The Ruling on One Who Studies Man-Made Laws or Takes on Their Teaching

From 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn 'Abd Allah ibn Baz to the honorable brother, the virtuous Shaykh Ahmad ibn Nasser ibn Ghanim, may Allah increase him in knowledge and faith and make him a source of blessing wherever he may be. Amen.
Peace be upon you, and Allah's mercy and blessings.
As for what follows: Your noble letter, dated 3/5/1397 AH, has reached me, may Allah guide you. Allah did not allow me to review it until five or six days ago. I have understood what it contains, which is a question about the ruling on one who studies man-made laws or takes on their teaching: does he thereby become a disbeliever or an open sinner? And is the prayer behind him valid?
And the answer:
There is no doubt that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, has made it obligatory upon His servants to judge by His Shari'ah and to refer to it for judgment, and He has warned against referring to anything else for judgment. He informed us that this is a characteristic of the hypocrites, and He informed us that every judgment other than His judgment, Glorified and Exalted is He, is from the judgment of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance. He made it clear that nothing is better than His judgment, and He swore that the servants do not believe until they judge by what His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) has revealed in what has occurred between them, and then they do not find in their souls any discomfort regarding His judgment, but rather they submit to it completely. He also informed us, Glorified and Exalted is He, in Surat al-Ma'idah that judging by other than what He has revealed is disbelief, injustice, and open sinfulness. All these matters that we have mentioned, Allah has clarified their evidence in His noble Book. As for those who study laws and those who undertake to teach them, they fall into categories:

(The First Category) : One who studies them or takes on teaching them in order to know their reality, or to know the superiority of the Shari'ah's rulings over them, or to benefit from them in matters that do not contradict the pure Shari'ah, or to benefit others in that, then there is no blame on him, as it appears to me from the Shari'ah. In fact, he may be rewarded and thanked if he intends to point out their defects and to show the superiority of the Shari'ah's rulings over them. There is no doubt that the prayer behind this category is valid. The ruling on those of this category is the same as the ruling on one who studies the rulings of riba (usury or interest), the types of intoxicants, the types of gambling, and the like, such as defective beliefs, or takes on teaching them in order to know them, know Allah's ruling on them, and benefit others, while believing in their prohibition, just as the previous category believes in the prohibition of judging by man-made laws that contradict the Shari'ah of Allah . His ruling is not the ruling of one who learns sorcery or teaches it to others; because sorcery is forbidden in itself due to what it contains of associating partners with Allah and worshipping the jinn other than Allah. So the one who learns it or teaches it to others does not reach it except through that, i.e., through associating partners with Allah. This is unlike the one who learns laws and teaches them to others, not for judging by them or believing them lawful, but for a permissible or Shari'ah-based purpose, as mentioned above.

(The Second Category) : One who studies laws or takes on teaching them in order to judge by them or to help others to do so, while believing in the prohibition of judging by other than what Allah has revealed, but his desire or love of money drives him to that, then those of this category are undoubtedly open sinners. In them is disbelief, injustice, and open sinfulness, but it is minor shirk (minor associating partners with Allah), minor injustice, and minor open sinfulness. It does not take them out of the circle of Islam. This opinion is the well-known one among the people of knowledge, and it is the opinion of Ibn 'Abbas, Tawus, 'Ata, Mujahid, and a group of the Salaf and the Khalaf, as mentioned by al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir, al-Baghawi, al-Qurtubi, and others. The scholar Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned its meaning in his book (Al-Salah). And Shaykh 'Abd al-Latif ibn 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Hasan (may Allah have mercy on him) has a good treatise on this issue, printed in the third volume of the collection (Al-Rasail al-Ula).
And there is no doubt that those of this category are in great danger, and it is feared that they will fall into apostasy. As for the validity of the prayer behind them and their like from the open sinners, there is a well-known disagreement on this. The most apparent from the Shari'ah evidence is that the prayer is valid behind all open sinners whose open sinfulness has not reached the level of major shirk (major associating partners with Allah). This is the opinion of a large number of the people of knowledge and the choice of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. He has valuable words on this which we quote here in their exact text due to their great benefit. He said in volume 23, page 351 of Majmu' al-Fatawa: "It is permissible for a man to pray the five daily prayers, Jumu'ah, and others behind one from whom he does not know of any religious innovation or open sinfulness, by the agreement of the four Imams and others from the Imams of the Muslims. It is not a condition of following an imam that the ma'mum (one praying behind the imam) knows the belief of his imam, nor that he tests him by saying, 'What do you believe?' Rather, he prays behind one whose state is hidden. And if he prays behind one whom he knows is an open sinner or an innovator, there are two well-known opinions in the madhhab (school of jurisprudence) of Ahmad and Malik, and the madhhab of al-Shafi'i and Abu Hanifa is that it is valid.
And the statement of the one who says, 'I do not entrust my money except to one I know,' and he means, 'I do not pray behind one I do not know, just as I do not entrust my money except to one I know,' is the statement of an ignorant person that no one from the Imams of Islam has said. For if a man entrusts his money to an unknown person, he may betray him in it or lose it. But as for the imam, if he makes a mistake or forgets, the ma'mum is not held accountable for that, as in al-Bukhari and others, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So he placed the mistake of the imam upon himself and not upon them. And 'Umar and others from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) prayed while in a state of major ritual impurity, forgetting the impurity, and he repeated the prayer but did not order the ma'mum to repeat it. And this is the madhhab of the majority of scholars, such as Malik, al-Shafi'i, and Ahmad in the well-known opinion from him.
And likewise, if the imam does something that is permissible in his view but invalidates the prayer in the view of the ma'mum, such as if he performs cupping and prays without performing wudu' (ablution), or if he touches his private part, or if he leaves out the basmalah (saying Bismillah) while he believes his prayer is valid with that, and the ma'mum believes it is not valid with that, then the majority of scholars are of the opinion that the prayer of the ma'mum is valid. This is the madhhab of Malik and Ahmad in the most apparent of the two narrations, indeed in the most correct of them from him.
And it is one of the two positions in the madhhab of al-Shafi'i, chosen by al-Qaffal and others. And if it were the case that the imam prayed without wudu' intentionally, and the ma'mum did not know until the ma'mum died, Allah would not hold the ma'mum accountable for that, and there would be no sin upon him, by the agreement of the Muslims. This is unlike the case where he knows that he is praying without wudu', for then he is not allowed to pray behind him, for this is not a prayer but play. And if he knows after the prayer that he prayed without wudu', there is a dispute regarding repeating it. And if the ma'mum knows that the imam is an innovator calling to his innovation, or an open sinner whose open sinfulness is apparent, and he is the regular imam behind whom prayer is not possible except, such as the imam of Jumu'ah and the two 'Eids, and the imam in the prayer of Hajj at 'Arafah and the like, then the ma'mum prays behind him according to the majority of the Salaf and the Khalaf. This is the madhhab of Ahmad, al-Shafi'i, Abu Hanifa, and others. For this reason, they said in the matters of creed that one prays Jumu'ah and the 'Eid behind every imam, whether he is righteous or a sinner. And likewise, if there is only one imam in the village, then the congregational prayers are prayed behind him, for prayer in congregation is better than the prayer of a man alone, even if the imam is an open sinner. This is the madhhab of the majority of scholars, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Shafi'i, and others. In fact, the congregation is an individual obligation in the apparent madhhab of Ahmad. And whoever leaves Jumu'ah and the congregation behind the sinful imam is an innovator according to Imam Ahmad and others from the Imams of the Sunnah, as mentioned in the treatises of 'Abdus, Ibn Malik, and al-'Attar.
And the correct opinion is that he prays it and does not repeat it, for the Companions used to pray Jumu'ah and the congregation behind the sinful imams and did not repeat it, as Ibn 'Umar used to pray behind al-Hajjaj, and Ibn Mas'ud and others used to pray behind al-Walid ibn 'Uqbah, who used to drink intoxicants until he once prayed the Fajr prayer with them as four rak'ahs, then he said, 'Shall I add to you?' So Ibn Mas'ud said, 'We have been with you since this morning in addition.' And for this reason, they brought him to 'Uthman. And in Sahih al-Bukhari, it is narrated that when 'Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) was besieged, a person prayed with the people, so a questioner asked 'Uthman, and he said, 'You are the imam of the general public, and this one who is praying with the people is an imam of fitnah (trial, discord or temptation).' He said, 'O my son, prayer is among the best of what people do. If they do well, do well with them, and if they do ill, avoid their ill-doing.' And there is much like this.
The prayer of the open sinner and the innovator is valid in itself, so if a follower prays behind him, his prayer is not invalidated. However, those who disliked praying behind him did so because enjoining good and forbidding evil is obligatory. Part of this is that one who openly displays an innovation or open sinfulness should not be appointed as an imam for the Muslims, for he deserves discretionary punishment until he repents. If it is possible to boycott him until he repents, that is good. If some people leave praying behind him and pray behind someone else, and this leads to his repentance, removal, or people stopping from committing a sin like his, then leaving to pray behind him in such a case has a benefit, and the follower does not miss the Friday prayer or the congregation. As for if leaving to pray behind them causes the follower to miss the Friday prayer or the congregation, then one does not leave to pray behind them except an innovator who contradicts the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). Likewise, if the authorities have appointed the imam and there is no benefit in leaving to pray behind him, then he is not required to leave to pray behind him; rather, praying behind the imam is better. This all applies to one from whom open sinfulness or an innovation is apparent that contradicts the Book and the Sunnah, such as the innovation of the Rafidah, the Jahmiyyah, and the like. This is the end of his words (may Allah have mercy on him).
With this, it becomes clear that there is no sound argument to rely upon, as far as I know, for those who say that the prayer behind the open sinner is invalid. Those who teach and learn the man-made laws are like those who learn the types of usury or interest, the types of intoxicants, and gambling, or teach them to others, due to a desire in their souls or a greed for money, even though they do not consider them lawful. Rather, they know that all usurious transactions are forbidden, just as they know that drinking intoxicants is forbidden and gambling is forbidden. But due to the weakness of their faith and the prevalence of desire or greed for money, their belief in the prohibition did not prevent them from committing these wrongs. They are among the people of the Sunnah. They are not declared disbelievers for engaging in what was mentioned, as long as they do not consider it lawful, as was explained previously.

(The Third Category) : One who studies the laws or undertakes to teach them, considering it lawful to judge by them, whether he believes that the Shari'ah is better or not, this category is a disbeliever by the consensus of the Muslims, with major shirk. Because by considering it lawful to judge by man-made laws that contradict the Shari'ah of Allah, he is considering lawful what is known from the religion by necessity to be forbidden, so he is in the position of one who considers zina and intoxicants lawful. And because by this permissibility, he has lied to Allah and His Messenger and defied the Book and the Sunnah. The scholars of Islam have agreed on the disbelief of one who considers lawful what Allah has forbidden or forbids what Allah has made lawful, from what is known from the religion by necessity. And whoever reflects on the words of the scholars in all four schools of jurisprudence in the chapter on the ruling of the apostate will find what we have mentioned.
There is no doubt that the students who study some of the man-made laws or the introduction to them in the Institute of Judiciary or the Institute of Administration do not intend thereby to judge by what contradicts the law of Allah. Rather, they intended, or were required, to know them and compare them with the rulings of the Islamic Shari'ah, so that they would know thereby the superiority of the rulings of the Shari'ah over the rulings of the man-made laws. They may also benefit from this study in other ways that help them to deepen their understanding of the Shari'ah and be reassured of its justice. Even if we suppose that there is among them one who intends by learning them to judge by them instead of the Islamic Shari'ah and considers that lawful, is it permissible to judge the rest by his ruling? For Allah the Exalted says: [Al-Isra: 15] And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: .
And by what we have mentioned, it becomes clear to your Excellency that disparaging the imamate of the aforementioned students and ruling that the prayer behind them is invalid is a matter that the Shari'ah does not approve, nor do the scholars approve it, and it has no basis to refer to. I hope that what I have mentioned will remove the doubt that has occurred in your Excellency's heart regarding the aforementioned students in the first category, or their being declared open sinners or disbelievers. As for the second category, there is no doubt in their open sinfulness. And as for the third category, there is no doubt in the disbelief of its people and the invalidity of the prayer behind them.
And I ask Allah by His most beautiful names and His exalted attributes to grant me and you and all our brothers understanding in His religion and steadfastness upon it, and to protect us all from the evils of our souls and the badness of our deeds, and from the misleading trials. Indeed, He is All-Hearing, Near. And peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.