The Questioner: Your Eminence, Shaykh, there are some who say that publicly denouncing rulers is from the methodology of the Salaf. They cite as evidence the Ḥadīth of Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī regarding his denunciation of Marwān ibn al-Ḥakam when he delivered the sermon before the prayer, and the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him), which means: “There will be oppressive rulers, so whoever opposes them will be safe or absolved,” and the Ḥadīth: “The master of martyrs is a man who stood before a tyrannical ruler, commanded him to do good and forbade him from evil, and was then killed.” Is this statement correct? And how can these authentic narrations be reconciled with his (peace be upon him) saying: “Whoever wishes to advise a ruler, let him do so secretly and not openly”? We request a detailed explanation of this matter, as many of the youth of the Islamic awakening are ignorant of the correct ruling on this issue, especially since there are some callers [to Islam] who say that publicly denouncing rulers is from the methodology of the Salaf, which causes the youth to become agitated and to think that not denouncing publicly is a sign of compromise in religion and other such things. Due to the seriousness of this issue, we request a detailed explanation, and may Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh: This question is important, and its answer is, in reality, even more important. There is no doubt that enjoining good and forbidding evil is an obligation upon everyone capable of it, due to the saying of Allah, the Blessed and Exalted: {And let there be from among you a nation inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those are the successful. * And do not be like those who became divided and differed after the clear proofs had come to them. And for them is a great punishment.} [Āl ‘Imrān: 104-105]. The lām in His saying {And let there be} is the lām of command. And the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “You must enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and you must restrain the foolish person, and you must compel him to adhere to the truth, or Allah will strike the hearts of some of you against others, then curse you as He cursed them.” That is, as He cursed the Children of Israel, about whom Allah said: {Those who disbelieved among the Children of Israel were cursed by the tongue of Dāwūd and ‘Īsā, son of Maryam. That was because they disobeyed and were transgressing. * They used not to forbid one another from the evil they committed.} [Al-Mā’idah: 78-79].
However, we must understand that the legislative commands in such matters have specific contexts, and the use of wisdom is indispensable. If we see that public denunciation will remove the evil and bring about good, then we should denounce publicly. If we see that public denunciation will not remove the evil—I repeat, if we see that public denunciation will remove the evil and bring about good, then wisdom dictates that we denounce publicly. But if we see that public denunciation will neither remove the evil nor bring about good, but rather will increase the pressure from the rulers on those who denounce and on the people of goodness, then it is better to denounce secretly. By this approach, the evidences can be reconciled. Thus, the evidences indicating that denunciation should be public – apply when we expect what? Benefit, which is the attainment of good and the removal of evil. And the texts indicating that denunciation should be secret – apply when public denunciation would increase evil and not bring about good.
I tell you: No one from this Ummah has gone astray except by taking one side of the texts and abandoning another, whether in matters of creed, or in dealing with rulers, or in dealing with people, or in other matters. We will give you examples so that it becomes clear to those present and those listening: For example, the Khawārij and the Mu‘tazilah saw the texts of warning that contain threats for certain major sins, so they took these texts and forgot the texts of promise that open the door of hope. For instance, they said: If a person (who is a Muslim) intentionally kills a believer, he becomes a disbeliever—according to the Khawārij—whose blood is permissible and who will abide eternally in Hellfire. And according to the Mu‘tazilah, they say: If he kills him, he exits Islam but does not enter disbelief, because we cannot definitively state that he is a disbeliever. So, we say: He exited Islam and was in a position between Islam and disbelief, but he will abide eternally in Hellfire. Then they forgot the verses of promise and the texts of promise indicating that Allah, the Exalted, will bring out of Hellfire anyone who has in his heart even the slightest speck of mustard seed of faith.
Then others countered 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 Hellfire. And they said: The saying of Allah, the Exalted: {And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell} [An-Nisā’: 93]—this applies to a disbeliever who kills a believer. Now, why did both these groups go astray? Because they took only one side of the texts.
Similarly, for example, regarding the attributes of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, some people said: Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, cannot come Himself, nor can He descend to the lowest heaven, and He does not have a face, nor does He have hands. Why? They said: Because Allah said: {There is nothing like unto Him} [Ash-Shūrā: 11], and if you affirm these matters, you would be likening Allah. Is this understood?
Well, others countered them and said: Allah, the Exalted, has affirmed for Himself a face, and He has affirmed for Himself two hands, and He has affirmed that He descends, and that He comes. So, His face is like our faces, and His hand is like our hands, and His descent is like our descent, and His coming is like our coming, because we do not comprehend coming, hand, and face except what we witness, and Allah has addressed us with what can be comprehended. 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.
Therefore: these are at one extreme and those are at another, and all of them are astray, because each one took only one side. So, we say: Indeed, Allah, the Exalted, has a face and has two hands, and He comes and descends, but it is not like our hands nor like our faces—far be it from Him, the Mighty and Majestic, from that—because {There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing} [Ash-Shūrā: 11].
Similarly, regarding the issue of advising rulers, some people wish to take one side of the texts, which is to publicly denounce rulers, regardless of the resulting harms. Others say: We can never denounce publicly; rather, it is obligatory to advise rulers secretly, as stated in the text mentioned by the questioner. We say: The texts do not contradict each other, nor do they clash with each other. So, when is denunciation public? When there is a benefit, and the benefit is that evil is removed and good is established. And it is secret if public denunciation does not serve the benefit, meaning it neither removes evil nor establishes good.
And you know—may Allah bless you—that rulers can never satisfy all people, ever. Even the Imām of the mosque, the Imām of the mosque, is he pleasing to the entire congregation? No. Some say: You pray too early! And some say: … Some say you prolong the prayer! And some say: You shorten it! And in winter, they dispute, and some say pray in the sun, and some pray in the shade—agreement is not reached. So, if public denunciation of rulers is announced, those who dislike them will exploit it, making a mountain out of a molehill, and sedition will erupt. Nothing has harmed people except such matters. The Khawārij were with ‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib (may Allah be pleased with him) against the army of Syria. When he reconciled with them—with the army of Syria—to spare the blood of the Muslims, they revolted against him and said: You are a disbeliever.
They even declared ‘Ali a disbeliever! Why? Because the masses and rabble cannot be controlled, and public criticism of rulers is exploited by such rabble to achieve their aims. As the Prophet said: “Indeed, Satan has despaired of being worshipped by those who pray in the Arabian Peninsula, but he is content to sow discord among them.” Among whom? Among the inhabitants of the peninsula. He incites conflict that may escalate to killing. A Muslim might meet his fellow Muslim perhaps even his relative or cousin – and kill him for no reason at all. Therefore, we advise the youth of the Islamic awakening to consider all textual evidence and to reflect on the consequences of their actions. The Prophet said: “Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day, let them speak good or remain silent.” Use this as a criterion for your words and actions. Allah is the One who grants success.
[End of Fatwa, Kitāb Liqā’ al-Bāb al-Maftūh (10/62), Shaykh Muhammad bin Saleh Al-Uthaymeen]
Source
(Translated by Mohammed bin Thajammul Hussain Manna, except for the last paragraph.)
Saheehus-Seerah 