came to him and said, what has Allah obligated upon me? He said, five prayers every day and night. The truth is, this group are criminals because they are turning the system of Islam upside down and driving people with one stick. Everyone who belongs to them, they want to impose a duty on them. That Messenger, a man came to him asking what Allah has obligated, he said, five prayers every day and night. Is there anything else upon him? He said, no, except that you volunteer. He said, I swear by Allah, I will not add to them or subtract from them. He said, the man has succeeded if he is truthful; he will enter Paradise if he is truthful. This hadith is practically abrogated with them. What does it mean that you impose voluntary acts on a person that only the great ones of people, the great ones of faith, strength, righteousness, and piety, perform? We impose on them, do you want to read this and do this? And I wish that what they impose is also found in the Sunnah. Why am I telling you that this is modern Sufism? Because just as the first ones followed a path, these latter ones follow it.

The questioner: From one of the approved books, it is the book al-Taj al-Jami' li al-Usul.

The Shaykh: This al-Taj... O Professor.

The questioner: I said to them, this contains many fabricated and false hadiths. They said, absolutely not. Among them are the hadiths of the middle night of Sha'ban and many hadiths. I said to them, originally, if this speech were true, because there was a strong discussion among people who wanted to escape, he said to them, I will argue with you before Allah and I will not forgive you, and he is afraid that one person will escape now and will ruin my house before Allah. Notice how. So among the required books for them, for example, the book al-Taj, they must read daily or every two weeks no less than ten pages of the book al-Taj. How much have you read in your calculation, and why have you not read? I said to them, O people, this speech is not established.

The Shaykh: This is how he is acting, O Shaykh, O Abu...

The questioner: I have a background in Sufism and I merged with them for a period of time when I was young, meaning in the secondary stage, from the first year of secondary until the third year of secondary, meaning about three or four years. I merged with them completely, and very dangerous things became clear to me in the end. I came out and disbelieved... First year in the College of Shari'ah.

The questioner: I came out and disbelieved in them, and I was still in the first year of the College of Shari'ah.

The Shaykh: Meaning they combined the pre-Islamic age of ignorance and Islam.

The questioner: And by the grace of Allah, I followed the people I was the cause of bringing in. I was the cause of bringing you into this group. I am telling you that they are wrong for the following reasons, and I withdrew.

The Shaykh: By Allah, you must praise your Lord day and night who saved you from this predicament, because these, regarding the seekers, they call them "afyun" (drugs). They get intoxicated, they have no will, it is very terrible, a person hardly believes it, but he saw it and it became a reality before him, so he is forced to believe that are these Shaykhs "afyun" for the people? We have a person in Damascus known as Abu Sulayman Shahrur, a layman or semi-layman, but he is shrewd and intelligent. When we have such occasions and we talk about Sufi myths and their beliefs and their miracles, etc... at the time when he knows that he has no right to speak.The Shaykh : He is speaking, but... he cannot help but speak, O brothers, I swear by Allah, these communists are right in saying that religion is "afyun" for the people, because these are not studying the Islam that Allah has blessed us with, studying the Book and the Sunnah. They think that what they see from the Sufi and Sufi Shaykhs is the religion, and this is truly "afyun". What does it mean?The Shaykh : He has the right to order his student to go and kill his father, and he must submit and follow, otherwise he would not have reached. And I once said to one of these when I asked him, if your Shaykh ordered you to slaughter your father, would you do it? I said, I have not reached this station. I said to him, may Allah will it, you will never reach there. He hopes to reach the station of submission to the opinion.The Shaykh : Even if it is the killing of his father.