Ruling on the ruler.. Is Islam the religion of consultation and freedom or the religion of tyranny and slavery?!

The issue of rebelling against the ruler is highly controversial, especially now, after the fall of the Caliphate and the rise of tyrannical rulers, many of whom are seen as agents of the West. This episode delves into this complex topic using insights from Dr. Abdullah Salem's book, 'Contemporary Islamic Groups: Facts and Fabrications', and parts of Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi's 'Fiqh Al-Jihad'.

The term 'Kharijites' emerged during the time of Imam Ali and applies to anyone who rebels against a legitimate ruler accepted by the community. Early Kharijites were characterized by their doctrinal issue of excommunicating Muslims for major sins, leading them to justify fighting Muslims. However, rebellion can also be against unjust rulers, which has been a point of contention among Muslims since the early days. While some permit rebellion against unjust imams, others, to prevent bloodshed, advocate patience. Even those who forbade rebellion against an unjust ruler did not permit fighting alongside him against those who rebelled.

The video discusses the conditions for legitimate leadership and the obligation to obey the Imam. Obedience is conditional on the ruler gaining power through the consensus and satisfaction of the Muslim community, not through coercion or usurpation. The examples of Abu Bakr, Omar, and Uthman's caliphates illustrate that their legitimacy stemmed from the pledges of allegiance from the people, not mere force. Ibn Taymiyyah emphasizes that without consensus, a leader's authority is not established.

The common saying, 'Obey even an Abyssinian slave,' is often misunderstood. The author clarifies that this refers to a governor appointed by a legitimate Caliph, not a usurper. The phrase implies obedience to an appointed authority, even if they are from a marginalized background and unjust, to maintain unity. However, it does not apply to a Caliph who is himself a tyrannical usurper.

The era following the orthodox caliphate saw the rise of the 'usurping ruler' (al-mutaghalib), normalizing a deviation from Islamic principles. Scholars found themselves in a dilemma, leading to interpretations that justified obedience to any ruler who gained power by force, even if it led to a state of constant power struggles. The author criticizes this approach, emphasizing that Islam is not about blind obedience but about truth and justice. He also challenges making obedience to the Imam a tenet of faith, comparing it to Shi'ite ideologies. He cites Al-Tahawi's doctrine of not rebelling against or even cursing unjust rulers as an example of an unfortunate deviation that has become widespread today.

Despite calls for unquestioning obedience, Islamic texts allow for cursing unjust rulers if they incur hatred. The Prophet's ﷺ saying about the worst leaders being those you hate highlights this. The argument against rebellion often relies on preventing greater harm (dar' al-mafasid), prioritizing stability over immediatejustice. This principle suggests endurance of a lesser evil (tyranny) to avoid a greater one (civil strife). The author questions this, proposing that the argument of incapacity to change a ruler should apply universally, regardless of his religiosity, if it is solely based on power dynamics. Ibn Uthaymeen, for instance, permits rebellion against an infidel ruler if there is the capability to remove him.

The discussion pivots to peaceful resistance against tyranny, such as speaking truth to power. Quranic verses and prophetic traditions underscore the obligation to resist injustice, even if only by denouncing it verbally. The most explicit traditions affirm that the best form of jihad is speaking a word of truth to an oppressive ruler. The author debunks the notion of advising rulers only in secret, asserting that public wrongdoing necessitates public condemnation. He refers to historical examples of early Muslims, like Imam Al-Jassas, who condemned those who discouraged armed resistance against unjust rulers.

When oppression becomes widespread rather than individual, the situation changes. The command to 'listen and obey, even if your back is beaten and your money taken' applies to individual Muslims facing injustice under a legitimate caliph to prevent general discord, not to an entire nation systematically oppressed by a pervasive tyranny. The existence of a unified Muslim community under one Imam is a prerequisite for such obedience. In contemporary states where injustice is the norm, such principles do not apply. Ibn Taymiyyah's saying, 'Allah establishes a just state, even if it is infidel, and does not establish an unjust one, even if it is Muslim,' underscores the importance of justice.

Islam dictates a single ruler for the Muslim community. The video explains that the fragmentation of the Muslim world into numerous states, each with its own ruler, is a legacy of colonialism. This division serves the interests of current rulers, who resist any move towards Muslim unity, perceiving Islamic movements as threats. This self-serving interest perpetuates fragmentation.

The debate over takfir (excommunication) of rulers is crucial because it influences the permissibility of rebellion. While some Islamic groups are unfairly accused of widespread takfir, the author highlights the dangers of downplaying it, especially when rulers exhibit clear acts of disbelief. He criticizes some Salafi interpretations for resembling the Murji'ah (those who believe faith is only in the heart) by making takfir exceedingly difficult, even for obvious acts of kufr, unless the ruler explicitly utters words of disbelief or states he believes it is permissible. The author states that this attitude leads to concealing knowledge and misguiding people about the nature of tyrants. He emphasizes that the Prophet Muhammad did not cease to declare the idolaters as infidels, even when he and his followers were weak. Weakness should not deter from declaring the truth.

The author clarifies that declaring a ruler an infidel does not automatically necessitate armed rebellion. It is distinct from fighting him. The video further discusses how some scholars extended the principles of 'maslaha mursalah' (public interest), 'istihsan' (juristic preference), and 'sadd al-dharai' (blocking the means) to discourage takfir and rebellion, leading to a situation where unjust regimes thrive on such interpretations. He asserts that a defeatist attitude resulting from a sense of weakness contributes to this. The author also mentions extremist fatwas, such as obligating Palestinians to emigrate from their land or justifying alliances with non-Muslim forces without proper Islamic conditions, and even deeming it permissible to obey an infidel ruler.

The video then introduces Sheikh Al-Qaradawi's more detailed analysis on rebellion, particularly his critiques of extremist groups. Al-Qaradawi collects numerous traditions emphasizing patience in the face of tyrannical rulers to prevent strife. However, he acknowledges that scholars have differed on whether patience is obligatory when a ruler's injustice is severe, or when he commits clear acts of kufr. Al-Qaradawi classifies rulers into two types: those who claim Islam but are lax in implementation and commit sins (not to be excommunicated unless they declare these sins permissible), and secular rulers who openly oppose Islamic law (who are considered infidels and can be rebelled against). However, Al-Qaradawi notes that very few rulers openly declare their disbelief in a way that warrants takfir, typically being cunning enough to maintain a facade of Islam.

The speaker concludes by highlighting the vast difference between the context of early Islamic scholars (even during great periods of expansion and strong caliphates like the Umayyads) and the current situation. Today, there is no single caliph, no true application of Sharīʿah, and many rulers are seen as puppets of external enemies. If early Muslims considered rebellion permissible against relatively just rulers, how much more so against modern regimes that oppress their people, imprison scholars, and actively suppress Islamic practices? This perspective, he emphasizes, is crucial for understanding the current political landscape and the challenges facing Muslim societies, warning against the dangers of blind obedience to unjust powers.