Text copied Link copied

Al-Fatawa – home

﴿ فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ ﴾

Scholar
Search mode

Is it permissible for a scholar to issue a fatwa contrary to what he believes out of fear of fitnah (trial, discord or temptation)?

Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The second question, O Shaykh, is: Is it permissible for a prominent scholar, for example one in Saudi Arabia, to resort to issuing a fatwa contrary to what he believes out of fear that a certain fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) will occur? Because if he issued a fatwa contrary to what the government of the Kingdom has adopted, a fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) would break out between the government and the people of religion, and the light of the da'wah (calling others to Islam) might be extinguished because of this fitnah (trial, discord or temptation). So should he resort to issuing a fatwa contrary to what he believes?

The Shaykh : Allah knows best. It is his ijtihad (independent legal reasoning). These are personal matters that cannot be regulated by fixed rules, because as you know, his saying (peace and blessings be upon him):
Whoever among you sees it, let him change it with his hand من رأى منكم فليغيره بيده
to the end of the hadith, until he says:
And that is the weakest of faith فبقبله وذلك أضعف الإيمان
Likewise, as they did today in what we were discussing, they justified and permitted this great fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) thinking they were preventing a mafsadah (harm) that is greater than it. So you have returned to the same question, but on a smaller scale. The discussion was about a state versus a state; now it is an individual versus a state. Today it is him and himself, and it is his assessment of whether the great fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) will occur. Is he right or wrong? We say that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade rising up against the Muslim ruler, but he permitted rising up if they saw clear, manifest kufr (disbelief). If that is not the case, it is not permissible to rise up. But does that mean it is not permissible to speak the truth? If one does not enjoin good and forbid evil, what do we do with his saying (peace and blessings be upon him):
The best of jihad is a word of truth in the presence of a tyrannical ruler أفضل الجهاد كلمة حق عند إمام جائر
Al-Mustadrak lil-Hakim 48:281
If we say that so-and-so issued a fatwa contrary to what he believes out of fear that a greater fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) would occur than this one, that is between him and his Lord. Was his assessment correct in the first place, and secondly, was there no inclination of the soul? That is between him and his Lord. As for me, I say that this assessment is imaginary, as we explained earlier regarding the assessment of the Saudi state. Bringing the Crusaders into the lands of the Muslims, whom it is impossible to expel with an effort greater than if the Iraqis had taken over, this is it. But you, may Allah reward you, have minimized the example, and it is part of what was said before, and the matter does not differ at all.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And beware of you... and that the situation there will become like the situation in the intifada... a disbeliever is killed, and in exchange, dozens of Muslims are killed. Did you hear this statement?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, may Allah guide you. We said, and I said in a phrase, "A Jew is killed, and in exchange, ten are killed." And what did he say?

The questioner : One hundred.

The Shaykh : One hundred. So I did not want to exaggerate, I said that in exchange for the killing of Muslims by a Jew, ten Muslims are killed. So he rebuked me and said, "No, but one hundred." Where were you? Now we imagine that you are in the Saudi army, who is fighting with whom? With the Americans? For the Iraqi Muslims? And so on. So you killed an American in front of you, but if he was behind you, you were exposed. But you will not be exposed afterwards?

The questioner : You are going to be exposed.

The Shaykh : You are going to be exposed, so you are going to kill, and you and others with you. Therefore, a person must think correctly to deal with matters that are not normal. That is why I said, "By treachery or openly?" Openly, the truth must be spoken, but unfortunately:
"And if you called out, you would have heard a living soul, *** But there is no life for the one who calls out."
"And if you blew into a fire, it would have lit up, *** But you are blowing into my ashes."
The Muslim peoples should rise up against these Americans and British, but are there peoples who can rise up?
"And if you called out, you would have heard a living soul, *** But there is no life for the one who calls out." O Allah, depart with wisdom...
Source www.al-albany.com

The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.

Similar fatwas