ruling with man made laws

**ummi salam** · 11th July 2011

salamu alaikum

there is one thing that im still confused about i hope someone can help me with it. with proofs inshallah

the thing is, making laws in itself is not a kufr. there isnt proof that making laws in itself is a kufr becuz if it would be kufr then making laws that are allowed (like rulings about spotlights etc) would also be haram.

so if a person makes a law that contains haram( like riba etc) then this law would be considered haram and not a kufr just like we see above that a law can also be allowed like in the case of making laws for spotlights etc.

if i would make a law that contains shirk then this law inevitably be a kufr. becuz in this case i allow shirk.

for deeds that are haram to become a kufr it needs istihlal. just like when a person makes laws that are haram he needs to make it halal before we can call him a kafeer.

becuz like i said: there is no proof that making laws in itself is a kufr. so by making laws that contain haram this law(by itself) will be haram also.

becuz ruling the people with laws that contain some haram is the same as parenting the childeren with rules that contain haram. if he does it out of hawa this is not kufr.

so now comes the question: why do some of the ulamah believe that making a general law to rule the public by witch contains the foribidden(like riba etc) to be a kufr?
im wondering if these ulamah ever consider this kufr. isnt it posible that they consider the actions of some of our leaders in our time to be kufr becuz they mixed different laws of different religions into 1 law? by this they are calling the people to other religions? and this is why they think its a major kufr?

am i right? who can help me with this issue?

proofs please.

**Aboo Shayba** · 11th July 2011

Originally Posted by ummi salam

salamu alaikum

there is one thing that im still confused about i hope someone can help me with it. with proofs inshallah

the thing is, making laws in itself is not a kufr. there isnt proof that making laws in itself is a kufr becuz if it would be kufr then making laws that are allowed (like rulings about spotlights etc) would also be haram.

so if a person makes a law that contains haram( like riba etc) then this law would be considered haram and not a kufr just like we see above that a law can also be allowed like in the case of making laws for spotlights etc.

if i would make a law that contains shirk then this law inevitably be a kufr. becuz in this case i allow shirk.

for deeds that are haram to become a kufr it needs istihlal. just like when a person makes laws that are haram he needs to make it halal before we can call him a kafeer.

becuz like i said: there is no proof that making laws in itself is a kufr. so by making laws that contain haram this law(by itself) will be haram also.

becuz ruling the people with laws that contain some haram is the same as parenting the childeren with rules that contain haram. if he does it out of hawa this is not kufr.

so now comes the question: why do some of the ulamah believe that making a general law to rule the public by witch contains the foribidden(like riba etc) to be a kufr?
im wondering if these ulamah ever consider this kufr. isnt it posible that they consider the actions of some of our leaders in our time to be kufr becuz they mixed different laws of different religions into 1 law? by this they are calling the people to other religions? and this is why they think its a major kufr?

am i right? who can help me with this issue?

proofs please.

If nobody else beats me to it, by the end of the day i'll post the adilla for it.