Who is the one who publicly rebukes the rulers? Are they the callers to Allah and the scholars? And who is the one who rebukes widespread evils?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : There is an important criterion, O Shaykh, in the brother's question. If you mention it, it will not be counted against me as a question.
The Shaykh : No, it is only your question.
The questioner : But it is an important criterion, an important criterion. If you would mention it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : That is, who decides to publicly rebuke known evils in society? Are they the scholars?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Or are they the callers to Allah?
The Shaykh : The issue of the ruling is speaking about rebuking the rulers.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : It is not about widespread evils. For example, what do we have now? Widespread evils like riba (usury or interest), gambling, and the insurance policies currently among us, most of which are gambling. It is strange that people have accepted them, and you hardly find anyone who rebukes them, even though Allah has likened them to intoxicants, divination, and lots. But, glory be to Allah! You do not find anyone who rebukes them. You insure your car or something else, your house. You hand over dirhams and do not know whether you will lose more or less. This is gambling.
So I say: As for rebuking widespread evils, rebuke them. But our discussion is about rebuking the ruler, such as a person standing in the mosque and saying, for example, "The state has wronged, the state did such and such," meaning he speaks about the rulers themselves. This is what we are discussing. Then, there is a difference between the prince or ruler you want to speak about being present before you and being absent, because all the rebukings reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) occurred 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 while we are wrong. But if he is absent and we start tailoring the garment to fit what we want, that is where the danger lies. Everything reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) was confronting the prince or ruler directly. It is known that if a person stood and spoke about one of the people, not the rulers, in his absence, it would be said: this is backbiting. If there is good in you, go advise him, meet him. Yes.
The questioner : Some people exploit widespread evils to rebuke them in a way that links them to the rulers, as if the rulers are involved in this, such that the listener understands that the rulers are the cause of this. So, is this considered exploiting it against the rulers, even though it is a widespread evil?
The Shaykh : No, it is not like that. I want, for example, to tell people: Avoid riba (usury or interest). He does not come and say: "These are houses of riba (usury or interest), openly raising their buildings." He does not say this, because this includes or implies a rebuke of the rulers. But he says: "Avoid riba (usury or interest). Riba (usury or interest) is forbidden, even if it is widespread among people. Gambling is forbidden, even if it is approved, and so on."
The Shaykh : No, it is only your question.
The questioner : But it is an important criterion, an important criterion. If you would mention it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : That is, who decides to publicly rebuke known evils in society? Are they the scholars?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Or are they the callers to Allah?
The Shaykh : The issue of the ruling is speaking about rebuking the rulers.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : It is not about widespread evils. For example, what do we have now? Widespread evils like riba (usury or interest), gambling, and the insurance policies currently among us, most of which are gambling. It is strange that people have accepted them, and you hardly find anyone who rebukes them, even though Allah has likened them to intoxicants, divination, and lots. But, glory be to Allah! You do not find anyone who rebukes them. You insure your car or something else, your house. You hand over dirhams and do not know whether you will lose more or less. This is gambling.
So I say: As for rebuking widespread evils, rebuke them. But our discussion is about rebuking the ruler, such as a person standing in the mosque and saying, for example, "The state has wronged, the state did such and such," meaning he speaks about the rulers themselves. This is what we are discussing. Then, there is a difference between the prince or ruler you want to speak about being present before you and being absent, because all the rebukings reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) occurred 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 while we are wrong. But if he is absent and we start tailoring the garment to fit what we want, that is where the danger lies. Everything reported from the Salaf (the earliest generations) was confronting the prince or ruler directly. It is known that if a person stood and spoke about one of the people, not the rulers, in his absence, it would be said: this is backbiting. If there is good in you, go advise him, meet him. Yes.
The questioner : Some people exploit widespread evils to rebuke them in a way that links them to the rulers, as if the rulers are involved in this, such that the listener understands that the rulers are the cause of this. So, is this considered exploiting it against the rulers, even though it is a widespread evil?
The Shaykh : No, it is not like that. I want, for example, to tell people: Avoid riba (usury or interest). He does not come and say: "These are houses of riba (usury or interest), openly raising their buildings." He does not say this, because this includes or implies a rebuke of the rulers. But he says: "Avoid riba (usury or interest). Riba (usury or interest) is forbidden, even if it is widespread among people. Gambling is forbidden, even if it is approved, and so on."