Ismail Kamdar – Dealing with Differences of Opinion in Islamic Law

			Salam alaykum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh Alhamdulillah wa salatu salam ala Rasulillah. Continuing
from our previous video, in which I explain that the nature of Islamic law of interpretive Islamic
law is speculative, it is only
		

			building upon that. How do we handle differences of opinion? This is a very important topic. And I
believe in our time especially, a lot of people have misunderstood this topic and gone far away from
the Sunnah and the actual methodology of the early Muslims in handling differences of opinion.
		

			We often find in our times that people treat their opinions in vec, or the opinions of their
teachers, as if it is absolute, as if it is quote, A as if it is from directly from the Quran, will
no room for any kind of difference. And they tried to intimidate and bully people into following
their opinions and shame people following a different opinion.
		

			And this makes life very difficult for the average Muslim.
		

			We go back to the statement of Omar Ibn Abdul Aziz Rahim Allah that we mentioned in the previous
video, where he said that the differences amongst the Sahaba
		

			are there to make Islam easy for us said the religion is not too rigid.
		

			That when there is a difference of opinion, this leaves some room for flexibility.
		

			So how do we deal then with these differences, especially especially if the difference is on whether
something is haram or not. So we have to make a few distinctions. Right, number one, distinguish
between what is clearly haram by consensus like Xena, and alcohol, and homosexual acts, these are
prohibited by consensus. Here, there is no room for difference of opinion, year the correct opinion
is enforced year we will command the good we will forbid the evil, we will make it clear that
violating these rules will not be tolerated. We can make people feel bad for violating these rules.
You know, you can literally in Islam and Islamic country, it wouldn't be wrong, you actually be
		

			right to create a culture where people feel ashamed of committing distance. Right. I know for some
people living in the West, that sounds weird, but this is the culture as opposed to create a one
where people feel ashamed of committing sins. But we have to distinguish between these laws, which
are clear cut and agreed upon across the board.
		

			And things which are matters of difference of opinion things which are specular, the big things
which are learning. And this is where many of us mess up. Because when it comes to zoning, or
speculate of issues, issues that are open to difference of opinion, you cannot force your opinion on
someone else. If they are following a legitimate opinion. You cannot you cannot take your opinion
and force it to other Muslims, because there is clearly a difference of opinion on this matter. So
for example, if there was
		

			a,
		

			a sport that was invented in a Muslim neck, or a type of game that was invented in a Muslim app, and
some people believe that that game or that sport is haram. And they have the reasons it's wasting
time it's addictive. Some people are using it for gambling, whatever it is. They have the reason so
they believe it to be haram. Another group of scholars looks at the same sport and or the same game
and they say that things are halal by default, as long as you avoid certain things. There's nothing
wrong with it. And so now you have two opinions, you have some scholars saying it's allowed some
scholars saying It's haram. This happens a lot nowadays, right? There's a lot of big issues
		

			nowadays, where this happens. What do you do in this case, you can teach your opinion, you can
preach your opinion, you could make your opinion, the opinion that has to be followed in your home
when you're the head of the household. But you can't force it on anyone else.
		

			Meaning for example, if you believe a certain game is haram, based on the US based on a speculative
deduction,
		

			and someone else believes that he's Halal also based on chaos.
		

			You have to just let them be you have to let them follow the opinion that they believe is correct.
		

			And these days, Muslims seem to find this very hard. Honestly, the majority of things that we fight
about on a daily basis are not the things that are definitely
		

			If we don't find missions fighting on a daily basis, about salah being five times a day, or Ramadan
being the month of fasting, or that Zina is haram, these are the big ones. These are the things that
yes, it's clear, right that what is right and what is wrong, what we fight over on a daily basis.
I've seen families break ties over this. I've seen communities break up over this, I've seen people
reaching out to the fold of Islam over these things are often secondary matters, which are
speculative in nature.
		

			So any Sharia land? How would these things be handled? Well, there's two levels here. One, if it
affects the rights of others, then if it is taken to the court, and the audit passes the judgment,
then that judgment can be enforced, even if the judgment is a result of chaos of a speculative
deduction, right, because the party has to have this power. Otherwise, what's the point of record?
What's the point of a judge if they have no power to enforce rulings. So it's only when something
		

			affects the rights of others. And it's taken to a court level that a judgment could be made that can
be enforced on those individuals, it wouldn't necessarily be enforced on the entire community, but
of that specific case.
		

			So for example,
		

			if there is a business dealings that some people consider halal, and others consider more cruel,
others considered haram. And one person feels like he was tricked into that kind of dealing, and he
didn't know the ruling at the time, and he takes it to the court.
		

			And the court declares it to be haram and declares the other person that the transaction is invalid,
and the other person has to give him his money back. In that case, it can be enforced or it will be
enforced. In that case, it will be enforced, because this is now a court case involving the rights
of others. That's very different from day to day pick from things that don't involve the rights of
others. So for example, if you were living in a Sharia leg, and you were of the opinion, that
		

			suggesting in a certain way is not permissible.
		

			And that opinion is based on your understanding of the Sunnah. Right? Like, for example, some
Muslims have the opinion that you have to dress like an Arab or an Indian, and the dressing in
western clothing is not permissible. This is an opinion to exist, I don't believe in it, but it
needs an opinion it exists. So if somebody has that opinion, and they see somebody else dressed in
western clothing, but they always covered they meet all the minimum legal obligations, they cannot
force the opinion on that person. Even if they are a judge, even if they are a mufti, they cannot
now say that the entire country, the entire Muslim world has to follow my opinion on this matter.
		

			Sharia doesn't work like that.
		

			Sharia is only strict on those matters, that are definitive, agreed upon major sins and crimes.
Right? Something that's definitive, something that's agreed upon something that's a major sin, and
something that counts as a crime. These are the areas where the Sharia will really force lots of
people. Otherwise, people are left to live their lives. And people are left to follow the
understandings of Islam. And people are left to follow the map. So people are left to follow their
groups, and people are left to follow their local scholars. And nothing is enforced on a person
beyond this. So you could live your life in a proper Sharia land, according to whichever school of
		

			thought you follow. Nobody can now come and say, Oh, you have to follow our school of thought.
		

			So in our time, we have a problem in both the Muslim lands and the non Muslim lands, in the Muslim
lands, we have government's making laws, and claiming that it Sharia
		

			and one of the mistakes they make is they will take an opinion, and they would force it on the
entire community. And they will say this is the Sharia.
		

			But in reality, that opinion is just their own speculative judgment. This is not possible. The
government in Islam is not supposed to have the power to meddle with the Sharia. Right and to force
their opinions on an entire community like this. This is actually the opposite of how Sharia
functions. But we see this like a government could say that, in our opinion, it's haram for women to
drive. While if the majority of people in your community or even if a minority are following a
different opinion, guess what, this is not a clear cut issue. There are other opinions right? To
force this opinion on the entire committee.
		

			ad can be an act of oppression, it's something that goes against how Sharia supposed to be
practiced. So these things should be left to the people to follow the opinions that they believe is
strongest. It should not be something that a government just forces on people to follow whatever
opinion they believe is correct. This is one of the causes of problems in our time, you know, we are
living
		

			in one of the only points in history the past 100 years, one of the only points in history is where
Muslims really feel pressurized by tyrannical governments. And one of the reasons for this is that
governments now have control over the law. For the bulk of Muslim history, even when they were
tyrants in power, they did not have control over the law itself. Right, they had to follow the
Sharia, yes, they will try to find loopholes. And they would sometimes just ignore the Sharia when
dealing with the enemies, but they couldn't, they couldn't enforce
		

			their opinions on people, without pushback from the people in the public. Right? Like, if a ruler
tried to change the rules of Joomla, or eat or something like this, people would push back, it
wouldn't be something where the government has the right to change it rather, it is the Allama that
interpret the law, not the government. So this is the problem in the Muslim as in the non Muslim
lands, we have a different problem that because we live as minorities in non Muslim lands, we, we
shoot, I think, as a defense mechanism, this is what I think it is, it is a defense mechanism to
protect our people from losing their religion and losing their culture. We tend to become over
		

			strict about things that Allah and His Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam were not strict about.
And so they we made the religion unnecessarily difficult on our people. And I've seen this in many
minorities, that they tend to be strict about things that people are not strict about in the Muslim
world, they tend to enforce rulings on their communities on matters that are considered secondary in
the Muslim world and considered secondary historically. And so we find that there's a lot of
		

			rigidity in how thick is applied and understood amongst minorities, that we seem to think that we
have to follow the harshest opinions and force it on our communities. Otherwise, they would get
caught up in the
		

			the culture of the non Muslims that become more like them.
		

			That's, that's not a good move.
		

			Because when you push people too hard, and when you make Allah's religion, unnecessarily
restrictive, it's going to push people in the opposite direction, it's going to have a slingshot
effect on people pushing it from one extreme to the other. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam
wonders, he said, The religion is easy, and the extremists make it difficult on themselves. Right,
the extremists make it difficult on themselves. So we need to have a more balanced view, when
something is clear cut, when something is definitive, when something is a matter of consensus, then
yes, we should be strict about it, we should enforce it, we should
		

			call people out when they do it. We should, you know, stay away from people that are trying to
change those rulings, when something's a matter of dispute with something is speculative. And
something is a matter where there's different opinions in different madhhab different cultures in
different parts of the Muslim world. They're just let people be just let people follow the opinion
that they believe is strongest, and do not try to force your opinion on them. Because doing so
unnecessarily restricts that which Allah made vast, and he takes a religion that is meant to be very
practical, and makes it unnecessarily restricted. So these are the two issues in our time. On one
		

			hand, we may have governments who are trying to interpret the Sharia and end up making it
unnecessarily restrictive. And then on the other hand, when Muslims are living away from such
governments, we have the people themselves trying to make their religion unnecessarily difficult on
themselves and their families. We have to go back to the way Islam was practiced for the bulk of its
history, which is that there are certain things that we are strict about the major sins, the
obligations that we chase consensus upon, but beyond that, it is a difference of opinion. I follow
my opinion, you follow your opinion, and we do not get personal about it. We do not make it a big
		

			deal. That is rarely how the Sharia function for the bulk of our history that you would find Muslims
of all Madhab and all sects living together in the Muslim world. And yes, they were incidents of
sectarian violence and outbreaks here and there. But
		

			For the bulk of our history, they live together. And they were able to just follow the
understandings of Islam without anyone trying to force their understanding of everyone else. Now,
some of you are going to bring up incidents in history, like when the mortality rates came into
power, and you try to force their views on others. These are the exceptions. These are people who
did not understand a religion. And that's why their stories stand out. Because it's an anomaly. It's
not how things were practiced for the bulk of our history, right? For the bulk of our history, if
there was a difference of opinion, it was not enforced, unless it evolved the rights of others,
		

			involved the rights of others. And if you went to court, then the audit could pass a judgement and
when Akagi passes a judgment on something, then it is enforced. Otherwise, people followed whichever
opinion, they believed was strongest, they follow the local scholars, and if there was a difference
of opinion, each group follow the opinion and they learn to live together in peace. Understanding
that this Sharia is wide enough to accomplish all of these opinions.
		

			And Allah knows best just after the hero or after the 100 Unite European army