بسم الله الرØÙ…ٰÙ† الرØيم
🔸 THE RULING ON OPENLY DENOUNCING THE RULERS 🔸
Shaykh Ibn al-‘Uthaymeen (d. 1421H, may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:
Question:
“O noble Shaykh! There are those who say: ‘Openly denouncing the rulers is from the methodology of the Salaf,’ and they cite as proof the hadith of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri in his denunciation of Marwan ibn al-Hakam when he placed the khutbah before the prayer, and also by the statement of the Prophet ï·º: ‘There will be leaders, you will recognize (the good in them) and you will reject (the evil in them); whoever hates (the evil) will be free (from blame), and whoever rejects it will be safe,’ and the hadith: ‘The master of martyrs is a man who stands before a tyrannical ruler, enjoins him (with good) and forbids him (from evil), and the ruler kills him.’
Is this statement correct? And how can we reconcile between these authentic reports and the Prophet’s ï·º statement: ‘Whoever wants to advise the ruler, let him not do so publicly.’
We ask for a detailed explanation on this matter, because many of the youth of the (Islamic) awakening do not know the correct ruling in this matter, especially since there are some du‘aat (preachers) who say that openly denouncing the rulers is from the methodology of the Salaf, which causes the youth to become agitated and to assume that not openly denouncing (the rulers) is a sign of compromise in religion and so forth. And because of the danger of this issue, we ask for a detailed explanation. May Allah reward you with goodness.”
---
Answer:
This question is important, and in reality, its answer is even more important.
There is no doubt that denouncing evil is obligatory upon everyone who is able to do so, due to Allah’s statement, the Blessed and Exalted:
> “Let there arise from you a group inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; it is they who will be successful. And be not like those who became divided and differed after the clear proofs came to them. They are the ones for whom there is a great punishment.” (Aal ‘Imran: 104–105)
The “lam” in His statement (ÙˆَÙ„ْتَÙƒُÙ†ْ) is “lam of command.”
And the Prophet ï·º said:
> “You will certainly enjoin the good, and you will certainly forbid the evil, and you will certainly take hold of the hand of the foolish, and you will certainly force him to the truth forcefully, or else Allah will strike your hearts against one another, then curse you just as He cursed them.”
Meaning: just as He cursed Bani Isra’il, regarding whom Allah said:
> “Those among the Children of Isra’il who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Dawud and ‘Isa, the son of Maryam. That was because they disobeyed and used to transgress. They did not forbid one another from the evil which they committed. Evil indeed was that which they used to do.” (Al-Ma’idah: 78–79)
However, we must know that the legislative commands in such matters have a scope, and wisdom must be applied.
If we see that openly denouncing (the rulers) will remove the evil and bring about good, then let us denounce them openly. But if we see that open denunciation will not remove the evil, nor bring about good, but rather will increase the oppression of the rulers upon the denouncers and the people of good, then the better approach is to denounce secretly.
In this way, the evidences can be reconciled: the evidences that indicate open denunciation apply when we expect benefit from it — the attainment of good and the removal of evil. The texts that indicate private denunciation apply when open denunciation would increase evil and not bring about any good.
I say to you: No group has gone astray from this Ummah except because they took one side of the texts and abandoned the other side — whether in matters of creed, in dealing with the rulers, in dealing with the people, or in other matters.
Let me give you examples so that the matter becomes clear to those present and those who are listening:
For example, the Khawarij and the Mu‘tazilah. They saw the texts that contain threats regarding some major sins, so they clung to those texts and neglected the texts of promise that open the door of hope.
For instance, they said: if a person kills a believer intentionally, he becomes a disbeliever — according to the Khawarij, his blood is lawful and he is eternally in the Fire. According to the Mu‘tazilah, they said: if he kills him, he leaves Islam but does not enter into kufr; because they said: we cannot affirm definitively that he is a disbeliever. Thus, they said: he left Islam, and he is in a position between Islam and kufr, yet he is eternally in the Fire. They neglected the verses of promise and the hadiths of promise, which indicate that Allah will take out of the Fire whoever has in his heart the smallest weight of faith.
Then others came to oppose them and said: a person, no matter how many sins he commits short of kufr, remains a believer with complete faith and will never enter the Fire at all. And they said regarding Allah’s statement:
> “And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell.” (An-Nisa: 93)
that this applies to the disbeliever if he kills a believer.
Why did both groups go astray? Because they took only one side of the texts.
Likewise, regarding the Attributes of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic: some people said, “Allah cannot come by Himself, nor can He descend to the lowest heaven, nor does He have a face, nor two hands.” Why? They said: because Allah said: “There is nothing like unto Him.” (Ash-Shura: 11). They said: if you affirm these attributes, you are making Allah like His creation.
Others opposed them and said: Allah affirmed for Himself a face, and two hands, and that He descends, and that He comes. Therefore His face is like our faces, His hands like our hands, His descent like our descent, His coming like our coming — because we do not comprehend from coming, hands, or face, except what we see. And Allah addressed us with what we can understand, so Allah’s face, hands, descent, and coming are like ours.
Thus, these people are on one extreme, those people are on the other extreme, and all of them are misguided, because each of them took only one side. But we say: Allah has a face, He has two hands, He comes, and He descends — but not like our hands, not like our face. Exalted is He above that, for “There is nothing like unto Him.” (Ash-Shura: 11).
Likewise in the matter of advising the rulers: there are those who want to take only one side of the texts — that is, open denunciation of the rulers, regardless of the corruption it may bring. And there are those who say: we cannot declare openly at all; it is obligatory to advise the rulers secretly, as came in the hadith that the questioner mentioned.
We say: the texts do not contradict each other, nor do they falsify each other. So denunciation should be open when there is benefit — meaning the removal of evil and the establishment of good. And it should be secret when open denunciation brings no benefit, removes no evil, and brings no good.
And you know — may Allah bless you — that the rulers cannot possibly please everyone, ever. Even the imam of a masjid: does he please all the worshippers? No.
Some say: you pray too quickly! Others say: you prolong! Others say: you shorten! In winter, they dispute: those praying in the sun and those in the shade cannot agree.
If denunciation of the rulers is made openly, then it will be exploited by those who hate (them), magnifying the small, and fitnah will erupt. And nothing harms the people except such things!
The Khawarij were once with ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) against the army of Sham. When ‘Ali made peace with the army of Sham to prevent Muslim bloodshed, they turned against him and said: “You are a disbeliever!” They declared ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib a disbeliever — we seek refuge with Allah. Why? Because the masses and the rabble cannot ever be controlled. Open denunciation of the rulers is exploited by such rabble to reach their own aims.
As the Prophet ï·º said:
> “Indeed, Shaytan has despaired of being worshipped by the worshippers in the Arabian Peninsula, but he is content with stirring enmity between them.”
Between whom? Between the inhabitants of the Peninsula. He stirs enmity between them until matters lead to killing, and a man meets his Muslim brother — perhaps even his own brother, cousin, or in-law — and he kills him. Over what? Over nothing.
Therefore, in conclusion we say: It is obligatory upon the youth of the (Islamic) awakening to look at all the texts from every angle, and not to proceed with anything until they consider its consequence. If the Prophet ï·º said: “Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day, let him speak good or remain silent,” then make this your scale in all your words, and likewise in all your deeds. And Allah is the One who grants success.
📚 [Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, Liqaa’ al-Baab al-Maftuh, 62/10]
#IslamicReminder #KajianOnline #IlmuAgama #MuslimWorld #IslamItuIndah #IlmuIslam
0 Comments