is the bay’ah to muslim rulers based on them ruling with a mixture of secular laws & islamic...

8/7/2019 Is The Bay’ah To Muslim Rulers Based On Them Ruling With A Mixture Of Secular Laws & Islamic Laws Valid. Is It A …

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/is-the-bayah-to-muslim-rulers-based-on-them-ruling-with-a-mixture-of-secular 1/27

Taken FromAhlu Sunnah Wal Jamaah.Com

Is The Bay’ah (Pledge Of Allegiance) To Muslim Rulers

Based On Them Ruling With AMixture Of Secular Laws &

Shariah (Islamic) Laws ValidOr Is It A Condition For TheBay’ah To Be Valid, That TheMuslim Ruler Has To Rule By

Shariah Laws Only?

By Abdul Kareem Ibn Ozzie



The takfires claim that the Muslim rulers of this time are allillegitimate rulers because they belief the bay’ah given to the Muslimrulers of today is not valid. The reason they claim the bay’ah is invalidis because this bay’ah was based on them ruling by a mixture of secular democratic laws (which are kufr) and Islamic shariah laws.

This is said by the takfires in an attempted to justify protests,demonstrations, publicly criticizing and slandering the Muslim rulersand even armed rebellions against these rulers, as illegitimate rulershave no right to rule or by listened to and obeyed.

This claim of theirs is false because the bay’ah to these rulers or any other ruler has nothing to do with whether they rule by a mixture of secular democratic laws (which are kufr) and Islamic shariah laws orany system the ruler wish to rule by. The bay’ah is about the decisionmakers (i.e. the scholars and people of virtue and status) giving theirindividual pledge of allegiance to hear and obey the Muslim ruler,their pledge counts for every individual subject of that state that they will hear and obey the ruler.

The bay’ah is not about what the system of law the ruler chooses to

rule by, as long as ruling by this system of law (what ever it is) doesnot make the ruler a disbeliever because the bay’ah can not be givento a disbeliever.

In the Two Saheehs (authentic) Books of Hadeeth (i.e. Al- Bukhari and Muslim) that Ubadah Ibn Al-Samit said: The Messenger of Allah called us and we took the oath of allegiance to him. Among the injunctions he made binding

upon us was: Listening and obedience (to the ruler) in pleasure and displeasure, in adversity and prosperity,even when somebody is given preference over us, and without disputing the delegation of powers to a man dulyinvested with them (Obedience shall be accorded to him inall circumstances) except when you have clear signs of hisdisbelief in Allah (major kufr (disbelief) in beliefs, so heexits Islam) - signs that could be used as a conscientious



justification (for non-compliance with his orders). This isthe narration of Muslim.

When the Prophet accepted Bay’ah from his Sahaba(Companions), he made sure that they would not fight over leadership with their rulers, unless you notice themcommitting absolute Kufr (disbelief which makes himleave Islam) for which there is a proof from Allah. (Saheeh

Bukhari - Book of Fitan)

Imam Al-Nawawi said “ Al-Qaadi said, ‘The scholars areunanimously agreed that a kaafir should not be appointed as ruler,and that if the ruler becomes a kaafir, he must be deposed. Sharh

Muslim (12/229).”’

Ruling by other than Allahs law in general is minor kufr (kufr of action which does not expel the doer from Islam). However it canreach the level of major kufr (kufr of belief) if the doer thinks the thislaw that is not Allahs law is better, the same, it is halaal to rule by thislaw or more suitable for this time than the shariah. However this typeof belief has to be proven form the statement of the ruler as the

tongue is voice of the heart. Meaning through someone’s speech they will testify to the beliefs in their heart, other wise their beliefs cannever be really known. As actions can be done for main reasons butthe only way to know why some did that action and their beliefsconcerning that action is through their speech.

Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-Uthaymeen stated in regardruling by other than Allahs law “Allah has described those who do norule by what Allaah has revealed with three descriptions: "Whosoevedoes not rule by what Allah has revealed then they are thedisbelievers [kaafiroon]." "Whosoever does not rule by what Allah harevealed then they are the oppressors [dhaalimoon]" "Whosoeverdoes not rule by what Allah has revealed then they are the sinners[faasiqoon]."



The People of Knowledge have differed concerning this. So it isopined that these descriptions in fact describe one and the same thin because the kaafir is a dhaalim due to the saying of Allah,"And the disbelievers are the oppressors." [al-Baqarah (2)

254] [Similarly the kaafir] is a faasiq due to the saying of Allah, "As for the sinners then their abode will be the Fire. [as-Sajdah (32): 20]

It is also opined that these are distinct descriptions and that they are[applied] in accordance to the situation: So [one] becomes a kaafir inthree circumstances, when he believes that it is permissible to rule byother than what Allah has revealed. The evidence for this lies in thesaying of Allah, "So is it the rule of Jaahiliyyah (ignorance) that they

seek?" [al-Maidah (5): 50]. Everything that opposes the rule of Allahconstitutes the rule of Jaahiliyyah. [Also the evidence for this] is thedefinitive consensus that it is not allowed to rule by other then what Allah has revealed.

(The three situations one becomes a kaafir due to ruling by other than Allahs law.)

1. Therefore the one who considers it lawful and permissible to rule by other then what Allah has revealed has contradicted thisdefinitive consensus and such a person is a kaafir and anapostate. This (is similar to the case of one) who, considersfornication or alcohol to be permissible or considers bread ormilk to be unlawful.

2. When he believes that ruling by other then what Allah revealed iequivalent (equal) to ruling by the rule of Allah.

3. When he believes that ruling by other then what Allah revealed i better than ruling by what Allah has revealed. The evidence forthis lies in the saying of Allah, "And who is better than Allah in judgment for a people who have certainty?" [al-Maidah (5): 50]



So this verse states that the ruling of Allah is the best of rulingsas is further proven by the saying of Allah, endorsing this, "Is Allah not the best of judges?" [at-Teen (95): 8]. So when Allah isthe best of the judges in ruling and He is the most just of therulers then whosoever claims that the rule of other than Allah isequivalent or better than the rule of Allah is a kaafir because hehas denied the Quran.

(The situations one rules by other than Allahs law but they are stillMuslim but are sinful.)

1. (One) becomes a dhalim (oppressor). When he believes thatruling by what Allah has revealed is the best of judgments and

the most beneficial for the servants and the lands and that it isobligatory to apply it. However hatred and jealousy (of hissubjects) lead him to rule by other than what Allah revealed overhis subjects - such a person is a dhaalim.

2. (One) becomes a faasiq (sinner). When he follows his owndesires, for example he rules in favour of a person due to being bribed by him, or due to his being a close relative or friend, or[because the ruler] seeks the fulfillment of a need from hiscomrades or the likes. This along with the belief that the rule of Allah is the ideal and it is obligatory to follow it - such a person isa faasiq. Even though he is also a dhaalim, describing him as afaasiq is more befitting.” Taken from Al-Qawl al-Mufeed `alaKitaab at-Tawheed' [2/263-269]

In regards to ruling by other than Allahs law Imam Ibn Qayyim alJawziyyah in Madaarij us-Saalikeen, vol.1, pp.336 said: “…What iscorrect (concerning the Islamic ruling on the ruler/person who rules by other than Allahs law) is: that ruling by other than what Allah hasrevealed goes between the two types of kufr, minor or majordepending on the condition of the ruler (or judge).



1. If he believes in the obligation of ruling by what Allah hasrevealed in this situation yet averts from ruling by it, along withhis admittance that he deserves punishment for this, and thenthis is minor kufr.

2. Yet if he believes that ruling by other than what Allah hasrevealed is not an obligation or that he has a choice in ruling by it, while accepting that it is the rule of Allah, then this is majorkufr.

3. If he (the ruler) is ignorant or errors: then he is mistaken andtakes the ruling of those who fall into error (being a free from sinand not a kaafir due to ignorance)…”

The reason why the bay’ah is not about what system of law the rulerchooses to rule by as long as ruling by this legal system does not makhim a disbeliever is because, the system of law the ruler chooses torule by is between him and his lord. No one can make the ruler rule by anything he does not want to because he is the ultimate authority in the sate. The subjects can only advise the ruler on the correctsystem to rule by (the shariah), how to rule but they can not makehim rule completely by the shariah if does not wish to.

Therefore ruling by Allahs law completely or partially (like theMuslim rulers of today do) is the sole responsibility of the Muslimruler, Allah given him alone this responsibility. So for instance therulers of today who will have to bear the responsibility for their minokufr due not ruling by Allahs law alone in this world and the next.

The prophet said, “If the ruler orders people withrighteousness and rules justly, then he will be rewarded

for that, and if he does the opposite, he will be responsible for that (not ruling by Allahs law so the ruler was unableto rule justly and therefore he did not order his subjectstowards righteousness).” Recoded by Bukhari.



The Messenger of Allah said, "Hear and obey, for they willbear responsibility for that entrusted to them (ruling by

Allahs law), and you for that entrusted to you (hearingand obeying the ruler)". Recorded by Muslim

Where as the bay’ah is concerned with the responsibility Allah has

placed upon the subjects, their responsibility which Allah hold toaccount for in this world and the next is to do with how quick andhow often did they hear and obey the Muslim ruler. This is why theprophet said in the above hadeeth, "Hear and obey, for they wilbear responsibility for that entrusted to them (ruling by

Allahs law), and you (for will bear responsibility for) that entrusted to you (how often you heard and obeyed the

Muslim ruler)". Recorded by MuslimThe responsibility entrusted to the subjects is to hear and obey theruler as this his is the right the bay’ah has given to the Muslim rulerover his subjects. This right has to hear and obey the Muslim rulerhas to be fulfilled as the prophet said, “… fulfil the rights youowe to others and to ask Allah for what is owed to you.”

Recorded by Bukhari and Muslim.

Shaykh Uthaymeen said: the Prophet ordered us that we shouldhear and obey (the Muslim ruler), even if we find it hard upon us, andeven if our backs are beaten, and our wealth is confiscated.

Al-Maaziri said: With regard to bay’ah being given to the leader of the Muslims, it is sufficient for the decision makers to give him their bay’ah… (And) it is sufficient (for each individual subject) to commit

oneself to obeying him and submitting to him by not going againsthim or rebel against him. Quoted from Fath al-Baari.

Imam Al-Nawawi said in Sharh Saheeh Muslim: With regard to bay’ah (oath of allegiance): …It is not obligatory for each person tocome to the leader and put his hand in his and give his oath of allegiance to him. Rather what is required of each individual is tosubmit to him and not go against him or rebel against him.



Shaykh Bin Baz said: it is obligatory upon the subjects to obey theiruler in Ma'ruf (that which is judged as good, beneficial, or fitting by Islamic law and Muslims of sound intellect). It is authentically reported in many hadeeths that it is obligatory to obey the ruler, evenif he oppresses or wrongs people unless he commits a plain act of Kufr (minor kufr), for revolt will result in rampant corruption andserious consequences that may exceed his wrong and oppression.

As the subject’s responsibility is to hear and obey the rulers they mushear and obey them in what the like and what they dislike. Thus thetakfiree belief that the bay’ah given to the Muslim rulers of today is not valid because this bay’ah was based on themruling with mixture of secular democratic laws (which are

kufr) and Islamic shariah laws is false.The bay’ah to the Muslim ruler concerns the subjectsupholding to the best of their ability the responsibility Allahhas given to them regarding hearing and obeying the Muslimruler in what they like and what they dislike. The bay’ah has noconcern or connection to the system of law the Muslim ruler rules with unless it can be proved the system he rules by makes him a

disbeliever.

In al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (9/274) Ibn Khuldoon in hisMuqaddimah explains what the bay’ah means and is concerned with.In it Ibn Khuldoon said:

(The meaning) (The) Bay’ah or allegiance: (is) a pledge to obey;

• (After he explained what the bay’ah concern (is about)); it is as ifthe one who swears allegiance is promising his ruler that he willaccept his authority with regard to his own affairs and the affairsof the Muslims,

• and he will not dispute with him with regard to any of that,• And he will obey him in any duties that he assigns to him (as lon

s they are not haraam), whether at times of ease or at times of hardship.



Above Ibn Khuldoon makes it clear that the bay’ah is sole connectedto and concerning obedience to the Muslim ruler through acceptinghis authority, not disputing with him about his authority and doinganything the ruler would like his subjects to do whether it in easetimes and or in hard times. He did not mention anything to do withthe bay’ah being concerned with the Muslim rulers system of rule.

Therefore it is clear that the bay’ah is about hearing and obeying theMuslim ruler in what his subjects like and what they dislike and hasnothing do with the rulers system of rule as that is his responsibility alone.

But if the Muslim rulers of today or the future rule with a mixture of secular democratic laws (which are kufr) and Islamic shariah lawsthis ruling system is corrupt evil and against the shariah. So thesubjects being Muslim should hate this system which they are forcedto live by.

But as the rulers of today have not yet become kaafirs for doing this(they have committed major sin and minor kufr) then the bay’ah(which is concerning hearing and obeying and not about how the

ruler rules as this is responsibility and choice whether to rule with justice and the shariah or to rule by injustice and kufr laws whichmake him a major sinner), necessitates that we hear and obey them ithis even though we dislike and hate this system of shariah and kufrlaws.

The Messenger of Allah said, "You must hear and obey (the Muslim ruler) both in your hardship and your ease and

with regard to what pleases you and what you dislike andeven if you do not get your due". Recorded by Muslim

However what is meant by hearing and obeying them in regards tothis system of shariah and kufr laws which the rulers of today rule byis that the subjects hear and obey him in regards to the shariah lawsas this halaal and the laws which are not from the shariah but are based on his ijtihad but do not contradict the shariah laws.



The reason the subjects must hear and obey the Muslim rulers inthese things is because these are things that the subjects must love, athis is obedience to the shariah laws and laws that do not contradictthe shariah. The Prophet said, ‘‘The person must obey inwhatever he loves…”Recorded by Bukhari

However the subjects must not obey the Muslim ruler in the kufr lawinclude in the ruling system of shariah and kufr laws. Because this isharam as it involves disobedience to Allah, because obeying this law iobeying a command by the ruler to do a wrong (haram). If thesubjects are forced to obey this kufr law and have no choice due to thrulers oppression being so great or because the kufr and shariah lawsare mixed together in such a way that just to survive (not to die i.e.

work etc to get money, food, clothing, water and shelter) then it is noharaam for the subjects to follow this law in that particular case.

The Prophet said, "A Muslim man must hear and obey (the Muslim ruler)…(but) if he is commanded to do a wrongaction, he should not hear or obey". Recorded by Bukhariand Muslim

The Prophet said, ‘‘The person must obey (the Muslimruler)…(but) if he is commanded to disobey Allah, then heshould not listen, not should he obey.’’ Recorded by

Bukhari

Therefore as the bay’ah is concerned with the responsibility Allah hasplaced upon the subjects to hear and obey the Muslim ruler, the bay’ah to the Muslim rulers of today is not invalid due to the rulers

ruling by a mixture of secular democratic laws (which are kufr) andIslamic shariah laws. As the subjects took this bay’ah based uponthem hearing and obeying the ruler in what they like (the Islamicshariah laws he rules by) and to obey him on what he dislikes (seculademocratic laws he rules by).

Also the subjects have been commanded to disobey the Muslim ruler when they command the subjects to disobey Allah by doing a wrong



Also when the Muslim ruler rules by secular laws and has thereforecommitted an open act of disobedience to Allah the subjects arecommanded to have patient but to also condemn this act. By hatingthese rules based on secular laws in their heart and they must notpraise these laws unless they are forced too.

The prophet said, “Whoever finds that the governor (meaning governor of a province inside a Muslim state butnot overall ruler or ruler of a state (like the rulers of today) or the caliph) appointed over them indulges in anact of disobedience to Allah, they should condemn thegovernor's act, but should not withdraw themselves fromhis obedience...” Saheeh Muslim

This condemnation does not take place through protests,demonstrations; sit inns etc or violent revolts. These actins involvethe subjects making a decision to no longer obey the Muslim ruler inanything he commands (good or bad) while at the same time they tryto remove him from power. All of these actions are haraam as they involve open disobedience to the Muslim ruler. The prophetMohammed in the above hadeeth has command us to condemn these

acts but he still told we have to do this and still obey the ruler.

Additionally this condemnation does not take place on TV stations, inthe newspapers, in the masjids on the minbar, in the street or atrallies and demonstrations. These actions are haraam as they involvepublicly backbiting the ruler and sometimes they involve slanderingthe ruler. Backbiting in public or in private is haram. Plus theseactions contradict the prophet’s advice of sincerely advising theleaders of the Muslims (the Muslim ruler).

"The Deen is Naseehah (Sincerity/Advice)."We (Thecompanions) said: "For who?" The Prophet said: "For

Allaah, His book, His messenger, the leaders of the Muslims and their common folk." (Muslim)



Imam An-Nawawee said “Sincerity to the Leaders is to help themupon the truth. To obey them in it, to order them with it, to remindand advise them with kindness and gentleness, to remind them of that which they are heedless and neglectful of, to help them fulfilthose rights of the Muslims that have not reached them yet. Not torebel against them and to enamour the hearts of the people withobedience to them.”

Imam al-Khattaabee said “From sincerity to them is Prayer behindthem, Jihad along with them, to give the zakat (charity) to them, andnot to rebel against them with the sword when injustice or badtreatment appears from them. And that they are not praised withfalse praises, and that duaa (supplication) is made for their

righteousness. All of this is based upon the fact that what is meant bythe leader of the Muslims is the Caliph and other than him from theadministrators who take charge of the affairs of the Muslims.”

Sincerely advising the leaders of the Muslims (the Muslim ruler) isdone in secret. The prophet said, "Whoever wants to advise asultaan (leader/ruler) with a matter, do not do it outwardly but let him take him by the hand and go intoseclusion with him. If he accepts it from him then that (isgood) and if not then he (the adviser) has fulfilled that which was upon him (to do)." Musnad of Ahmad, as-

Sunnah of Ibn Abee Aa'sim, authenticated by Albaanee.

Based on this hadeeth it is haraam to condemn the ruler in public orprivate this condemnation should only b between you, the ruler and

Allah. Advising the ruler could also involve other private ways suchas: the person could write a letter, give the letter to someone (only this person) who may be able to give it to the ruler directly, email hisoffice, phone his office or tell someone (only this person) who may beable to advise him your advice in the hope it will get to the ruler (duenecessity) or any other private non public way.



So when the takfires claim that the bay’ah given to the Muslim ruler inot valid because the Muslim ruler rules with a mixture of seculardemocratic laws and Islamic shariah laws is incorrect. Because thesubjects have to still obey the ruler in what he rules by that is fromthe shariah or does not contradict it.

If the Muslim ruler rules by the secular laws then the subject havepatient with this as they dislike it, they have to condemn it (hate therulers action I their heart and not praises his action) and they have toadvice him sincerely in a private manner (how they advise the rulerprivately is up to the individual) however they do not obey those lawsunless forced by him or it is a necessity.

The takfires further claim the Muslim rulers of this time are allillegitimate rulers because the bay’ah was given to the Muslim rulersof today, who do not rule by Allahs law in everything only in somethings. The takfires claim for any bay’ah to a Muslim ruler to becorrect the condition is the Muslim ruler must totally implement theshariah law.

But it is not a condition for the bay’ah to be correct that ruler has torule by Allahs law only as the takfires claim.

Allah said “O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (Muhammad) and those of you (Muslims) whoare in authority (the rulers)...” (Surah Al-Nisa', 4: 59) Allahsays obey those who are in authority referring to the Muslim rulers who are in authority over their subject’s daily life. Allah says obey

them, this obedience is due to the rulers through the bay’ah to hearand obey them.

Thus if it was a condition for the bay’ah to be correct that Muslimruler has to rule by Allahs law only, Allah would have prohibitedmaking bay’ah to a ruler who rules by other than Allahs law (unless itmakes him a disbeliever) or at least indicated it was haraam to do so.



Allah says “...He (Allah) has explained to you what He hasmade haram for you...” (6:119), therefore if it was a condition oharam to give the bay’ah to a ruler who rules by other than Allahs law but has not reached the level of major kufr (disbelief) Allah wouldhave said (or indicated that) it in the Quran.

The Muslim ruler like the rulers of today who rule with a mixture of secular democratic laws and Islamic shariah laws but have not yet become kaafirs (disbelievers) due to their minor kufr (kufr of action, which is a major sin) then Allah never prohibited bay’ah to this typeof rule in the Quran until he rules only by the shariah, Allah said “O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (Muhammad) and those of you (Muslims) who are in

authority (the rulers)...” (Surah Al-Nisa', 4: 59)

As Allah has not mentioned this condition or prohibition in the Quranif it is truly a condition or prohibited as the takfires claim to give the bay’ah to a ruler who rules by other than Allahs law than it must be inprophets Sunnah.

Unfortunately for the takfires there is no mention of this in the

Sunnah. If it was a condition for the bay’ah to the Muslim ruler to becorrect that the ruler would have to rule by Allahs law only theprophet would have told us.

The reason the prophet would have told us about this condition is because the prophet told his ummah about all haram things and bay’ah to a ruler who does not rule by the Quran and Sunnah would be haram if it was a condition for the bay’ah to the Muslim ruler to be

correct that the ruler would have to rule by Allahs law only. All theprophets including the prophet Mohammed always disclosed what is best for their ummahs and warned from what is evil for theirummahs.

The prophet said, “Never was a prophet before me, but hedisclosed to his people what he knew to be best for them,



and warned them of what he knew to be evil for them.” Recorder by Muslim.

Plus if it was if it was a condition for the bay’ah to the Muslim ruler to be correct that the ruler would have to rule by Allahs law only. Theprophet would have told us as he always told his ummah about the

thing which would bring them closer to paradise and further from thehell.

The prophet said, “There is nothing that would bring youcloser to Jannah (Gardens of Paradise) and farther fromthe Fire (hell) but it has been clarified [by me] to you.”

Recorded by Ahmad and others; authenticated by al-

Albaanee and others.

The takfires should note that if the divine revelation (Quran andSunnah) was silent about something, this means it is permissible andpeople are free to practice it unless someone can bring a proof that itis haram. So if in the divine revelation it is found that making bay’ahis obligatory, the subjects have t make it. If like you (oh takfires)claim it is a condition for the bay’ah to the Muslim ruler to be correct

that the ruler would have to rule by Allahs law only, then if the divinerevelation was silent concerning this condition then it is permissibleto give the bay’ah to the ruler without this condition.

The prophet said “What Allah has made lawful in His Bookis halal and what He has forbidden is haram, and that concerning which He is silent is allowed as His favour. So

accept from Allah His favour, for Allah is not forgetful of anything. He then recited, "And thy Lord is not forgetful." (19:64), this hadeeth was reported by al-Hakim classified as saheeh and quoted by al-Bazzar.

In a supporting narration for the hadeeth above the prophet said,"The halal is that which Allah has made lawful in His Bookand the haram is that which He has forbidden, and that



concerning which He is silent He has permitted as a favourto you." Reported by al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah.

Thus, it is favour to this ummah that he allowed us to make the bay’ah to the Muslim ruler who rules by other than Allahs law when idoes not make him a disbeliever.

The reason for this favour is that there would be a period of rule by un-Islamic rulers in this ummah. Firstly biting kings (meaning notupon the way of the prophet or four rightly guided khalifahsrulership) and after that there would be oppressive kingship(meaning they do not rule by Allahs law due to there oppression asoppressive rule is not in line with ruling by the shariah).

The prophet said, "Prophethood will be amongst you for aslong as Allah wills, then Allah will raise it up when Hewills, then there will be Khilaafah upon the way of

Prophethood, then Allah will raise it up when He wills,then there will be biting Kingship, then oppressive

Kingship, then Khilaafah upon the way of the Prophethood." Decleared saheeh by Shaykh Saleem al- Hilaalee

If Allah had not favoured this ummah by allowing the subjects tomake the bay’ah to the Muslim ruler who rules by other than Allahslaw when it does not make him a disbeliever, then in the reign of biting kings oppressive kingships there would be much fitnah(tribulation and troubles). As this would have lead to many wars,

deaths and division in the ummah.

So Allah and his messenger have kept silent over this issue of making bay’ah to the Muslim ruler who rules by other than Allahs law when idoes not make him a disbeliever out of there mercy for this ummah.



The Prophet also said, “Allah…He has prohibited certainthings, so do not do them; and He has kept silent concerning other things out of mercy for you and not because of forgetfulness, so do not ask questionsconcerning them.” Reported by Darqutni and classified ashasan by Imam al-Nawawi.

In fact in the Sunnah the prophet indicates what is importantconcerning the bay’ah is that the subjects obey the ruler as much ashe can. Unlike today when the subjects (the takfires) try to make asreason as possible to not hear and obey the rulers due to their unfairand unjust oppression.

The prophet said, “Whoever gives his oath of allegiance(bay’ah) to a leader and gives him his hand and his heart (submit to his ruling him both outwardly as well asinwardly unless they go against the shariah), let him obeyhim as much as he can...” Narrated by Muslim, 1844

Also the Prophet indicated that this ummah must listen and obey theMuslim ruler even if he does not follow the prophet’s guidance and

does not follow his Sunnah in ruling by the shariah (i.e. he rules by other than Allahs law) and by being a just ruler.

The prophet said, "There will be after me leaders who donot follow my guidance and do not follow my Sunnah, andthere will be among them men whose hearts are like thoseof Satan in the body of a human being". And Hudhaifa (binal-Yaman) asked the Prophet, 'What we should do at that

time if we reach it?' He said, 'listen and obey the ruler,even if he lashed your back (unjustly) and took your money (unjustly)". Recorded by Muslim.

From this hadeeth it is very clear that it is not a condition for aMuslim ruler to rule by Allahs law for the bay’ah to be valid, because



if it was the prophet Mohammed would not have commanded hisummah to listen to and obey Muslim rulers:

1. who do not follow the prophets guidance,2. do not follow his Sunnah,3. lash your back unjustly,4. take your money unjustly 5. And have hearts like those of Satan when it comes to ruling by

the shariah and being a just ruler (i.e. they are unjust rulers whorule by other than Allahs law).

In conclusion the takfires claim that the bay’ah to the Muslim rulersof today is invalid because this bay’ah was based on them ruling by amixture of secular democratic laws and Islamic shariah laws and thei

claim that for any bay’ah to be correct the Muslim ruler must ruleonly by Allahs law has been proven to a false claim.

Also if/when takfires claim that the bay’ah to the Muslim rulers of today is invalid because this bay’ah was based on them ruling by amixture of secular democratic laws and Islamic shariah laws and theiclaim that for any bay’ah to be correct the Muslim ruler must ruleonly by Allahs law. Then they should know it easy to say this but thequestion is can they prove from the Quran and sunnah that this typeof bay'ah is haram or that it is a condition for the bay’ah to be correcthat the ruler has to only rule by Islamic law.

The reason the takfires can not prove their stance is because bay’ah tthe Muslim ruler is halaal, so foundation in this matter is that aMuslim can make bay’ah to a Muslim ruler no matter what ruling

system he rules with. Therefore if he ruler rules with a mixture of shariah and any other law then it is halaal to make bay’ah to himunless it is proven to be haram.

Haram (the prohibited or unlawful) is that which the Law-Giver hasabsolutely prohibited; anyone who engages in it is liable to incur thepunishment of Allah in the Hereafter as well as a legal punishment inthis world.



Nothing is haram except what is prohibited by a sound and explicit verse of the Quran or a clear authentic and explicit hadeeth of theProphet Muhammad.

If the hadeeth is not authentic or if the hadeeth or verse of Quran isnot explicit in stating the prohibition, the original principle of permissibility applies, which is to make bay’ah is approved of in theQuran and authentic Sunnah, so therefore this allowance can not beremoved by something unauthentic or unclear.

There is NO CLEAR CUT EXPLICITY VERSE OR AUTHENTICHADEETH STATING THE PROBHIBITION of giving the bay’ah toruler who rules with a mixture of Islamic law and non-Islamic law can

be found.

Also there is NO CLEAR CUT EXPLICITY VERSE OR AUTHENTICHADEETH STATING THAT THE CONDITION FOR BAY’AH TO BECORRECT IS THAT THE RULER MUST RULE ONLY BY ALLAHSLAW.

So then it must be concluded that the divine revelation (Quran andSunnah) was silent about this matter, Allah being silent over thisissue is a favour to this ummah

The Prophet also said, “Allah…He has prohibited certainthings, so do not do them; and He has kept silent concerning other things out of mercy for you and not because of forgetfulness, so do not ask questions

concerning them.” Reported by Darqutni and classified ashasan by Imam al-Nawawi.

Some of the takfires have realised there is no CLEAR CUTEXPLICITY VERSE OR AUTHENTIC HADEETH STATING THEPROBHIBITION of GIVEING THE BAY’AH TO A RULER, WHORULES WITH A MIXTURE OF ALLAHS LAWS & OTHER THAN



ALLAHS LAW. So they argue that there is a general prohibition onthis issue.

So these takfires think this general prohibition on this issue makes itHARAM TO GIVE THE BAY’AH TO A RULER, WHO RULES WITH A MIXTURE OF ALLAHS LAWS & OTHER THAN ALLAHS LAW, but what they do not understand is that there is also a generalallowance on this issue.

The general prohibition on this issue is it is haraam to rule by KUFR (RULING BY OTHER THAN ALLAHS LAW IN EVERY SITUANTION), so it is haraam to give the bay’ah to this type of ruler

The general allowance on this issue is that it is halaal to rule by Islamic law only, thus it is also halaal to give the bay’ah to this ruler.

So it be could argued that there is a general allowance on this issue which therefore makes it HALAAL TO GIVE THE BAY’AH TO A RULER, WHO RULES WITH A MIXTURE OF ALLAHS LAWS &OTHER THAN ALLAHS LAW.

This is why they those who claim it is haram must bring A CLEAR CUT EXPLICITY VERSE OR AUTHENTIC HADEETH STATINGTHE PROBHIBITION of GIVEING THE BAY’AH TO A RULER, WHO RULES WITH A MIXTURE OF ALLAHS LAWS & OTHER THAN ALLAHS LAW.

Also the general prohibition on this issue is it is haraam to rule by

KUFR (RULING BY OTHER THAN ALLAHS LAW IN EVERY SITUANTION), so it is haraam to give the bay’ah to this type of rulerBut this general prohibition has nothing to do with giving bay’ah toTHE MUSLIM RULER, WHO RULES WITH A MIXTURE OF ALLAHS LAWS & OTHER THAN ALLAHS LAW and this is what ishalaal.



If the ruling on bay’ah to the ruler who rules by Islam or bay’ah to theruler who RULES WITH KUFR (i.e. no shariah at all) has been made very clear in the shariah with clear cut verses and authentic hadeeth.THEN IF IT IS HARAM TO GIVE THE BAY’AH TO A RULER WHORULES WITH A MIXTURE OF ALLAHS LAW & OTHER THAN ALLAHS LAW THERE MUST BE A CLEAR CUT EXPLICITY VERSEOR AUTHENTIC HADEETH STATING THIS PROBHIBITION.

Those Muslims from the takfires or those who have been influenced by them and therefore do not give their bay’ah to the Muslim rulers otoday or state that they took back their bay’ah, then they fall underthe threat mentioned in the following hadeeths.

In the Saheeh Muslim on the authority of 'Abdullah Ibn Amr Ibn Al-'As (may Allah be pleased with both of them)that “One who withdraws his hand from obedience (to theruler) will find no argument (in his defence) when hestands before Allah on the Day of Judgment, and one whodies without having bound himself by an oath of allegiance (to a ruler) will die the death of one belongingto the days of Jaahiliyyah (the time before the prophet

Mohammed’s prophet hood in which the idol worshiping Arabs lived was is known as Jaahiliyyah).” Saheeh Muslim

The prophet said, “One who defected from obedience (tothe ruler) and separated from the main body of the

Muslims, if he died in that state he would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jaahiliyyah (i.e. would not die as a Muslim). Saheeh Muslim

The prophet said, “When you are holding to (one singleman as your leader), you should kill the person who seeksto undermine your solidarity or disrupt your unity (by no



giving the bay’ah to the Muslim Ruler or taking it backwith out a right to do so) whoever is he.”

May Allah guide all the Muslims to success in this world and thehereafter. Ameen.

Side Points:

1. The Muslim Ruler Who Rules Only By Other Than AllahsLaw

The Muslim can ruler who rules by the shariah laws only or theMuslim ruler rules with a mixture Islamic law and non-Islamic laws

then this type of ruler can be and must be given the bay’ah to beheard and obeyed by his subjects.

However the Muslim ruler who rules by only other than Allahs law with no trace of the shariah in is legislation (which he refers judgement to) is NOT to be given the bay'ah. The reason for this is thMuslim ruler who only rules by other than Allahs law, has committedopen major kufr and his system of rule would be classed as total kufr(like democracy of the USA and communism of China) Only ruling by(i.e. referring judgement to another law) is and indication that thisruler hates the laws of Islam other wise he would at least have someshariah laws. Hating Islam is major kufr of belief, which would thisruler a kaafir.

Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan stated, “…that the one who abolishes

the Shariah entirely (nihaa’iyyan) (means the Muslim rulercompletely and totally effaces Islam and everything related to it, suchthat nothing of it remains, or is allowed to remain, and then bringsanother law to replace it totally, then that does not exist today),and puts another law in its place, that this is evidence (daleel) to showthat he views the [secular] law to be better than the Shariah, and



whoever holds this opinion, he is the one who is a kaafir [emphasisgiven]…”

The rulers of today do not rule by Islam or kufr they rule with amixture of both so bay'ah can be given to them.

2. The Hadeeths Commanding Obedience To The Rulers Rather To The Over All Caliph Or Rulers Of Individual Muslim States Not Just The Caliph

Shaykh As-San'aani explained that this hadeeth refers not only to thecaliph but also to separate rulers of individual states. He said in his

explanation of the hadeeth of Abu Hurairah, raised to the Prophet(who is reported to have said), “One who defected fromobedience (to the ruler) and separated from the main bodyof the Muslims, if he died in that state he would die thedeath of one belonging to the days of Jaahiliyyah (i.e.would not die as a Muslim). Saheeh Muslim, Book 20, #

4555, English Translation.

That the "obedience" is the obedience to the Khalifah upon whomthere is agreement and it seems that what is intended is the khalifah(ruler) of any region from the regions, since people were not onagreement on a single khalifah over the entire Islamic lands since the Abbasid Rule. Rather each region became independent under a rulerrunning its affairs. And if we carry the hadeeth to apply only to onekhalifah upon whom the Muslims are unanimous (agreed upon) then

it’s (the hadeeths) benefit would be diminished. And that the saying(in the hadeeth) "and separated from the main body of the Muslims,"means: separated from the Jamaah who agreed upon an imam (any ruler of a particular region not specifically a overall khalifah of all theMuslim regions), under whom their body and affairs are organized,their word is united, and their protection from their enemy isachieved.



So it becomes clear that negating the validity of governorship onseparate Muslim states leads to evil in the sense that its sets the stagefor rebellion against the rulers, and this is forbidden in Islam even if the ruler is an oppressor as this contradicts the creed of AhlusSunnah. And Allah Knows Best.”

3. Question: Is Bay’ah Only Made To The Muslim Ruler

Answer By Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said, “Bay’ah only has todo with the leader of the Muslims; these various bay’ahs (given toother than the Muslim ruler) are innovated and they are among thecauses of division. The Muslims who are living in one country or onekingdom should have one allegiance to one leader; it is notpermissible to have several kinds of bay’ah.” al-Muntaqa min Fataawal-Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, 1/367

4. Question: How Is The Bay’ah (pledge Of Allegiance)Given To The Muslim Ruler

Answer: With regard to how the allegiance should be given to the

leader, in the case of men it is done in word and in deed, namely witha handshake. In the case of women, it is done by word only. This isproven in the ahaadeeth which speak of how allegiance was given tothe Messenger of Allah.

For example, Aa’ishah said: “No, by Allaah, the hand of the Messenger of Allah never touched the hand of any (non-mahram) woman. Rather he would accept their allegiance(bay’ah) in words only.” Narrated by al-Bukhari, 5288;

Muslim, 1866

Imam Al-Nawawi said in his Sharh (commentary), “This indicatesthat for women, allegiance is given in words only, without taking thehand of the leader, and for men it is done in words and by taking hishand.



In al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (9/274) it says: Bay’ah orallegiance, as defined by Ibn Khuldoon in his Muqaddimah When they swore allegiance to a ruler and made this pledge, they would put their hands in his as confirmation of the pledge. That isakin to what the seller and purchaser do, so bay’ah or allegiance wasaccompanied by a handshake.

is the bay’ah to muslim rulers based on them ruling with a mixture of secular laws & islamic...

Documents