What is the ruling on a man who leaves off enjoining good and forbidding evil because he fears that he will not adhere to it, and how do we reconcile this with the verse
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Al-Huwayni: A questioner says regarding the statement of Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He: [Al-Baqarah 2:44], that he fears that if he enjoins good and forbids evil, it will be an argument against him because he does not comply. He then reads the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): the hadith. He asks how we can escape the sin of not enjoining good and forbidding evil in light of this verse and this hadith.
The Shaykh : I clearly remember that I read in the Tafsir of Imam al-Qurtubi, the comprehensive commentary on the Qur'an, this doubt that was directed at Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him). He answered: "Satan wishes to hear from you such a doubt. Who among us is able to comply with everything he enjoins and refrain from everything he forbids?" However, the Muslim must strive to act upon what he enjoins and refrain from what he forbids. But if he feels that sometimes he may enjoin something and not comply with it, and forbid something else and not refrain from it, then here we must keep in mind two realities. The first, which I mentioned earlier, is that he must strive to act upon what he enjoins and refrain from what he forbids. The second reality is that the one who enjoins good and forbids evil has two obligations: one is the enjoining and forbidding, and the other is not contradicting what he enjoins and what he forbids. If he neglects one of the two, he should not neglect the other. He acts upon the good but does not enjoin it, and refrains from the evil but does not forbid people from it. In this case, he has fulfilled one obligation and left off another. The opposite of this is what we are currently discussing: he enjoins good but does not comply, and forbids evil but does not refrain. His performance of enjoining good and forbidding evil is the fulfillment of an obligation, and his leaving off acting upon the good and refraining from the evil is the leaving off of an obligation. So this is equal to that; each of them has neglected an obligation. The truth is to combine the two: when he enjoins, he complies, and when he forbids, he refrains. But it is not possible for a non-infallible person to combine the two in every matter of enjoining good, doing it, or forbidding evil, leaving it off. Rather, he will miss some things, especially since some of enjoining good and forbidding evil may not be obligatory; it may be from the category of recommended acts or confirmed sunnahs. For example, he encourages people and orders them to stand in night prayer, but he does not stand in night prayer. He encourages people to pray the Dhuha prayer and orders them to do so, mentioning to them its virtue as Allah wills, but he does not pray the Dhuha prayer. Here, there is no blame on him because he has not neglected an obligation, as what we mentioned are not among the obligations. In summary: this doubt invalidates enjoining good and forbidding evil, so it is not permissible for the Muslim to be affected by it. But he must strive with all effort not to fall into the warning of the hadith that he referred toThe questioner : , which is what al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated in their Sahihs from the hadith of Usamah ibn Zayd (may Allah be pleased with them both), that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:. I say that the one who enjoins good and forbids evil must strive with all effort not to be in the position of this scholar who is thrown into the Fire, and so on.
Then I observe in this hadith that this scholar's characteristic and habit is that he enjoins good but does not comply, and forbids evil but does not refrain. That is, he is not like one who sometimes enjoins good and then does not comply, and sometimes forbids evil and then does not refrain. Because, as I said earlier, it is not possible for a human being to escape neglecting something of the obligations, including enjoining something and not complying with it, and forbidding something and not refraining from it. The hadith is to be understood as referring to one whose characteristic is to enjoin good and forbid evil, and then he contradicts the people by doing the opposite of what he enjoins them to do and forbids them from. This is my answer; may it be correct, if Allah wills.
Do you order righteousness of the people and forget yourselves while you recite the Scripture? Then will you not reason?
أَتَأْمُرُونَ النَّاسَ بِالْبِرِّ وَتَنْسَوْنَ أَنْفُسَكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ تَتْلُونَ الْكِتَابَ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَThe man will be brought on the Day of Resurrection and will go around in the Fire like a donkey at a millstone...
يؤتى بالرجل يوم القيامة فيدور في النار كحمار الرحى ..The Shaykh : I clearly remember that I read in the Tafsir of Imam al-Qurtubi, the comprehensive commentary on the Qur'an, this doubt that was directed at Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him). He answered: "Satan wishes to hear from you such a doubt. Who among us is able to comply with everything he enjoins and refrain from everything he forbids?" However, the Muslim must strive to act upon what he enjoins and refrain from what he forbids. But if he feels that sometimes he may enjoin something and not comply with it, and forbid something else and not refrain from it, then here we must keep in mind two realities. The first, which I mentioned earlier, is that he must strive to act upon what he enjoins and refrain from what he forbids. The second reality is that the one who enjoins good and forbids evil has two obligations: one is the enjoining and forbidding, and the other is not contradicting what he enjoins and what he forbids. If he neglects one of the two, he should not neglect the other. He acts upon the good but does not enjoin it, and refrains from the evil but does not forbid people from it. In this case, he has fulfilled one obligation and left off another. The opposite of this is what we are currently discussing: he enjoins good but does not comply, and forbids evil but does not refrain. His performance of enjoining good and forbidding evil is the fulfillment of an obligation, and his leaving off acting upon the good and refraining from the evil is the leaving off of an obligation. So this is equal to that; each of them has neglected an obligation. The truth is to combine the two: when he enjoins, he complies, and when he forbids, he refrains. But it is not possible for a non-infallible person to combine the two in every matter of enjoining good, doing it, or forbidding evil, leaving it off. Rather, he will miss some things, especially since some of enjoining good and forbidding evil may not be obligatory; it may be from the category of recommended acts or confirmed sunnahs. For example, he encourages people and orders them to stand in night prayer, but he does not stand in night prayer. He encourages people to pray the Dhuha prayer and orders them to do so, mentioning to them its virtue as Allah wills, but he does not pray the Dhuha prayer. Here, there is no blame on him because he has not neglected an obligation, as what we mentioned are not among the obligations. In summary: this doubt invalidates enjoining good and forbidding evil, so it is not permissible for the Muslim to be affected by it. But he must strive with all effort not to fall into the warning of the hadith that he referred toThe questioner : , which is what al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated in their Sahihs from the hadith of Usamah ibn Zayd (may Allah be pleased with them both), that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
The scholar will be brought on the Day of Resurrection and thrown into the Fire, and his intestines will gush out, and he will go around in the Fire as the donkey goes around the millstone. The people of the Fire will go around him and say to him: "O so-and-so, were you not the one who used to enjoin good upon us and forbid us from evil?" He will say: "Yes, I used to order you to do good but I did not do it, and I used to forbid you from evil but I did it."
يؤتى بالعالم يوم القيامة فيلقى في النار فتندلق أقتاب بطنه، ويدور في النار كما يدور الحمار بالرحى فيطيف به أهل النار فيقولون له يا فلان ألست كنت تأمرنا بالمعروف وتنهانا عن المنكر فيقول بلى كنت آمركم بالمعروف ولا آتيه وأنهاكم عن المنكر وآتيهThen I observe in this hadith that this scholar's characteristic and habit is that he enjoins good but does not comply, and forbids evil but does not refrain. That is, he is not like one who sometimes enjoins good and then does not comply, and sometimes forbids evil and then does not refrain. Because, as I said earlier, it is not possible for a human being to escape neglecting something of the obligations, including enjoining something and not complying with it, and forbidding something and not refraining from it. The hadith is to be understood as referring to one whose characteristic is to enjoin good and forbid evil, and then he contradicts the people by doing the opposite of what he enjoins them to do and forbids them from. This is my answer; may it be correct, if Allah wills.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.