Series of answers by the eminent scholar Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah, Ameer of Hizb ut Tahrir, to the questions of his Facebook page followers "Fikhi"
Answer to Question
To: Nader Al-Za'tari
Question:
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful,
A question for our Sheikh regarding The Islamic Personality (Al-Shakhsiyya Al-Islamiyya), Volume 3, page 301, the second and third lines, where it says: "As for the branches (furu'), not following them is considered transgression (fisq), so it is not called guidance (huda)." I was told that the word "misguidance" (dalal) should be placed instead of the word "guidance" (huda). Was the word used here by mistake? Thank you.
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh,
The passage you are referring to in the book The Islamic Personality, Volume 3, appears in the chapter "Every consensus (ijma') other than the consensus of the Sahaba is not a Shari’ah evidence." I will quote what is necessary from it to answer your question:
(...As for the consensus of the Ummah, the consensus of the people of authority (ahl al-hall wal-'aqd), and the consensus of the mujtahids, they said that the consensus of the Ummah is a Shari’ah evidence, and they cited as evidence the saying of Allah (swt):
وَمَنْ يُشَاقِقِ الرَّسُولَ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ الْهُدَى وَيَتَّبِعْ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ نُوَلِّهِ مَا تَوَلَّى وَنُصْلِهِ جَهَنَّمَ وَسَاءَتْ مَصِيراً
"And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers - We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination." (An-Nisa [4]: 115)
The point of evidence in this verse is that Allah (swt) threatened against following other than the way of the believers; if that were not prohibited, He would not have threatened against it, and it would not have been appropriate to combine it with the prohibited act of opposing the Messenger ﷺ in the threat. Just as it is not appropriate to threaten against combining disbelief and eating permitted bread, thus following other than the way of the believers is prohibited. Since following other than their way is prohibited, it becomes obligatory to follow their way; because there is no exit from the two, i.e., there is no middle ground between them. The obligation to follow their way necessitates that the consensus of the Ummah is an evidence, because a person's "way" is what he chooses of speech, action, or belief. The answer to this is from three perspectives:
First: Although the verse is definitive in its transmission (qati’ al-thubut), it is speculative in its meaning (dhanni al-dalalah). Therefore, it is not suitable as evidence that the consensus of the Ummah is a Shari’ah evidence; because it must be proven as a Shari’ah evidence through definitive evidence (dalil qati’), as it is from the Usul (foundations), and speculative evidence is not sufficient for it.
Second: *The "guidance" (huda) in the verse means the evidence for the Oneness of Allah and the Prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ and does not mean the Shari’ah rule; because guidance in the Usul has misguidance (dalal) as its opposite. As for the branches (furu'), not following them is considered transgression (fisq), so it is not called guidance (huda).* As for the "way of the believers" which must be followed, it is that by which they became believers, which is Tawhid (monotheism). It does not mandate following them in permissible matters (mubah), nor does it mandate the prohibition of everything that differs from their way; rather, it applies in one instance, which is disbelief (kufr) and the like from the Usul where there is no disagreement. What indicates that it is obligatory to follow the way of the believers in what made them believers is that the verse was revealed concerning a man who apostatized. The reason for the revelation of the verse defines the subject about which it was revealed, even if it applies generally to everything that fits this subject. Thus, the verse is specific to the subject of apostasy (riddah) and does not generalize to every way of the believers.) End of quote from the book The Islamic Personality.
In order to clarify the answer to your question: Is it as it appeared in the text above "so it is not called guidance (huda)" or as your friend said "so it is not called misguidance (dalal)", we must clarify the meaning of the word "guidance" (huda):
1- Guidance (Huda) in the Usul means the Aqeedah (creed), i.e., belief in Allah, His Messengers, His Books... etc., and the opposite of guidance is misguidance (dalal).
2- The text of the verse confirms this, as Allah threatened those who are not on guidance with Hell and an evil destination, meaning whoever is not on guidance is a disbeliever. Thus, guidance is the Islamic Aqeedah and not the Shari’ah rules (ahkam). Consequently, not following guidance is disbelief, i.e., misguidance, but not following a Shari’ah rule is transgression (fisq).
3- This is also confirmed by the reason for the verse's revelation which we mentioned earlier—that it was revealed regarding a man who apostatized and applies to everyone who apostatizes. Therefore, guidance in the verse is the Aqeedah, because the one who apostatizes is not upon guidance, i.e., he becomes a disbeliever. So guidance is the Islamic Aqeedah.
4- From the above, the matter is as follows:
a- The one to whom guidance—meaning the Aqeedah of Islam—becomes clear, and then he opposes the Messenger and follows other than the way of the believers in terms of the Oneness of Allah and belief, is a misaligned disbeliever who will enter Hell and an evil destination. This means that guidance is following the way of the believers, meaning the belief they hold. The opposite of guidance in this sense is misguidance (dalal).
b- As for following Shari’ah rules (furu'), it is not the "guidance" mentioned in the noble verse; rather, it is the righteousness of action (salah al-'amal), and its opposite is transgression (fisq).
c- This means that following the Usul (foundations), i.e., the Aqeedah, is guidance (huda), and not following it is misguidance (dalal). Following the furu' (branches) is righteousness of action, and not following it is transgression (fisq).
5- Now let us ponder the text:
("The guidance in the verse means the evidence for the Oneness of Allah and the Prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ and does not mean the Shari’ah rule; because guidance in the Usul has misguidance as its opposite.
As for the branches, not following them is considered transgression, so it is not called guidance (huda).") As you can see, the text consists of two sentences:
The first: Not following the Usul, i.e., belief, is called (misguidance)... and following the Usul, i.e., belief, is called (guidance).
The second: Not following the furu', i.e., Shari’ah rules, is called (transgression)... and following the furu', i.e., Shari’ah rules, is called (righteousness of action).
As you can see, the text is clear in the first sentence. As for the second sentence, the first part is clear: not following the branches is transgression. But in the second part, we used a pronoun: "فلا يطلق عليه الهدى" (so it is not called guidance). It is understood from the context that the pronoun here refers back to "following" (al-ittiba') because in the first part of the sentence, we mentioned "not following," and thus the second part is about "following." The pronoun in "عليه" (on it) refers to "following" (al-ittiba'), meaning: (so following the branches is not called guidance). Thus, the word "guidance" (huda) here is correct, and it is not as your friend said ("misguidance").
Consequently, the meaning of the second sentence is thus: (As for the branches, not following them is considered transgression, and following the branches is not called guidance).
I hope this is sufficient, and Allah is All-Knowing and All-Wise.
Your brother, Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
04 Safar 1442 AH 21/09/2020 CE
Link to the answer from the Ameer's Facebook page: Facebook
Link to the answer from the Ameer's website: Web