The Fourth Issue

Ibn ’Uthaymīn, may Allāh have mercy on him, initially issued a fatwa endorsing takfīr in this case, but he later retracted it. The details are as follows: The Earlier Fatwa: He, may Allāh have mercy on him, stated: « ... ومِن هؤلاء: مَن يضعون للناس تشريعات تخالف التشريعات الإسلامية، لتكون منهاجاً يسير الناسُ عليه، فإنهم لم يضعُوا تلك التشريعات المخالفة للشريعة الإسلامية؛ إلا وهم يعتقدون أنها أصْلَحُ وأَنْفَعُ للخلق، إذ من المعلوم بالضرورة العقلية والجبلة الفطرية؛ أن الإنسانَ لا يَعْدِلُ عن منهاج إلى منهاج يخالفه؛ إلا وهو يعتقد فَضْلَ ما عَدَلَ إليه، ونَقْصَ ما عَدَلَ عنه» "Among these individuals are those who establish laws for people that contradict Islamic legislation, intending them to be the governing system. They did not establish these contradictory laws except that they believed them to be more suitable and beneficial for society. It is a self-evident truth, both logically and instinctively, that a person does not abandon one system for another unless they believe the new system is superior and the old one is deficient." [Fatāwa (2/143)]. He also said: «لأن هذا المُشرع تشريعاً يخالف الإسلام؛ إنما شرعه لاعتقاده أنه أصْلَحُ من الإسلام وأنْفَعُ للعباد» [الفتاوى (١٤٣/٢)]. "This legislator who enacts laws contrary to Islam does so only because he believes they are better and more beneficial for the people than Islam." [Fatāwā (2/143)]. I say: There are three key points to note regarding this fatwa: First: Ibn ’Uthaymeen based his ruling of takfīr on the necessary implication of the act, but as discussed earlier, this reasoning is questionable (refer to page #). Second: He, may Allāh have mercy on him, tied in this case to the underlying belief, which aligns with my analysis of this case. However, he connected disbelief in this case to a necessary implication that is not obligatory. This should be carefully considered, by those who rely on his opinion in this matter but view referring to the underlying belief as a form of Irjā'. Third: He did not apply this reasoning consistently and did not declare takfīr based on necessary implication in any other case. If takfīr based on necessary implication were valid, both he and other scholars would have applied it universally across all issues of takfīr. The Later Fatwa: He, may Allāh have mercy on him, later stated: «وإذا كان يعلم الشرع، ولكنه حكم بهذا، أو شرع هذا، وجعله دستوراً يمشي الناس عليه؛ يعتقد أنه ظالم ذلك، وأن الحقِّ فيما جاء به الكتاب والسنة : فإننا لا نستطيع أن تكفّر هذا» "If someone knows the Sharī‘ah but still judges by something else, or legislates contrary to it, and makes it a constitution for people to follow, while believing that he is wrong and that the truth lies in what is found in the Qur'ān and Sunnah, then we cannot declare him a disbeliever." [Refer to the full fatwa at the end of the book (page #)].