The Ruling on Rebellion against Muslim Rulers and Its Punishment: A Special Study of the Opinions of Classical Jurists مسلم حکمرانوں کے خلاف خروج کا حکم اور اس کی سزا:فقہائے کرام کی آراء کا خصوصی مطالعہ

Abstract

Islam promotes a structured and peaceful social system founded upon justice, obedience, order, and mutual responsibilities. Within this framework, the relationship between the ruler and the ruled holds vital significance. In light of the Qur’an and Sunnah, Islam has outlined certain clear principles to safeguard the stability of the state, the unity of the Muslim Ummah, and the preservation of social harmony. Among these, one of the most important principles is the obedience to "Ulu al-Amr" the rightful Muslim rulers. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) emphasized obedience to rulers in numerous hadiths, even if the ruler is sinful or unjust, as long as he does not commit clear disbelief .These teachings indicate that social order and political stability must be prioritized under all circumstances, and that discord and rebellion must be avoided. From a jurisprudential and theological perspective, the majority of Muslim scholars have declared armed rebellion against Muslim rulers as impermissible and forbidden. The four Imam Abu Hanifah, Malik, Shafi’i, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal along with the righteous predecessors, strongly condemned such rebellion, especially when it disrupts public order and results in bloodshed and civil war. According to them, it is more in line with Islamic wisdom and public interest to be patient with corrupt rulers, pray for their guidance, and pursue peaceful means of reform. This is because the damage caused by rebellion including loss of life, civil unrest, and embodiment of enemies is often far worse than the evil one seeks to remove. The painful consequences of rebellions during the Umayyad, Abbasid, and other Islamic periods have historically confirmed the soundness of this stance. As for the punishment for rebelling against a Muslim ruler, jurists have presented differing opinions. The slight flexibility present in the rulings regarding rebellion is not meant to undermine the legitimacy of the ruler but rather to allow room for peaceful reform in the face of oppression and injustice. If, however, a ruler openly renounces Islam, abandons prayer, publicly opposes the Qur’an and Sunnah, or seeks to annul the Shari’ah, then, according to the consensus of scholars, action may be taken against him provided that all precautions against civil strife are in place and the leadership of such action lies in the hands of qualified and knowledgeable individuals. Nonetheless, this is a highly sensitive and conditional matter that allows no room for emotionalism or ideological extremism. Rebellion against Muslim rulers is a serious issue which Islamic law has addressed with principles of patience, reform, sincere advice, and prioritization of the collective welfare. Justifying rebellion on the basis of political dissatisfaction or ideological disagreement constitutes a deviation from the foundational tenets of Shari’ah. For this reason, jurists have consistently discouraged rebellion in order to protect Muslim societies from turmoil and emphasized the importance of unity and societal stability. In the present age when much of the Muslim world is already beset by political and social crises this subject demands renewed scholarly inquiry and understanding. Only through a combination of sound Islamic insight and contemporary wisdom can the Ummah be guided toward stability, peace, and cohesion.

Keywords: Islam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Qur’an, Imam Abu Hanifah, Malik, Shafi.