Question

I have had this question for some time regarding Shaykh Yoosuf al-Qaradaawi, his books, thoughts and methodology. For in the beginning of my learning the Religion, I read some of his books and found them to be good. I was an Ikhwaanee at that time. But after a number of years my understanding and outlook increased, and I read much from the books of the righteous Salaf, where I found my direction that I had lost and Allaah Guided me to the Manhaj that I find to be true and the correct creed by which salvation is possible. During my searches on the website “Minbar of Tawheed and Jihaad” on the internet (Abu Muhammad’s website), I learned more and more about the Saved Sect and the major signs of the Victorious Aided Group, so I increased in my love and adherance to it. Everytime I read more pieces regarding Shaykh al-Qaradaawi, I realized the extent of his mistakes and what he had fallen into, most specifically in his understanding of democracy, freedom, and his position towards the rulers and Taaghoot, etc. But I also noticed that some people attack him with the harshest of labels, such as al-Kalbaawee (the dog), al-Jarbaawee (another mockery), and I heard an audio tape titled “Silencing the Barking Dog, Yoosuf al-Qaradaawi” [by Muqbil bin Haadi al-Waadi'i). Other labels included, al-Qirdaawi [i.e. the monkey], the deviant deviator, the scholar of deviance calling to the gates of Hellfire, etc.

So my question, if the Shaykh made mistakes, is it befitting of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah and those who call themselves Salafiyoon, the real ones and claimants, to swear about him, mock him, curse him, instead of opposing him and exlaining his mistakes in an academic soft fashion distant from accusations and attacks?!

My second question: What is our position as Muslims with regards to this Shaykh? Should we consider him a scholar who can be relied upon in his statements, and reject what is false? Or is he not befitting of such, but rather he is a deviant innovator? Does his innovation reach the level of sin or Major Kufr?

The third question: If the people of Ra’yi (opinions) differed with the people of Hadeeth, and they had differed from the longest of times, and permitted this difference, and were loving brothers, then why do we not permit it today and respect each other since the pure Shar' recognized such, like in the Hadeeth of Bani Quraythah? Isn’t this extremism, harshness, and exaggeration, like they claim?

Lastly, we hope from you, oh Shaykh to say a sufficient fulfilling word regarding this person so that we can be sure and certain in our position regarding him. May Allaah Bless you and Reward you the best of rewards.

Answer

All Praise to Allaah, Lord of the creation.

We don’t agree with using these sharp phrases mentioned in the question, whether with al-Qaradaawi or others. This is because a Muslim should not be one who curses, stabs, or swears. The Muslims should be better than this. But this does not prevent applying the Shar'i terms and rules, like declaring corruption or deviance or Major Kufr, etc., upon al-Qaradaawi for what he deserves, or upon others. This is the case if the person has some aspects which necessitate these labels and rules.

As for your question regarding the person of al-Qaradaawi:

I say: The man had a good beginning, and useful knowledge-based productions in the beginning stage of his educational and teaching life. But it is believed that later on he changed and retracted many of his views, and diverted a great divergence, unlike what we knew him to be in the beginning of his knowledge-seeking, and from what he's offered this religion. But actions are by their seals, and with what a man is sealed with, as is in the hadeeth, "Do not be over-impressed by a mans actions until you see with what he is sealed with, for a man may do good for all his life, had he died upon it, he would have entered paradise, but he changes and does what is bad," we ask Allah, the Most High, to keep us firm, and to grant us a good seal.

If you ask: How has he changed, and what has he replaced?

I say: His changing and replacing occurred in a number of ways and places

His closeness to the tawagheet and the oppressive rulers and his praise for them, and his defense of them; and this is well known about him, famous and is known by anyone who knows the least about this man!

He calls for democracy in its ideological shirki form, propagates it, and calls for the freedom of the apostate secularist parties and for allowing them to take authority in the land if the majority elect it, and we had replied to him on this point in our book, Hukm al-Islaam Fil-Demoqraatiyyah wat-Ta'adudiyyah al-Hizbiyyah [The Ruling of Islaam upon Democracy and Multi-Political Parties] in over eighty pages, which you could read and find out more about in particular.

It comes from his praise of the Rawaafid Shee'ah, his belittlement of our differences with them, his entering in their muwalaat [friendship, allegiance, etc], despite all that they commit from clear disbelief in the Book and the Sunnah and in their actions towards the companions of the Prophet, and other than it!

It comes from his pleas to leave the idols which were worshipped besides Allah in Afghanistan, submitting to the wishes and orders of the tawagheet who rule, who assigned him for this filthy task, that will always be considered a black spot in the life of this man, that cannot be cleansed except by deep regret, crying and repentance in front of the people!

It comes from his mockery of the Creator. He [al-Qaradaawi] is the one who stood on the pulpit on Friday, and said to the people, after he had praised the democracy of the accursed Israel, "Had Allah appointed himself to be elected, He would have not attained this number of votes"; i.e. 99.99% that is achieved by the Arab rulers.

When this statement was narrated to ash-Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen, he said, "This is apostasy," due to it incorporating mockery and the elevation of the creation over the Creator, "He must be asked to repent - to announce his repentance on the same pulpit that he made this disbelieving word of his - and if he doesn't repent, he is to be killed as an apostate." The Shaykh was correct in what he said, and this is what we say ourselves.

It comes from his making permissible what is known as prohibited by necessity in the religion of Allah:

- Like his permitting for a woman to sing in theatres and with the usage of music.

- [His permitting] of some of the prohibited commercial transactions, as came in the bulletin published by the European Committee for Verdicts and Research, that is lead by al-Qaradaawi, and in it came a summary of the advices that they reached in their second meeting, that was held in Ireland:

1. "The Committee permits the selling of alcohol and pork in the supermarkets that are owned by Muslims if there is a need to sell it, and the Committee states as a condition that those types of products are little in comparison to the general sales.

2. "The Committee declares it prohibited to sell alcohol in restaurants because it forms a large portion of the sales.

3. "The Committee permits the buying of homes, cars via banks and instalments.

4. "The Committee permits the mixing of women and men in one place, like classes and lectures and the social gatherings, if done in accordance with the Shar'ee principles," and he considers the word 'free-mixing' to be new to Islamic terminology.

5. "The Committee permits the eating of food that has little amount of prohibited ingredients, like pork and its fat, as long as it doesn't exceed 1%.

6. "The Committee stresses the importance of abiding by the laws of the country that one resides in.

7. "The Committee permits the participation in the local elections, as long as it benefits the Muslims".

I say: This is clear falsehood, where what is prohibited by Allah - by text and consensus - is permitted in unequivocal terms. They were all issued in the name of al-Qaradaawi, and with his signature and acceptance of it, and due to this, it has become commonplace in the European lands [to do the above], and there is no power or change except with Allah's help!

Due to these reasons and others, we say he has changed and replaced, permitted what Allah had prohibited, and fallen into the clear disbelief, and we do not see any obstacle from doing takfeer of him unless he repents openly and in address of the people, from all that has been mentioned of disbelief from this person, and is affirmed from him, and Allah knows best.

This judgement that we have issued here concerning this man is not a result of hastiness, or from the understanding of the extremists in takfeer, but rather it is after long comprehension in the obstacles, causes and results of doing takfeer, and after a long patient silence, after which we began fearing sinning by keeping quiet, especially since the fitnah of this man has become wide-spread and popular, and many have begun asking questions concerning him, his positions, statements and fiqh. So we found that it is necessary to express the Shar'ee ruling concerning this man, that we see, although [we understand] that this ruling may not be pleasing to a particular people who know nothing but partisanship to the man and his personality. And Allah is our account-holder and is best to rely upon.

If you ask: Why a public repentance?

I say: Because his announced his disbelief, and said the word of disbelief to the people, therefore he must repent and explain his repentance to the people, so that we recant this Takfeer of him, and holding him as an apostate, as Allah, the Most High says: "Except those who repent, and do good, and explained [their repentance], then those I will forgive and I am the forgiving, the merciful".

As for your question regarding allowing love and closeness between Muslims regardless of these differences:

I say: This is needed and obligatory but when the difference is of a legitimate nature. This type of difference should not destroy the love that should exist between two brothers.

But if the difference is in the fundamentals and established principles, like Tawheed, the issues of Kufr and Eemaan, declaring Halaal the Haraam, or declaring Haraam the Halaal, from what is known by the necessity of faith, then this type of difference we cannot be silent about nor can love and respect remain to exist between the two opposing parties. So it is not like the first type of differences. Examples regarding this from the Sunnah and history of the Salaf are greater than being possibly gathered here in this answer.

And Allah knows best.

'Abd al-Mun'im Mustafa Halimah (Abu Basir at-Tartusi)

[Translator’s Note: This fatwa was issued before al-Qaradaawi’s appalling statements concerning the US crusade on Afghanistan, where he saw it permitted for a Muslim to join the US army and fight with it, as long as he is not on the front line! So ponder, dear brother, to level has this man reached in his misguidance! We ask Allah for protection for this ummah from this mans misguidances.]