What do you say about a state that rules by what Allah has revealed, yet has apparent errors and sins, and a state that rules by an imported constitution? Which of them is a disbeliever?

The questioner : He says, "What do you say about a state that rules by what Allah has revealed, yet has apparent errors and sins, and a state that rules by an imported constitution? Which of them is a disbeliever?" That is what he says.

The Shaykh : Perhaps we spoke in a previous session about disbelief or shirk (associating partners with Allah), and that it is of two types: one is creedal disbelief and the other is practical disbelief. Creedal disbelief is related to a person's belief. So whoever deems permissible in his heart and adopts a system, law, or Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) that Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) did not send down and did not legislate for His servants, his disbelief is disbelief of apostasy; his disbelief is creedal disbelief, meaning his person is not a Muslim, because he adopted and believed in his heart the opposite of his Lord's Shari'ah. As for whoever adopts the Shari'ah of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) as a system and ruling, he is a Muslim, having what we have and owing what we owe. Among what he has, which we also have, is what came in the authentic hadith from the hadith of Tamim al-Dari (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: They said: For whom, O Messenger of Allah? He said: So whoever adopts Islam as a religion, system, and law, and we see in him what no ruler is free from, such as negligence or error or the like, our duty is to advise him, to enjoin good and forbid evil as much as we are able. And the first ruler who adopts other than Islam as a constitution and system, it is obligatory for those under his banner to leave and migrate from him to a land where the ruling of Islam prevails. This is also within the limits of the general rule, which is capability, and as he (peace be upon him) said: .

The questioner : Now, if he does not deem it permissible, meaning if he sees that that ruling is a necessity and he believes that the ruling not from Allah is the obligatory one...

The Shaykh : ... I do not see that we should repeat the previous discussion in detail, for fear of boredom... especially since it seems there are questions, and our other brothers also have questions...

The questioner : A clarification, may Allah reward you, or even just a reference?

The Shaykh : We say that whoever adopts other than Islam as a creed, his disbelief is disbelief of apostasy. And whoever adopts Islam as a creed, whether he is a ruler or a subject, he is a Muslim, as I mentioned earlier. But if this ruler or subject violates something of what Islam brought, this violation is considered a sin and is not considered disbelief, no matter how much he commits sins or how great his sin is, as long as he does not deem that sin permissible in his heart. That is, he does not say, "This thing I am committing is not a sin, and this is not haram (forbidden) and this is not halal (lawful)." He does not say this. If he says this, he has disbelieved and apostatized from his religion. Based on this, we must distinguish between disbelief that is disbelief of apostasy and disbelief that is disbelief of sin. Disbelief of apostasy is related to the heart; his heart contradicts the Shari'ah of Allah. Disbelief of sin: his heart is with the Shari'ah of Allah, but his action is with his desire. Otherwise, everyone who disobeys Allah (Mighty and Majestic) would be a disbeliever of apostasy, and this is what no Muslim says.
And of this type is hypocrisy (nifaq), which is a type of disbelief. This is also something hidden from many people today. Hypocrisy, like disbelief, has creedal hypocrisy and practical hypocrisy. When we remember this fact, it becomes easy for us to understand some of the hadiths of the Shari'ah. Without that, the student of knowledge remains confused. For example, the famous hadith: How do we understand this name here in this hadith? Is the hypocrite as it came in the Noble Qur'an: Do we say that whoever makes a promise and breaks it is in the lowest depth of the Fire? One who is ignorant of the legal realities in legal terminology might say this.
The hypocrite may have practical hypocrisy or creedal hypocrisy. You know that those about whom Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said that they are in the lowest depth of the Fire are those who conceal disbelief and display Islam. In terms of what is settled in their hearts, they are disbelievers because they concealed disbelief in their hearts regarding what Allah sent down. But in what they display to people, they display Islam. So they pray with them and fast with them and pretend to follow the rulings of Islam, but in their hearts they are disbelievers. They were called hypocrites because they display the opposite of what they conceal. But what they display is good and beautiful, which is Islam, and what they conceal and hide in their heart is the great disbelief. This is a disbelief that is eternal in the Fire, and its person is in the lowest depth of the Fire. Is the hypocrite mentioned in this hadith and others, such as his saying (peace be upon him): , is this the hypocrisy whose people are in the lowest depth of the Fire in this hadith and the one before it? The answer is no. So how do we understand our hadith? This hypocrite's hypocrisy is practical, like practical disbelief. That is, he acts contrary to his belief. The Muslim believes in the depths of his heart that lying is haram and not permissible; this is in his heart. But what does he do? He does the opposite of what he concealed. The disbeliever, the apostate hypocrite, also displayed the opposite of what he concealed, but he concealed evil and displayed good. As for the Muslim hypocrite, he concealed good and displayed evil. He believed in good and did evil. He believed that lying is haram and that litigation is haram, but he contradicts his belief. So in terms of the Muslim's action contradicting his belief, in terms of the Muslim's action contradicting his sound belief... he is a hypocrite, and he shares with the disbeliever, apostate hypocrite in that his outward action is the opposite of his inward reality... So "the sign of the hypocrite is three" we can now say... creedal hypocrisy where he conceals disbelief and displays Islam; this is in the lowest depth of the Fire. As for the Muslim who conceals faith in everything that came from Allah (Mighty and Majestic), but he contradicts his words with his action, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) called him a hypocrite. So there is no difference at all between the ruler and the subject. Whoever has a sound creed but falls into something in his actions that contradicts his Shari'ah, his disbelief is practical disbelief and his hypocrisy is practical hypocrisy. As for whoever displays Islam and conceals disbelief, displays Islam in speech and then adopts... this, and in the depths of his heart he does not attack Islam... and the like of that. How vast is the difference between this one, who is a disbeliever and a hypocrite eternally in the lowest depth of the Fire, and the one who believed in what Allah sent down but contradicted Allah (Mighty and Majestic) in a little or a lot of his actions. He is thereby a sinner and not a disbeliever of apostasy. This is what can be said on the occasion of this question.

The questioner : A similar question: Is it permissible to call the sects existing in the present age, such as the Qadiyyah and the Shi'ah, and others, as well as those who call to Islam but by methods different from the method of the Salaf (the earliest generations), "people of the Fire" who are included in the hadith: and so on?

The Shaykh : There is no doubt, yes...