A talk on the disagreement among Muslims, the gravity of that disagreement, and the example of the disagreement regarding the prohibition of certain types of intoxicants.

The Shaykh : Recently, what are called Islamic banks have appeared, and I sincerely hope that this name is a name that fits its reality, and that it is not a case of applying this attractive name to a non-Islamic bank. This is what I fear most, and the reason for that is a very fundamental reason, that ... the Islamic world and ... it is us, people like us, who are compelled to issue fatwas and answer questions. So the matter is as our Lord - Mighty and Majestic - said in the Noble Qur'an: , so the Muslims differ to the greatest extent; not only in the four schools of jurisprudence, where this one forbids what that one has permitted, and this one makes obligatory what that one has allowed, and so on from the disagreements which we are not now in a position to detail. And I sincerely hope that none of you present goes away thinking that there is in this any hint of disparaging the mujtahid imams. We are only narrating the reality, which has no other explanation. The reality is that there is a great deal of disagreement. This disagreement may lead some of those in charge of an Islamic bank to adopt one of these differing opinions, and they establish the bank on this opinion, which is the opinion of a learned Muslim scholar. It is not possible for everyone to sit in the councils of ... this knowledge and then choose the opinion that is closest to the scriptural evidence. Especially since in the present era a party has emerged that adopted Islamic ideas, Islamic ideas which they named as such, and these are undoubtedly the ideas of Muslim scholars. But this party stated explicitly that any opinion issued by a Muslim scholar is permissible to call an Islamic opinion, and consequently it is permissible to adopt it and follow it, even if this opinion was issued by the mujtahid under an excuse, such as that he did not come across the text that contradicts his opinion, and if he had come across it, he would not have issued this ... as is befitting the good opinion one holds of the imams of the Muslims.
And I do not know if I go far in explaining to you the danger of this new opinion, this new opinion which says: every opinion issued by a Muslim scholar is valid, first of all, to be called an Islamic opinion, and consequently it is permissible to adopt it even if it contradicts the Sunnah. For example, there is an opinion, and I do not of course call it an Islamic opinion, but I say: it is the opinion of one of the early Muslim scholars; that intoxicants are divided into two categories: intoxicants extracted from grapes; so this is forbidden, whether much or little, and intoxicants derived from other than grapes, in which there is a distinction; the much that intoxicates is forbidden, and the little that does not intoxicate is permissible. This distinction was said by one of the respected imams, even though the Messenger - peace and blessings be upon him - said in the authentic hadith: ; therefore, this learned, virtuous man was contradicted in his opinion, and the majority of Muslim scholars adopted what the following hadith indicates: .
And this is what aligns with the rules of Islam. How can it be that there is a cup of araq derived from grapes, and another cup derived from corn or dates or the like, and if the drinker drinks this cup he does not become intoxicated, and if he drinks this one he becomes intoxicated; so this is permissible, and it is derived from grapes, and this is forbidden because its quantity intoxicates, the proportion of intoxicating alcohol in it is high? And if we say that this does not intoxicate and this does not intoxicate; they say: this, despite the fact that it does not intoxicate, is forbidden; because it was extracted from grapes, whereas this is permissible; one drinks the cup and the two cups and more than that until the last sip by which he became intoxicated; this sip is the forbidden one [everyone laughs!], and all the cups before it are permissible. This ... and from a scholar among the Muslim scholars, and yet this is called an opinion by those we referred to as an Islamic opinion. This means the beginning of evil, and its end is likewise evil; and that is that if a Muslim ruler adopts this opinion, it becomes a Shari'ah that must be adhered to, even if you are aware of his saying - peace be upon him: , you must leave what you knew and acted upon because the Muslim caliph adopted that opinion, and that non-Islamic opinion is permissible for him to adopt even if he is aware of this hadith. The matter is very dangerous. It involves following the way of the priests and monks, about whom Allah - Mighty and Majestic - revealed in the Qur'an: . 'Adi said - as is well known - : How is this, O Messenger of Allah, and we did not take them as lords besides Allah? He said: . He said: But that did happen. He said: .
This legislation by the opinion of the priests and monks has become in this time the Shari'ah of Islam for the adoption of some people. And I said to some of them: What do you say if the Muslim state and the Muslim ruler existed, and they issued a decision permitting the pressing of intoxicants from other than grapes, and permitting the drinking of this juice in the amount that does not intoxicate, and you know the previous hadith: ; would you consider it permissible? He said: Yes!