What is the ruling if the Imam orders a scholar not to issue fatwas or teach the people, and wants to compel him to a specific fatwa?

The questioner : The other part of the question says: If the Imam orders a scholar not to issue fatwas or teach the people, and wants to compel him to a specific fatwa; what is the ruling? And is there a distinction in this matter?

The Shaykh : In my opinion, this matter falls under the topic of sadd al-dhara'i' (blocking the means to harm) and closing the door to fitnah (trial, discord or temptation). If the ruler is of the first type, which is the just one, and he orders a specific person not to issue fatwas to the people, it is obligatory for this person to obey this just ruler. We mention on such an occasion the story narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, which is that 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) was informed that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari was issuing fatwas regarding "what?
The student : Tamattu' (combining 'Umrah and Hajj with a break between them).

The Shaykh : He was issuing fatwas regarding tamattu' in Hajj, so he sent for him and mentioned to him that you are issuing fatwas to the people regarding tamattu' from 'Umrah to Hajj. He said: "If you wish, I will do it, and if you wish, I will leave it." This is entirely similar—indeed, it is more explicit—to the story of the man who performed tayammum (dry ablution with clean earth) with 'Umar ibn al-Khattab. The story of tayammum: it was 'Ali ibn Hatim al-Tai? Did he appoint another person? Perhaps I will remember as I recount the story. The point is: "He was issuing fatwas that a traveler, if he does not find water, should perform tayammum." Do you not remember, Abu al-Abd? ...
The student : ... .

The Shaykh : Abu Musa.
The student : ... .

The Shaykh : Yes.
The student : ... .

The Shaykh : The point is, I do not think Abu Musa was the one in the story of tayammum. In any case, the name does not matter to us. "He sent for him and said: 'You are issuing fatwas regarding tayammum for the traveler.' He said to him: 'Yes, O Commander of the Faithful. Do you not remember that we were on a journey and did not find water?!'
The student : 'Ammar ibn Yasir.

The Shaykh : 'Amir ibn Yasir. That is it. 'Amir ibn Yasir, certainly.
"Do you not remember that we were on a journey and did not find water, so we rolled in the dust as a beast rolls? When we came to the Messenger (peace be upon him), he said: . He said: 'I do not remember.' 'Amir ibn Yasir says: 'No, excuse me, 'Umar says to 'Amir: 'I do not remember.' He said to him: 'Do you refrain from issuing fatwas?' Here is the point. He said: 'No, we only appoint you to what you have taken on,' meaning at your own responsibility, 'we only appoint you to what you have taken on.'
The point from ... that story and this one, and there are similar cases, for example: 'Uthman ibn 'Affan (may Allah be pleased with them both) ... adopted 'Umar ibn al-Khattab's opinion regarding the prohibition of tamattu' from 'Umrah to Hajj, even though this is a ruling explicitly stated in the Noble Qur'an: , and there are many well-known hadiths, including his saying (peace be upon him): . Nevertheless, 'Uthman ibn 'Affan, who took over the caliphate after 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, adopted 'Umar's opinion and forbade the people from tamattu' from 'Umrah to Hajj. So he prepared ... while he was forbidding the people from tamattu', and 'Ali ibn Abi Talib stood against him and said: "Why do you forbid the people from something we did with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)? Labbaik Allahumma bi 'Umrah, Labbaik Allahumma bi 'Umrah."
The point is: the Companions considered 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), as we mentioned earlier at the beginning of the session, to be inspired, and he had opinions that were truly valid, at least in his time.
So now we return to the ruler. If he is a scholar and just, and it appears to him to forbid a scholar among the Muslim scholars from issuing fatwas to the people, then at that time this scholar must stop. There is a great deal of discussion on this matter, up to the point that if the Muslim ruler is ruling by Islam, and it appears to him to order a scholar not to issue fatwas to the people, then it is supposed that this scholar obeys this just ruler. This is because in this obedience, first of all, there is no disobedience, as it may appear to some observers. As it may appear to some observers, there is no disobedience. This is because spreading knowledge among the people is a collective obligation (fard kifayah); if some people fulfill it, it drops from the rest. So if the Muslim ruler sees that he should order a specific individual from the people of knowledge not to issue fatwas to the people, he has not ordered a disobedience, unless there is no one to issue fatwas except this one man. In that case, .
If the matter is not so; that is: he did not order all the scholars not to speak, but ordered a specific person for a reason that appeared to him. Here, attention must be drawn to something: this ruler, who is the shepherd of the ummah (the Muslim community) with the people of consultation, the people of knowledge, and the specialists in all fields related to the administration of the ummah, is in fact the one who knows the needs of the people, what benefits them and what harms them. It is not so for any scholar among the scholars who live under his rule; he is more knowledgeable about what is suitable for a fatwa and what is not, who is suitable to issue fatwas to the people and who is not. So at that time, this individual should obey this knowledgeable Imam. Because if he orders everyone not to speak, there is no obedience, because it is disobedience.
The rest of the question?

The questioner : If the Imam is not just?

The Shaykh : This is a discussion for the case if he is just.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is right. But if he is not just, if he orders what is prescribed, he must be obeyed; because if he had not ordered it, it is originally commanded.