Excuse of Ignorance in Major Shirk Difference of Opinion? | Shaykh Salih al Fawzan

1,808 views·Apr 12, 2026

📌 In this video, Shaykh Salih al Fawzan, Mufti of Saudi Arabia, clarifies and affirms consensus that there is no difference of opinion regarding the outward rulings related to the excuse of ignorance. This fatwa of Shaykh and Mufti of KSA Salih Al-Fawzan is sufficient for the sincere seeker of truth. - The Shaykh was asked clearly about whether there is any difference of opinion in the outward ruling, and he affirmed that there is ijma, no difference of opinion in this matter. For the one who is truly seeking the truth, this clarification is enough to recognize it and follow it. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ❓ Where is the valid difference of opinion regarding the excuse of ignorance? 1. Names and Rulings The rulings in the matters of iman and kufr are divided between legislative names and legislative rulings. The legislative names are based solely upon what is outwardly apparent from an individual’s statements and actions. As for the legislative rulings, they pertain to both the outward and the inward. Accountability and punishment within the legislative rulings is the place where the ulama have differed regarding ignorance, whether it is a valid preventing factor that lifts punishment or not. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 2. Valid Difference of Opinion 1. A group of scholars hold that the mushrik, whether before or after the arrival of the message, is a mushrik outwardly and a kafir inwardly, and is in the Fire eternally. This is the position of Imam al-Tabari (d. 310 AH) and Hafiz al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH), and others who do not accept ignorance as an excuse in shirk. 2. Another group of scholars hold that the mushrik, before the arrival of the message, is labeled a mushrik outwardly but NOT a kafir inwardly. Rather, his inward reality is left to Allah. Such a mushrik, if he did not receive the revelation, and was not negligent, having no ability to learn it or to travel in order to seek it, then he is not held fully accountable for his actions and will not be punished for his shirk until after being tested. This is the position of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) and Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH), and others who accept ignorance as a valid excuse that lifts punishment. In this case, their ruling is that of Ahl al-Fatrah: they are mushrikin outwardly, but not declared kuffar inwardly in terms of final accountability. Their inward state is left to Allah. Both are valid opinions, as they pertain only to punishment and accountability, whether in this world or in the Hereafter. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 3. Invalid Opinion Opposing Ijmāʿ There is NO difference of opinion regarding the outward worldly rulings in terms of names. The one who commits shirk, whether in Mecca or in Antarctica, is called a mushrik. The only difference is that the one in Antarctica may not be punished for his shirk on the Day of Judgement due to lack of ability to learn, without negligence. ✍️ STATEMENT: Shaykh al-‘Allamah Ishaq ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Hasan Al al-Shaykh (d. 1319 AH) أهل الفترة الذين لم تبلغهم الرسالة والقرآن وماتوا على الجاهلية لا يسمون مسلمين بالإجماع ولا يستغفر لهم وإنما اختلف أهل العلم في تعذيبهم في الآخرة "The people of the Fatrah are those whom the message and the Qur’an did not reach and who died upon ignorance. They are NOT labeled as Muslims by CONSENSUS. And no one is to seek forgiveness for them. The scholars ONLY differed on whether they will be punished in the Hereafter." 📚 SOURCE: Hukm Takfir al-Muayyan wa al-Farq Bayna Qiyam al-Hujjah wa Fahm al-Hujjah, Page: 9 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ✍ The Permanent Committee for Islamic Research and Fatwas in Saudi Arabia. Fatwah no. 4400: 👉 (❗) "So clarifying the matter and establishing the proof (Iqāmat al-hujjah) is for the purpose of removing any excuse before carrying out the PUNISHMENT upon him, NOT in order for him to be called a disbeliever only after the clarification.Rather, he IS CALLED a disbeliever based on the outward act he committed. such as prostrating to