A discussion between the Shaykh and a student of knowledge regarding declaring as disbelievers those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed, and distinguishing between the types of those who judge by other than what Allah has revealed.

The Shaykh : ... There is no separation between them. When you answered, it necessitates disavowal. This has strayed from the topic.

The questioner : Excuse me, let me speak. May I speak, Shaykh?

The Shaykh : How long do you need?

The questioner : Three minutes only.

The Shaykh : Take five minutes.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : Here, and I am not speaking, nor am I recording. Speak for five minutes. It is ten seven now. Please, go ahead.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good. The judge or ruler who judges by other than what Allah has revealed and explicitly states with his tongue that he believes Allah's ruling is better than his ruling—this requires detailed explanation. Among them is a ruler who judges by other than what Allah has revealed in all matters of life, in general and in detail, and then explicitly states with his tongue that Allah's ruling is better than his ruling. This person is a disbeliever who is expelled from the religion. The evidence for this is the saying of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He): . Thus, Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) linked judgment with servitude. The second piece of evidence is: . Ibn Kathir said that the taghut is every ruling other than the ruling of Allah and His Messenger. Likewise, the evidence is Ibn Kathir's statement regarding the declaration of Genghis Khan as a disbeliever, who prayed, fasted, performed Hajj to the House, and claimed Islam, but ruled among the people with the Yasa, which took a quarter from Islam, a quarter from Christianity, a quarter from Judaism, and a quarter from his own desires. Ibn Kathir said in Surat al-Ma'idah that he is a disbeliever expelled from the religion, even if he claims Islam. Those who recorded the scholarly consensus in the book al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya on the disbelief of Genghis Khan, who even established the banner of jihad. And among the evidence is the statement of the Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-Shaykh, the former Mufti of the Arabian Peninsula, who said, "Among the categories of disbelievers who are declared disbelievers for judging by other than what Allah has revealed are five." He said regarding the fifth category, "It is the ruler who does not judge by what Allah has revealed and made his ruling a general, binding law, replacing Allah's ruling, nullifying Allah's ruling, and substituting a man-made law, which is a general, binding law. Even if he says with his tongue that Allah's ruling is better than his ruling, he is a disbeliever expelled from the religion." This is found in his book on the enforcement of man-made laws. He distinguished between the judge or ruler who, in a single specific case, does not judge by what Allah has revealed; he does not exit the religion because his foundation is judging by the Book and the Sunnah in reality, but a specific case arose, such as bribery or the like, and he did not judge that specific case by what Allah has revealed, so he does not become a disbeliever. The author of al-'Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah, the author of the book al-'Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah, mentioned this when he spoke about the ruler who does not judge by what Allah has revealed, stating that in a single case, he is not declared a disbeliever. Ibn Taymiyyah also mentioned this, and Ibn al-Qayyim mentioned this, and the Shaykh Ahmad Shakir, the editor, mentioned this. In his commentary on the saying of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) in Surat al-Ma'idah, I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan, , when he edited Ibn Kathir's tafsir, he said, "There is no doubt that the modern Yasa, if he rules with it among the people and makes it a general, binding obligation, imposing his ruling among the people, then he is a disbeliever, and no one doubts his disbelief." He mentioned this in his tafsir of Surat al-Ma'idah, commenting on Ibn Kathir's words. He also mentioned that the ruler who replaces and substitutes, who replaced the Shari'ah of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) with a man-made law from himself, even if he says that Allah's ruling is better than my ruling, is a disbeliever. A complete chapter was written in the book al-Qawanin al-Ilahiyyah li al-Qawanin al-Jahiliyyah by 'Umar al-Ashqar, a complete chapter in which he mentioned the statements of the scholars that the one who says this phrase is a disbeliever expelled from the religion, because if he were truthful in his statement, he would not have made the man-made law a general, binding law for the people and placed legislation in the hands of humans. Also, he is outside the religion because he made the ruling of democracy, which is the ruling of the people by the people, and this is a principle of disbelief, and he imposed it on the people and made it part of his system. So he says that the people are the ones who rule themselves, not Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). The action supports this statement that the people are the ones who rule themselves and that the people are the ones who rule the Book of Allah. The people and the council are the ones from whom the rulings are issued. There is no doubt that this is disbelief by the consensus of the scholars if legislation is placed in other than the Book and the Sunnah and the people make it a source of legislation and protect it. There is no doubt that this is disbelief. Also, among the aspects of disbelief is if he says in his constitution, if he says, "I respect this constitution," namely the British or French constitution, and the laws of the land, which are man-made laws, where they made the ruling for the drunkard to pay a fine, or the ruling for the thief to be imprisoned for six months, or the ruling for the fornicator to be imprisoned, or the like. This change: he says, "I swear by Allah that I respect this constitution and the laws of the land." Which is more severe in the Arabic language: to say that I permit, or to say that I respect? If a person says, "I swear by Allah that I respect fornication," and another person says, "I swear by Allah that I respect fornication and defend it," which one is stronger in expression? These are three matters: that he nullified Allah's ruling and made it a binding law; the second matter is that he made the people rule themselves; the third matter is that he swore to respect the constitution and man-made laws. These all support each other until we say that the action, we say that the action of this man is, in fact, outside the religion. And there is a difference between the ruler who established these three matters and the judge who submitted everything to Allah in terms of sovereignty, except for one specific case. There is no doubt that the first is a disbeliever outside the religion, and the second is an open sinner and a transgressor. It is required of the second that he acknowledges that his action is [wrong], and it is not required of him to oppose Allah's ruling, nor is it required of the first person to say this, because his actions are like the actions of one who tramples on the mushaf.