How do we respond to those who obligate people to take the pledge of allegiance and covenant to the leader of a group, citing the principle: "What is necessary for the completion of an obligation is itself obligatory"?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Your Eminence, the jurisprudential principle "What is necessary for the completion of an obligation is itself obligatory"
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : Some groups, or rather, specifically the Islamic Group in Egypt, cite this verse in the covenant
The Shaykh : This is not a verse, it is a principle
The questioner : ... the principle
The Shaykh : Ah
The questioner : Excuse me, the one in the covenant specifically, which Shaykh 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman wrote, states that establishing the religion is obligatory, and establishing the religion is not completed except by a group, so joining the group is obligatory
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : So what is the response to this principle? Is this argument correct?
The Shaykh : This argument is both correct and incorrect. It is correct because a group is necessary, but who is the group? The group is one that, first, is united upon the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). And this group, unfortunately, does not exist today as a group. It exists as individuals. As a group, first, they know and recognize the correct Islam, and second, they are raised with a correct Islamic upbringing. This does not exist today as a group. As scattered individuals here and there on earth, they exist. Therefore, the argument using the principle as a general argument is correct, but its application is incorrect.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Is the difference clear to you?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Very well.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : Some groups, or rather, specifically the Islamic Group in Egypt, cite this verse in the covenant
The Shaykh : This is not a verse, it is a principle
The questioner : ... the principle
The Shaykh : Ah
The questioner : Excuse me, the one in the covenant specifically, which Shaykh 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman wrote, states that establishing the religion is obligatory, and establishing the religion is not completed except by a group, so joining the group is obligatory
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : So what is the response to this principle? Is this argument correct?
The Shaykh : This argument is both correct and incorrect. It is correct because a group is necessary, but who is the group? The group is one that, first, is united upon the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). And this group, unfortunately, does not exist today as a group. It exists as individuals. As a group, first, they know and recognize the correct Islam, and second, they are raised with a correct Islamic upbringing. This does not exist today as a group. As scattered individuals here and there on earth, they exist. Therefore, the argument using the principle as a general argument is correct, but its application is incorrect.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Is the difference clear to you?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Very well.