Episode 25 - Blocking the Means to Polytheism in Legislation Is a Priority!

Block the Means to Shirk in Legislation First!

Introduction: The Rule of Blocking the Means and Its Application

The rule of blocking the means, and widen its gaps. In this episode, we mention this rule to the scholars and call upon them to apply it. Here, it is necessary to note that the distorted practices we criticize in democratic political work are not a means to the prohibited, but they are prohibited in themselves. Indeed, some of them are a negation of the foundations of Islam. Writing democracy and calling for the election of democrats is prohibited in itself for reasons we have detailed in the word "The Stance on Elections."

So why talk about blocking the means then? To say to the scholars and callers: If you prohibit statements and actions that are a means to the prohibited, how about the prohibited itself? Especially since we are not talking about minor issues, but about the greatest prohibited, about shirk in legislation, and about wasting servitude. Is it not more befitting for you to renounce it and warn against it instead of calling people to engage in it and elect its practitioners, then remaining silent about their misguided actions, to the extent that these statements and actions are stamped with your approval?

Therefore, we repeat: The participation of Islamists from different methodological spectrums in democratic work has caused the pollution of people's beliefs and concepts, not just that it contains practices that may lead to this pollution in the future.

The Sharia's Stance on Statements Leading to Shirk

Here, we will review the stance of the Sharia on words and phrases that can lead to the pollution of people's beliefs. We will then say to the scholars and callers: If Allah, the Exalted, has prohibited these statements and actions even if the belief of their owner is pure and untainted, He, the Exalted, has prohibited them because they are a means to the corruption of belief, so how about when this corruption, confusion, and mixing have actually occurred?

And we will say to the scholars and callers: You have always applied and differentiated the rule of blocking the means for sins that can be forgiven, so where is your blocking of the means to shirk? The shirk that is not forgiven in matters of democracy, the sovereignty of the people, rule, and legislation.

Examples from the Sunnah on Blocking the Means

• Blocking the Means to Excess in Glorifying the Prophet (peace be upon him): Allah named His Messenger a slave in the most honorable of positions, and this is a blocking of the means to excess in glorifying the Prophet, knowing that the ultimate a human can reach in ranks of greatness is servitude to Allah. And the Prophet forbade excess in his praise, saying: "Do not exaggerate in my praise as the Christians exaggerated in the praise of the son of Mary. I am only a slave, so say: Slave of Allah and His Messenger," blocking the means to exaggeration in his glorification.

• Blocking the Means to Shirk in Graves: And he (peace be upon him) said shortly before his death: "May the curse of Allah be upon the Jews and the Christians." Ibn Taymiyyah said: "He (peace be upon him) forbade the building of mosques on graves, cursed those who did so, forbade the enlargement of graves and honoring them, commanded their leveling, forbade praying to them and near them, and forbade lighting lamps on them, lest that be a means to taking them as idols. And He prohibited that for those who intended it and those who did not intend it." Meaning, He prohibited these acts of glorification or adornment for those who intended to take them as idols and those who did not intend it. He said: "And He prohibited that for those who intended it and those who did not intend it, but intended the opposite, blocking the means." Meaning, even for those who intended to single out Allah, the Exalted, for worship, all acts that may be a means one day to shirk in graves are prohibited for them.

• Blocking the Means to Resembling the Polytheists: And the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbade praying after Asr and after Fajr, blocking the means to resembling the polytheists who used to prostrate to the sun at these times, even though this resemblance, as Ibn al-Qayyim said, hardly occurs to the mind of the one praying. For it is not among the Muslims that it occurs to their mind if they pray at these times resembling the disbelievers, but the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) wanted to block the means of resemblance completely.

• Blocking the Means to the Return of Shirk: And a man vowed during his lifetime (peace be upon him) to sacrifice camels at Bawaanah (a place), so the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Was there - meaning in Bawaanah - an idol of the idols of ignorance that was worshipped?" They said: No. He said: "Was there a festival of their festivals there?" They said: No. So the Prophet commanded him to fulfill his vow. Note: Was there an old idol and not now? All of this is blocking the means to the return of shirk.

• Blocking the Means to Equating in Glorification with Allah: And he (peace be upon him) forbade swearing by the fathers and by anything other than Allah, but said in the good hadith: "Whoever swears by other than Allah has disbelieved or committed shirk." All of this is blocking the means to equating in glorification with Allah, the Exalted.

• Blocking the Means to Shirk in Phrases: And the Messenger of Allah forbade his companions from saying: "As Allah willed and as you willed," and he condemned the preacher who said: "Whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has been guided, and whoever disobeys them has gone astray." He condemned him. All of this is a breaking of the material of shirk even in phrases. And he (peace be upon him) said: "Let no one say: Feed your lord and give drink to your lord," meaning your master, "but let him say: My master and my patron, and let no one say: My slave, my servant, but let him say: My boy, my girl, my servant." The hadith is agreed upon, even though the phrases "my lord" meaning my master and "my slave" meaning my servant girl, all of these were used in language without the intention of shirk. Al-Baghawi said: "So, including his slave under this name, the name of a slave, suggests partnership," meaning with Allah, the Exalted. Look, just because it suggests, the Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibited it.

• Blocking the Means to Fitna in Social Interactions: And the Messenger of Allah forbade a man to bow to his friend when he meets him. All of this, why? Preservation of the purity of belief.

Double Standards in Blocking Means of Deviation

Do you not acknowledge, O scholars, who have mobilized people for parliamentary and presidential elections and voted 'yes' in the referendum, do you not acknowledge all that you have presented, rather you have taught and spread it? So where is your guardianship of Tawheed (monotheism)? And where is your decisive stance against the material of deception? And where is your blocking of means of deviation?

When the speaker says to the people, "You are the legitimacy that nothing is above," when he says in his first speech, "You have what you will and prevent what you will." Which is closer to shirk (polytheism) and more deserving to be denied as a means of deviation: calling the master 'Lord' with pure intention? Or the statement, "Sovereignty belongs to the people alone, and the people are the source of all authorities," which means the lordship of legislation with corrupt intention that is entrenched in the hearts of the people?

Which is closer to shirk and more deserving to be denied as a means of deviation: lighting lamps on graves? Or expressions of exaltation for the constitutional law and swearing to respect it? Does it make sense that the Sharia prohibits prostrating to Allah at sunrise and sunset to block means of deviation, yet allows swearing to respect the constitution, a constitution that makes legislation for humans without Allah? What is wrong with you and how do you judge?

Which is closer to shirk: the phrase "As Allah wills and as you will"? Or "The people are the source of all authorities" and the statement "Judgments are issued and executed in the name of the people"? These are not phrases of "As Allah wills and as the people will," but "As the people will" alone. Yet, you have mobilized people to agree to a constitution that includes these phrases, and there is no power except with Allah.

Did you not prohibit people from hanging a picture of a deceased father, considering that this act is exaltation and a means of deviation to shirk, so you prevent them from doing so with a single statement and do not see them as open to debate, until this became one of the characteristics of the Salafi call? So where is your firmness and resolve in denying the electoral campaigns for hanging a giant picture of a president who will rule by other than what Allah has revealed?

Did you not exercise extreme caution in blocking means of deviation in the relationship between genders, to the extent that you prohibited the use of Facebook for a period of time? Sheikh Yasser Burhami was asked about chatting between genders, and he said, "Closing this door is a means of blocking deviation," meaning chatting between genders due to the fitan (temptations) it contains. I do not deny the caution in this matter, but I say: blocking means of deviation for ideological deception is more important, O scholars.

Did you not insist on the obligation of the niqab (face veil) and mention as one of your arguments blocking the means of deviation to fitna (temptation), and present this as the sole statement that does not accept any debate? Is not blocking the means of deviation for ideological deception more important and more deserving not to accept any debate?

Does not our rigidity in thinking lead us to the fact that the shirk (polytheism) of idols and graves was the most dangerous phenomenon at the time of the revelation of the message? We deny the statement of those who say, "We want to apply the principles of the Sharia only," and it is said to us, "But he said in another place, 'We want the rule of the Sharia.'"

Did the Prophet, peace be upon him, not prohibit ambiguous phrases that lead to ideological corruption, even if the companions sometimes used other correct phrases? For they sometimes swore by their fathers, but they also sometimes swore by Allah alone. So how is it that the companions, with all of this, were sound in their beliefs, fighting for all legislation to be for Allah, while those who make statements containing shirk of legislation and clear justification for ruling by other than what Allah has revealed, implement these statements on the ground, and the statements of applying the Sharia remain mere promises in the air that tickle the emotions of those who demand it, with no share in reality.

Contradiction in Understanding People

Here we notice a strange duality. The defenders of the democratic path justify these corrupt statements by saying that "people understand everything." People understand everything, and these statements will not deceive people because they know that they are merely military maneuvering. Meanwhile, these same defenders justify the suspension of the Sharia by saying, "People have ignorance of the concepts of religion and distorted perceptions of it, so how do you want us to apply the Sharia on them all at once?" Glory be to Allah! For these defenders, people sometimes understand everything and are protected against ideological deception, and other times they are ignorant with corrupted concepts, according to the interest of the defenders of the democratic path.

Then, are people more understanding of the creed and more immune to deception than the companions of the Prophet, peace be upon him, whom the Messenger of Allah prohibited these phrases to block means of deviation?

Conclusion: Failure of the Democratic Path in Blocking Means of Shirk

In conclusion, the followers of the democratic path have not only failed to block the means of deviation to shirk of legislation, but they have also made statements containing clear shirk of legislation and justification for ruling by other than what Allah has revealed. Then we see these statements being implemented on the ground. Our problem is not that they said, "As Allah wills and as the people will," but they said, "As the people will alone." Then this was not a mistake in expression corrected by reality, but a conviction that bore its evil fruits in the concepts of people and in the system of rule and legislation.

In the next episode, we will present the concept of the sovereignty of the people and its effects on the beliefs and perceptions of people, and we will monitor the extent of the spread of these effects in Islamic societies, with the permission of Allah.

End of the Episode

If scholars block means of deviation to prohibited acts, then blocking means of deviation to shirk of legislation and ruling by other than what Allah has revealed is more important. Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.