Is it obligatory to forbid evil to one whom one is convinced will not respond?

The questioner : If one knows that the one enjoining good and forbidding evil is committing the evil, or if it is more likely than not that the one being commanded or forbidden will not respond, is it still obligatory for him to command and forbid?

The Shaykh : Yes, it is obligatory for him. It is obligatory for him to command good and forbid evil, because even if the only result is making it clear that this is an abominable matter, especially if the one commanding or forbidding is someone whose approval is considered significant, if he approves of it, it will appear to the general public that it is lawful, and it will even appear to the one committing the evil that he is on the right path.

The questioner : A little of...

The Shaykh : But suppose he commanded him once, twice, or three times, but he returns to it, is he required to continue? Or can he say, "I have performed the obligation once, twice, or three times, and I am not required to do more"? This is a matter in which scholars differ, but if a long time has passed, he should repeat the command, because he does not know that perhaps this man, with much advice and command, will repent.

The questioner : Now, some people cite the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): "If you see a ruler who is obeyed, and he is followed, and the world is a concern, and every person is pleased with his own opinion, then let him concern himself with his own affairs and leave the affairs of others to him."

The Shaykh : In any case, first, there is a point of discussion regarding this hadith: is it authentic or not? Second, these conditions are necessary: a ruler who is obeyed, who is followed, the world being a concern, and every person being pleased with his own opinion. These may not all be present; perhaps one or two of them exist, but all four are required.