This struggle that the Ummah is engaged in is the highest political struggle that was sanctioned by the Messenger of Allah (saw) as the best struggle.
The Ummah (Islamic Nation) around the world is rising and seeking to reclaim the authority that was stolen from her by the tyrant rulers. In country after country, we are seeing the people lose their fear of the regimes that have been suppressing, repressing, torturing and imprisoning them while standing in the way of their political aspirations. Now, some of these rulers have fallen, and others are living precariously; the momentum is for change and the Ummah will not turn back.
Yet, we find some ‘ulama (clerics) sponsored by the oppressive regimes giving a most unfortunate regressive fatwa (religious edict) that claims protests and demonstrations in the Muslim lands are haram(prohibited). In this article, inshAllah, we want to scrutinise this fatwa, since Muslims are commanded not to be like the Ahl al-Kitab (The People of the Book) who took their priests and rabbis as Lords (instead of Allah), accepting their judgments blindly without question. The reasons given for such afatwa range in gravity, from the serious charge of rebellion, to the downright ludicrous claim that demonstrations will hold up traffic! One fatwa is premised on the principal reason: that protests and demonstrations constitute rebellion against legitimate rulers.
It is important to note that accounting the rulers is an important obligation in Islam, independent of their legitimacy. In other words, whether the rulers are legitimate or illegitimate, the Ummah has the obligation to hold them to task. This article will inshAllah explain that public protests and demonstrations (which are conducted in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Sharī’ah) are a permitted form of accounting.
What is a Legitimate Authority in Shari'ah?
A state becomes Islamic when its rules and policies are based on the Islamic Aqeedah (creed). Specifically, all laws and policies enacted by the government are solely extracted from the Qur’an and Sunnah. In other words, the sovereignty solely lies with Allah (swt). That is why obedience to the rulers is required if they rule by the Sharī’ah, as Allah (swt) says:
“O you who believe! Obey Allah, Obey His Messenger and those in authority from amongst you; and if you differ, then refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day.” [Al-Nisa: 59]
This noble verse in Surah al-Nisa comes after verse 58, which focused on the rulers when they were enjoined to rule by justice – which is nothing other than what Allah (swt) has revealed (i.e. the Qur’an and the Sunnah). The focus in the verse is on the Muslims under the authority of the rulers, and their responsibility. In this respect, the message of this ayah is addressed to the Ummah:
The Messenger (saw) said: “There is no obedience (when this results) in disobedience of the Creator.”
[Sahīh Bukharī]
[Sahīh Bukharī]
Here the apparent mantūq (meaning) is an absolute prohibition of following an order that goes against the order of Allah (swt).
It has been reported that ‘Alī (ra) said, “The Messenger of Allah sent a troop under the command of a man from Al-Ansar. When they left, he became angry with them for some reason, and said to them, `Has not the Messenger of Allah commanded you to obey me?’ They said, `Yes.’ He said, `Collect some wood,’ and then he started a fire with the wood, saying, `I command you to enter the fire.’ The people almost entered the fire, but a young man among them said, `You ran away from the Fire to Allah’s Messenger. Therefore, do not rush until you go back to Allah’s Messenger, and if he commands you to enter it, then enter it.’ When they went back to Allah’s Messenger, they told him what had happened, and the Messenger said, ‘Had you entered it, you would never have departed from it. Obedience is only in righteousness.’” [Bukhari]
Here the Messenger (saw) stated that obedience is only in the ‘ma’rūf’ (good) and not in the ‘munkar’ (evil).
Even though the persistent violation of Sharī’ah by the regimes in the Muslim lands is clear to any observer, it is important not to confuse the issue of legitimacy, with that of accounting the rulers. Accounting the rulers is an independent obligation in Islam. Suffice it to say, as the following section will show; if public accounting was permitted in the time of our Prophet (saw) and the Khulafa Rashideen(rightly-guided Caliphs), who represent the pinnacle of Islamic leadership and justice, then by min bab awla (greater reasoning), such accounting is needed in the time of oppressive and corrupt rulers, whether they are legitimate or illegitimate.
Evidences for Permissibility of Protests/Demonstrations
A number proofs (adillah) exist for the permissibility of demonstrations. Firstly, the general evidences that allow people to meet and express opinions would also permit people to demonstrate their opinions - as long as the opinions expressed are permitted by Islam. As such protests and demonstrations are merely a permissible style, which takes its hukm (ruling) dependent on the reasons and aims of the demonstrations. Thus, these must be assessed before a hukm can be given. How can a style be labelledharam without considering its aim and purpose? For example, if Muslims come out on a demonstration calling for the legalisation of riba, such a demonstration would not be halal, as it calls for something that is haram. However, if people come out to account the rulers for their oppression, and neglecting the people’s legitimate rights (given by Islam); then such a demand – whether via a letter, meeting or demonstration – is halal, because it is regarding a matter that is not only permitted, but also obliged by the Sharī’ah.
Another form of general evidences are the ‘umūmat (generality) and mutlaq (unrestricted) of the ahadīth, that enjoin Muslims to speak the haqq, enjoin the good and forbid the evil. So for example the hadīth:
“The best struggle (jihad) is the word of truth spoken to a tyrant ruler.” [Al-Nasa’ī]
This hadīth encouraging political struggle does not specify the manner in which the truth should be spoken to the tyrant ruler, which means any style that has not been prohibited by another text is permitted. So whether by a letter, distribution of leaflets, publication of a book, article in a newspaper or speaking directly to the ruler - these are all permissible means of fulfilling the obligation. This is similar to the hadīth of the Messenger (saw) when he said: “Convey from me even if it be one verse.”[Bukharī]. This hadīth enjoins on us to convey Islamic knowledge or carry da’wah to others and in the language of this hadīth the Prophet (saw) did not restrict it to any particular style or means. Therefore, it is permissible to impart knowledge via one to one teaching, group lessons or even via the internet. These are all permissible styles as the command of ballighū (convey) is mutlaq (unrestricted): so whatever action will realise this is permitted, as long as there is no specific nass (text) to the contrary.
The above hadīth for example says ‘the best struggle’: this fits a reality where the accounting is done publicly, since that is truly a struggle, whereas it is easier to account privately. It is when the ruler is accounted in front of everyone that he is likely to kill or imprison the person accounting him. This is also the significance of the following hadīth:
“The master of martyrs is Hamzah and a man who stood up to a tyrant ruler to advise him and was killed”
[Al-Hakim]
[Al-Hakim]
The fact that a ruler was accounted publically is the most likely reason for the accounting-person being killed.
This is also the example of the Sahabah and Salaf al-Salih who accounted the rulers in public. It is reported that a person told ‘Umar b. Khattab (ra) to “fear Allah” publicly, and ‘Umar responded by saying: “There is no goodness in you if you do not say it, and there is no goodness in us if we do not hear it.” (Manaqib amir al-muminin by Ibn Jawzi. P.155)
As for the Salaf al-Salih, look at the example of Hasan al-Basrī: he was present in Basrah when al-Hajjaj, a tyrant walī, built his grand palace and called all the people to witness it. Hasan knew that this was a great opportunity to remind the people about the place of wealth and status in this life. He said: “We looked at what the filthiest of filth built, and we found that Fir’awn built greater than what he built and higher than what he built, then Allah destroyed Fir’awn and what he built. Hajjaj should know that the inhabitants of the sky hate him and the people of the earth only deceive him!” It was said to Hasan “Be careful, O Abū Sa’īd!” Hasan replied “Allah has taken a covenant from the people of knowledge to explain it to the people and not to be silent!” In this example, Hasan al-Basrī openly exposed the excesses of the legitimate ruler. (Suwar min hayat at-tabi’in, ‘Abdur Rahman Ra’fat Basha p.101-102)
This was the same practice for Ahmad Ibn Hanbal when he accounted the Abbasid Khalīfah al-Ma’mun, and Ibn Taymiyyah with Sultan al-Nasir, the Mamluk sultan: so how can it be claimed today that it isharam to account the rulers publicly?. It does not befit those who claim to follow such scholars that they should give a fatwa that effectively stops a means to accounting the rulers and speaking the word of truth. This is not blocking the means (sad al-zari’ah) to evil but blocking the means to hold the rulers to account and speaking the Haqq.
Therefore, demonstrations and protests to account the rulers and expose their betrayal of the Ummah’sinterest are permissible. The caveat to this permissibility is conditional that no other rules of theSharī’ah are violated, such as destruction of public or private property, non Islamic slogans or free-mixing etc.
It is an Obligation
If a person were to steal our property, would we sit back and watch as bystanders? Rather, we will at least protest or attempt to reclaim our property. So why is it that some choose to remain silent, or ask others to remain silent when the tyrant rulers have stolen something far more precious, which is the authority (sultan) of the Ummah to implement Islam. This authority has been stolen, usurped and abused by the tyrant rulers and we are obliged to reclaim that authority by accounting these rulers and working to re-establish the Khalīfah who will rule by what Allah has revealed. Let us continue to heed the words of Muhammad al-Mustafa (saw) which came in the form of a warning, when he said:
“Nay, by Allah, you either enjoin good and forbid evil and catch hold of the hand of the oppressor and persuade him to act justly and stick to the truth, or, Allah will involve the hearts of some of you with the hearts of others and will curse you as He had cursed them.”
[Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhi] (PAM)
[Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhi] (PAM)
No comments:
Post a Comment