Takfir and “Establishing the Evidence”

When engaging with the subject of takfir, scholars often emphasize the necessity of iqamatul hujjah (establishing the evidence) as a prerequisite before such a verdict can be pronounced. However, what does it truly mean to establish evidence? Consider a scenario where an individual presents their arguments to someone who holds a belief deemed as kufri, but the person does not change their mind. Does this imply that the evidence has been sufficiently established against them, justifying their excommunication from the faith?

The matter is far more complex. An individual may believe they have presented sufficient evidence yet actually fall short while doing so. Additionally, people vary in what they require as adequate evidence to accept a new idea or madhab. It is reasonable to expect a potential convert to a new madhab to require more convincing evidence than someone being asked to retain the madhab they were born into or have emotional ties to.

This complexity underlines the importance of an additional condition before pronouncing takfir, known as izalat al-shubha (removal of doubts). One may present evidence for their views, but the other party may have their own ‘evidence’ that supports their current beliefs, creating obstacles to embracing the truth. As long as an individual genuinely appears to be intellectually sincere and not simply obstinate, takfir should not be applied as a general rule, regardless of whether the individual is a layperson or a scholar.

Ibn Taymiyyah states in his Al-Istighatha fil Radd ‘ala al-Bakri:

كنت أقول للجهمية من الحلولية والنفاة الذين نفوا أن يكون الله -تعالى- فوق العرش لما وقعت محنتهم، أن لو وافقتكم كنت كافرًا؛ لأني أعلم أن قولكم كفر، وأنتم عندي لا تكفرون لأنكم جهال، وكان هذا خطابًا لعلمائهم وقضاتهم وشيوخهم وأمرائهم

“During the ordeal that occurred, I used to say to the Jahmites among the Hulūliyya (those who believe in divine indwelling) and the deniers, who rejected the notion that God, exalted be He, is above the Throne: If I were to agree with you, I would be a disbeliever, for I know that your statement is disbelief. However, I do not consider you disbelievers because, in my view, you are ignorant. This was directed at their scholars, judges, elders, and leaders.”

Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa: 

فَلَيْسَ لِأَحَدِ أَنْ يُكَفِّرَ أَحَدًا مِنْ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَإِنْ أَخْطَأَ وَغَلِطَ حَتَّى تُقَامَ عَلَيْهِ الْحُجَّةُ وَتُبَيَّنَ لَهُ الْمَحَجَّةُ. وَمَنْ ثَبَتَ إيمَانُهُ بِيَقِينِ لَمْ يَزُلْ ذَلِكَ عَنْهُ بِالشَّكِّ؛ بَلْ لَا يَزُولُ إلَّا بَعْدَ إقَامَةِ الْحُجَّةِ وَإِزَالَةِ الشُّبْهَةِ

“No one has the right to declare another Muslim a disbeliever, even if they have made a mistake or erred, until the evidence has been established against them and the correct path has been made clear to them. And whoever’s faith is confirmed with certainty cannot have it removed due to doubt; rather, it is only removed after evidence has been established and doubts have been dispelled.”

Ibn Hazm states in al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam:

 وصفة قيام الحجة عليه هو أن تبلغه فلا يكون عنده شيء يقاومها

 “The condition for establishing the evidence against someone is that it reaches them, and they have nothing with which to counter it.”

Ibn Hazm articulates this concept effectively by stating that removing doubts implies that the individual literally has no counterarguments left to offer.

A pertinent example to relay in this discussion is Ibn Abbas’s engagement with the Khawarij. Although he “established the evidence” against them through debate, he did not label those who refused to repent and renounce their views as kuffar merely because they rejected his arguments. Ibn Abbas and the other Sahabah recognized that these individuals were genuinely misguided despite having one of the most knowledgeable Muslims “establish the evidence” against them.

While dedicated works explore this topic in more depth, this brief article aims to convey the critical point clearly.

Allah knows best.