← Back to In Support of the Sharia
This content has been automatically translated. View original in Arabic
Greetings and peace be upon you, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
Dear brothers, we are still in the series of defending the Sharia. In the previous episode, we mentioned that whoever carries an Islamic project, if he comes to power, has no choice but to declare the absolute, complete, and exclusive sovereignty of the Sharia from the very first moment. We also mentioned that this does not necessarily mean that he will fulfill all the obligations and abolish all the prohibitions at once, but as long as the law is purely Islamic and the state applies what it can, the Sharia is being applied.
We mentioned practical examples of the great leap that declaring the sovereignty of the Sharia brings, and I promised you to extract important lessons from these examples. Come, my dear beloved, let us review some of these lessons.
Firstly, we noticed that declaring the sovereignty of the Sharia affects everything in society. The society becomes built on the absolute servitude to Allah with this declaration. Acts that were considered crimes under positive laws become permissible, and others that were permissible become crimes. People and properties lose their validity, and others gain it. Cases that were winning become losing, and others that were losing become winning. Agreements are nullified, and others are concluded. All of this happens with the declaration of the application of the Sharia from the very first moment.
Even if the state cannot enforce these rulings all at once, the naming and legal description of them remains of great significance. There is a big difference between an individual knowing that he is doing something forbidden by the state that encourages him, and doing something prohibited that warrants punishment, even if the reward and punishment are delayed until the state's ability and capacity. The description of actions remains of great significance in the behavior of society.
Secondly, we noticed that the alternative to declaring the sovereignty of the Sharia is for the Islamic state to rule by positive Jahili laws. When we say "Islamists in power," they are a state that cannot take a neutral stance towards actions, people, and issues. Either they rule by Islam, or they rule by positive Jahili laws. "Do they seek the judgment of Jahiliyyah? And who is better in judgment than Allah for a people who have certainty."
To clarify this further, I ask you to review the third episode titled "The Serious Meaning of Gradualism." O you who demand not to declare the sovereignty of the Sharia from the very first moment, know what that leads to: the Islamic state becomes the guardian of positive laws, enforcing them, punishing those who violate them, rewarding the disobedient, and punishing the obedient. What remains of its Islamic name at that time? Would you accept the Islamic state to do that even for one day?
O advocates of the condemned gradualism, I have not heard any of the callers say to his listeners in the mosque: "You think that if the Islamists come to power, they will change everything at once. Maybe there is nothing in the laws that will change in the first two or three years, but the people will remain pure." And as you see, brothers, this is extremely dangerous speech, indicating a lack of awareness of the meaning of being in power, or allowing Muslims to govern society with Jahili positive laws.
If nothing changes in the laws, the places where prohibitions are practiced will remain legal as they were in the positive law, and they deserve protection and care from the state against those who want to deny their prohibition. Can you imagine that the Islamic state will eventually appoint bearded guards at the doors of liquor stores and nightclubs? How do you rule? O you who defend gradualism, know what you are defending.
Thirdly, the third benefit of the examples we gave in the previous episode is that truth is one and falsehood is diverse. If the callers do not adhere to declaring the sovereignty of the Sharia, they will stumble in the alternative to that, because they have lost their compass by giving up the truth. So what is after the truth except misguidance? How will you act?
So you see this caller saying: "We may not change anything in the laws in the first two or three years," another estimates it in months, the third in a longer or shorter period. Another says: "We will start with the rulings of the Sharia that the people accept, and we will postpone what they do not accept." Another says: "We will start with the rulings related to morals and behavior, and we will postpone the punishments." Another also says: "We will strengthen the economy and then apply the Sharia."
The matter has become subject to human estimates. The most important matter, the matter of servitude to Allah by applying His law and the caliphate on earth, has become subject to whims, assumptions, and speculations. "And most of them do not follow except assumption. Indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all." Does one think of Allah the Most High that He will leave this crucial matter, the matter of servitude to Allah by applying His law, to the assumptions of humans like this?
So the truth is one, which is in declaring the absolute, complete sovereignty of the Sharia from the very first moment. And whoever abandons that enters into the diversifications, labyrinths, and stumblings of falsehood.
Fourthly: Declaring the sovereignty of the Shariah from the very first moment is a contract between the ruler and the ruled, binding on both parties, preventing either from manipulation. With this, the false immunities even of the rulers fall, for if they deviate from the consequences of this declaration, then the people must hold them accountable and measure their actions against this clear standard, the standard of the Shariah.
Those working for Islam are not infallible if they reach power. What guarantees that they will not be affected by the corruption of power and grandeur that has affected those who have held office before them? Is that reasonable? Yes, it is reasonable, no one is immune. If we see concessions made by some who have not even reached power, what will be the case when they taste the sweetness of titles and walking on red carpets?
And we are commanded to take people by their outward appearances, both in good and evil. It does not benefit us if someone says, "My intention is good." As for intentions, they are a matter between the person and Allah, the Exalted. Therefore, we never accept these vague, slippery statements that are used these days as a substitute for the phrase "judgment by the Shariah" from the very first moment.
These vague, slippery statements are like: "A clear agenda for the gradual implementation of the Shariah," or "We will apply what is in accordance with the spirit of the Shariah," or "So-and-so has a tendency towards the implementation of the Shariah," or "We will legislate laws that achieve the purposes of the Shariah," or "Such-and-such party will strive with swift steps to implement the Shariah," or "He must have a firm intention to implement the Shariah," or "Seriousness in bringing society to the implementation of the Shariah," or "The state will be one with a Shariah reference."
All these statements are slippery and evasive, even if they use words of seriousness, firmness, resolve, and sincerity, they remain slippery and unacceptable. Brothers, the implementation of the Shariah is a contract. Would you accept that you write with your apartment owner a lease agreement whose wording is: "The two parties agree that the tenant will pay 500 dinars monthly in return for the landlord having a clear tendency to rent the apartment"? Would you accept in your marriage contract that it is written: "The two parties agree that the man will pay the dowry in return for the guardian of the woman having a firm intention to marry her to him"? Would you accept that? Would intentions suffice you at that time?
Similarly, the implementation of the Shariah is a contract between the ruler and the ruled. The ruled gives obedience and loyalty and worships Allah by obeying this ruler, in return for the ruler's commitment to implementing the Shariah. And it is a contract with Allah, the Exalted, a contract of servitude and submission to His Shariah, in which such slippery statements are of no avail. If you do not accept these statements in a marriage or lease contract, then it is even more important that you do not accept them in the most critical matter for which you live, the servitude to Allah, the Exalted, by implementing His Shariah.
The phrase "implementation of the Shariah" is specific and can be measured, while phrases like "tendency," "position," "gradualism," "intention," "vision," and "reference" are not specific and cannot be measured. If those who raise such slogans come to power one day, and then their hearts deviate and they are affected by the corruption of the throne, and they want to appease the West not out of fear for their people but out of fear for their thrones, how will their people hold them accountable if they fail in the commands of the Shariah? Some have asked them to implement it, so what prevents these Islamic rulers from saying: "We have a real tendency and a sincere intention to implement the Shariah, but in our estimation the people are not ready and the stage does not suit it, and we see it in our interest not to implement this part of the Shariah now, and we are still gradually implementing the Shariah according to a clear agenda, and in our agenda we must remain at this stage for the next few months"?
If deviation occurs to the Islamic rulers and they justify it with such justifications, what prevents them, especially since their contract with their peoples was slippery from the beginning? At that time, we will enter into a battle over the intentions and differences in assessing the situation, whether it allows or does not allow, and so on.
If this is the fourth lesson from the examples we gave in the previous episode. Are there any more lessons? Yes, but so as not to prolong, let us discuss them in the next episode, God willing.
Allow me now, brothers, to summarize the first four lessons: First: The declaration of the sovereignty of the Shariah brings about a revolution in the balances, concepts, and laws of society from the very first moment. Second: The alternative to this declaration is that the state rules by the secular, ignorant law. Third: Whoever abandons the declaration of the sovereignty of the Shariah will enter into the labyrinths of falsehood. Fourth: The declaration of the sovereignty of the Shariah is a contract that does not accept vague statements.
Summary of the episode: The declaration of the implementation of the Shariah from the very first moment is the sole truth, it is the specific, defined, and measured concept according to the Shariah, by which both the ruler and the ruled are held accountable. And anything other than that is a rule of ignorance and falsehood, and concepts that are not specific or defined leading to the deviation of the ruler and the ruled.
And until we meet in the next episode, God willing. Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.