Summary of Sunni concepts
Two suspicions and the response to them
Two doubts respond to the right statement regarding the issue of ruling according to Sharia law
We mention them below and respond to them
Firstly
Some see silence regarding the statement of this blatant disbelief
The straw of strife
Because of the evils that his statement entails, as they claim
What is more important in their view is patience and silence
So say reformers
He is able to speak out and confront tyrants
To answer that, we say:
There is a difference between clarification and change
What we are currently calling for is a statement by tongue or pen
Without changing it by hand and teeth
Change is through struggle and confrontation
He is the one who is required to have the ability
Benefits and harms are taken into account
As for the statement of monotheism
He is the most well known
With which one should confront major polytheism
This cannot be delayed under any circumstances
Because major polytheism is major temptation
Contained in the words of God Almighty
Sedition is worse than murder
And the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace
When the words of God Almighty were revealed to him
Arise and warn
He was weak in Mecca
His companions hide their Islam
So he stood up and declared the truth
He explained polytheism and warned against it
But he postponed the change by force
Until he is able to do so
The idols did not disappear from around the Kaaba
Except for the conquest of Mecca in the eighth year of the Hijri year
That is, the evil continued for twenty-one years
It is the sum of the Meccan era
Eight years of civil covenant
While warning against it and stating the truth
It was invented from the first mission of the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace
The second suspicion
It boils down to what has emerged recently
From some evil advocates
Whoever exceeds the limit of silence in stating the truth on this issue
To belittle it
And defending those rulers who fall into it
Praying that this is just a sin
It is not a greater polytheism
As long as the legislator is for the rule of someone other than God
He did not deny God's ruling, nor did his action become permissible
He is one of those who say
There is no god but God
They argue against this with the saying narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with them both
In interpreting the words of God Almighty
And whoever does not rule by what God has revealed
Those are the disbelievers
He said disbelief without disbelief
This understanding is one of them
Clear error
A strange mix of things
As it is merely changing God’s law
And recovery from it through other human legislation
This in itself is greater blasphemy
Whether derivation exists or not
Because the texts were not derived
Which indicates disbelief instead of Sharia
And he ruled without the law of the Most Gracious
To replace this is just
Prayers were brought by these people
Of the structures of their thoughts
But it is required because the ruling
Contrary to Sharia law, it is sin and not disbelief
The following conditions or restrictions
First, to be sovereign
The origin of the ruling is based on the book
And the Sunnah and what is done
In people's reality
Secondly, there must be a dissenting ruling
Sharia law makes an exception for specific incidents
Not in general matters
It is not imposed on people as such
A binding public law
Rather, it is an honor from the ruler
Or a relative, for example, of the arbitrator
To him is falsehood and ruler
This is at great risk
He committed a major sin
Even if it does not reach the point of disbelief
Thirdly, not to believe
The judge or ruler solved what he did
If I think it will be solved
Unanimous disbelief, that is
Disbelief without disbelief
He said this in his debate with the Kharijites
Those who disbelieve in sin
They want the scholars to approve of them
In expiating the rulers of injustice
Who ruled in some districts
In violation of Sharia
Following whims or ignorance of the ruling
They justify them with that approval
It also indicates that this
He is Murad bin Abbas, may God be pleased with them both
The picture of changing the law is one way
Commons did not exist
Originally, the time of Ibn Abbas
This did not occur to anyone
No one thinks it's just a joke
It is permissible for him to rule Muslims
Without God’s law, nor to be enacted
Contrary to the Qur’an and Sunnah
Then he obliges people to resort to it
But this appeared during the era of the Tatars
When Genghis Khan wrote
Eliasa's book and make it a reference
Judgment between people has been mixed up
Between legislation for Muslims
And others for the religions of the People of the Book and others
And some prevailing customs and traditions
What he wants is laws and legislation
The Sheikh of Islam issued a fatwa
Because of his disbelief and his followers who support him
Disbelief that takes one out of the religion
It was permissible to fight them