Episode 24 - Blind Imitation of Scholars

Blind Following of Scholars

Theological confusion increases confusion and theological ambiguity, which is the opposite of the expected role of scholars. We have taken an example of this in the words of Dr. Muhammad Ismail Al-Muqaddam before the revolution and compared it to what came after the revolution.

Let us take an example today from scholars who were a great reference for the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Abdul Majid Al-Shazly may Allah preserve him, who had joined the Brotherhood then was influenced by the thoughts of Sayyid Qutb may Allah have mercy on him, and was one of the founders of what is now known as the call of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah in Egypt.

Sheikh Abdul Majid Al-Shazly's Position on Theological Confusion

He may Allah preserve him said in his article "The Religious Discourse and the Political Discourse": "The condition of any political movement is that it should not be at the expense of theological clarity nor at the expense of its explanation, but rather to remove the confusion therein." This means that political movement must be free from confusion in matters of creed, but it must also be accompanied by an explanation of our creed and the correction of misconceptions in people's minds.

Then he said: "This discourse and this movement are servants of the launch of the call and the consolidation of correct theological concepts." This means that the goal of political movement should be to consolidate correct theological concepts, not to sell the goal for the sake of the means, so that we confuse concepts for the sake of political movement.

Then he said: "Therefore, any political movement for Muslims requires clarity of the theological dimension, not recognizing the legitimacy of secular systems, and that this movement should not be a detractor from the theological capital, but rather Muslims and their revivalist movements should be clear in creed and orientation, clear to the enemy opponent as well as to the agreeing friend."

Focus on this speech, I will need it when we see that there are statements issued by democrats in extreme error and confusion in the most dangerous issues of slavery, sovereignty, and the legitimacy of positive constitutions, and yet defenders defend them as political statements, as if they are exempt from legal controls because they are intended to deceive the enemy, because taqiyya in matters of creed and fundamental issues leads to confusion of the truth for the masses.

Then Al-Shazly said: "The experience of the known Islamic currents that took the political path at the expense of their beliefs and theological constants, did not even pay attention to the legal constants, but even denied them at times" until he said about these currents: "They lost the concepts that must be conveyed, and created confusion and disorder in them that caused an obstacle to the revival of the nation."

Therefore, he affirms that these currents have confused the theological constants and caused disorder in them, and consequently hindered the movement of the revival of the nation. I do not know if this speech is about the parties that participated in parliamentary work, who would that be?

Then he said: "The duty now for Muslims is not to go to rigged elections with theological confusion, loss of legal concepts, and severe weakness of Muslims, lack of clarity for their issues or positions, but rather the duty is to clarify the truth, explain the correct concept of monotheism, remove the ambiguity in concepts, orientations, and creed in general, and strive in the project of reviving the nation."

Dr. Muhammad Ismail Al-Muqaddam's Position

This speech of his is like the speech of Dr. Al-Muqaddam, as he said: "The application of the Sharia that is relied upon in this field does not begin with the selection of some legal rulings and their codification and imposition on people" meaning parliamentary work, "but it begins with the reform of this greater defect that has spread its filthy spirit in all the strongholds of the nation, which is the principle of the sovereignty of the nation in the Western term."

Therefore, the statements of the two scholars may Allah preserve them agree that the most important duties at this time are to clarify the truth, explain the correct concept of monotheism, remove the ambiguity in concepts, and reform this greater defect that has spread its filthy spirit in all the strongholds of the nation, which is the principle of the sovereignty of the nation. And this is the duty that we claim to practice with this series, by the permission of Allah, a series in support of the Sharia.

The Contradiction Between Words and Actions

The strange and very strange thing is that Sheikh Al-Shazly may Allah preserve him now supports presidential parliamentary work in Egypt, and mobilizes people to elect the president on the basis that the call - meaning his group, the call of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah - emphasizes respect for positive judiciary and law. And we have seen that the Sharia is no longer mentioned in the speeches, and we have seen promises to parties to include them in writing the constitution of the state in exchange for electing the Islamic candidate.

I say to you, O Sheikh, that I have criticized candidates before because they say: "We want the principles of the Sharia, not rulings or texts." And now we have seen the resounding failure by keeping the term principles of Islamic Sharia, while the Jews and Christians have secured for themselves the right to refer to their laws. And we have seen the current president when he was facing during his electoral campaign the question of the Sharia, he insists that he adheres to the principles of the Sharia. Where is your denial, O noble Sheikh? Where is the clarification? Where is the clarification of the truth and the removal of ambiguity in concepts, orientations, and creed that you have emphasized?

Where is your denial, O Dr. Al-Muqaddam and Sheikh Al-Shazly, of what you considered before a crime and a denial of the legal constants? Where is the removal of confusion and disorder and the fight against the concepts that have spread their filthy spirit in the strongholds of the nation? Why, O Sheikh Al-Shazly may Allah preserve you, do we see your recent articles that do not contain any denial but absolute support and talk about dissolving the Supreme Constitutional Court, restoring parliament, and other steps that will not avail as long as the basic concepts are distorted as you taught us when you clarified that the duty is not to elect with theological confusion and loss of concepts.

Dealing with the Mistakes of Scholars

Brothers, the previous statements of scholars regarding the prohibition of doctrinal deception are clear, and the occurrence of this deception is a reality that is clear to us, as we will see from our follow-ups, discussions, and monitoring of the flaws in people's concepts, God willing.

Here, we have two options: either we say, "Our scholars know best," and indeed, they are aware of the reality, even if their previous statements supported by evidence lead us to conclude that they are wrong in supporting democratic work and their silence about the practices that confuse doctrine. Perhaps they have seen what we have not, and we will not be more pious or more concerned about religion than them, especially since one of them has spent more time in preaching than the entire life of one of us. Who are we to correct them?

Brothers, this approach is the one we criticize the Sufis for, who say, "The sheikh's heart has been spoken to by his Lord," and who entrust their minds to their sheikhs and believe in the revelations that open up to them. If you dispute about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. Allah has made obedience absolutely to Him and His Messenger: "Obey Allah and obey the Messenger," and He did not say, "And obey those in authority among you," but "And those in authority among you," making the obedience of those in authority, including scholars, secondary to the obedience of Allah and His Messenger.

Then, He confirmed this meaning and clarified what should be done if we dispute with the scholars or the scholars dispute among themselves: "If you disagree about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger." Therefore, the requirement is to follow the evidence. Thus, we differ from the Jews and Christians who took their rabbis and monks as lords besides Allah, making the forbidden permissible for them and the permissible forbidden, and they followed them. Therefore, Allah linked faith to this reference to Him and His Messenger: "Refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is better and a better interpretation." Otherwise, our fate would be like that of the Jews and Christians.

So, how can we come to these scholars with some of their own words, and their mistakes are not a matter of consensus, but a number of trustworthy scholars share our view. Therefore, we have no choice but the second option, which is to say that our scholars were wrong in supporting what has been proven in reality to deceive people about their doctrine, and by their silence about these ongoing practices, they were also wrong. We have eyes that see, ears that hear, minds that reason, and reality.

Question for the Next Episode

There is one issue left that we want to address. Someone might say: Why do you not consider that these scholars were exaggerating in their previous fatwa when they prohibited both minor and major doctrinal deception and considered it among the crimes? Is it not possible that some deception and deception of the people and some corrupt political statements are permissible by the Sharia? Is it not possible that these evils are acceptable in exchange for great interests, especially if our intention is to work in the future to reform this deception?

This is the question we will answer in the next episode, God willing, to conclude the theoretical aspect of judging the deception of the people, and then we will move on to reading reality and applying the theoretical rules to it, God willing.

Summary of the Episode

The summary of the episode is a statement by Sheikh Shadhali, word for word: "The condition of any political movement is that it should not be at the expense of doctrinal clarity or at the expense of its explanation, but rather to remove the deception from it." Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.