Pages

Sunday, October 12, 2014

Not Declaring Disbelief (Kaafir) and Innovation (Mubtadi') Until the Proof Has Been Established

Those who are excused because of their ignorance (al-‘Uthr bil Jahl) in issues of disbelief and innovation on any particular individual is the stance of many from the people of knowledge.

From their statements:

Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee (d. 204) [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Allaah has Names and Attributes that is not permitted for anyone to deny. Those who deny them have committed Kufr (disbelief in Allaah). However, if they belie them before the proof is established then they are excused because of their ignorance, because knowledge (of Allaah) is not attained by intellects, observation or having opinions. So we affirmed the Names and Attributes and deny any resemblance to Him, as He has Affirmed and Denied them Himself.

[Fath al-Baaree(13/407)]

Aboo Bakr bin al-‘Arabee (d.543) [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

The one who is ignorant or the one who makes a mistake from this Ummah, even if one was to do an act of Kufr (disbelief in Islaam) or Shirk (aligning partners to Allaah), they will not automatically become a Kaafir (a disbeliever) or a Mushrik (a polytheist). This is because the person is excused by their ignorance or mistake until the truth has been explained to them, the proofs have been clearly established upon them, and their doubts removed.

[Mahaasin al-Ta’weel by al-Qaasimee (5/1307-1308)]

Ibn Qudaamah (d.620) [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Every ignorant person is not declared to be a Kaafir until their mistake has been clarified and their doubts removed.

[al-Mughnee (12-277)]

Imaam an-Nawawee (d.676) [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Every affair that the Ummah have agreed upon on to be part of the religion, if its knowledge has spread, such as the obligation of the five daily prayers, or the obligation of fasting the month of Ramadhaan, or the obligation of ritual bathing after marital relations or the prohibition of adultery or fornication, or the prohibition of drinking alcohol or the prohibition of marrying immediate family members and the likes of the rulings of Islaam (are all binding to know and act upon without excuse). Except for the one who is new into Islaam and they do not know its rulings, so if this person denies any of the things known by necessity of the religion due to their ignorance then we do not declare that person to be a Kaafir.

[Sharh Saheeh Muslim (1/205)]

Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728) [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

The one who believes in Allaah and the Last Day but knowledge has not reached him explaining what is correct then we do not place the ruling of Kufr on such a person until the proof has been established upon those who contradict the truth and practice Kufr.

Many people make mistakes in the way they interpret the Quraan and ignorance is widespread on the meanings of the Kitaab and the Sunnah, however mistakes and forgetfulness are pardoned upon this Ummah. So Kufr is only declared on a person until after the matter has been explained to them.

[Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa (3/229)]

He also said:

If we know a person has Eemaan with certainty, then this person's Eemaan cannot be stripped off him with the doubt we may have in him, rather there nothing is said about him until the proof is established to him and his doubts removed.

[Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa (12/504)]

Imaam Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751) [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Punishment is only applicable if two causes are fulfilled:
1)     The person rejects the proof and stubbornly refuses to want them or act upon them or denies its obligation.
2)    The person arrogantly turns away from the proof once it has been established against him and denies any need for it or its obligation.

The first instance mentioned here is Kufr and rejection and the second instance is Kufr and arrogance in it. As for the one who does an act of Kufr out of ignorance and does not have the proof established against him, in this case it is not possible that they realise their error. In this scenario, Allaah has negated any punishment for such a person until the proof has come to him with what the Messengers brought.

[at-Tareeq al-Hijratayn (Pg. 546)]

Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abdul-Wahaab (d. 1206) [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Lies and slanders have spread (about us) which have blocked many from the religion of Allaah and His Messenger. Rather, we do not declare anyone who is worshipping an idol or graves etc. as a Kaafir because of their ignorance and their lack of comprehension.

[ad-Durrar as-Sunniyyah (1/66)]

[Taken from Muqadamah Tat-heer al-‘Itiqaad of Imaam an-Sana’aanee by Shaykh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-‘Abbaad al-Badr (Pg. 47-49)]

Shaykh Saaleh al-Fawzaan [May Allaah Preserve him] said:

No one has a ruling placed on him until the proof is established upon him from the Quraan and the Sunnah, because without this the person is acting upon ignorance, and believes it to be the truth, and that the reality has not been explained to him. In this case, the person is excused because of his ignorance, despite the fact that what they are doing is an innovation. So we maintain that the deed is an innovation and we deal with him as we would with innovators (the Shaykh explained elsewhere that if someone sees a mistake in a person they must advise them. See: Ajwabih as-Saheehah, pg. 163-164). 

[al-Muntaqaa (1/404)]

Shaykh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-‘Abbaad [May Allaah Preserve him] was asked:

If a person has not had an issue explained to him, or he is being led astray by evil scholars, so if this person dies, so we declare him to be a Mushrik (if he died doing Shirk)?

He answered: Yes, this is what we declare him as, however during his life we do not declare him to be a Kaafir or hold him to contempt based on what has been mentioned in the question. No, this is because the proof has not been established against him, so once it is explain then he should repent, if he repents then this is all well and good, otherwise we will declare him to be an apostate, and the rulings of an apostate will apply to him.



1 comment: