The duty of ‘amr bil ma’roof wa nahy anil munkar in the contemporary Islamic movement

The Qur’an is the eternal source of guidance for Muslims, indeed for all mankind. According to a Prophetic hadith, the Qur’an yields ever greater insights as human knowledge expands, yet contemporary Muslims have a frightening tendency to indulge in trivia even concerning the Divine Book. Far from gaining deeper insights into the meanings of the Qur’an, many Muslims channel their energies into "proving" that modern scientific discoveries confirm Qur’anic revelations, as if the Qur’an needs such validation. There are others who have busied themselves with finding errors in the Bible. How many errors in the Bible does it take to make one a better Muslim? Yet another group insists on tabligh to fellow Muslims, leaving all other precepts of deen aside. These may still be considered less serious in light of the frightful arguments Muslims get into over where they should place their hands in salah, and whether ‘ameen’ should be said softly or loudly in prayer.

It is at a more fundamental level that Muslims are guilty of wilful distortion of the meanings of the Qur’an, and of the Sunnah and Seerah of the noble Messenger of Allah (saw). Nothing illustrates this better than the manner in which Muslims have distorted the meaning of the ayah "amr bil ma’roof wa nahy anil munkar". All English translations give: "To enjoin good and forbid evil", or minor variations to that effect. Let us first remind ourselves that this phrase occurs at least 28 times in the Qur’an, in various forms, which indicates its importance.

The key point to note is that the Arabic word ‘amr is an active command, not a passive verb. Thus, Allah says: "You Muslims must command the common good and forbid evil." This is in stark contrast to the normal Muslim understanding of the phrase as being passive. Moreover, it is not enough merely to only command the common good; one must also forbid evil. Without forbidding evil and wrong-doing, the duty of commanding the common good cannot be fulfilled. It is like trying to clean a room while permitting others to continue throwing rubbish into it.

How did Muslims come to distort the meanings of the noble Qur’an and move away from its true commands, as well as proper understanding of the Sunnah and Seerah? This has much to do with Islamic history. Soon after the khilafah was subverted into mulukiyyah (kingship), the ulama came under intense pressure from the rulers to give them legitimacy. The rulers believed, probably correctly, that they needed religious authority to be acceptable to the Muslim masses. Many ulama refused to oblige and suffered grievously for it — Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i and Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal all suffered much persecution at the hands of the rulers — but others succumbed to official pressure much more easily.

The scholars’ acquiescence took several forms. Unable to change a bad situation, they tried to limit the damage by justifying it under the pretext of avoiding fitna (sedition), hoping that the situation would ultimately rectify itself. Gradually, a body of ‘court ulama’ emerged who provided religious sanction to the un-Islamic behaviour of rulers. The Qur’anic prohibition on ghaybah (backbiting, al-Qur’an 49:12) was represented to stifle criticism of those in power. The prohibition applies to publicising the errors of ordinary Muslims, not to the un-Islamic behaviour of rulers. This interpretation contradicts the Prophetic command that if you see an evil, stop it by hand (i.e., use force); if unable to do so, speak out against it. If that too is not possible, at least consider it evil in your heart but remember that is the lowest form of iman (faith). At the same time, the duty of amr bil ma’roof and nahy anil munkar was reduced to giving naseeha (advice).

Most Muslims today are guilty of abandoning the duty of amr bil ma’roof wa nahy anil munkar. Let us consider the divine punishment for such dereliction. In surah al-A’araf, Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala narrates the story of Bani Israel (Yahud) who lived on the banks of a river (al-Qur’an 7:163-166). They were prohibited from fishing on the day of the Sabbath. A group among them started to subvert this prohibition by digging a channel from the river, into which the fish swam. The channel was then blocked to prevent the fishes’ returning to the river; the next day, they would be ‘caught’. When another group of God-fearing Jews castigated them for this, a third group reprimanded them for interfering unnecessarily. If God willed to punish the first group, they argued, He would do so Himself. When God’s punishment came, only the group that had spoken out was spared; the rest were all punished.

We need to bear in mind that these ayaat come after a long series of ayaat in this surah in which the story of the Pharaoh’s rebelliousness is narrated in great detail. He and his people were repeatedly punished, and after each reprieve they returned to their evil ways. Finally, when the Pharaoh chased Musa (as) and his followers across the Red Sea, Allah saved Bani Israel and the pursuing Pharaoh and his army perished. The group of Yahud who were punished for violating the Sabbath knew the consequences of Pharaoh’s rebelliousness, yet they still thought they could cheat Allah (astaghfirullah). Equally revealing is the punishment meted out to the second group which, although not involved directly, failed to prohibit the munkar.

In yet another surah, Allah tells us that the transgressors of Yahud were condemned by both the Prophets Da’ud and Isa (peace be upon them). Further, that those who do not prohibit evil deeds when they see them, they also stand condemned and will be punished (5: 78-79). The duty of prohibiting munkar cannot be abandoned without opening oneself to Allah’s wrath. In a hadith the Prophet, upon whom be peace, has said that the Yahudi deviation began when one person would see another indulging in evil and would tell him to stop it; but the very next day, would dine with the offender. The Prophet then went on: "You must command the good, forbid evil and prevent injustice, otherwise you will incur Allah’s wrath" (Abu Daud, 4336). In another hadith, he says "If you abandon this duty (of commanding the good and forbidding evil), you will earn Allah’s wrath and your prayers will go unanswered" (Musnad of Ahmed ibn Hanbal, vol. 5, p.388).

Most Muslims today have clearly abandoned this Qur’anic duty, especially of forbidding munkar. Seeking refuge in rituals is no substitute for honest responsibility towards Allah’s deen. Is it any wonder, then, that Muslims’ prayers go unanswered in the face of such horrendous crimes against us as occur in Palestine, Bosnia, Kosova, Chechnya, Kashmir and elsewhere? A small group of Muslims are paying a very high price while most of us are silent spectators in the face of these atrocities against fellow Muslims.

It is also important to understand where the fault really lies. There are at least 56 Muslim nation-states. The Muslim world is not poor, but its rulers are, with rare exception, cowards and agents of the west and have effectively declared war on the Muslim Ummah. Most are also morally bankrupt, which makes them unfit to govern; yet Muslims have remained largely oblivious of their duty in this situation. The few who dare to speak out are often castigated by others, accused of causing fitna. A few naive Muslims may sincerely fall for this argument, but there are also hordes of paid agents of these regimes who deliberately promote such thinking in order to cause confusion among Muslims. Many of the petty fiqhi divisions among Muslims are similarly promoted by agents of the west for the same reason.

An important principle rule of governance in Islam is that the greater the authority of a person, the greater his responsibility to live up to Islamic principles. Lying is bad if an ordinary person indulges in it, but it is infinitely worse if someone in authority is guilty of it. The same holds true for other offences. Yet in the Muslim world, the rules are applied ruthlessly against the weak and poor, while the rich and powerful go free.

In his first sermon as khalifah, Abu Bakr Siddiq (ra) said: "I am not the best among you for this position, but I have been charged with it. Obey me so long as I obey Allah and His Messenger. If I go astray, you have no obligation to follow me; rather, you must set me right." Muslim rulers today take exactly the opposite position. They indulge in every kind of vice but the people must not speak against them. The heavy hand of the law is used against those who do.

After the period of the khulafa ar-Rrashidoon, the rulers tried to enlist the support of the ulama to legitimise their rule. Many ulama refused to cooperate. Imam Abu Hanifa, for instance, repeatedly refused to accept the position of qadi under the Abbassid ruler Mansoor. On one occasion, the Imam was lashed 30 times for displeasing the ruler. When Mansoor’s uncle chastised him for offending such a great scholar, he sent 30,000 dirhams as compensation. Imam Abu Hanifa refused to accept the money, and told the courier to ask Mansoor whether he had a single coin in his coffers earned by halal means. How many ulama do we have today who can stand up to our rulers?

Let us look at the House of Saud, occupiers of the Haramain. Their moral corruption is well-recorded. Were the hudood punishment of stoning adulterers applied, few members of the House of Saud would escape; there may not even be enough stones to do the job. Yet how many ulama in the Arabian peninsula defy them and fulfil their Qur’anic obligation of ‘amr bil ma’roof wa nahy anil munkar? Is it any wonder, then, that the prayers of Muslims remain unanswered?

Such corruption is not confined to the House of Saud. In other places, Tunisia or Turkey, for instance, Muslimahs are threatened with rape for daring to practise their Islam. In Tunisia, this has actually happened, as it has in Egypt. For Muslims to remain silent in the face of such crimes is for us to become accomplices. One needs to remember the wrath that befell the Yahud for violating the prohibition on fishing on the Sabbath: they were turned into apes. The crimes that we Muslims are now guilty of are far worse.

Imam Ghazali, that great intellectual of Islamic history, has given excellent advice in his masterpiece, Ihya Ulum al-Deen. "Shun those ulama who go to the courts of the rulers. Go and learn from those who shun the rulers." Perhaps there has never been greater need for this advice than today.