Question:
You have mentioned the opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah regarding the prohibition of revolting against an oppressive ruler, but are there not other opinions on this matter which sanction such a revolt?
Answer:
The sword has been raised between Muslims over this matter more than over any other. Of course there have been differing opinions on the subject, but after numerous disastrous rebellions, the overwhelming majority of scholars recognized that the prohibition is the correct opinion, until it has become established as the position of the Ahl-us-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, and the earlier differences have mostly past into history.
The majority of the ahl al-Sunnah wa al-]ama’ah are of the view that it is forbidden to make an armed rebellion against oppressive or unjust rulers, as long as their misdeeds do not reach the level of kufr.
This was the opinion of a number of the Sahabah, including Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqaas, Usaamah ibn Zaid, Abdullah ibn Umar, Muhammad ibn Maslamah4 and others. This is also the view of the vast majority of the ahl al-hadith.
A number of scholars claimed a consensus on this point, including al-Nawawi who said, “As for rebelling against them and fighting them, this is forbidden according to the consensus of the Muslims, even if they were impious, oppressors.”
Al-Kirmaani also said, “The jurists all agree that the Imam who has taken over the power must be obeyed as long as he establishes the congregational prayers…[This is so] unless he commits a clear kufr in which it is not permissible to obey him. Indeed, [in that case] it is obligatory to struggle against him by those who have the ability to do so.”
Ibn Battaal also said, “The jurists all agree that it is obligatory to obey and make jihad with the ruler who has taken control. Obeying him is better than rebelling against him [This option] prevents the spilling of blood and repels catastrophes . . . There is no exception to that unless the ruler falls into a blatant kufr.”
The evidence from Qur’an and Sunnah for this opinion is extensive, but the following hadith succinctly summarizes the position.
Rasulullah ﷺ said:
“The best of your rulers are those whom you love and they love you. You pray over them and they pray over you. The worst of your rulers are those whom you hate and they hate you. You curse them and they curse you.” They said, “O Messenger of Allah (peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him), shall we fight and oppose them over that?” He ﷺ replied, “No, not as long as they establish the prayer among you No, not as long as they establish the prayer among you. If someone is appointed over a person and he sees some act of disobedience to Allah from him, he should dislike what he does of disobedience to Allah but he should not remove his hand from obedience.”
The establishment of the Salah, therefore, is the most important factor which draws the line between impermissible and permissible rebellion.
It is worth mentioning that the strongest proponents of the view that rebellion is permissible were from deviant sects, such as the Khawarij, Mu’tazilah, Murjiyah Zaidis, and others; and, as I said, when rebellion after rebellion proved to bring catastrophic outcomes, this opinion was almost entirely discredited.
You will generally find that those who revive this opinion today often share other characteristics with these deviant sects in matters of interpretation and understanding of the religion.