What is the obligation of Muslims toward their rulers who do not rule by the Shari'ah and sell forbidden things?

The questioner : In another question: What is the obligation of Muslims toward their rulers if it becomes apparent from these rulers that they are doing things contrary to the Shari'ah, such as ruling by other than the law of Allah, permitting zina, riba, and khamr, showing loyalty to disbelievers and disavowing Muslims, and so on?

The Shaykh : As for the ruling of Muslims toward these rulers, as we say in principle, there is nothing. In principle, they have no obligation toward them, but they have every obligation toward them. How is that? They have no immediate obligation toward them, but they have every obligation toward them in the future, and this is not achieved except by what we call "purification and education." This means that Muslims who truly want to take an Islamic stance toward these rulers who do not rule by what Allah has revealed must revive in themselves the conduct of the righteous predecessors, especially the first predecessors who had our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) among them. We say that purification and education are necessary before that. Why? Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), who was sent in Makkah, did not do anything to oppose the disbelievers or take an aggressive, warlike stance toward them. Rather, he took a stance of da'wah, as they say today, in terms of calling to "La ilaha illa Allah" and to worshipping Allah alone, having no partner. And as you know, he continued with this for thirteen years in Makkah. Then he migrated, and the story is known to all Muslims. In these ten years plus three years, the function of the Messenger (peace be upon him) was nothing but da'wah, meaning teaching those who responded to his call what they needed to know about the rulings of their religion, which were being revealed one after another. And without a doubt, he (peace and blessings be upon him) was concerned with teaching his companions and educating them in this purified Islam. Therefore, when they were tested and tortured, they showed great patience until their Lord (Blessed and Exalted is He) permitted them the first migration to Abyssinia, twice, as is known, and then the final migration to the blessed city of Madinah. Then the Messenger (peace be upon him) began to lay the foundation for establishing the Muslim state. Now, if you look at the Islamic world as a whole, or look at it partially in some countries, you will not find a people who can be said to have learned a correct Islamic education, plus being raised on this correct Islam. This does not exist. Therefore, we firmly believe that any party movement or political grouping that is not based on this foundation, meaning that it does not bring to the minds of the movers what the leader of the movers did, if this expression is correct, because I am saying it for the first time, and the leader of the movers is the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), to those who move with many parties and diverse methodologies, if they do not follow the path of the Messenger (peace be upon him), which is limited to two foundations or two great pillars, purification and education, then there is absolutely no benefit from these groupings and these parties. I say this as a reminder that there is a very great difference between Muslims today in terms of what they must achieve in purification and the first Muslims. The first Muslims did not need purification because the revelation was descending upon them pure, not mixed with anything foreign to Islam, and this is a self-evident and very clear matter. But today, you know that the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him) has come true regarding them, and more so in the well-known hadith: to the end of the hadith. Now, are the Muslims who want to move, are they moving on the basis of purification and education? In my opinion, no. Because this purification requires a long and extended time. How many years did it take against purification? Do you know what I mean by the opposite of purification? How long has it been since Islam, and things that are not of Islam have entered it, for many and very many years? Especially after the three centuries known for their virtue. So, as we always know, if destruction requires effort and toil, and building requires more toil, and if destruction accompanied by toil is easier than construction, then construction is harder and takes time. So, we do not now have that Islam that was in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), which he expressed a part of when he said (peace be upon him) regarding Abdullah ibn Mas'ud: Is Islam today fresh and green? Is Islam as a whole fresh and green as it was revealed? No. There is a difference in beliefs, a difference in rulings, and a difference in behavior, and the clearest thing is the issue of weak and fabricated hadiths, which even small children know, that the Sunnah is not purified as it was when the Messenger (peace be upon him) was teaching it to his companions. So, we are in need of these two pillars, "purification and education," and on this basis we keep repeating, and therefore we said what we said earlier, and we command all individuals of the Muslims to learn Islam and to strive, as much as they can, to understand it as it was revealed, and to educate themselves in a way that their learning of knowledge, as they say, is for knowledge only, but rather it is for action as well: . Yes.