Islāmic Standard of Obedience

However, since Islām wishes to prevent disorder and is a very staunch defender of the establishment of peace, the teaching presented by the Holy Prophet(sa) emphatically states that aside from extreme circumstances, the question of a refusal of obedience and deposition should not arise. It is necessary, inasmuch as possible, for the people to never think of rebelling against an Amīr. However, in this respect, such a strict directive has been given that the Holy Prophet(sa) states that even if the people notice their rights being usurped, they should demonstrate patience; if required, they should bear the tyranny and oppression of their rulers, but refrain from following a course of rebellion and division. Hence, the Holy Prophet(sa) states:

“‘O ye Muslims! After my demise, a time shall come when such people shall become rulers upon you who shall usurp your rights and commit very hateful things.’ The Companions inquired, ‘O Messenger of Allāh! In such circumstances, what do you enjoin upon us?’ The Holy Prophet(sa) responded, ‘Fulfill the rights owed to your rulers and seek your rights from God.’”1

Then, he states:

“A person who refuses to render obedience to the Amīr, and sets the foundation for division by separating himself from a unified community, shall die a death of disbelief if he passes away before having repented.”2

However, along with this, the public has been urged to work towards reconciliation by giving righteous consultation, even if the Amīr acts in a cruel and oppressive manner. In Islām, this struggle has been deemed a very great Jihād and an act of goodness. The Holy Prophet(sa) states:

“When an Amīr is guilty of tyranny and oppression, the greatest Jihād is to strive in order to prevent the cruel and unlawful practices of the Amīr by exhorting him to act with equity and justice.”3

However, if the Amīr still does not desist and remains adamant upon his unjust practices, and issues commandments in direct contradiction with divine injunctions, the public has been given the right to obey the Amīr in everything righteous and lawful as usual, but to refuse obedience in anything which is unlawful. As such, the Holy Prophet(sa) states:

“It is obligatory upon every Muslim to obey his Amīr, whether he agrees with a commandment issued by him or not. However, if he issues a commandment which explicitly contradicts divine law, then it shall not be compulsory to obey such an order.”4

If, despite the good consultation and partial disobedience of the people, an Amīrs chain of unjust commandments continues to increase; and he openly begins to tread a path which is at odds with the divine law of government and Sharī‘at, to the extent that his leadership takes on such a harmful state that in order to ensure its dismissal, it becomes appropriate to risk the peace of the country and unity of the community, in such extreme circumstances of this nature, people have been permitted to relinquish their obedience to the Amīr, and struggle to depose him. It is related in a Ḥadīth:

“A renowned Companion of the Holy Prophet(sa) named ‘Ubādah bin Ṣāmit relates, ‘When the Messenger of Allāh(sa) would take an oath of allegiance from us, he would make us declare that we would always demonstrate obedience to our Amīr: in a time of hardship or ease, in a state of pleasure or displeasure, whether our rights were given to us or snatched from us; and that we would never quarrel with our Amīrs in the matter of administration.’ However, the Holy Prophet(sa) said, ‘Verily, if you witness manifest disbelief in the attitude of your Amīrs, i.e., you notice a clear disbelief in a fundamental law of God, for which you have a clear and conclusive argument from God, then you have the right to challenge the leadership of the Amīr.’”5

In this Ḥadīth, with regards to the word ‘Kufr’ [i.e., ‘disbelief’] it should be remembered that this does not only infer a disbelief in religious doctrine; rather, it also implies a divergence from the fundamental principles of the law of government and Sharī‘at. Therefore, it is mentioned in another Ḥadīth that the unlawful killing of an innocent Muslim is also a form of ‘disbelief.’6 Moreover, learned scholars from among the Companions have also declared the unlawful designs of the rebels in the era of Ḥaḍrat ‘Uthmān(ra) as constituting ‘disbelief.’7 However, in order to stand up against an Amīr, it is necessary for this disbelief to be absolutely clear and manifest. It should not be the result of an error in judgement or obscure circumstances. Furthermore, there should be no door open for the Amīr to be absolved even as a possibility and his leadership must take on such a dangerous form that it becomes necessary to risk the peace of the country and unity of the nation in order to overthrow such a government.