← Back to Videos

This content has been automatically translated. View original in Arabic

Dr.Eyad Qunaibi Vostfr-Pour le triomphe de la charia-Episode 4

June 3, 2013

Personal Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/EyadQunaibi4

Twitter account: @EYADQUNAIBI Google account gplus.to\eyadqunaibi

Introduction: On the Concept of Gradualism in Implementing Sharia

The opposing brothers speak of what they call "gradualism" and cite evidence from the Sunnah and Sharia to prove the validity of the current gradualism, as if by rejecting this gradualism I contradict these evidences they bring. To clarify the matter in more detail, the bulk of what the brothers cite as evidence for gradualism actually falls under two categories:

Prioritization: In presenting and explaining the Sharia to people.
Suspension of a particular legal ruling: In accordance with the Sharia itself, because the conditions for this ruling have not yet been met, making it obligatory to act upon another ruling.

Examples of the Correct Understanding of Gradualism

As for prioritization in presenting and explaining the Sharia, they cite the example of the Prophet (peace be upon him) sending Muadh to Yemen and instructing him to call the people to the two testimonies of faith first, then to prayer, then to zakat.

As for suspending a legal ruling in accordance with the Sharia, this is like suspending the punishment for theft in the case of a hungry, poor thief (during a year of famine), or like dropping some forms of enjoining good and forbidding evil by the Islamic government due to its inability to do so.

I want to clarify that I do not deny any of these matters, but I will explain their validity in the upcoming episodes, God willing. I do not say that the emerging Islamic state should build an Islamic society on the first day, eradicate all evils with the stroke of a pen, and engage in a conflict on all fronts at once.

Problems with the Unlawful Gradualism Proposed Currently

However, I also say: everything that my brothers propose is not evidence for the "unlawful gradualism" that is being advocated these days. The gradualism that we criticize and say is not valid is the one in which one or more of the following problems occur:

Not declaring the sovereignty of the Sharia so that it is not considered the supreme reference governing laws from the beginning.
Seeking permission from the "People's Council" to apply the Sharia (as if the right to legislate belongs to humans).
Enacting temporary man-made laws that contradict the rulings of the Sharia.
Enforcing inherited laws from non-Islamic rule that contradict the Sharia.
Claiming "gradualism in legislation" as if the Sharia is being revealed anew from Allah the Most High.
Linking the application of the Sharia to solving people's economic or security problems first.
Making concessions to reach power, which will have lasting effects and prevent the application of the Sharia later.

These are the problems with the proposed gradualism, and we will dedicate a special episode to explaining the invalidity of each of them, God willing.

Methodology of Responding to Objections

This topic is vast and highly complex, so it must be broken down into smaller elements to respond to objections one after another, and then explain the Islamic solution that the Ummah should follow.

I am now proceeding according to a specific plan, so I ask the brothers who have objections to discuss the "specific point" that I present specifically, rather than rushing things by introducing a new objection. For example: In the first episode, I explained that it is not possible to solve the problems of society before applying the Sharia; it is expected that those who discuss this with me will focus on this point specifically, not leave it and jump to the topic of "Umar's suspension of the punishment for theft, may God be pleased with him," as this is another objection that will have its turn. If we discuss matters in a fragmented and truncated way, we will not do justice to the topic, and the train will derail.

Similarly, in the second episode, I clarified that the ruler will need to enforce social, economic, and political rulings, and if he rules with rulings that agree with the Sharia in some aspects, he will rule with something other than what Allah has revealed in other aspects (if he does not adhere to the Sharia completely as a reference). I expect the objector to discuss this specific point for the response to be methodical.

A Word to the Impatient and Conclusion

Without this order, we will not reach a comprehensive presentation based on sound foundations. And to those who are very impatient, I say: I had previously delivered a series of lectures titled "The Jurisprudence of Concessions" (available on the Furqan website), which the impatient brother can refer to, as it may reassure him that there are answers to the objections he raises.

Brothers, the matter is related to the crisis of the Ummah and the way to its salvation and achieving its submission to Allah by subjecting life to His law; the matter is related to the happiness of both worlds and deserves our effort and patience.

In conclusion: The evidence presented for the gradualism proposed in the arena is not actually evidence for it, but rather evidence for prioritization or the fall of rulings due to incapacity. We will explain the points of failure in the proposed gradualism point by point, God willing.

Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.