The salaf and the major imams strongly warned against declaring a Muslim a disbeliever without clear Sharia-based proof. They explained that accusing someone of kufr without evidence is part of the offensive speech that Allah forbade in the Quran. Both ʿIkrimah and Mujāhid explained that the verse about not calling others by offensive names includes wrongly accusing a believer of kufr.
Imām Ahmad accepted the hadiths warning against takfir and said they should be left as they are, without reinterpretation, to preserve their deterrent effect. Al-Bukhārī specified that the warning applies to those who accuse without valid interpretation. Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr explained that if a Muslim accuses his brother of kufr wrongly, he bears the sin, although it does not take him out of Islam.
Abu al-Qāsim al-Taymī dedicated a full section to warning against takfir without evidence.
Specific Issues Included Under This Principle
- Takfir without Sharia proof is forbidden.
- It is considered minor kufr (kufr asghar).
- The one who makes takfir based on ijtihād (valid interpretation) is excused.
The Meaning of the Principle
A Muslim must not rush to declare another Muslim a disbeliever. It is better to err by excusing than by wrongly accusing. If there is a way to interpret a Muslim’s action in a sound manner, that must be done. The Prophet ﷺ said that declaring a person a disbeliever without right is a serious matter. But takfir is allowed only if it is based on Quran and Sunnah, and if the accused has clearly committed kufr.
Shaykh ʿAbd al-Laṭīf warned that making takfir without proof contradicts the path of Ahl al-Sunnah and resembles the people of innovation and misguidance.
Declaring a Muslim a Disbeliever Without Proof Is Minor Kufr
The Prophet ﷺ said: “If a man says to his brother, ‘O disbeliever,’ then one of them has taken it upon himself.” The hadith shows that this action is minor kufr, not major kufr, since the Prophet ﷺ still referred to the person as “his brother.” It is a major sin and must be avoided.
If someone does takfir based on ijtihād, like ʿUmar did with Ḥāṭib, then he is not sinful. The Prophet ﷺ excused ʿUmar because of his good intention and reasoning.
Two Conditions for Correct Takfir
- The person must have committed kufr based on clear evidence.
- All conditions must be fulfilled and all barriers removed.
If either is missing, then the person making takfir is at fault.
Takfir Based on Implication/Entailment (Lāzim al-Qawl) Is False
It is wrong to accuse someone of kufr based only on the consequences of their words unless they affirm those consequences. Many people say things without realising what they imply. Ibn Taymiyyah explained that implications are only attributed to a person if he accepts them after they are made clear. Otherwise, they are not to be used in judgement against him.
The Khawārij Opposed This Principle
The Khawārij made takfir of Muslims for major sins. Imām Mālik said the hadith about wrongful takfir applied to them. Nāfiʿ ibn al-Azraq and others among the Khawārij even claimed that the blood of children of the disbelievers was lawful. This shows their extremism and deviation from the principles of Ahl al-Sunnah.
Evidences for the Principle
- “And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge…” (al-Isrāʾ: 36)
- “Say: My Lord has forbidden… that you say about Allah what you do not know.” (al-Aʿrāf: 33)
- “Avoid much suspicion…” (al-Ḥujurāt: 12)
All these verses forbid speaking without knowledge and judging without proof.
The Prophet ﷺ’s hadith on takfir shows the danger of wrongly accusing a Muslim. The ruling in the hadith is that the sin falls on the accuser, not necessarily that he leaves Islam. It is minor kufr unless someone clearly permits a known act of kufr.
Some scholars said the hadith means the sin and burden return to the speaker. Others said it leads toward kufr because frequent sin leads a person to destruction.
Conclusion
Takfir is a right of Allah and must be based only on clear texts from the Quran and Sunnah. Accusing someone of kufr without evidence is a major sin, counted as minor kufr, and has dangerous consequences in this life and the next. Ahl al-Sunnah stress that takfir of individuals must be based on fulfilling all conditions and removing all barriers, unlike the Khawārij and people of innovation.
End of Summary
المسألة الأولى: أقوال سلف الأمة وأئمتها في تقرير قاعدة تكفير المسلم بلا حجة شرعية ذنب عظيم
The Salaf of the Ummah and its leading imams made it clear that a servant must beware of declaring a Muslim a disbeliever without a clear Sharia-based proof. They firmly established this principle, and it is evident through their statements.
ʿIkrimah (d. 134 AH) said regarding Allah’s words: “And do not call each other by offensive nicknames” (al-Hujurat: 11): This means a man says to another: “O hypocrite, O disbeliever” (Reported by al-Tabari in his Tafsir, 13/162).
And Mujahid (d. 104 AH) said regarding the same verse: “A man was called a disbeliever while he was a Muslim” (Reported by al-Tabari in his Tafsir, 13/162).
These two great imams made it clear that part of the forbidden name-calling that Allah prohibited is for a man to accuse his brother of kufr. This necessitates great caution and the need to stay away from such a thing, because name-calling is something Allah has prohibited.
Imam Ahmad (d. 241 AH) said, after mentioning hadiths including: “If a man says to his brother: O disbeliever, then one of them has certainly taken it upon himself”: He said: “We accept these narrations, even if we do not understand their full explanation, and we do not speak about them, nor dispute over them, nor interpret them, but rather we let them pass just as they have come. We do not reject them unless there is something more deserving” (Usul al-Sunnah by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, p. 9)
This shows that these hadiths should be accepted as they are, without interpretation, so that their warning and power as a deterrent remain stronger, encouraging people to avoid takfir without legitimate grounds.
Al-Bukhari (d. 256 AH) said: “Chapter: Whoever declares his brother a disbeliever without valid interpretation, then he is as he said” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Manners, Chapter: Whoever declares his brother a disbeliever without interpretation, hadith 6103).
Imam al-Bukhari restricted the return of the kufr upon the speaker to when it is done without valid interpretation, meaning without a sound justification. This shows the danger of rushing into takfir without a Sharia-based proof.
Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463 AH) said: “He has taken it upon himself” means: he has borne the burden of it. Its meaning is: if a person is actually a disbeliever and is called such, then he bears the burden of his kufr, and the one who called him that has no sin. The same applies to a sinner being called a sinner.
But if someone says to a believer: “O disbeliever,” then the one who said it has taken upon himself the sin of that word, and has carried a clear wrongdoing and a great slander. However, this does not make him a disbeliever, because kufr only exists when a person abandons what constitutes iman.
The benefit of this hadith is that it forbids calling a believer a disbeliever or a sinner (al-Istidhkar, 8/548).
He clarified that the benefit of this hadith is to prohibit rushing into takfir without proof, and that whoever says “O disbeliever” to his brother without evidence bears the sin of the word.
Abu al-Qasim al-Taymi (d. after 400 AH) said: “A section on warning against declaring a Muslim a disbeliever” (al-Hujjah fi Bayan al-Mahajjah, 2/451).
He dedicated an entire section to warning against takfir of a Muslim. This is restricted to cases where takfir is made without a clear Sharia-based proof, as mentioned previously.
Specific Issues Included Under This Principle
Among them:
– The obligation to beware of declaring a Muslim a disbeliever without Sharia-based evidence.
– Declaring a Muslim a disbeliever without proof is minor kufr (kufr asghar).
– Whoever declares his Muslim brother a disbeliever based on a valid interpretation is excused.
The Meaning of the Principle
The Muslim must not rush into declaring another Muslim a disbeliever. He must be extremely cautious in this matter and not declare anyone a disbeliever without clear Sharia evidence, so that he does not bear its burden and sin, and so that he does not transgress the right of Allah or fabricate lies against Him.
Making the mistake of admitting a disbeliever into Islam is lighter than the mistake of expelling a Muslim from Islam.
Making an error by pardoning is better than making an error by punishing.
Ibrahim al-Nakhaʿi said: “It used to be said: Repel the hudud from the Muslims as much as you can. If you find a way out for a Muslim, then repel the punishment from him, for a judge making a mistake by pardoning is better than him making a mistake by punishing” (Reported by ʿAbd al-Razzaq in al-Musannaf, 10/166).
An exception to this is if the declaration of kufr is based on the clear texts of the Quran and Sunnah, because takfir is the right of Allah and must be based on the Quran and Sunnah alone.
Declaring a disbeliever a disbeliever is obligatory due to the guidance of the Sharia on that.
But declaring someone a disbeliever without proof contradicts the texts of the Sharia which confirm that one enters Islam by pronouncing the two testimonies, as previously explained (see p. 346).
Whoever declares a Muslim a disbeliever without Sharia evidence has spoken without knowledge, which is forbidden, as Allah says:
“And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight, and the heart – all of them will be questioned about that” (al-Isra: 36).
Such action leads to grave consequences, such as removing the protection of his life, blood, and wealth, forbidding prayer over him, barring him from burial in Muslim graveyards, separating him from his spouse, and other rulings.
For this reason, the Muslim must beware of rushing to takfir without Sharia-based proof.
Shaykh ʿAbd al-Latif ibn ʿAbd al-Rahman ibn Hasan (d. 1293 AH) said: “Daring to declare someone a disbeliever whose outward condition is Islam, without any Sharia basis or acceptable proof, contradicts the path of the scholars from Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamaʿah.
This method is the path of the people of innovation and misguidance, and arises from a lack of fear and piety in what one says and does…” (Majmuʿ al-Rasa’il wa al-Masa’il al-Najdiyyah, 3/20).
Declaring a Muslim a disbeliever without Sharia-based proof is minor kufr.
The proof: Abu Hurayrah reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “If a man says to his brother, ‘O disbeliever,’ then one of them has taken it upon himself” (Reported by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, Book of Manners, Chapter: Whoever declares his brother a disbeliever without interpretation, hadith 6103).
The reason why this is considered minor kufr is that the Prophet ﷺ still referred to him as “his brother” at the moment the word was said. He also said that one of them would bear the statement. If one of them had truly exited Islam, he would no longer be considered a brother (paraphrased from Majmuʿ al-Fatawa, 7/355).
The warning in the hadith shows that it is a major sin.
It is necessary to distinguish between one who declares another a disbeliever based on valid interpretation, and one who does so without it. The one who interprets based on legitimate reasoning is excused and not a disbeliever.
This is supported by what occurred in the story of Hatib (d. 30 AH). When ʿUmar said: “O Messenger of Allah, let me strike the neck of this hypocrite,” the Prophet ﷺ said: “He witnessed Badr. And what do you know? Perhaps Allah looked upon the people of Badr and said, ‘Do whatever you wish, for I have forgiven you’” (Reported by al-Bukhari, Book of Jihad, Chapter: The spy, hadith 3007).
The Prophet ﷺ excused ʿUmar because he acted on interpretation.
Whoever declares a Muslim a disbeliever must fulfil two conditions for it to be correct and valid:
-
- First: That the Muslim has actually fallen into kufr based on evidence from the Quran and Sunnah.
- Second: That the conditions are met and the obstacles are removed.
If either of these two conditions is not fulfilled, then the person falls into the error of declaring someone a disbeliever without proof and incurs the warning in this matter.
One of the forms of rushing into takfir without proof is takfir based on implied meaning (lawazim al-qawl), when someone is judged based on the consequence of his words, not on the words he actually said.
This wrongs the Muslim and attributes to him what he did not say. It is based on opinion, not on the texts of the Quran and Sunnah.
The consequence of speech is not the same as the speech itself unless the speaker affirms it.
Many people say things without being aware of what their words imply. So how can people be judged based on outcomes they never intended?
Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) said: “The necessary implication of a person’s statement is of two types:
One: The implication of a correct statement. This a person must accept, because the implication of truth is also truth. It may be attributed to him if it is known from his condition that he would not reject it once it becomes clear. Many things attributed to the views of the imams come under this type.
Two: The implication of an incorrect statement. This is not binding, because at most it results in contradiction. Contradictions are known to occur from every scholar except the Prophets.
If it is known that a person accepts this consequence once it is made clear to him, then it may be attributed to him. But if it is not, then it must not be attributed to him. It may be that he said something whose consequence is false, but he is unaware of that consequence and would not accept it if he knew it” (Majmuʿ al-Fatawa, 29/41-42).
The Khawarij opposed this principle
They rushed into takfir of Muslims, to the extent that they declared those who committed major sins to be disbelievers.
Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463 AH) said: Imam Malik was asked about the hadith of the Messenger ﷺ: “Whoever says to a man, ‘O disbeliever,’ one of them has taken it upon himself.”
He replied: “I think that applies to the Haruriyyah (a name for the Khawarij).”
Then I asked him, “Do you consider them disbelievers for that?”
He replied: “I do not know what this is” (al-Tamhid, 17/15).
Imam Mālik applied the hadith to the Khawarij, because they rushed into takfir without clear evidence.
Supporting their hastiness in takfir is the report from a freedman of Banu Hashim, who said to Nāfiʿ ibn al-Azraq: “The children of the polytheists are in the Fire, and whoever opposes us is a polytheist. The blood of these children is lawful to us.” Nāfiʿ said to him: “You have disbelieved and brought ruin upon yourself” (al-Kamil fi al-Lughah wa al-Adab, 3/206).
Evidences for the Principle
Among the evidences:
Allah said: “And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight, and the heart – all of them will be questioned” (al-Isra: 36).
Allah also said: “Say: My Lord has forbidden indecencies, both outward and inward, sin and transgression without right, and that you associate with Allah what He has not authorised, and that you say about Allah what you do not know” (al-Aʿraf: 33).
Allah has forbidden speaking without knowledge and saying things about Him without knowledge. This includes accusing a Muslim of kufr without clear evidence from the Quran and Sunnah. Since takfir is the right of Allah, it must be established through valid proofs. Anyone who engages in it without that is speaking without knowledge, which is forbidden.
Allah also said: “O you who believe, avoid much suspicion. Indeed, some suspicion is sin” (al-Hujurat: 12).
Abu Hurayrah and ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿUmar reported from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ that he said: “If a man says to his brother: ‘O disbeliever,’ then one of them has taken it upon himself”
The Prophet ﷺ warned against accusing a Muslim of kufr without Sharia proof. This shows the seriousness of takfir without right and that it falls back on the one who said it.
This does not mean that the one who uttered it has fallen into major kufr that takes him out of Islam. Rather, it is minor kufr, because the Prophet ﷺ still called him “his brother” at the time of speaking. If either of them had exited Islam, the term “brother” would not apply (See: Majmuʿ al-Fatawa, 7/355).
Some scholars said that the hadith applies to one who makes takfir based on declaring something lawful that is known to be kufr, so the kufr in this case would be major.
Others said: It means the sin and blame return to the one who uttered it.
Others said: The meaning is that such behaviour leads to kufr in the end, because sins are a pathway to disbelief. The one who frequently engages in them may eventually fall into kufr (See: al-Minhaj Sharh Sahih Muslim, 2/50).
