The brother asked me making takfir on a group of men *engaging* in riba would be extreme, while the kufr ibn Taymiyyah is talking about would be a group with established structures of governance *permitting* riba.
/1
/1
https://twitter.com/AbuHumayd99/status/1471180990982901762
If we accept his understanding, it would be necessary to make takfir on every group of Muslim bandits in history, since they were armed and allowed violating the sanctity of the lives and property of Muslims and dhimmis for themselves.
/2
/2
The confusion here relates partly to the absence of an authority recognized as responsible for appointing governors and judges. In this vacuum, someone can take ibn Taymiyyah's fatwa, and think it's necessary to pronounce takfir on any group that fails to implement some...
/3
/3
...aspect of sharia. Hence ISKP listing "failure to implement slavery" as one of their reasons for takfir of the Taliban.
It's not right to make takfir on Muslim bandits, because there is no responsibility of establishing sharia incumbent upon them.
/4
It's not right to make takfir on Muslim bandits, because there is no responsibility of establishing sharia incumbent upon them.
/4
Rather, they are under an Islamic authority responsible for establishing sharia, and due to their worldly desire, they disobey that authority and disobey Allah.
In the absence of an established Islamic authority, it's a lot harder to define who has the responsibility to...
/5
In the absence of an established Islamic authority, it's a lot harder to define who has the responsibility to...
/5
...implement sharia and who doesn't.
This is at the root of the conflict between IS and other groups in the Syrian civil war. Fighting groups formed to fight Assad, and they had varying degrees of influence over governance in the areas where they were located.
/6
This is at the root of the conflict between IS and other groups in the Syrian civil war. Fighting groups formed to fight Assad, and they had varying degrees of influence over governance in the areas where they were located.
/6
The label of taifah mumtani'ah was always applied to groups that were already responsible for governance, and who then refused to implement some aspects of sharia.
There are multiple factors that need to be addressed here.
/7
There are multiple factors that need to be addressed here.
/7
For example, were the groups in Syria struggling to control the institutions of the Syrian state or destroy them?
If they are trying to control them, does the responsibility of governing fall on them before they control them completely?
/8
If they are trying to control them, does the responsibility of governing fall on them before they control them completely?
/8
If they are trying to destroy them, should building new institutions take place before the war is won?
If so, at what point do we say the responsibility of governance falls on a group such that they can be blamed for neglecting it?
/9
If so, at what point do we say the responsibility of governance falls on a group such that they can be blamed for neglecting it?
/9
To what extent can neglecting some administrative duties be excused due to a persistent condition of war?
If they cannot be excused, and it's obligatory to divide efforts between war and governance, can someone be excused for thinking it's necessary to focus on war first?
/10
If they cannot be excused, and it's obligatory to divide efforts between war and governance, can someone be excused for thinking it's necessary to focus on war first?
/10
Discussion of these issues, among others, was mostly neglected by IS, and this is itself is leaving a part of the sharia, because making a shari' hukm on a situation requires understanding the situation, the sharia, and their interrelation thoroughly.
/11
/11
When talking about the taifa mumtani'ah, it should be clear that يمتنع means to abstain, meaning it is a voluntary decision. If there is an inability or even a reasonable perception of an inability, this label doesn't really make sense anymore...
/11
/11
...because abstaining from implementing sharia is an arrogant refusal to submit to Islam, not faulty ijtihad about how to establish sharia.
There needs to be a bit more patience with Muslims whose stated aim is to establish Islam.
/12
There needs to be a bit more patience with Muslims whose stated aim is to establish Islam.
/12
Even if they fall into severe mistakes, it's a false equivalence to say that those who have flawed methodologies or aqeeda are like those who flat out rejected part of the sharia without even trying to make an excuse, as with the Tatars or murtadin of the wars of ridda.
/13
/13
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
