What is the criterion for ruling that a land is a land of disbelief or a land of Islam?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : You posed the question to me, and I did not understand your words correctly. When you said "lands of Islam," there is a statement made by some people that a land is a land of Islam if the ruling is Islamic and the law of Allah is applied in that land, even if the majority of its people are disbelievers. And lands are lands of disbelief if the ruling in them is not by what Allah has revealed.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Even if the majority of its people are Muslims, is this statement correct?
The Shaykh : No, this statement is not correct. What does it mean? What are its implications? For example, this country, or Syria, or other countries where the rulers, unfortunately, rule by man-made laws, like Algeria. Which category of lands are these? Lands of war?
The questioner : No, no, they are not lands of war. I asked you.
The Shaykh : Then, no problem, no problem.
The questioner : I asked whether this statement is correct or not. Is that all?
The Shaykh : I answered you, but we need to reach the refutation of this statement through a logical, intellectual sequence. If these lands are not Islamic lands because they are afflicted with rulers who rule by other than what Allah has revealed, then these rulers are of two types. One type acknowledges that Islam must be the ruling, but
The questioner : there are obstacles.
The Shaykh : But the desire of the soul, and you know the interests, and a second type tells you that Islam is backward and not suitable to be the ruler in this time. This time has changed... These are disbelievers. There is no difference between them...
The questioner : By the text of the verse.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner :[Al-Ma'idah 5:44]
The Shaykh : Yes, but the verse has interpretations, as the interpreter of the Qur'an said: "Disbelief less than disbelief," "It is not the disbelief they assume. It is disbelief less than disbelief." And therefore I said that those who rule today in the lands of Islam are of two types.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : One type acknowledges that ruling by Islam is obligatory, but like the usurer, the thief, the fornicator, the deceiver, the talebearer, and the backbiter, and so on. All these contradict Islam. If they deem any of these sins permissible, they are disbelievers.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh: And if they say, "There is no power nor strength except in Allah. May Allah accept our repentance. May Allah guide us," and so on, meaning their creed is correct, but their actions contradict the creed. We do not rule that they have apostatized. A second type of rulers, as I told you just now, says that Islam is not suitable for ruling in this time. These are apostates. Now, many Islamic lands, most Islamic lands, if we do not say all Islamic lands, are ruled by laws, but to varying degrees. A large portion of them may have rulings that are more in accordance with Islam, a portion is more in contradiction with Islam, and between them are ranks and degrees. And such details do not concern us, because we are now living in the age of[Al-Ma'idah 5:105]. When we want to become a group and be able to fight the disbelieving ruler, Islam does not command fighting the disbelieving ruler initially. Rather, it calls them, as the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did with whom? With Kisra, Caesar, and al-Muqawqis, and so on. Those who respond, praise be to Allah. Those who do not respond, did he fight them suddenly or prepare for it? He prepared for it. So if we are afflicted now, as the closest example is Algeria, with European-style rulers who took the system of France, which colonized them for a century and more, and they now rule by these laws, do we start by fighting them? We have not started by fighting our own desires and training them on the Book and the Sunnah, and we have not gathered and formed a group as we explained just now. No, now is the time of [Al-Ma'idah 5:105]. If we have this group, as we explained just now, we say: O ruler, either you rule by what Allah has revealed, or you leave the ruling to one who rules by what Allah has revealed, otherwise there will be fighting between us and you. This is how Islam is. It is not a revolution, it is not a game where we spill innocent blood without any notable benefit. And we ask Allah to inspire us to act upon the Book and the Sunnah and to train us upon that. I forgot your situation.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Even if the majority of its people are Muslims, is this statement correct?
The Shaykh : No, this statement is not correct. What does it mean? What are its implications? For example, this country, or Syria, or other countries where the rulers, unfortunately, rule by man-made laws, like Algeria. Which category of lands are these? Lands of war?
The questioner : No, no, they are not lands of war. I asked you.
The Shaykh : Then, no problem, no problem.
The questioner : I asked whether this statement is correct or not. Is that all?
The Shaykh : I answered you, but we need to reach the refutation of this statement through a logical, intellectual sequence. If these lands are not Islamic lands because they are afflicted with rulers who rule by other than what Allah has revealed, then these rulers are of two types. One type acknowledges that Islam must be the ruling, but
The questioner : there are obstacles.
The Shaykh : But the desire of the soul, and you know the interests, and a second type tells you that Islam is backward and not suitable to be the ruler in this time. This time has changed... These are disbelievers. There is no difference between them...
The questioner : By the text of the verse.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner :
And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed
ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل اللهThe Shaykh : Yes, but the verse has interpretations, as the interpreter of the Qur'an said: "Disbelief less than disbelief," "It is not the disbelief they assume. It is disbelief less than disbelief." And therefore I said that those who rule today in the lands of Islam are of two types.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : One type acknowledges that ruling by Islam is obligatory, but like the usurer, the thief, the fornicator, the deceiver, the talebearer, and the backbiter, and so on. All these contradict Islam. If they deem any of these sins permissible, they are disbelievers.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh: And if they say, "There is no power nor strength except in Allah. May Allah accept our repentance. May Allah guide us," and so on, meaning their creed is correct, but their actions contradict the creed. We do not rule that they have apostatized. A second type of rulers, as I told you just now, says that Islam is not suitable for ruling in this time. These are apostates. Now, many Islamic lands, most Islamic lands, if we do not say all Islamic lands, are ruled by laws, but to varying degrees. A large portion of them may have rulings that are more in accordance with Islam, a portion is more in contradiction with Islam, and between them are ranks and degrees. And such details do not concern us, because we are now living in the age of
upon you is [responsibility for] yourselves. Those who have gone astray will not harm you when you have been guided
عليكم أنفسكم لا يضرّكم من ضلّ إذا اهتديتمupon you is [responsibility for] yourselves. Those who have gone astray will not harm you when you have been guided
عليكم أنفسكم لا يضرّكم من ضلّ إذا اهتديتم
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.