Some attendees reported that we should discuss the transmission of the consensus on the disbelief of the one who rules by other than what Allah revealed, and his discussion with Shaykh Al-Albani on the issue of ruling by other than what Allah revealed, and the issue of the types of disbelief and the difference between disbelief of belief and disbelief of action.

The Shaykh : It is correct, and Allah is the One to be sought for help.

The questioner : Yes, by Allah.

The questioner : The consensus that Ibn Kathir mentioned in *Al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya* is that whoever rules by the *Yasq* is a disbeliever by the consensus of the Muslims. Also, my Shaykh, if we say as Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab said...The Shaykh : Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab said that the meaning of *taghut* or the heads of the *taghut* are five, and he mentioned the second and the third. He said the second is the unjust ruler who changes the laws of Allah, and he said the third is the one who rules by other than what Allah revealed. And as we know, disbelief in *taghut* is the second pillar of the pillars of tawhid (the oneness of Allah), because Allah Mighty and Majestic said in Surat al-Baqarah, and He said in Surat al-Nahl, in Surat al-Nahl and not in al-Baqarah: So disbelief in *taghut* is the second pillar of the pillars of faith. And if we say that the consensus has been established on the disbelief of the one who replaces the law of Allah Mighty and Majestic, then you should establish this creed and establish the state of Islam. From what we have heard from you, in my heart, I should not believe in this in my heart, especially since more than one scholar of the Muslims transmitted the consensus on the disbelief of the ruler who replaces [the law], including Mahmud Shakir and including Dr. 'Umar al-Ashqar, approximately six scholars transmitted the consensus on this issue.

The Shaykh : May Allah bless you, did you notice earlier or later in this session that disbelief is an action of the heart and not an action of the body? Did you notice this or not?

The questioner : We do not approve of this.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : We do not approve of this.

The Shaykh : Here lies the problem. Well, what is disbelief? What is the meaning of *kufr* (disbelief) linguistically and in the Shari'ah?

The questioner : It is said that *kufr* linguistically means denial. As for in the Shari'ah, the scholars divided it into practical disbelief or belief-based disbelief, or major disbelief and minor disbelief. They said that major disbelief is the disbelief that takes one out of the religion, and minor disbelief is that which...

The Shaykh : Please, may Allah bless you, we do not want to give lectures now. We want to understand, A and B. Now, it is clear to you that there is practical disbelief and belief-based disbelief. Do you mean what you are saying?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Well, does practical disbelief make its doer a disbeliever?

The questioner : Yes, if it takes one out of the religion.

The Shaykh : Does belief-based disbelief make its doer a disbeliever?

The questioner : Yes, if it takes one out of the religion, if it is major disbelief; because there is major disbelief and minor disbelief in practical disbelief.

The Shaykh : My brother, may Allah bless you, I told you a moment ago that we do not want to give lectures now. We want to understand. They say in Syria a word of its fulfillment. We seem to have agreed that there is belief-based disbelief and practical disbelief. So I asked you: does practical disbelief take its doer out of the religion? The answer: either you say yes, or you say no. Then there is no harm in detailing if detailing is necessary.

The questioner : Here detailing is necessary.

The Shaykh : We have not reached that yet. You answer: Is practical disbelief apostasy or not?

The questioner : I will not answer except with detailing.

The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah. Is belief-based disbelief apostasy?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Well, why did you not detail?

The questioner : Because this is agreed upon, but practical disbelief is the point of disagreement between the Murji'ah and the people of the Sunnah.

The Shaykh : Well, does belief-based disbelief have a connection to the belief-based disbelief that you say is apostasy, or does it not have a connection?

The questioner : It has a connection.

The Shaykh : Then it returns to belief-based disbelief, may Allah bless you. It returns, then, to belief-based disbelief. Practical disbelief, as it appears, and do not hold me to this, though I am trying to soften the expression, you have not yet clarified for yourself the difference between belief-based disbelief and practical disbelief, so that you may clarify for yourself the fruit of this difference between belief-based disbelief and practical disbelief. Practical disbelief is an action that comes from a Muslim; it is the action of the disbelievers. But this action that comes from the Muslim is similar to that action that comes from the disbeliever in one aspect, namely in terms of the action, but it differs in another aspect from that action that comes from the disbeliever. That action that comes from the disbeliever is accompanied by belief-based disbelief, whereas this Muslim, here the difference and the fruit between the two disbeliefs appear. If this Muslim commits practical disbelief and it is also accompanied by belief-based disbelief, like the disbelief of the disbeliever, then it is apostasy, there is no problem with that. But if there does not come from him what indicates that his practical disbelief is accompanied by belief-based disbelief, then it does not become belief-based disbelief, because belief-based disbelief differs from practical disbelief in that it is a disbelief of the heart, whereas practical disbelief is not a disbelief of the heart, but rather it is practical disbelief. Take for example the authentic hadith agreed upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim, which is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): A Muslim fighting his Muslim brother is disbelief. Now I ask you: does a Muslim who fights a Muslim become a disbeliever by this fighting?

The questioner : He does not become a disbeliever, because this is minor disbelief.

The Shaykh : My brother, may Allah bless you.

The questioner : No, no, he does not become a disbeliever.

The Shaykh : The best of speech is what is little and instructive. Well, is this disbelief?

The questioner : Yes, it is disbelief.

The Shaykh : Now you call it minor disbelief, and I call it practical disbelief. What is the difference between you and me? I called it practical disbelief, and you called it minor disbelief. Now we say: this is practical disbelief. Why? Because he performed the action of the disbelievers. It is the nature of disbelievers, as is constantly and eternally observed, that some of them fight one another. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) pointed to this reality, which helps us with your interpretation and your claim that this is minor disbelief, and helps us in explaining practical disbelief. His (peace and blessings be upon him) statement in the Farewell Pilgrimage, as it came in Sahih al-Bukhari from the hadith of Jarir ibn 'Abd Allah al-Bajali, where the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said to him: , then he (peace and blessings be upon him) addressed them and said: , the phrase , the phrase that some of you strike the necks of others. This is undoubtedly an action, and it is an explanation of his (peace and blessings be upon him) previous statement: , . How? . So this is practical disbelief. Insulting a Muslim is open sinfulness, and fighting him is disbelief. It does not take him out of the religion, but if it is accompanied by fighting a Muslim brother, deeming his blood lawful in his heart, while he believes him to be a Muslim, then at that point his practical disbelief transforms into creedal disbelief. You argue with the consensus you transmitted from so-and-so and so-and-so from the predecessors or the contemporaries. You must have read in the exegesis of the Imams regarding, for example, the statement of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He): . I mean, you have read that the verse was revealed concerning the Jews who used to send some of them to ask the Messenger, because they were two factions at odds with each other. They would send Muhammad to ask Muhammad. If he answered them in a way that suited them, they would accept it; otherwise, they would reject it. Among the well-known and famous Imams of exegesis, Ibn Jarir al-Tabari says in his exegesis of this verse: "Those are the disbelievers," because they do not believe in the ruling of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in their hearts, because they originally disbelieved in the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), except when the ruling was in their favor. In that case, they adopt the ruling because it is for their benefit. But if it is not for their benefit, they reject it in heart and in appearance. Therefore, he states, and likewise Ibn Kathir, that it is not permissible to apply this verse to the sinful, wicked Muslim who testifies and believes in what Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has revealed, but who may rule in his own case or in the case of another contrary to what Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has ruled in His Book or His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in his Sunnah. It is not permissible to apply this verse to those Muslims because they differ from the polytheists in that they believed in what Allah revealed. But their belief in what Allah revealed was not accompanied by action, whereas those disbelievers denied what Allah revealed in heart and in appearance. Therefore, the scholars, the scholars of the Muslims, in their exegesis of this verse—which many who cling to declaring people disbelievers argue with, including your statement that practical disbelief may be disbelief that takes one out of the religion—you did not notice that it is impossible for practical disbelief to be disbelief that takes one out of the religion unless the disbelief has been established in the heart of this disbeliever in practice. So we must distinguish between creedal disbelief and practical disbelief. We do not have in the Shari'ah, ever, a text that explicitly and clearly indicates that one who believes in what Allah revealed but does not act upon any of what Allah revealed is a disbeliever. For example, what is the ruling on one who consumes riba (usury or interest)? Is he a disbeliever who has apostatized from his religion? You will say: No, is that not so?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : I do not say what you say in this way. I say "may be" and "has been," meaning: if he also deems riba (usury or interest) permissible in his heart, just as he deemed it permissible in his action, then it is disbelief of apostasy, and to Hellfire, and what an evil destination. But if he says, "May Allah accept our repentance, and we want to live from these empty words," and so on, which makes us feel that he believes he is disobeying Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and His Messenger, but on the other hand, he followed his desire. There is no difference, O Muslim brother, between one who disobeys Allah (Mighty and Majestic) in consuming riba (usury or interest), for example, and one who disobeys Allah (Mighty and Majestic) by ruling other than what Allah has revealed. And now I will end this speech with a very simple example. I say: a Shari'ah judge rules—I do not say he rules by the Shari'ah, but I say, as we always say, he rules by the Book and the Sunnah. But in a government, in a specific case, two people sue before him, and he rules in favor of the wrongdoer against the rights of the wronged. Is this ruling by what Allah has revealed?

The questioner : I will answer, but I have a query before I answer. I am asking about your question. Is this...

The Shaykh : They say in our region of Sham, "If it doesn't come with you, come with it, please."

The questioner : Okay. Did this judge make this ruling a Shari'ah by which he judges in every case, in this situation, in this case? Let us give an example: a person stole and came to the judge who rules by what Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has revealed. But in this case, due to bias or kinship, he said, "I do not want to cut off his hand, and I want to establish another hudud (fixed Qur'anic punishments) punishment on him," even though the conditions of theft were present in him, even though in other cases he cuts off the hand. In this case, we do not say: it is disbelief. We apply to him the statement of Ibn 'Abbas: "disbelief other than disbelief." But if he made the hudud (fixed Qur'anic punishments) punishment for theft to be imprisonment or detention, we say this is disbelief simply by his ruling in this case, because he made it a law to follow, as he made it a rival to Allah.

The Shaykh : May Allah bless you. Do not hold me to this. You are repeating a phrase you read, and your request to cut off my speech to clarify this does not benefit you. I will say: Did this man who ruled in favor of the wrongdoer against the wronged rule by the Shari'ah of Allah? You are supposed to say no. You are supposed to say that, and we will follow the topic to its end. After that, if you find an opportunity to say what you said, say it.The questioner : Now we enter into the topic. After that...

The Shaykh : We return to what we were discussing. This Muslim and the judge who rules by what Allah has revealed usually ruled in a certain case other than what Allah has revealed. I do not think a knowledgeable Muslim would rule that he is a disbeliever simply because this contrary ruling issued from him. I do not think anyone does this. So I want to say: in another case, for one reason or another, that reason repeated or renewed—it is not important—but he also ruled other than what Allah has revealed. Likewise, I say: I cannot say that it is creedal disbelief and disbelief of apostasy. How long will we repeat this? Five times, ten times, twenty times, a hundred times, and so on. When can I say that his ruling condemns him to disbelief of apostasy, and not just practical disbelief? When something appears from him that indicates what is settled in his heart. So if something appears from him that indicates what is settled in his heart, and that is that this ruling is not fit to be ruled by, despite it being from what Allah revealed, then it is said that his disbelief is disbelief of apostasy. So we do not return, perhaps we will meet. The fact that he adopted a system may be the reason for those who say that this is disbelief of apostasy, because they took his system as evidence of what is settled in his heart. Because ruling in Islam is not fit—I say: if their ruling or their derivation is correct, then this is a correct ruling that corresponds to creedal disbelief. So now, the criterion for the ruling, the research, and the distinction between disbelief and disbelief is that we look at the heart. If the heart is believing and the action is disbelieving, then here the ruling settled in the heart overrides the ruling settled in the action. But if what is in the heart corresponds to the action, meaning he does not approve of this ruling that came in the Shari'ah, either by explicit statement with his tongue or by expression, as it is said, with the tongue of his state. That is, the expression may be with the tongue of speech or with the tongue of state. If his expression of his heart's disbelief is with his tongue, the matter is finished. But if it is with the tongue of state, here the tongue of state may be open to debate. What do you say now regarding this detail? And I summarize what preceded: practical disbelief, which may be creedal disbelief as I said at the beginning of your answer, this must be linked to creedal disbelief. As for practical disbelief, and his ruling was creedal disbelief, meaning he is an apostate from the religion, and he is a believer in his heart—this does not exist in Islam. And now, please, what do you have?

The questioner : First of all, may Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And beware of that.

The questioner : What we believe is that there is practical disbelief that takes one out of the religion, regardless of the belief, whether he was a believer or not. And we have predecessors for this, among them Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah in the Fatwas.

The Shaykh : We want evidence from the Book first of all.

The questioner : From the evidence: .

The Shaykh : Please allow me, my brother. I am returning to my point. I told you just now: regarding creedal disbelief, please do not rush me. Creedal disbelief, whose center is the heart, is either indicated by the tongue of speech or the tongue of action. You are now arguing with the verse . Glory be to Allah, is this for me? Is this for me? Do you not feel with me?

The questioner : No, I do not feel it; because Allah the Exalted did not specify that they made it lawful or did not make it lawful. Allah the Exalted stated it generally, and this is the case.

The Shaykh : My brother, may Allah guide you. I am telling you in clear Arabic. By what do you judge a believer's faith? Is it not by his speech?

The questioner : His testimony, yes.

The Shaykh : Good. And by what do you judge a disbeliever? By his speech. And I agree with you. I preceded you in saying that disbelief which settles in the heart—we do not reach the heart directly—but we take one of two paths to reach what is in the heart.
Either speech, which is the tongue of speech, or the tongue of action. Do you distinguish between the two matters or not?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Good. So now you argued with the verse. The verse is an argument for me.

The questioner : But I did not understand from your words that you do not declare him a disbeliever as long as he said the word of disbelief. The proof is that you said: a person with bad upbringing in his family home who curses Allah the Exalted—we do not declare him a disbeliever. This contradicts the consensus of the scholars transmitted by Ibn Taymiyyah. Regardless of whether he is a believer or not, merely cursing Allah makes him a disbeliever.

The Shaykh : Good, is he killed?

The questioner : Yes, he is killed.

The Shaykh : No, he is given the opportunity to repent.

The questioner : There is a disagreement among the scholars.

The Shaykh : What is the stronger position in the disagreement among the scholars?

The questioner : The one who preferred... in this issue is that he is not killed.

The Shaykh : Good, is he declared a disbeliever or not?

The questioner : He is declared a disbeliever and given the opportunity to repent.

The Shaykh : He is not given the opportunity to repent?

The questioner : He is given the opportunity to repent.

The Shaykh : We asked: is he given the opportunity to repent or not? You mentioned two opinions. Good, what is the stronger position?

The questioner : The one we did not read, the one who preferred it, is that he is not.

The Shaykh : Good, is one who publicly declares apostasy from his religion given the opportunity to repent?

The questioner : He is given the opportunity to repent.

The Shaykh : One who publicly declares apostasy from his religion?

The questioner : One who is declared a disbeliever is given the opportunity to repent, yes.

The Shaykh : , is he given the opportunity to repent?

The questioner : What I know is that he is given the opportunity to repent.

The Shaykh : There is a difference, my brother, between a person who publicly declares apostasy from his religion and a person who speaks the word of disbelief. The latter may have an excuse, as we mentioned earlier regarding the ignorant. Perhaps you remember with me that the reason the Companion narrated this hadith is that I am now uncertain. The issue revolves around Mu'adh ibn Jabal and Abu Musa al-Ash'ari. They were in Yemen when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) sent them. Either Abu Musa stayed as a guest at Mu'adh's place, or Mu'adh stayed as a guest at Abu Musa's place, or vice versa. He found a man bound in chains. He asked about him and was told, "He changed his religion." Immediately, he drew his sword and killed him. It does not concern us whether it was Abu Musa or Mu'adh ibn Jabal who did it; both were noble Companions. The ruling was executed immediately . Changing religion does not admit an excuse for him; he is not given the opportunity to repent. As for the one who speaks the word of disbelief, he may have a wrong viewpoint due to lack of knowledge, ignorance, or any other reason, as I hinted at earlier and repeated, such as bad upbringing. We hear of these people today because of bad upbringing. You find one speaking the word of disbelief in a state of national outrage, and immediately he says, "I seek forgiveness from Allah, may Allah curse Satan," and so on. You do not judge this person; he is contradicting himself. If there is a ruling of Islam, he repents. Except if he cursed the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), as in some questions, then he is given the opportunity to repent. If he repents, well and good; otherwise, he is killed. But if he immediately says, "I seek forgiveness from Allah" and turns back, this is proof that the man did not intend disbelief. The point is, we repeat in our speech that creedal disbelief—we know it either by the disbeliever's testimony, as in the verse you mentioned, or by inferring from his tongue of action, or by inferring from his tongue of action. Inferring from the tongue of action is a field for disagreement and discussion: is this deduction correct or not? But when one publicly declares disbelief with his tongue, the matter is settled. What is the evidence now, if we want to say that practical disbelief not accompanied by creedal disbelief is a disbelief that keeps its owner in the Fire? What is the evidence from the Book of Allah or from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah? We know that the argument is only valid with knowledge of the Shari'ah ruling. If he did not know for one reason or another, and this is a topic previously mentioned, what is the evidence that one who falls into any of the things that make one a disbeliever, by speech, out of ignorance or negligence, as we mentioned in the story of the one who made that bequest, or by action? What is the evidence that this is a disbelief that keeps its owner in the Fire? We have no evidence. As for saying: so-and-so said, and so-and-so said, these opinions are contradictory. And Allah the Exalted says: to the end of the verse.