Denying Prevalent Evils
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Your Eminence! Who decides to publicly deny known evils in society: are they the scholars or the preachers?
The issue of reporting, which is speaking about denying the rulers, not about denying prevalent evils.Meaning: For example, we currently have prevalent evils such as riba (usury or interest) and gambling, and the insurance policies currently available to us are mostly a form of gambling. It is strange that people have accepted them, and you hardly find anyone denying them, even though Allah has associated them with intoxicants, sacrificial stones, and divination arrows. But people—Glorified and Exalted is He—you do not find anyone denying them. You insure your car or your house, you hand over money, and you do not know whether you will lose more or less, and this is gambling.
So I say: As for prevalent evils, deny them, but our discussion is about denying the ruler, such as if a person, for example,In the mosque and he says: The state has wronged, the state has done something, so he speaks about the rulers themselves. And there is a difference between the prince or ruler you want to speak about being present before you and being absent; because all the denials reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) were denials that took place in the presence of the prince or ruler.
And there is a difference between the prince being present or absent.
The difference is that if he is present, he can defend himself and explain his point of view, and he may be right and we may be wrong. But if he is absent and we start tailoring the garment to fit what we want, that is what is dangerous. And what was reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) was all in the presence of the prince or ruler. It is known that if a person stands and speaks about a person from among the people, not from among the rulers, and mentions him in his absence,So it will be said: this is backbiting. If there is good in you, confront him and meet him.
The questioner: Some people exploit prevalent evils to deny them in a way that links them to the rulers, as if the rulers have a stake in this, such that it implies to the listener that the rulers are the cause of this. So, is this also, even though it is a prevalent evil, something to be wary of being exploited against this matter?The Shaykh: No.
It is not like that.I want, for example, to say to the people: Avoid riba (usury or interest).And he comes and says: These are houses of riba (usury or interest) that are public and raising their buildings, so do not say it like that.Meaning: This is a presumptive denial of the rulers.But he says: Avoid riba (usury or interest), and riba (usury or interest) is forbidden even if it is widespread among people. Gambling is forbidden even if it is approved, and the like of that.
The issue of reporting, which is speaking about denying the rulers, not about denying prevalent evils.Meaning: For example, we currently have prevalent evils such as riba (usury or interest) and gambling, and the insurance policies currently available to us are mostly a form of gambling. It is strange that people have accepted them, and you hardly find anyone denying them, even though Allah has associated them with intoxicants, sacrificial stones, and divination arrows. But people—Glorified and Exalted is He—you do not find anyone denying them. You insure your car or your house, you hand over money, and you do not know whether you will lose more or less, and this is gambling.
So I say: As for prevalent evils, deny them, but our discussion is about denying the ruler, such as if a person, for example,In the mosque and he says: The state has wronged, the state has done something, so he speaks about the rulers themselves. And there is a difference between the prince or ruler you want to speak about being present before you and being absent; because all the denials reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) were denials that took place in the presence of the prince or ruler.
And there is a difference between the prince being present or absent.
The difference is that if he is present, he can defend himself and explain his point of view, and he may be right and we may be wrong. But if he is absent and we start tailoring the garment to fit what we want, that is what is dangerous. And what was reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) was all in the presence of the prince or ruler. It is known that if a person stands and speaks about a person from among the people, not from among the rulers, and mentions him in his absence,So it will be said: this is backbiting. If there is good in you, confront him and meet him.
The questioner: Some people exploit prevalent evils to deny them in a way that links them to the rulers, as if the rulers have a stake in this, such that it implies to the listener that the rulers are the cause of this. So, is this also, even though it is a prevalent evil, something to be wary of being exploited against this matter?The Shaykh: No.
It is not like that.I want, for example, to say to the people: Avoid riba (usury or interest).And he comes and says: These are houses of riba (usury or interest) that are public and raising their buildings, so do not say it like that.Meaning: This is a presumptive denial of the rulers.But he says: Avoid riba (usury or interest), and riba (usury or interest) is forbidden even if it is widespread among people. Gambling is forbidden even if it is approved, and the like of that.