Is it true that what some say, that openly rebuking the rulers is the methodology of the Salaf, and they cite as evidence Abu Sa'id al-Khudri's rebuke of Marwan ibn al-Hakam when he placed the sermon before the prayer?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Your Eminence, some people say that openly rebuking the rulers is the methodology of the Salaf, and they cite the hadith of Abu Sa'id al-Khudri regarding his rebuke of Marwan ibn al-Hakam when he placed the sermon before the prayer, and his saying (peace and blessings be upon him), to the effect that , and the hadith . Is this statement correct? And how do you reconcile these authentic reports with his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): We ask for detail in this issue, as many of the youth of the awakening are unaware of the correct ruling in this matter, especially since some of the callers to Allah say that openly rebuking the rulers is the methodology of the Salaf, which causes the youth to become agitated and think that not rebuking them openly is a sign of compromising in the religion, and so on. Given the seriousness of this issue, we ask for detail, and may Allah reward you with good?
The Shaykh : This question is important, and its answer is actually more important than the question itself. There is no doubt that forbidding evil is obligatory upon everyone who is able to do so, based on the saying of Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He:[Ali 'Imran 3:104-105] The lam in His saying: is the lam of command. And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: Meaning: just as the Children of Israel were cursed, about whom Allah said: [Al-Ma'idah 5:78-79].
But we must know that the legislative commands in such matters have their places, and wisdom must be employed. If we see that openly forbidding evil will remove the evil and bring about good, then let us forbid it openly. And if we see that openly forbidding evil will not remove the evil—I say, if we see that openly forbidding evil will remove the evil and bring about good—then wisdom dictates that we forbid it openly. And if we see that openly forbidding evil will not remove the evil and will not bring about good, but rather will increase the pressure of the rulers on those who forbid evil and the people of good, then the good is to forbid it in private. In this way, the evidences are reconciled. The evidences indicating that forbidding evil is to be done openly apply when we expect what? The benefit, which is the realization of good and the removal of evil. And the texts indicating that forbidding evil is to be done in private apply when making the forbidding public increases the evil and does not bring about good.
And I tell you: no one has gone astray from this Ummah except because they took one side of the texts and left the other side, whether in creed, in dealing with rulers, in dealing with people, or otherwise. We give you examples so that it becomes clear to those present and to the listeners. For example: the Khawarij and the Mu'tazilah saw the texts of threat containing threats for some of the major sins, so they took these texts and forgot the texts of promise that open the door of hope. For example, they said: if a person kills a believer intentionally, he becomes a disbeliever—according to the view of the Khawarij, his blood is permissible and he is eternal in the Fire. And according to the view of the Mu'tazilah, they say: if he kills him, he exits Islam but does not enter disbelief, because we cannot be certain that he is a disbeliever. So we say: he exited Islam and was in a state between Islam and disbelief, but he is eternal in the Fire. Then they forgot the verses of promise and the texts of promise indicating that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, will take out of the Fire whoever has in his heart the weight of a mustard seed of faith.
Then others opposed them and said: no matter what sins a person commits that are less than disbelief, he is a believer with complete faith and will never enter the Fire. And they said: His saying, Exalted is He:[An-Nisa 4:93] this is regarding the disbeliever who kills a believer. So now, why did these and those go astray? Because they took one side of the texts.
Similarly, for example, regarding the attributes of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, some people said: Allah, Mighty and Majestic, cannot come down Himself, and it is not possible for Him to descend to the lowest heaven, and He has no face, and He has no two hands. Why? They said: because Allah said:[Ash-Shuraa 42:11] And if you affirm these things, you have likened Allah to creation. Is this clear?
Fine, others opposed them and said: Allah, the Exalted, has affirmed for Himself a face, and affirmed for Himself two hands, and affirmed that He descends, and that He comes. So His face is like our faces, His hand is like our hands, His descent is like our descent, and His coming is like our coming. Because we do not comprehend of coming, hand, and face anything other than what we observe, and Allah addressed us with what can be perceived, so the coming of Allah, the face of Allah, the hand of Allah, and the descent of Allah are like what is affirmed for us.
So: these are on one side and those are on the other side, and all of them are astray, because each one took one side. We say: Allah, the Exalted, has a face and two hands, and He comes and descends, but not like our hands and not like our faces, and far is He from that, Mighty and Majestic, because[Ash-Shuraa 42:11]
Similarly, in the issue of advising the rulers, some people want to take one side of the texts, which is publicly declaring rebuke against the rulers, no matter what harms result from it. And some say: it is not possible to declare it absolutely, and the obligatory thing is to advise the rulers in private, as came in the text mentioned by the questioner. And we say: the texts do not lie to each other, and they do not contradict each other. So when is the rebuke to be public? When there is benefit. And the benefit is that the evil is removed and good is established. And it is to be private if declaring the rebuke does not serve the benefit, does not remove the evil, and does not establish good.
And you know—may Allah bless you—that the rulers cannot please all people ever. Even the imam of the mosque, the imam of the mosque, is he pleasing to the whole congregation? No, some say: he is too early! And some say: ... some say: it is too long! And some say: it is too short! And in winter they dispute, and the one who says pray in the sun and the one who prays in the shade do not reach agreement. So if rebuke is declared against the rulers, those who hate them will exploit it and make a mountain out of a mole, and fitnah will erupt. And what harmed the people was only such a matter. The Khawarij were with 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) against the army of Sham, and when he made a truce with them with the army of Sham to spare the blood of Muslims, they rebelled against him and said: you are a disbeliever. They declared 'Ali ibn Abi Talib a disbeliever—seeking refuge in Allah—why? Because the rabble of the people and the mob of the people cannot be controlled ever. And declaring rebuke against the rulers
There will be unjust rulers, so whoever repudiates them is safe or free
سيكون هناك ولاة ظلمة فمن نابذهم فقد سلم أو برئThe master of martyrs is a man who stands up to an unjust imam, commands him to do good and forbids him from evil, and he kills him
سيد الشهداء رجل قام إلى إمام جائر فأمره ونهاه فقتلهWhoever wants to advise a person in authority, let him advise him in private and not make it public
من أراد أن ينصح لذي سلطان فلينصحه سرًّا ولا يبده علانيةThe Shaykh : This question is important, and its answer is actually more important than the question itself. There is no doubt that forbidding evil is obligatory upon everyone who is able to do so, based on the saying of Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He:
(104) And let there be [arising] from you a nation inviting to [all that is] good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those will be the successful. (105) And do not be like the ones who became divided and differed after the clear proofs had come to them. And those will have a great punishment.
وَلْتَكُنْ مِنْكُمْ أُمَّةٌ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْخَيْرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ وَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ * وَلا تَكُونُوا كَالَّذِينَ تَفَرَّقُوا وَاخْتَلَفُوا مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ وَأُولَئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌAnd let there be
ولتكنYou will surely enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and you will surely take hold of the hand of the foolish person, and you will surely force him to the truth by force, or Allah will strike the hearts of some of you against others, and then He will curse you just as He cursed them.
لتأمرن بالمعروف ولتنهون عن المنكر، ولتأخذن على يدي السفيه، ولتأطرنه على الحق أطراً أو ليضربن الله قلوب بعضكم على بعض، ثم يلعنكم كما لعنهم(78) Cursed were those who disbelieved among the Children of Israel by the tongue of David and of Jesus, the son of Mary. That was because they disobeyed and [habitually] transgressed. (79) They used not to prevent one another from wrongdoing that they did. How wretched was that which they were doing.
لُعِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ بَنِي إِسْرائيلَ عَلَى لِسَانِ دَاوُدَ وَعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ ذَلِكَ بِمَا عَصَوْا وَكَانُوا يَعْتَدُونَ * كَانُوا لا يَتَنَاهَوْنَ عَنْ مُنْكَرٍ فَعَلُوهُBut we must know that the legislative commands in such matters have their places, and wisdom must be employed. If we see that openly forbidding evil will remove the evil and bring about good, then let us forbid it openly. And if we see that openly forbidding evil will not remove the evil—I say, if we see that openly forbidding evil will remove the evil and bring about good—then wisdom dictates that we forbid it openly. And if we see that openly forbidding evil will not remove the evil and will not bring about good, but rather will increase the pressure of the rulers on those who forbid evil and the people of good, then the good is to forbid it in private. In this way, the evidences are reconciled. The evidences indicating that forbidding evil is to be done openly apply when we expect what? The benefit, which is the realization of good and the removal of evil. And the texts indicating that forbidding evil is to be done in private apply when making the forbidding public increases the evil and does not bring about good.
And I tell you: no one has gone astray from this Ummah except because they took one side of the texts and left the other side, whether in creed, in dealing with rulers, in dealing with people, or otherwise. We give you examples so that it becomes clear to those present and to the listeners. For example: the Khawarij and the Mu'tazilah saw the texts of threat containing threats for some of the major sins, so they took these texts and forgot the texts of promise that open the door of hope. For example, they said: if a person kills a believer intentionally, he becomes a disbeliever—according to the view of the Khawarij, his blood is permissible and he is eternal in the Fire. And according to the view of the Mu'tazilah, they say: if he kills him, he exits Islam but does not enter disbelief, because we cannot be certain that he is a disbeliever. So we say: he exited Islam and was in a state between Islam and disbelief, but he is eternal in the Fire. Then they forgot the verses of promise and the texts of promise indicating that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, will take out of the Fire whoever has in his heart the weight of a mustard seed of faith.
Then others opposed them and said: no matter what sins a person commits that are less than disbelief, he is a believer with complete faith and will never enter the Fire. And they said: His saying, Exalted is He:
whoever kills a believer intentionally - his recompense is Hell
مَنْ يَقْتُلْ مُؤْمِناً مُتَعَمِّداً فَجَزَاؤُهُ جَهَنَّمُSimilarly, for example, regarding the attributes of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, some people said: Allah, Mighty and Majestic, cannot come down Himself, and it is not possible for Him to descend to the lowest heaven, and He has no face, and He has no two hands. Why? They said: because Allah said:
There is nothing like unto Him
لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌFine, others opposed them and said: Allah, the Exalted, has affirmed for Himself a face, and affirmed for Himself two hands, and affirmed that He descends, and that He comes. So His face is like our faces, His hand is like our hands, His descent is like our descent, and His coming is like our coming. Because we do not comprehend of coming, hand, and face anything other than what we observe, and Allah addressed us with what can be perceived, so the coming of Allah, the face of Allah, the hand of Allah, and the descent of Allah are like what is affirmed for us.
So: these are on one side and those are on the other side, and all of them are astray, because each one took one side. We say: Allah, the Exalted, has a face and two hands, and He comes and descends, but not like our hands and not like our faces, and far is He from that, Mighty and Majestic, because
There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.
لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وهو السميع البصيرSimilarly, in the issue of advising the rulers, some people want to take one side of the texts, which is publicly declaring rebuke against the rulers, no matter what harms result from it. And some say: it is not possible to declare it absolutely, and the obligatory thing is to advise the rulers in private, as came in the text mentioned by the questioner. And we say: the texts do not lie to each other, and they do not contradict each other. So when is the rebuke to be public? When there is benefit. And the benefit is that the evil is removed and good is established. And it is to be private if declaring the rebuke does not serve the benefit, does not remove the evil, and does not establish good.
And you know—may Allah bless you—that the rulers cannot please all people ever. Even the imam of the mosque, the imam of the mosque, is he pleasing to the whole congregation? No, some say: he is too early! And some say: ... some say: it is too long! And some say: it is too short! And in winter they dispute, and the one who says pray in the sun and the one who prays in the shade do not reach agreement. So if rebuke is declared against the rulers, those who hate them will exploit it and make a mountain out of a mole, and fitnah will erupt. And what harmed the people was only such a matter. The Khawarij were with 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) against the army of Sham, and when he made a truce with them with the army of Sham to spare the blood of Muslims, they rebelled against him and said: you are a disbeliever. They declared 'Ali ibn Abi Talib a disbeliever—seeking refuge in Allah—why? Because the rabble of the people and the mob of the people cannot be controlled ever. And declaring rebuke against the rulers