abukhadeejah.co mhttp://www.abukhadeejah.com/the-tears-o f- ibn-baaz-when-ibn-jibreen-and-salmaan-al-awdah-debated-ibn-baaz/

By Abu Khadeejah Abdul-Wahid

The Tears Of Ibn Baaz: When Ibn Jibreen and Salmaan al-Awdah Debated Ibn Baaz.

Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) said:

“There is no happiness for the servant, nor guidance or salvation in this World or in theHereafter except by having the utmost respect for the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of Histrustworthy Messenger (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam), [adhering to that] in belief, speech andaction – to be steadfast and patient upon that until death..”

From The Tape Ad-Dam`at al-Baaziyah. (The Baazee Teardrop) i.e. The Tears of Ibn Baaz.

The story behind the tape:

The pious eminent Shaikh, the Imaam, the Scholar, `Abdul-`Azeez Ibn `Abdullaah Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah)delivered a lecture to a group of teachers and students f rom the ‘Department of Sunnah and Foundationsof the Deen’ at the University of Imaam Muhammad Ibn Sa`ood in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in early to mid1990′s. In this lecture, he encouraged with seeking knowledge and giving da`wah. He is also spokeconcerning his own Shaikh, the Muf tee, Muhammad Ibn Ibraaheem Aalush-Shaikh (rahimahullaah), and theconcern he would have over his students in terms of their learning and manners and other than that. And asShaikh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) remembered the manners, behaviour, knowledge and good treatment ofShaikh Muhammad Ibn Ibraaheem (rahimahullaah), Shaikh Ibn Baaz started to weep due to the immense lovef or his Shaikh. As he continued talking, he cried f urther until he can be heard on the audio tape weeping. Forthis reason, the one who recorded the lecture entit led it, “The Baazee Teardrop”, or maybe more eloquentlyin English, “The Tears Of Ibn Baaz.”

Once Shaikh Ibn Baaz f inished his lecture, he took questions f rom those present, covering various topicssuch as the science of hadeeth, the ruling upon those who abandon the prayer, and so on. Side “A” of theaudio tape f inishes there. Then side “B” begins, and the crux of that revolves around the topic of : “Thedisbelief of the Rulers who exchange the Sharee`ah”. So the questions begin concerning the verse:

“And whomsoever does not judge by that which Allaah has revealed, then such are theunbelievers.” (al-Maa’idah)

So the one who introduced the lecture of Shaikhul- Islaam Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) was `Abdullaah IbnJibreen. This whole debate was orchestrated by those af f ected by ideas of Sayyid Qutb in the hope thatthey could convince or overpower Shaikh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah). From this discussion you will see howthis Imaam of the Sunnah was not swayed by some of these heads of hizbiyyah, Qutbiyyah, and misguidedpolit ical ideologies. Those most ardent here in f ront of Shaikh Ibn Baaz were the likes of Salmaan al-`Awdah, `Aa’id al-Qarnee, and others. The Shaikh remained steadf ast, f irm and resolute as they threwquestion af ter question knowing that his posit ion was the truth, may Allaah have mercy upon him.

What is quite astounding is the f act that even af ter this and other discussions with the great scholars ofthe era, the likes of al-`Awdah, al-Qarnee, Saf ar al-Hawaalee, and even Ibn Jibreen did not take on boardthe guidance of these eminent scholars. So they became well-known f or their def ence of the Jihadistideologues such as Sayyid Qutb, and embraced these f alse doctrines, teaching that to the youth. The endresult of which was mayhem and chaos amongst the Muslim youth; the prolif eration of streetdemonstrations, rebellious speeches f rom the pulpits, increase in terrorist plots, open belitt lement anddisrespect towards the Rulers, lit t le attention paid towards teaching the youth the basics of Tawheed andSunnah and great exaggerated emphasis placed upon entry into the polit ical arena, parliaments anddemocratic elections. The f ruits of this f alse doctrine we see in f ull f ruit ion today within Muslimcommunities. This also shows the immense insight of the Scholars of the era that is not seen by the hastyagitators who seek to cajole the youth into wasting their lives in f utile causes whilst those who direct themsit comf ortably in their homes watching the anarchy unf old on the news channels.

So here is the f irst instalment of the transcript that I have translated. Please take time to read it caref ullyand also the notes I have added at the end to show clearly the correctness of the speech of Shaikhul-Islaam Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah).

Ibn Jibreen asked:

The explanation of Ibn `Abbaas of the verse concerning the verse: “And whomsoever does not judge bythat which Allaah has revealed, then such are the unbelievers,” that it is unbelief lesser than theunbelief that exits a person f rom Islaam (kuf r-doon-kuf r)?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

So long as he does not make [that judging] to be permissible f or himself . Meaning: he judges with briberyupon his enemy or in f avour of his f riend, then this is kufr-doon-kufr (unbelief which does not exit the doerf rom Islaam). However, if he makes judging by other than Revelation to be permissible, if he makes theabandonment of the Sharee`ah permissible, then he is an unbeliever with the major kuf r [that exits him f romIslaam]. So the verse ref ers to kuf r-doon-kuf r, similar to what was said by Ibn `Abbaas (radiyallaahu`anhumaa), Mujaahid and others.

An attendee:

That is a major problem at this point, may Allaah pardon you, that is the issue of exchanging the Sharee`ahRulings with [f oreign] constitutions…

Shaikh Ibn Baaz interrupts:

This is a point of investigation, if he does so (i.e. exchanges the Sharee`ah) making it permissible (istihlaal)…

The same attendee interrupts:

He may claim that he is not making permissible this act?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

If he does so, making that permissible, then he has disbelieved [exit ing Islaam]. But when he does so toplease his people, or other than that, then it is kuf r lesser than [major] kuf r, that does not exit f rom Islaam.So it is obligatory upon the Muslims to f ight [the one who makes permissible (istihlaal) exchanging theSharee`ah] if they have the power to do so, so that he adheres to the Sharee`ah. So whoever changes theReligion, whether it be the Zakaat or other than that, then he is f ought until he adheres.

The same questioner:

He has exchanged the Prescribed Punishments, he has exchanged the prescribed punishment f orf ornication and other than that.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Meaning that he does not establish the Prescribed Punishments (al-hudood), so he applies a discretionarypunishment in place of execution.

Ibn Jibreen:

Or imprisonment.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Or imprisonment.

Questioner:

He institutes a constitution, may Allaah pardon you.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

The origin is not declaring [major] kuf r upon him until he makes that permissible. He is a sinner – he hascommitted a major sin and is deserving of punishment. It is kufr-doon-kufr until he makes that permissible.

Questioner:

Until he makes that permissible (istihlaal)??!! But whether someone has made something permissible is inthe heart, and we do not know about that?!

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

That is right. If he claims that, if he claims that he has made that permissible (i.e. made it halaal).

Ibn Jibreen:

If he permits (makes halaal) f ornication so long as both parties are pleased..

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Yes, that is [major] kuf r.

Ibn Jibreen completes:

A woman is f ree to do as she pleases with herself .

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

If they make that halaal with pleasure, then it is [major] kuf r.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

Even if he judges by an abrogated law such as the law of the Jews? And he obligates that upon the people,and he makes that into generalised legislation, and he punishes whoever rejects that with imprisonment,exile and death and such things?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Does he ascribe that to the Sharee`ah or not?

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

But he judges by it without commenting on it. He has made it a replacement!

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

If he ascribes this law to the Sharee`ah, then it is kuf r.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

Is that major kuf r or lesser kuf r?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

It is major kuf r if he ascribes that to the Sharee`ah, but if he does not ascribe that to the Sharee`ah and itis a law introduced legislated by himself , then it is not major kuf r, such as the one who lashes the peoplewithout a legal Sharee`ah reason. He lashes the people or kills them due to his own whims and desires. Hemay kill some people due to his desires overcoming him.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

May Allaah preserve you – so there is no distinction between a specif ic case with respect to an event thattakes place, or a particular situation and between the situation wherein a ruler introduces a generalised lawor constitution f or all the people?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

If he ascribes that [law or constitution] to the Sharee`ah, then he has disbelieved. But if he does notascribe that to the Sharee`ah, and sees it as a law that is suitable f or the people, whilst he holds that it isnot Shar`ee – and that it is not f rom f rom Allaah, nor f rom His Messenger, then it is considered a crime, butit is not major kuf r. That is what I believe.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

O noble Shaikh, [but] Ibn Katheer cites in al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah the consensus (ijmaa`) upon the kuf rof such a person, with major kuf r.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Maybe he intended if one ascribes that to Sharee`ah.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

No! He said: The one who judges by other than the Sharee`ah of Allaah, even a Sharee`ah that wasrevealed but abrogated, then he is a unbeliever. So how about the one who judges with other than that: withthe opinions of the humans? There is no doubt, such a one is an apostate.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Even if he said that. Ibn Katheer is not inf allible. This requires thought and insight. He can be wrong. Himand other than him. Most of what is reported as ijmaa` is not ijmaa`.

Ibn Jibreen:

They introduce these laws in replacement of the Sharee`ah. They say: This law is better and morebenef icial f or the people. And they ascribe that to the regulations of the Sharee`ah.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

This is kuf r on its own. If he said: This af f air is better than the Sharee`ah, or the same as it, or he saysthat it is permitted to judge by other than what Allaah has revealed, then that is major kuf r.

An attendee:

Those who declare the constitution to be kuf r and they say: the people are not declared to be unbelievers.Meaning, they make that distinction in their writ ings, so they say: The constitution is a kaaf ir, but we do notcall individuals unbelievers.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

If he makes permissible judging by other than what Allaah has revealed, then it is unbelief , even if thatref ers to a person. Meaning he himself has committed kuf r. It is said: So and so is a kaaf ir, if he makespermissible (halaal) to judge by other than what Allaah has revealed, or if he makes halaal f ornication – andsimilar to that which is considered as kuf r, such as whoever the Sahaabah declared to unbelieversspecif ically, those who abandoned [Islaam]. Musailamah is declared as an unbeliever specif ically. Talaihahbef ore he repented was declared an unbeliever. Likewise f or the one who mocks the Religion is declared anunbeliever specif ically. Whoever is f ound to have nullif ied his Religion is declared an unbeliever specif ically.As f or killing, then that is a dif f erent matter, meaning killing requires repentance [and one does not exitIslaam].

An attendee:

However, if he ascribes that to the Sharee`ah, is it not judged that that he is f rom the liars (al-kaadhibeen).

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Yes, f rom the liars.

[Some unclear speech. Then, a f ew questions later]:

`Aa’id al-Qarnee:

Ok Shaikh, some of them say: Umar (radiyallaahu `anhu) lef t of f the prescribed punishments in the year ofthe f amine?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

This ijt ihaad of his has a valid reason because a person may be f orced to take something or steal out ofnecessity.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

The evidence f or the f act that the kuf r mentioned in the Qur’aan is lesser kuf r: “…such are thedisbelievers.” What is the indication that shows that there in this verse a restriction [to lesser kuf r]?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

It is taken to mean that [one is a kaaf ir] if one makes the judgement by other than Revelation permissible(halaal), in the most correct saying. If it understood to mean other than making it halaal and what Ibn`Abbaas (radiyallaahu `anhumaa) said, that it is understood to mean kuf r lesser than the kuf r that existsone f rom Islaam. Otherwise the origin would be that they unbelievers.

One of the debaters:

There is no evidence f or that in the speech of `Ibn Abbaas. There is not in his speech that one makesjudging [by other than Revelation] permissible.. (unclear)

Salmaan Al-Awdah interjects:

Yes, meaning what makes us change the text f rom what is apparent?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Because he has made that judging permissible f or himself . Likewise, the unbelievers who judge by otherthan what Allaah has revealed. They judge that the dead animal is halaal to eat, and what is similar to that.However if Zaid or `Amr (i.e. Muslims) were to judge with bribery, do we say that is kuf r?! They do notbecome disbelievers with that. Or that he judges that Zaid should be killed without due right based on hiswhims? No, he does not become an unbeliever due to that judgement of his.

[After a short silence] Ibn Baaz:

So upon the principle. Making something haraam or making something halaal has great signif icance. Forexample, the f ornicator, does he f all into major disbelief ?

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

No, he does not f all into disbelief .

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

But if he were to say, “It is halaal [to f ornicate]?”

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

Then he has disbelieved.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

There you have it.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

Yes, he has disbelieved [by making it halaal] even he himself does not f ornicate.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

[Yes], even if he [himself ] does not f ornicate [but holds it to be halaal].

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

We desire, our eminent f ather, concerning the verse: “And whoever does not judge by that which Allaahhas revealed..” So the Judgement is connected to the abandonment of judging [by what Allaah has

revealed].

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

“Judging by other than what Allaah has revealed”, meaning, making that halaal to do. It is understood in thatlight.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

This restricted understanding is taken f rom where?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

From other evidences that prove that. Evidences that prove that the sinner [who judges with sin] is notjudged to have committed [major] kuf r. So long as he does not make that sin halaal, he does not become akaaf ir.

[unclear question]..

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

A f aasiq (open sinner), dhaalim (transgressor) and kaaf ir.

[He is a kaaf ir] only if he makes that [sin] permissible (halaal). Or that he views that the Judgment [of IslamicLaw] is unsuitable, or he holds that judging by other than the Islamic Law is better. So the point here is thatthe issue revolves around whether he makes it permissible [to judge by other than the Islamic Law]. Or theone who goes f urther than merely claiming that it is halaal, he claims it is better than the Judgement ofAllaah. However, if he judges by other than what Allaah has revealed due to his whims, then he is a sinnerjust like the one who f ornicates due to f ollowing his whims and desires and not holding that f ornication ispermissible. Or the one who is undutif ul to his parents, due to f ollowing his whims, or one who kills anotherdue to his whims – these are sinners. However, if he kills another holding that to be permissible, then hehas disbelieved. Or the one who disobeys his parents whilst holding it permissible to be undutif ul to them,or the one who f ornicates whilst making that halaal, then he has disbelieved. It is based upon this that wego against the Khawaarij. We separate and distinguish ourselves f rom them and between us and them thereis huge gulf – otherwise, we would have f allen into that which they f ell into. So this is what resembles theKhawaarij, this af f air of broad sweeping generalizations.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

This af f air is an issue f or many of the brothers, so there is no problem if we take some time?

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

No problem. It is important, hugely important.

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

You mentioned the af f air of takf eer (i.e declaring to be an unbeliever) of the sinner or the one who f allsinto major sin. This is not the point of dif f ering.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

No. What is the issue, the main issue of the Khawaarij? That is the underlying cause of the Khawaarij. It isindeed these broad generalizations – they abandon the restrictions and they take to broad generalizationsand by that, they declare people to be unbelievers. The Prophet (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam) saidregarding them: “They will shoot out of Islaam, and they will not return to it .”

Salmaan Al-Awdah:

The f ornicator and thief , O Shaikh…

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

They are disbelievers according to the Khawaarij.

Salmaan al-`Awdah:

With the Khawaarij. However, Ahlus-Sunnah are agreed that they are sinners.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

Yes, so long as they do not make those sins permissible.

Salmaan al-`Awdah:

They do not exit Islaam.

Shaikh Ibn Baaz:

So long as they do not make [those sins] halaal.

—

To be continued… inshaa’Allaah.

Explanatory Notes:

Imām Ibn ʿAbdul-Barr (died 463H) said:

“The scholars are in agreement that tyranny and oppression in rulership is f rom the major sins f or theone who purposely, knowingly does that; and many severe texts have been reported f rom the Salafregarding that. Allāh, the Mighty and Majestic, stated:

‘And whosoever does not judge by what Allāh has revealed, such are the unbelievers(kāfirūn).’[1]

And:

‘And whosoever does not judge by what Allāh has revealed, such are the wrongdoers(dhālimūn).’[2]

And:

‘And whosoever does not judge by what Allāh has revealed, such are the disobedient(fāsiqūn).’[3]

These were revealed concerning the people of the Book (the Jews and Christians). The CompanionsHudhaif ah and Ibn ʿAbbās stated, ‘These [verses] are general upon [all of ] us.’

They also said, ‘It is not the disbelief (kufr) that takes the person out of the Religion if a person f rom this

Ummah was to do that (i.e. judge by other than what Allāh has revealed), unless he disbelieves in Allāh, HisAngels, His Books, His Messengers and the Final Day.’

And this meaning has been narrated f rom a group of scholars in their explanation of the Qurān; f rom themIbn ʿAbbās, Tāwūs and ʿAtā.’”[4]

[1] Al-Mā’idah: 44.

[2] Al-Mā’idah: 45.

[3] Al-Mā’idah: 47.

[4] At-Tamhīd of Ibn ʿAbdul-Barr, 5/74-75.

—-

Ibn Taymiyyah (3/267 of Majmūʿ ul-Fatāwā):

“And when a person declares a unanimously agreed unlawful matter to be lawful or aunanimously agreed lawful matter to be unlawful or replaced the Sharīʿah (baddala ash-Sharʿ) –that [from it] which is agreed upon – he is a disbeliever, an apostate by agreement of the jurists.And it is with regards to the likes of this that the following (verse) was revealed, according to oneof two opinions: ‘And whoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed then they are thedisbelievers’ (al-Mā’idah 5:44) – meaning that he declares it to be permissible to rule by otherthan what Allah has revealed.”

Imām an-Nawawī said in Sharh Sahīh Muslim (12/229):

“And as for revolt – meaning against the rulers – and fighting them, then it is forbidden byunanimous agreement (ijmāʿ) of the Muslims, even if they are sinful oppressors. And theProphetic narrations are abundantly overwhelming with the meaning that I have mentioned. AndAhlus-Sunnah are united that the ruler is not to be removed, on account of his sinfulness.

As for the angle that has been mentioned in some of the books of jurisprudence of some of ourassociates, that he is to be removed, and which is quoted from the [deviated] Muʿtazilites, thenthis is an error on behalf of the one who says it and is in opposition to the unanimousagreement. And the Scholars have said that the reason for the prevention of his removal andthe forbiddance of revolting against him is due to what arises from that of tribulations, andshedding of blood, and also corruption that is evident. Hence, the harm from his removal isgreater than from him remaining in place.”

Due to the weightiness of this af f air, the great learned Scholar and jurist Shaikh Ibn ʿUthaimīn(rahimahullaah) stated an advice to the Muslims:

“And that which I hold is that the youth should not occupy themselves with the likes of this matter,whether a ruler is a disbeliever or not a disbeliever and whether it is permissible for us to rebelagainst him or not. The youth must occupy themselves with the worship that Allāh has made binding uponthem, or has made recommendable to them, and they should abandon what He has made f orbidden f orthem, either due to its being disliked or being prohibited. They should rush towards making agreementbetween themselves and to have unity; and they should know that having disagreements in the af f airs of

the religion and knowledge occurred during the times of the Companions, however it did not lead toseparation – [due to the f act that] their hearts were one and their methodology (manhaj) was one.

As f or what is connected to the issue of ruling by other than what Allāh has revealed, then it is, as occursin the Mighty Book (Qurān), divided into three types: that which is disbelief , that which is oppression andthat which is sinf ulness – all in accordance with the various reasons upon which each judgment is made:

1. So if a person judges by other than what Allāh has revealed due to following his desires,alongside his knowledge that the truth lies in what Allāh has decreed, then such a one does notdisbelieve, however he is either a sinner or an oppressor.

2. When he legislates a general ruling which the nation [adopts and] traverses upon, and heconsiders this to be of benefit, and he is caught up in it, then he does not disbelieve either,because many of the rulers have ignorance of the knowledge of the Sharīʿah and the one whodoes not know the Sharīʿah ruling is often by their side, and they (the rulers) consider such aone to be a great scholar, and opposition [to the Qurān] occurs as a result of all of this.

3. And if he knows the legislated Sharīʿah, however he judges by this (his own law) or helegislates this [law] and then makes it a code of law (dustūr) to be followed by the people,believing that he himself is an oppressor in all of that, and that the truth is what has come in theBook and the Sunnah, then we are not able to declare such a one to be a disbeliever.

4. But we do declare as a disbeliever the following:

i. The one who holds that legislation other than Allāh’s is more appropriate for the people to beupon.

ii. Or the one who believes that this legislation is equivalent to the legislation of Allāh, the Mightyand Majestic.

It is this one who is a disbeliever because he is a denier of the statement of Allāh, the Blessed andAlmighty, “Is not Allāh the Best of all Judges?” and also His saying, “Is it the judgment of the times ofignorance they seek? And who is a better judge than Allāh f or a people of sure f aith?”

Then [even] these matters do not mean that when we declare someone to be a disbeliever, that it is nowobligatory to rebel against him, since great evils result f rom this rebellion…”[1]

[1] Source: From an audio recording dated Tuesday, 22nd Rabīʿ al-Awwal, 1420H, taken f rom: takf iris.com

>>You can download the f ull tape f rom here<<