Continuation of the discussion on whether seeking the aid of disbelievers is apostasy.

The Shaykh : What do you notice when you say here there is no difference, and there you say there is a difference? Look now at how a hasty person falls into what he does not like. What is the difference between this and that?
The Shaykh: And is my speech not clear? Where is the one who was whispering? What do you think, did you understand my question?

The questioner : I understand your question, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : What is your answer? Tell your companion to help you.

The questioner : It is the same seeking of aid, the same as eating riba (usury or interest). The sin is one.

The Shaykh : I mean, no, that is not the question. The question is whether there is a difference in this sin between a country whose people live among scholars and another country where scholars are few, as our Algerian brother wants to say. Is there a difference?

The questioner : No, there is no difference.

The Shaykh : It has not yet become clear to him. Why has it not become clear to you?

Another questioner : No, there is no difference, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : But you made a distinction.

Another questioner : No, I did not make a distinction. I mean, should we make...

The Shaykh : You forgot what you said. You said, as a correction to me, but there is a difference, O Shaykh. You said this.

Another questioner : We ask you, may Allah reward you, to explain this difference so that the truth becomes clear to us.

The Shaykh : No problem, but I do not object to what you say. There is no difference, may Allah bless you. The difference is perceived in the case of a person who knows that it is haram (forbidden) and a person who does not know that it is haram. This is an acknowledged difference. For example, this brother of ours whom Allah has blessed with Islam, Ibrahim, considering that he is new to Islam. When he was in his old misguidance, he used to drink khamr (intoxicants). I may not be saying this specifically about him, and perhaps others, but it is not far-fetched that he converted to Islam and still drinks khamr. Is this possible or not?

Another questioner : It is possible.

The Shaykh : And he drinks khamr while not knowing that it is muharram (forbidden). Is this possible or not?

Another questioner : Yes, you may.

The Shaykh : But this is not possible in the lands of Islam. This difference exists. But I am saying now that riba (usury or interest) is haram (forbidden), whether it is Saudi riba, Jordanian, Syrian, or Algerian. Is there a difference?

Another questioner : No, there is no difference.

The Shaykh : Allow me. Are all these people in all these countries the same in that we say they are all kafir (disbeliever) murtadd (apostate) from Islam because they consider permissible what Allah has forbidden? Or are they all Muslims, even if they consider permissible what Allah has forbidden? Or could some be kafir (disbeliever) murtadd (apostate) from the religion and some still be Muslims? What do you see in this fair division? I see you have lost your way from me.
Al-Halabi : I am raising the white flag, O my Shaykh.

The Shaykh : It seems he has lost his way.

Another questioner : O Shaykh, a question.

The Shaykh : No, you should not ask. I mean in my speech, this is more appropriate for the rulers. It is known for the Al Saud, or the Kuwaitis, or the Egyptians, or any rulers, including the Algerians. Do we know, O Shaykh, that their outward appearance is that they ally themselves with the enemies of Allah and do not disavow them?

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : So, and I want a very precise answer, is this apostasy or not? That is the question?

The Shaykh : What is your answer regarding those who eat riba (usury or interest) while knowing its prohibition? What is the answer you are confident in?

Another questioner : It is possible that he eats riba (usury or interest) while not believing it to be permissible.

Another questioner : If he considers it permissible...

The Shaykh : You have done well.

Another questioner : Yes, this is known...

The Shaykh : Remember, it does not appear that this known matter becomes unknown in many cases, and this is the reality now. Remember this word. What do you say about those who eat riba (usury or interest)? Are they kafir (disbeliever)?

Another questioner : If they consider it permissible, they are kafir (disbeliever) who have exited the religion. And if they do not consider it permissible...

The Shaykh : And if you say this about those rulers who ally themselves with the enemies of Allah, would you be wrong?

Another questioner : No, I would not be wrong.

The Shaykh : So, this is what I mean. If we meet?

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Loyalty in itself is not kufr (disbelief) or apostasy. But it is a major sin. So, whoever considers it permissible in his heart, like the one who considers riba (usury or interest) permissible in his heart, both have apostatized from Islam. And whoever does not consider this sin and that one permissible in his heart, he remains within the circle of Islam. And I remind you of what Hatib ibn Abi Balta'ah did. Do you remember his hadith?

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Did he become a kafir (disbeliever)?

Another questioner : No, he did not become a kafir (disbeliever).

The Shaykh : Why? Even though he allied himself with the mushrik (one who associates partners with Allah) in a very serious matter.

Another questioner : He informed about the affairs of the Muslims...

The Shaykh : And the affairs of the Muslims, and upon them is the Master of the Messengers.

Another questioner : But is this not...

The Shaykh : And there is no "but." "But" is for correction. What are you correcting? There is nothing to correct. I am asking you now: Did he not ally himself with the mushrik (one who associates partners with Allah)? If he did not become a kafir (disbeliever), is that not so?

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So, not every loyalty is kufr (disbelief) or apostasy. Is this clear up to here?

Another questioner : Is that clear?

The Shaykh : ... It is the one that is coupled with considering it permissible in the heart. And just now you said we do not have the right to pry into their hearts. We have the outward appearance. Fine. I am asking you now: What is the outward appearance that you rely on in the matter of loyalty that is forbidden in Islam? It is that they disobeyed the Lord of the Worlds This is the outward appearance. But we agreed that this outward appearance is muharram (forbidden). But what is the outward appearance that indicated to you that this considering it permissible is outward, and that it is also inward? Do you have evidence for this?

Another questioner : I have their outward appearance, O Shaykh. I think the inward may agree with the outward. We are speaking with the Shaykh to learn. This is an opportunity that may not come again.

The Shaykh : I remind you once again not to be among those who use "perhaps," because this may be met with a "perhaps" of the same kind, is that not so? Otherwise, you have lost your way from me.

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So, remove the word "perhaps" and answer my question. These people who allied themselves with the mushrik (one who associates partners with Allah), their outward appearance is that they contradicted the text of the Noble Qur'an. There is no dispute about this. But how did you arrive, or do you want to arrive, at their inward state and say that these people considered allying with the kafir (disbeliever) permissible in their hearts? Do you have a way to reveal what is in their hearts?

Another questioner : I have no way.

The Shaykh : So, you remain with the outward appearance.

Another questioner : We remain with the outward appearance.

The Shaykh : What is the outward appearance? That they contradicted the text of the Noble Qur'an. And this is not a point of disagreement.