← Back to In Support of the Sharia
This content has been automatically translated. View original in Arabic
Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.
These examples indicate gradualism, and they use them to prove the validity of the proposed gradualism, as if by rejecting gradualism I am contradicting these examples they bring. With more detail and clarification, the summary of what the brothers want from examples and consider it evidence for gradualism is either that in reality it is evidence of prioritizing the order in presenting and explaining the Shariah to people, or evidence of suspending a certain Shariah ruling in accordance with the Shariah, because the conditions of this ruling have not been met yet, so it is obligatory to act upon another ruling.
As for prioritizing the order in presenting and explaining the Shariah, it is their argument that the Prophet (peace be upon him) sent Muadh to Yemen and directed him to call the people to the two testimonies of faith first, then prayer, then zakat.
As for suspending the Shariah ruling in accordance with the Shariah, it is the suspension of the punishment for theft against the hungry poor thief, or the dropping of some forms of enjoining good and forbidding evil by the Islamic government due to its inability to do so and its inability to carry it out.
Our brothers call this gradualism, then they use it to prove the validity of the gradualism proposed in the Islamic arena. To clarify to my brothers, I would like to explain that I do not deny any of these three things, 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 evil with the stroke of a pen, and enter into a conflict on all fronts at once.
However, at the same time, I say: everything that my brothers propose is not evidence of the unlawful gradualism that is being called for these days. Because the gradualism proposed, which we criticize and say is not valid in this series, has one or more of the following major problems:
These are the problems in the proposed gradualism that is being called for, and we will dedicate a special episode to explaining the invalidity of each of them, God willing.
There remains here an important point: our topic is huge and very complex, so it must be broken down into small elements to respond to the doubts one after the other, and then explain the Shariah solution that the nation should follow. I am now following a certain plan for that, so I hope that my brothers who want to object will discuss the specific part that I present, instead of rushing things by introducing a new doubt.
For example, in the first episode, I explained that it is not possible to solve the problems of society before applying the Shariah. Is there any disagreement on that? I expect those who will discuss with me to discuss this point specifically, for example, by saying to me: what you have presented as evidence does not support the correctness of your conclusion, but there is evidence that it can be solved before applying the Shariah. But my brothers leave this point and say: Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) suspended the punishment for theft in the year of famine. Brothers, this is a completely different doubt that will have its turn, God willing. If I discuss it with the objector in the form of a truncated, incomplete response, we will not do justice to the topic, and the train will go off the tracks.
Similarly, in the second episode, I explained that saying that problems should be solved before applying the Shariah is a belittling of the value of the Shariah, for if he rules with rulings in accordance with the Shariah in some of it, he will rule with what Allah has not revealed in the other part. I expect the objector to discuss this specific point, and at that time the response will be ready, God willing.
Brothers, without that, we will not reach an organized, comprehensive presentation based on sound foundations. And to those who are very impatient, I say: I had previously delivered a series of lectures entitled "The Jurisprudence of Concessions," and the series is available on the Furqan website. So, the impatient brother can refer to it, although it does not cover everything I want to present, but it may reassure him that there is an answer to the doubts he raises.
Brothers, the matter is related to the crisis of the nation and the way of its salvation and the achievement of its servitude to Allah by subjecting life to His law. The matter is related to the happiness of both worlds, which deserves our effort and patience. May Allah bless you.
Our interim plan for the upcoming episodes, God willing, is to first clarify that what our brothers, the defenders of gradualism, propose is in fact evidence of prioritizing the order in explaining the Shariah, or the fall of certain Shariah rulings and acting upon other Shariah rulings from the Shariah, and not evidence of the gradualism they defend. Then we will point out the points of failure in the proposed gradualism point by point, God willing.
In conclusion: the evidence presented for the gradualism proposed in the arena is not evidence for it. Until we meet again in the next episode, God willing. Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.