Title: The Position of the Rulers Who Do not Judge According to the Shari`ah Question: In light of the ongoing discussions regarding khaleepha , can you please clarify the ayats in Surah Al-Maaidah in reference to those that do not judge by the command of Allah are kafiroon , dhalimoon , and fasiqoon . I believe it was the khaawarij who first used these verses to revolt against Ali (S). Many Muslims today use these ayats as a justification to overthrow various Muslim leaders who are not implementing Shari`ah , although they profess to be Muslims. Is this not an open case of Kufr (i.e. rejection) by the so-called Muslim leaders? Of course, I do not mean to imply those leaders that are forced into situations where they cannot take steps towards improving on the situation. Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (R) was known for his GRADUAL and not sudden program of reform despite the protests from his son. Salaam Answer: The Arabic word "Lum" as used in the referred verses [1] of the Qur'an does not merely give a negative sense to the sentence, as 'La' or 'Ma' (in Arabic), but is generally used for forceful negation. Thus, the sense of the referred verses is not merely to not decide according to God's stipulations, but is actually a refusal and a conscious avoidance to decide according to the Shari`ah . Thus, Zamakhshariy , in his commentary on the verse, has cited Ibn Abbas (ra) as having said: Whoever refuses God's directives is guilty of rejection. Whoever refuses to decide accordingly, declaring his refusal, is unjust and disobedient. It is basically for this reason that the classical Muslim scholars have generally not agreed with the idea propounded by the Khawaarij (which you have mentioned in your question). Raaziy , in his commentary on the Qur'an "Al-Tafseer al-Kabeer" has said that on the basis of the verses under consideration, the Khawaarij are of the opinion that if a person does not decide according to God's revelation, then he is a Kaafir (rejecter). He writes: The Khawaarij have said: Whoever disobeys God, in any of his commands, is a Kaafir (rejecter). The mainstream Muslim scholars, however, say that such is not the case. As far as the Khawaarij are concerned, they have based their opinion on this verse of the Qur'an and have said: It is evidence to effect that whoever decides according to anything except that which is revealed by God is a Kaafir and every person who has sinned, has actually decided according to something other than God's revelations. Thus, it necessitates that a sinner be considered a Kaafir . After this, Raaziy has cited the various rebuttals of this argument, which were given by the Muslim scholars. From among these rebuttals, citing his own preference, he writes: `Ikramah has said: "The words 'Whoever refuses to decide according to what God has revealed', imply the person who refuses from his heart and declares his refusal from his tongue. As for him, whose heart accepts these directives to be God's decisions and whose tongue acknowledges their being God's directives, and yet he does things which are against these directives, he is, in fact, a person who decides according to God's revelations, but is guilty of ignoring these directives. It is not necessary to bring such a person under the scope of this verse". [ Raaziy says:] This is the correct answer [to the argument of the Khawaarij ]. Ultimate knowledge resides with God. The opinion ascribed to `Ikramah , in my opinion, is according to the other stipulations of the Qur'an, relating to sin and rejection. Keeping the foregoing clarification in perspective, let us now turn our attention to the position of those leaders and rulers, who even after being bestowed with rule and authority, do not decide according to the stipulations of the Shari`ah . This position needs to be considered from two separate perspectives: Firstly, from the perspective of the individual (ruler) who does not judge according to the stipulations of the Shari`ah (revelations of God) and secondly from the perspective of others (the subjects or the led). From the perspective of the individual (ruler), it is clear that if he is guilty of openly and manifestly rejecting the stipulations of the Shari`ah , then he is guilty of a clear and manifest 'Kufr' (i.e. rejection). The repercussions of such an action are both from the perspective of the life of this world as well as from that of the hereafter. In the life of this world, such a person loses the religious right [2] of commanding obedience of his followers and his Muslim subjects. The Qur'an has clearly directed the Muslims to obey their rulers, as long as they remain 'from among them' (i.e. Muslims) [3] . The Prophet (pbuh) has been reported to have said that as long as the ruler is guilty of manifest and unequivocal rejection, he must be obeyed in all matter [4] (unless obedience to any of his directives, clearly results in the disobedience toward any of the directives of the Almighty [5] ). In the hereafter, such a ruler shall obviously meet the end of those, who rejected God's directives and consciously refused to submit to His commandments [6] . From the perspective of the followers, the Qur'an has ordained the Muslims to patiently persevere in obeying their Muslim rulers and not to refuse obedience toward them. It is clear from Al-Nisaa 4: 59 that obedience toward the rulers, as long as they remain Muslims, is a religious obligation upon Muslims. The Prophet (pbuh) has also been ascribed to have said that even though the ruler is guilty of acting against the clear directives of the Shari`ah , as long as he is not guilty of manifest and unequivocal rejection of faith, all Muslims must remain obedient toward him [7] . The Prophet (pbuh) has also been reported to have said that it is the responsibility of the rulers to decide among their subjects according to the Shari`ah , while it is the responsibility of the subjects to steadfastly persevere in being obedient toward him. On the Day of Judgment, the leaders as well as the subjects shall be held answerable for their own respective responsibilities. Thus, even though the leaders do not fulfill their responsibilities, the subjects should steadfastly fulfill their responsibilities and, thereby, secure their own success in the hereafter [8] . I hope this helps. February 9, 2001 [1] Reference is to Al-Maaidah 5: 44, 45 and 47. [2] It should, however, remain clear that obedience toward the Muslim rulers is a relgious obligation of the subjects. This obedience is no longer a religious obligation, if the ruler clearly forsakes Islam. This, however, does not mean that disobeying a non-Muslim ruler or raising mutiny against a manifest rejecter is a religious obligation. It only means that obedience toward a non-Muslim ruler (or one who is a manifest rejecter) is NOT a religious obligation. [3] Reference is to Al-Nisaa 4: 59. [4] Bukhari , Kitaab al-Fitan , No. 6532. [5] Tafsir Ibn Kathir , Vol. 1, Pg. 517. [6] Al-Maaidah 5: 44, 45 and 47. [7] Reference is to those narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), in which he is reported to have directed Muslims to remain obedient toward their rulers even if they do not follow the directives of the Shari`ah . The Muslims have been directed to remain obedient toward their ruler even if they do not like him, even if he unjustly prefers others over them, even if he is guilty of general injustice, even if he refuses the legal and moral rights of the subjects, even if he does not offer prayers at their prescribed timings and even if he is a Faajir (disobedient). Obviously, all these qualities are clearly against the stipulations of the Shari`ah , yet the Prophet (pbuh) has directed the Muslims to steadfastly remain obedient toward their rulers. [8] Muslim , Kitaab al-Imaarah , No. 3433.