Category Archives: Tawheed

The ruling on Parliaments and on those who enter them


What is the ruling on parliaments, and the ruling on those who enter them? And are there details to this?



The ruling on parliaments is that they are not allowed and they are places of Shirk and Kufr, and we see them as Thaghut because they are places of legislation and of making laws and judging by other than what Allah has sent down (the Shariah). And the basis of parliaments and democracy is “judgment of the people for the people” and the people are the ones who legislate through their representatives who are called “parliamentarians”. And this goes against singling out Allah alone for judging and legislating and ordering and forbidding.

Allah says:

إن الحكم إلا لله

“The judgment is for none but Allah”

Surat Al An’am 6:57

And it (judgment) is not for the people.

And Allah says:

   أفحكم الجاهلية يبغون

“Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance?”

Surat al Ma’idah 5:50

And Allah says:

ولا يشرك في حكمه أحدا

“He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule.”

Surat Al Kahf 18:26

It is not for the parliament, or for the people, or for anyone.

As for the claim of the one who says that the foundation of democracy and parliaments is established upon Shura (Islamic consultation) then this is either lie and deceit or ignorance and misguidance. It is not established upon the Islamic Shura, rather it is based on legislation, and they consult amongst themselves not on those issues that are permitted, rather they consult in order to legislate laws that contradict the Shariah. And this is the reality of them.

As for the ruling on those who enter them (parliaments), then there are some details to this:

1) If he enters them and legislates man made laws which contradict the Shariah, or agrees to or is pleased with a law that contradicts the Shariah or votes for it, then this person is a Mushrik (Polytheist) Kaafir (Disbeliever), and he is not excused for ignorance or misinterpretation or (for considering it as bringing) benefits.

Allah says:

أم لهم شركاء شرعوا لهم من الدين ما لم يأذن به الله

“Or do they have partners (false gods) with Allah, who have legislated for them a religion which Allah has not allowed?”

Surat Ash Shuraa 42:21

And Allah says:

إن الحكم إلا لله

“The judgment is for none but Allah”

Surat Al An’am 6:57

And Allah says:

ولا يشرك في حكمه أحدا

“He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule.”

Surat Al Kahf 18:26

2) If he enters and swears to respect the Kufr constitution knowing that the constitution contradicts the Shariah, then this is Kufr (disbelief) and Riddah (apostasy), whether he was serious (in his oath) or not, and whether it was done for benefit or not. He has indeed committed this act of Kufr by choice, knowingly and intentionally. And he is like the one who takes an oath to respect Al Laat and Al Uzza, or takes an oath to respect the laws of the Quraish during the time of the Messenger, sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.

3) He does not take an oath to respect the constitution, and does not legislate or participate in legislation which contradicts the Shariah, but he rejects that and votes against it – this person is mistaken and misguided and he goes against the guidance of the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam in bringing change and reform and in establishing the Islamic State, but he is not a Kaafir even though he has taken a path of misguidance and Shirk as a path for Dawah and bringing change and reform.

Allah says:

فماذا بعد الحق إلا الضلال

“And what is after truth, except falsehood”

Surat Yunus 10:32

And we have discussed this issue in our book “Al Jam’u wa Thajreed Fee Sharh Kitaab At Tawheed” in the chapter “The call to Tawheed”, and it is the issue of the ruling on entering the parliaments”

Shaykh Ali Bin Khudayr al Khudayr




Is it allowed to work in the legal profession in the system of the man made law?


Question: is it permissible to work in the jahili legal system composed of man made laws with the pretext of helping Muslims and defending them if they were to be subjected to questioning by the tawaqit?

Answer: it is not permissible if it means following certain laws or systems which defy the law of Allah.

If he were to work using laws that defy the Sharia willingly, knowing that it is against the Sharia: Then this is kufr and apostasy and belief in the Tagut(instead of Allah)-may Allah protect us from that-Allah says:

ألم تر إلى الذين يزعمون أنهم آمنوا بما أنزل إليك وما أنزل من قبلك يريدون أن يتحاكموا إلى الطاغوت وقد أمروا أن يكفروا به

“Have you seen those (hyprocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taghut (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them.”

Surat An Nisa 4:60

But if he were being an attorney for and defending Muslims without committing disbelief or sin nor being satisfied with (certain) rules nor moving upon that way,and not under the man made Laws of ignorance:there is no objection.

Based on the Hadith: “whomever of you who is able to benefit his brother should do so”.

And the Saying of Allah:

فَمَن يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ

So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it,

Surat Az Zalzalah 99:7

And the Hadith: “The Muslim is for a Muslim a structure (support)”

And other than these.

So based upon that, It is not permissible,and the first answer becomes the questions response, rather they be patient as was the case of the Sahaba when they were being persecuted by the tawaqit of Quraish in Makkah, The messenger of Allah did not, Allah forbid, commit kufr or apostasy in order to defend them, rather they were to be patient or migrate to a safe place,until jihad was prescribed or deliverance would come.

Shaykh Ali Khudayr ibn Khudayr



Some advise regarding Takfeer


By Shaykh Usmah bin Ladin

I say to my brothers that the method of Ahlus Sunnah is that if a person enters Islam with certainty he will not exit Islam except with certainty. So the origin of the Muslims is that they are Muslims, so it is not allowed for the people to make takfeer on them, rather that is of the beliefs of the Khawarij and There is no Power nor Might except with Allah.

In the authentic hadeeth of our Messenger salallahu alayhi wa salam he said:

“If a person says to his brother “Oh disbeliever” then one of them has drawn it upon himself”

If the one who has been called a disbeliever is a disbeliever then that’s done with, he is a disbeliever. if he wasn’t a disbeliever then it returns to the one who said it (ie the takfeer). So this is a big, great, great, great warning of falling into those issues and especially making takfeer of the individual.

So fear Allah and know that for the victory that we are waiting for from Allah we have to show to Allah patience and taqwa. But if you remain patient and have taqwah, not the least harm will their plotting do to you.

So be cautious and again be cautions because making takfeer on the people is from the very dangerous greatest sins so guard your tongues. Continue reading

Kufr bi Taghut and the misconceptions of the extremists

Kufr bi Taghut is necessary and it is a condition for the correctness of Imaan, and the Muslim is Ordered with it and no believer would argue with that.

However problems arise when we put this matter in other than its place and it is placed on the one whom it is not allowed to be paced upon, or it is given an incorrect meaning which differs with the Shariah and its rules and then this leads to excessiveness or negligence.

And the saying that the ruling on the Muslims as a whole today is kufr and that whoever doesnt make takfeer of them he is also a kaffir, no scholar have said this, rather no Muslim with a sound mind who cares about his Deen says this. But it is from the sayings and beliefs of the khwaarij and extremists of this time.

And the Prophet salallahu alayhi wa salam said in a Saheeh hadeeh Whoever prays as we pray, turns to face the same Qiblah as us and eats our slaughtered animals, that is a Muslim. and is under Allah’s and His Apostle’s protection. (Al Bukhari)

And there is ijma of the people of knowlege that if a man enters into Islam then he is judged with Islam if he pronounces the Shahadaah of Tahweed, or if is seen to pray the prayers even if it is not known that he ratified (the shahaadah) with his tongue.

Al Qurtubi said in his Book “Al Jammi” (8/207): Imaan is not achieved except with La illaha ilallah and not with other than it from the sayings and actions, except the Salat. Ishaaq Ibn Ruwayyah said: There is ijma upon the salat for something for which there is no ijma for the rest of the Shariah, that is because they said that whoever is known by kufr then he is seen praying in its time many prayers and even if it is not known from him that he has ratified the shahaadah with his tounge, he is still judged with Imaan”

And the problem with those extremists, is that they do not distinguish between the degree with which a man enters Islam and the degree with which the ruling of Islam continues upon him and that degree which raises the sword from him during the battle.

At that with which a man (is judged to have) entered Islam is the Shahaadah of Tawheed and also like that the establishment of the Prayer, like what has preceeded.

And that level with which he continues in Islam, is that he protects the Prayer (continues to pray) and its not known of him that he has fallen into a nullifer from the nullifiers of Imaan and Tawheed.

And that level with which the sword is raised from him during battle is that he says a statement which indicates that he wants to enter into Islam such as “sabat”(I have come out of one religion to another) or “Assalam alaykum” or “I am from you” or other similar such statements. And these statements do not enter the one who says them into Islam, but they do raise the sword off him during the battle until he knows the correct words which enter him into Islam.

And so we find that the Prophet salallahu alayhi wa salam forbade Khalid Ibn Al Waleed radiallahu anhu when Khalid killed those soldiers who said “We have come out of one religion to another” and they wanted to say that they have accepted Islam, but their expression was not good and so they said “we have come out of one religion to another” and Khalid Radiallahu anhu did not accept it from them and he killed them, and the Prophet salallahu alayhi wa salam forbade this and made baraa from his action and he said “Oh Allah I am innocent from what Khalid has done” two times and ordered to pay the blood money.

And Allah Allah said:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا ضَرَبْتُمْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ فَتَبَيَّنُوا وَلَا تَقُولُوا لِمَنْ أَلْقَىٰ إِلَيْكُمُ السَّلَامَ لَسْتَ مُؤْمِنًا تَبْتَغُونَ عَرَضَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا فَعِندَ اللَّهِ مَغَانِمُ كَثِيرَةٌ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ كُنتُم مِّن قَبْلُ فَمَنَّ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكُمْ فَتَبَيَّنُوا ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ خَبِيرًا

O you who believe! When you go (to fight) in the Cause of Allah, verify (the truth), and say not to anyone who greets you (by embracing Islam): “You are not a believer”; seeking the perishable goods of the worldly life. There are much more profits and booties with Allah. Even as he is now, so were you yourselves before till Allah conferred on you His Favours (i.e. guided you to Islam), therefore, be cautious in discrimination. Allah is Ever Well-Aware of what you do.

Surat An Nisa 4:94

And Allah orderdered the verification and establishment of the one who gives salam to the Muslims and Mujahideen during battle and not to fight and kill them so as to verify if they are Believers or if they want to enter into Islam. However still it is not said this indicares that salam is a subsitute for the Shahaadah of tawheed.

And like this it is not from Islam whatsoever, not to accept the Islam of a person except after he informs you of his Aqeeah or he is known to hold specific beliefs or say specific things. And this is not from the Deen of Allah at all and no scholar has ever said this, but rather it is from the sayings of Ahlul Biddah and it is a deviation and misguidance.

الشيخ عبدالله الغليفى

Kufr bi Taghut is a conditon of the Shahaadah

By Shaykh Hamood Ibn Uqla ash Shuaybee


From the conditions of the correctness of Tawheed is kufr bi Taghut and there is no Imaan except after kufr bi Taghut outwardly and inwardly.

Allah Says:

فَمَن يكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيؤْمِنْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَى لا انفِصَامَ لَهَا وَاللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ 

Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is the All Hearer the Allah Knower

Surat Al Baqarah 2:256

And Allah Said:

وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولاً أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ وَاجْتَنِبُوا الطَّاغُوتَ 

And verily We have sent among every Ummah a Messenger (proclaiming) worship Allah and avoid Taghut

Surat An Nahl 16:36

And the Messenger of Allah salallahu alayhi wa salam said:

من قال لا إله إلا الله وكفر بما يعبد من دون الله حرم ماله ودمه وحسابه على الله

Whoever says there is no god but Allah and disbelieves in what is worshipped other than Allah, then his blood and wealth is haram and his reckoning is with Allah.

Saheeh Muslim

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab said: “Whoever worships Allah day and night, then makes Dua to a prophet or a wali in the grave then he has taken two gods and and he has not in fact testified that there is no god but Allah, as a god is the one who is made dua to like the Mushrikeen done at the grave of Zubayr or Abdul Qadir or other than them. And whoever sacrifices for Allah one thosand times, then sacrifices to a Prophet or other than him, then he has taken two gods as Allah Said:

 قُلْ إنَّ صَلاتِي وَنُسُكِي وَمَحْياي وَمَمَاتِي لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ 

Say verily my prayer and my sacrifice and my living and my dying is for Allah, the Lord of the Alamin.

Surat Al Anaam 6:162



When the man of the house commits a sin, has he ruled by other than what Allah Revealed?


The Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa salam) said:

قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: كلكم راع وكلكم مسؤول عن رعيته

{“All of you are shepherds, and all of you are responsible over their flock..”}

In this we can understand that a father is responsible for his family and he will be asked about them. Due to this, the neo-Murji’ah of today use this misconception against us that if the man of the house rules with something other than what Allah reveals, and starts to judge according to his desires, it means that he becomes an disbeliever just like the ruler who judges with something other than what Allah has revealed.

He says, for example, that we say that the ruler has changed the rule of law and exchanged it with something else, and the man of a house wants to divide his inheritance according to his desires, shave his beard, or commit other sins. By this they have rules with something other than what Allah has revealed and changed his laws and exchanged them with something else, and thus according to our stance has become a disbeliever. We ask our respected scholars to give us a response firm rooted in the Quran and Sunnah.


In the Name of Allah. All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be on His Noble Prophet, and upon all his family and companions. To proceed:

Because these con-artists are unable to prove their stance with clear and evident proofs, they resort to this method of trying to distort concepts and play around with religious terminology. In this fallacious misconception, they have tried to generalize the concept of hukm (judgement, ruling), forcing it to include even a’maal (actions), so that there no longer remains any difference between judgement and actions! If we were to say this, it would mean that whoever committed any type of sin would become a disbeliever, because he has judged with other than what Allah has revealed. This is the exact ideology of the Khawaarij!

The Khawaarij, either due to their ignorance or their deviance, do not differentiate between the concepts of judgement and actions, and thus they declare anyone who commits sin as disbelievers, seeking evidence in the saying of Allah:

وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ

{“Whoever does not judge and rule with what Allah has revealed, it is them who are the disbelievers.”} [al-Maidah 5:44]

As these people are like the Khawaarij in that that do not differentiate between the concepts of judgement and action, both of them have come to incorrect conclusions.

The conclusion drawn by the Khawaarij is that anyone who commits a sin is a disbeliever, because he has ruled with something other than what Allah has revealed, while the conclusion drawn by these others is that one who judges with other than what Allah has revealed is not a disbeliever, because he has committed a sin, and the creed of Ahl-us-Sunnah is that a person does not become a disbeliever by merely committing a sin! To clarify the misconception of the neo-Kharijites, we say that there is a difference between judging with other than what Allah has revealed and other sins about which there is no evidence to prove that it is disbelief. The first is considered disbelief which takes a person out of the fold of Islam due to the evidence found in this regard, while the second is not considered disbelief because there is no evidence to prove so.

Also, to be able to clearly differentiate between the concepts of judgement and action, we must exactly define what judgement is. Judgement is that one judges and rules between people by setting laws, and in matters of dispute and the affairs of the general masses by the rulers. Thus, the concept of judgement is limited to the actions of a judge, ruler which is enforced upon the general masses. The judgement mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah is only of this type, and this is been mentioned in over one hundred places in the Quran. The obligation of ruling with what Allah has revealed is addressed to the judge and the ruling Imam. It is not inclusive of the rest of the people. Thus, the ruling of the verse in Surah al-Maidah is not inclusive of them, because they are not being addressed in this obligation of judgement.

As for them seeking evidence in the hadeeth:

قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: كلكم راع وكلكم مسؤول عن رعيته

{“All of you are shepherds, and all of you are responsible over their flock..”}

It is nothing but more proof of their paying around with the textual evidence. Ibn-ul-Atheer said in explanation of this hadeeth: {“All of you are shepherds, and all of you are responsible over their flock. This means that they are entrusted guardians, and the flock are all those who fall under his guardianship.”} [An-Nihaayah fee Ghareeb Al-Aathaar, 2/581]

An-Nawawi said: {“The scholars have stated that the shepherd is the entrusted guardian who ensures the well-being of that which he has been tasked and those under his guardianship. It also means that he has been commanded with justice in regards to those under his guardianship and to do what is required to fulfill their best interests in this life and the next.”} [Sharh An-Nawawi alaa Muslim 12/213]

Ibn Battal said Al-Mulhib said: {“A slave entrusted with the wealth of his master. He is required protect what he has been entrusted like all other shepherds, and that he not do anything the majority of the time except by the permission of his master.”}. [Sharh Saheeh Al-Bukhari by Ibn Battal 6/531]. The meaning of the hadeeth, thus, is that all people, whether the Imam, a man, a woman or slave, are required with that which they have been entrusted. This is the reason they have been compared with shepherds, while each has their own specific responsibility and rulings.

Ibn Hajar said Al-Khattabi said: {“The Imam and other men have both been called this term, described as shepherds, but their meanings are different. The flock of the Imam is the religion, by establishing the Hudood and being just in his rulings. The flock of a man is his family, running of their affairs and fulfilling their rights. The flock of the woman is to look after the affairs of the house, her children, her servants, remaining loyal to her husband in all this. The flock of the servant is to protect what he has been entrusted with and to fulfill what he has been tasked with.”} [Fath-ul-Bari 13/113]

The specific role of the Imam is judgement amongst his flock, and the specific task of the man of the house is to take care of his family, and the specific role of the woman is to take care of the house. Thus, we do not call the man of the house a ruler or judge, just like we do not call the ruler or judge the man of the house. With this, it should be clear that all of them are similar that they have been called shepherds, but each is different according to their tasks. And Allah knows best.

And all praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all that that exists.

Answered by Sheikh Abu al-Munthir as-Shinqitee.