1

As far as I understand until now, shirk is to "worship" anything other then ALLAH, were the term "to worship" is a matter of believe and circumstances (otherwise any living soul would have the sin of shirk no matter how hard they try).

Kufr looks more like an ethnically aspect, or otherwise, not worshiping anything, not having any deity at all.

Please clarify.

With my low status of reputation points I am not allowed to leave comments and will stay away from this site, as I cannot do any good and would not misuses answers in place of comments.

Have a nice day.

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

In short, kufr means denial or rejection of something that is known to be true, whereas shirk means to associate something with Allah. There is a lot of overlap since kufr generally involves aspects of shirk and vice-versa, so it's not unusual to see the two terms used interchangeably by mistake.

You mention worship, which is a major aspect of both, but either term would apply to more general beliefs and actions and aren't exclusive to worship.

For example, rejecting that Allah exists or is worthy of worship is clearly kufr, but also if you reject one of the clear laws of Islam (i.e. eating pork), that's still kufr, since you're rejecting the laws of Allah and the Qur'an which clearly says that it is forbidden. It doesn't necessarily need to be an act of worship to be kufr.

Also, in order for it to be kufr, the truth needs to be known in order to be rejected. If someone considers eating of pork acceptable because they haven't been taught the laws of Allah, that is not kufr, that is simply ignorance.

Shirk would be anything that associates with Allah something that is unique to Allah. Again, worship is a major aspect of this since only Allah is worthy of worship, but again it could also apply in non-worship beliefs. For example, claiming that a doctor has the ability to give life is still shirk since only Allah is the bringer of life. Claiming that any worldly leader can make haram anything that Allah has permitted or to permit what Allah has forbidden would be shirk since only Allah has that authority.

For further reading, I leave the following links:

Improve this answer
7
  • This is a good and understandable answer. However, it leaves room for debate. For example, could the different schools of Islam call each other "kufr" because what one holds for truth is rejected by the other? I see it is a matter of degree, but that would be another question.
    – Gyro Gearloose
    Commented Sep 20 at 16:02
  • @GyroGearloose I don't know if there's difference of opinion on kufr itself, but I do know that there's some debate around scales of kufr, i.e. major kufr that makes one no longer a Muslim vs minor kufr that is sinful but forgiveable.
    – goldPseudo
    Commented Sep 20 at 22:09
  • The main point in my comment was not about kufr itself, but abut the reasons to call others kufr. Say some schools of Islam differ on what is halal to eat, or in which situations (of emergency) it is halal or haram to eat. Each on thinks he is the the possession of truth (that is the essence of believe as such, wrong or right), so they two call each others kufr? Hopefully not!
    – Gyro Gearloose
    Commented Sep 21 at 19:51
  • @GyroGearloose They do not. There are certain matters that, if I remember the term right, are mentioned as "qat'i" by scholars, as in, being explicitly elaborated directly in the Quran and Hadith with zero valid difference of opinion ever being there, such as the fact that Allah is one, or that angels exist, or that Quran is the speech of Allah. And then there are matters in which there is difference of opinion and research by later scholars for a number of reasons, such as ahadith that appear to mention different contents with similar chain, for example. (1/3)
    – Syed M. Sannan
    Commented Nov 11 at 14:21
  • In those matters, a scholar can derive what they consider to be correct based on their reasons, follow it, and tell others to follow it, and none of them is sinful for following it even if the matter actually turns out to be incorrect later on, say, on the judgment day. This is an established aspect in the rules of jurisprudence. But if a person disagrees on matters that are under the heading of qat'i, then they risk themselves falling out of the fold of Islam. (2/3)
    – Syed M. Sannan
    Commented Nov 11 at 14:23

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .