The consequences of rebelling against the rulers throughout history
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
The nation which does not read its history and does not benefit from it in its present and future is certainly a broken and isolated nation, since the past is not merely a key to understanding the present alone, rather it is from the foundations of shaping the present. The saying: “History repeats itself” is not completely wrong. The Noble Quran uses the stories of previous nations to influence the hearts of the people, or to influence those who have not lost their natural inclination. Allah the Exalted said:
That is from the news of the cities, which We relate to you; of them, some are [still] standing and some are [as] a harvest [mowed down]. (1)
And Allah the Exalted said:
So have they not traveled through the earth and observed how was the end of those before them? (2)
It is a must that the people of every age face the same type of complications that those who came before them faced. The recording of history is nothing more than the lighthouse which informs the new sailors of the dangerous rocks which may be hidden underneath the surface of the sea. If the Muslims of this age were to take in the lessons of the past, they would not have made mistakes in many issues. Similarly, carefully studying the present also helps us to understand the past. The one who samples the fortunes and misfortunes of nations and communities, witnesses political schemes and scrutinizes the economic depression, is more capable of understanding the events of the past, which even though they are not an exact copy of the present, have a large similarity to it.
The historian Ibn Athīr said:
No event happens except that it, or something similar to it, has preceeded, so a person increases in intellect because of it, and because of it becomes deserving of being followed.
From these events which have preceeded, either the same events or something similar to them, is the matter of relying upon the methodology of armed opposition and rebellion against the rulers and those in authority, as a result of practice and criticism that those who rebel see as justifying the actions which they take. There are many examples of rebellion against the rulers and those in authority, which have been recorded by the books of history, from the time of the early generations until the present day. The sensible and prudent person is the one who looks at these examples, with consideration and scrutiny, in order to extract lessons and examples from them.
The point of this is not to defend these rulers or to approve of what they did, it is simply a call to look completely at the effects and consequences which happen at times of rebellion, and they are consequences about which none differ.
Nor is the point of this to say who was right and who was wrong. Rather, the point is to talk about the consequences of this rebellion for the nation of Islam and the Muslims, both the rulers and those who are ruled over.
a) The Manner of Rebellion against the Rulers in Olden Times
First: The rebellion of Al-Husayn bin ‘Ali t against Yazīd bin Mu‘āwiya, in the year 61 AH
When Mu‘āwiya died and the pledge of allegiance was given to Yazīd, Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn ‘Abbās gave their pledge of allegiance while Al-Husayn and Ibn Az-Zubayr fled to Mecca. Many letters were sent to Al-Husayn from the cities of Iraq, calling him to come to them and encouraging him to come to them so that they could give him the pledge of allegiance instead of Yazīd bin Mu‘āwiya and informing him that they had not given the pledge of allegiance to anyone as of yet as they were waiting for him.
Al-Husayn sent his paternal cousin, Muslim bin ‘Aqīl, to Iraq in order that he might uncover the truth of the matter.
When Muslim arrived in Kufa, the people heard of his coming and came to him and pledged allegiance to him for the leadership of Al-Husayn. And they swore to him that they would support him with their selves and their wealth. The number of those who pledged allegiance reached eighteen thousand. So Muslim wrote to Al-Husayn that he should come to Kufa, since the pledge had been arranged and things were settled for him.
At this point, Al-Husayn left Mecca heading for Kufa. At the same time, Yazīd wrote to Ibn Ziyād that he should go to Kufa and demand Muslim bin ‘Aqīl and kill him if he was able, or at least expel him.
‘Ubaydullah bin Ziyād set about sending some of the generals out and ordering them to travel to Kufa to force the people to abandon Muslim bin ‘Aqīl – and they did so. At this point, the people fled from him and he remained by himself, with no one to show him the way. Then he was captured and at this time he cried saying:
By Allah, I do not cry for myself, but I cry for Al-Husayn and the family of Al-Husayn, he has left Mecca today coming to you.
Al-Husyan headed towards Kufa in spite of the people imploring him not to go. Ibn ‘Abbās said:
Tell me, if they have called you after having killed their ruler and expelled their enemy and seized their lands, then go to them. If their ruler is alive and he is staying there, in control of them, and his people have overcome their lands, then they have only called you for tribulation and fighting, and I cannot guarantee that they will not flee from you and their hearts turn against you, so the one that called you will be your greatest enemy. By Allah! I think that you will be killed tomorrow between your wives and your daughters, and if it were not that this would humble you and me I would have clung with my hand to your head, and if I knew that if we were stuck together you would remain [here] I would do so.
Ibn ‘Umar met Al-Husayn while he was going to Iraq at a distance of three nights. Ibn ‘Umar asked him: “Where are you heading?” Al-Husayn replied: “Iraq,” and Ibn ‘Umar saw that he had letters and scrolls with him. Al-Husayn said: “These are their letters and their pledges of allegiance.” Ibn ‘Umar said: “Do not go to them.” Al-Husayn, however, refused. So, Ibn ‘Umar said:
I will tell you a hadīth. Jibrīl came to the Prophet r and he gave him a choice between this world and the hereafter, and he chose the hereafter and he did not want this world. You are a piece of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh). By Allah! None of you will ever rule it. Allah did not take it away from you except for that which is better for you.
Al-Husayn refused to go back. Ibn ‘Umar embraced him and cried, saying: “I entrust you to Allah against being killed.”
Ibn Az-Zubayr t said: “Do you go to a people who killed your father and expelled your brother?”
Al-Husayn learnt about the killing of Muslim bin ‘Aqīl but refused to go back.
The army of Al-Husayn was one hundred and fifty men, and with them were his whole family. Al-Husayn was brought before the army of Ibn Ziyād, under the leadership of ‘Amr bin Sa’d and Shamr bin Dhil-Jawshana, and Al-Husayn offered them three options, but they refused them and insisted that Al-Husayn defer to Ibn Ziyād. The battle ensued and Al-Husayn t was killed along with sixteen men, all of them from his family. There was nothing on the face of the earth on that day resembling them, as Al-Hasan Al-Basri said. The head of Al-Husayn was sent to ‘Ubaydullah bin Ziyād and then to Yazīd.
Sa‘īd bin al-Musayyib said: “If only Al-Husayn had not gone out – meaning: to Iraq – it would have been better for him.”
Shaykh-ul-Islām Ibn Taymiyya said:
There was no benefit in his going out, not in the religion and not in the worldly life. There was corruption in his going out and his being killed which would not have happened if he were to stay in his city. Indeed, nothing of the good and keeping away evil which he sought happened. In fact, the evil increased with his going out [to Iraq] and his being killed, and good was reduced by it. It became a reason for a great evil, and the killing of Al-Husayn was from that which caused the tribulations to happen.
Second: The Battle of Al-Harrah, in the year 63 AH
The reason for it was the people of Medina rejecting Yazīd, and that ‘Abdullah bin Mutī’ became in charge of Quraysh [in Medina] and ‘Abdullah bin Handhala ibn Abi ‘Āmir became in charge of the Ansār, and that the people came together to throw out the representative of Yazīd from Medina and to force Bani Umayya to leave it. Banu Umayya gathered in the house of Marwān bin al-Hakam and the people of Medina laid siege to it. Ibn ‘Umar discouraged the people of Medina from giving allegiance to ‘Abdullah bin Mutī’ and Ibn Handhala that they would fight to the death. Ibn ‘Umar and his family withdrew from the people. Yazīd sent an army made up of fifteen thousand men, lead by Muslim bin ‘Uqbah and said to him: “Leave the people three [days]. If they return to obedience accept it from them and withhold from [fighting] them. If not, seek the help of Allah and fight them. If you are victorious over them, declare Medina lawful [to attack] for three [days], then withhold from them, then when you have finished with Medina, go to Mecca to lay siege to Ibn az-Zubayr.”
The people of Medina were defeated after a severe battle. Muslim bin ‘Uqbah declared the city to be lawful [to attack] for three days, killing a large number of their noble ones and reciters of the Quran and seized a great amount of wealth from it.
Az-Zuhri said about the number of the dead: “They were seven hundred of the faces of the people from the Muhājirīn and the Ansār and the faces of those who were attributed to them. As for those who I did not know, from the free-men and slaves, they were ten thousand.”
Third: The rebellion of Sulaymān bin Surad as the leader of the Army of the Repentant against Marwān bin al-Hakam, in the year 65 AH
Sulaymān bin Surad al-Khazraji al-Ansāri t was a noble Companion who narrated from the Prophet r narrations found in the two Sahīhs. Around seventeen thousand people came together with him, all of them seeking revenge for Al-Husayn against those who killed him.
They saw themselves as being a reason for the killing of Husayn because of their betrayal of him and they named themselves ‘The Army of the Repentant.’ They agreed to go out on a particular day. When the people left, they began shouting at the top of their voices: “O avengers of Al-Husayn!” The people heard them and came out with them. The most noble of the people of Kufa set out and they were near to twenty thousand. When Sulaymān resolved to fight with them, nobody lined up with him except four thousand. He marched with them in stages. They would not complete part of their march to Shām, except that a group of the people who were with him would turn away. When the people of Shām heard of them, they prepared a great army made up of forty thousand fighters. The army of the Khilāfa went forth and met the Army of the Repentant in the battle of ‘Ayn Warda.
The battle of ‘Ayn Warda was a dreadful battle. The two armies fought a harsh battle and it was a great slaughter between the Muslims, to the point where the fighters were wading through blood. Victory went to the army of the Khilāfa and Sulaymān bin Surad t was killed along with his generals and most of his army. Non remained from them except for a few who turned and ran, returning back to Kufa.
Four: The rebellion of Ibn al-Ash‘ath against ‘Abdul-Malik bin Marwān, in the year 80 AH
This tribulation was from the greatest of the tribulations which the nation of Islam have been tested with after the Great Tribulation, because of the affliction of killing of the imams of guidance and the great figures of the religion.
The reason for it: al-Hajjāj used to hate Ibn al-Ash‘ath and would say: “I have never seen him except that I desired to kill him.” Ibn al-Ash’ath knew of this and harbored evil towards him and a desire to see his authority removed from him. Al-Hajjāj placed him in charge of the armies which fought to conquer the Turkic cities and he was able to conquer some of the cities then he stopped in order to correct the affairs of the army and to strengthen themselves until the end of the winter season, when they would then attack Ritbīl.
Ibn al-Ash‘ath communicated this to al-Hajjāj and he replied to him condemning this opinion and deeming him weak-minded, reprimanding him for cowardliness and refusal to fight, and ordering him unquestionably to enter the lands of Ritbīl. He then followed this with a second and third letter. Ibn Al-Ash‘ath became angry and said: “This is what he writes to me, when he is not deserving of being even one of my soldiers, nor one of my servants.” Ibn al-Ash’ath gathered the leaders of the people of Iraq and spoke to them, explaining his opinion and that of al-Hajjāj, and that he would not back down from his opinion. The people rose up to him saying: “No! Rather we will refuse the enemy of Allah, al-Hajjāj, and we will not listen, nor will we obey.”
The people removed their obedience to Al-Hajjāj, but they did not do so to ‘Abdul-Malik and they leapt upon ‘Abdur-Rahman bin al-Ash‘ath and they gave him the pledge of allegiance instead of al-Hajjāj.
Ibn al-Ash‘ath made peace with Ritbīl and turned back to al-Hajjaj to fight him and take Iraq from him. Mid-way back they also withdrew their obedience to ‘Abdul-Malik bin Marwān and they instead pledged allegiance to Ibn al-Ash‘ath, upon the Book and the Sunna!
When the actions of Ibn al-Ash‘ath reached al-Muhallab bin Abi Sufra, he wrote to him, advising him:
Remain upon the nation of Muhammad (pbuh). Look at your person, so do not destroy it. And the blood of the Muslims, do not spill it. And the united body of the Muslims, do not depart from it. And (look) to the pledge of allegiance, so do not break it.
Thirty three thousand horsemen gathered around Ibn al-Ash‘ath, along with one hundred and twenty thousand foot soldiers. Al-Hajjāj went to him with a great army. The two armies met on the day of Al-Adhā, at the Dakhīl river and the vanguard of al-Hajjāj’s army were defeated, and a great many men of the companions of Ibn al-Ash’ath were killed; around one hundred and fifty. Ibn al-Ash‘ath entered Basra, and there he addressed the people. He requested the pledge of allegiance and they gave it to him that they would withdraw their allegiance to ‘Abdul-Malik and his deputy, al-Hajjāj. Ibn al-Ash‘ath said to them: “Al-Hajjāj is nothing, but come with us to ‘Abdul-Malik so that we may fight him.” All of the scholars, reciters of the Quran, the old and the young agreed with him to do so.
Then the Battle of az-Zāwiya happened in 82 AH, between al-Hajjāj and Ibn al-Ash’ath. Victory went to al-Hajjāj and many of the reciters of the Quran were killed from amongst the companions of Ibn al-Ash‘ath. This was followed by the battle of Dayr al-Jamājim between the two armies, and Ibn al-Ash‘ath had with him one hundred thousand men, and an equal number of servants. The fighting continued for almost a year, and victory went to neither side.
Al-Hajjāj ordered an attack against the detachment of the reciters in the army of Ibn Al-Ash‘ath and a great many of them were killed, then he turned to the remainder of the companions of Ibn Al-Ash‘ath and they were defeated, fleeing in every direction. Ibn Al-Ash‘ath fled with only a few men.
Al-Hajjāj killed five thousand prisoners and entered Kufa, refusing to accept the pledge of allegiance from its people without saying: “Witness against yourself that you have disbelieved.” If they said yes, he accepted their allegiance, and if they refused, he killed them. A great many of them were killed who refused to witness that they were guilty of disbelief.
Al-Hajjāj hunted down the companions of Ibn Al-Ash‘ath, and killed in front of him one hundred and thirty thousand of them, from the good people, the leaders, the scholars, and the pious, such as Muhammad bin Sa‘ad bin Abi Waqqās, and the last of them was Sa‘īd bin Jubayr, may Allah have mercy on them and be pleased with them.
The total number of Muslims killed in this tribulation was around one hundred and fifty thousand.
Ibn Kathīr said:
Ibn Al-Ash‘ath was from [the tribe of] Kinda, he was not from Quraysh… How could they turn to a Khalīfa who had been given the pledge of allegiance to rule the Muslims for years, then oust him, while he is from the heart of Quraysh, then give the pledge of allegiance to a Kindi man; a pledge of allegiance which those charged with authority did not agree to? For this reason, when this error and miscalculation happened, a great evil spread because of it, and many people died. Indeed, we belong to Allah and to Him we will return.
Fifth: The rebellion of Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin ‘Ali ibn Abi Tālib, along with his brother, against the Abassid Khalīfa, Abu J‘afar al-Mansūr
The story of this rebellion can be summarized in the following: Muhammad and his brother were absent from giving allegiance to J‘afar al-Mansūr, and they both fled through many countries. Al-Mansūr asked their father about them and he swore that he did not know where in the land of Allah they had ended up. Then Al-Mansūr reviled ‘Abdullah while looking for his two sons, and so ‘Abdullah became angry at this and said: “By Allah! If they were under my feet I would not have shown you where they were.”
Al-Mansūr became angry and ordered that he be imprisoned and ordered his slaves and wealth to be sold off, and he remained in prison for three years. They suggested to Al-Mansūr that he imprison the children of Hasan away from others, so he did so, and strove to seek out Ibrāhīm and Muhammad. He sent out spies throughout the lands, but they did not find any news of them.
The family of Hasan were transferred from the prison of Medina to the prison of Iraq. They had shackles around their feet and chains around their necks, Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Uthmān ibn ‘Affān [al-‘Uthmāni] was sent with them, who was known as ad-Dībāj [silk], because of the beauty of his face, and his mother was Fatimah bint al-Husayn bin ‘Ali ibn Abi Tālib. This Muhammad was the brother of ‘Abdullah bin Hasan from his mother’s side, and his daughter was married to Ibrāhīm ibn ‘Abdullah bin Hasan and she was pregnant from him.
The Khalīfa ordered Muhammad to be brought before him and said: “You swore to me, against freeing your slaves and divorcing your women, that you did not betray me, and this is your daughter, pregnant. If this is from her husband then she is pregnant because of him and you know something of him. If she is pregnant from someone else then you have no shame over your family.”
[Muhammad] al-‘Uthmāni replied to him with an answer that made him furious so he ordered that his clothes be taken off him then he whipped him in front of him one hundred and fifty times, thirty above his head, and one of them struck his eye and it dissolved. Then he was returned to the prison. He remained like a black slave from the blueness of the whipping and the congealing of the blood over his skin. In the jail was Muhammad bin Ibrāhīm bin ‘Abdullah, and he was a handsome young man, known as ad-Dībāj al-Asfar [Yellow Silk], because of his beauty and splendor. Al-Mansūr ordered him to be brought in front of him and said to him: “Indeed I will kill you like no one has been killed before,” then he threw him between two columns and crushed them against him until he died.
Many of the family of Hasan died in the prison. From those who died in the prison were ‘Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin ‘Ali bin Abi Tālib and his brother Ibrāhīm bin al-Hasan and others. Few of them ever left the prison. Al-Mansūr put them in a prison where they could not hear the adhān and did not know the time for prayer. Then the people of Khorasan sought to intercede for Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah al-‘Uthmāni, so he ordered his head to be chopped off and sent his head to the people of Khorasan. As for what happened to Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah, some of the people continued to rebuke him for concealing himself and not coming out into the open, until he decided to come out. He agreed to come out with his companions on a certain night.
Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah bin Hasan turned with two hundred and fifty men towards Medina. He passed the prison of Medina and took out those who were in it, then he came to the house of the ruler and laid siege to it. He caught the governor of Medina, Ribāh bin ‘Uthmān, and imprisoned him in the house of Marwān. Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah claimed victory over Medina and most of its people submitted to him. Muhammad began attracting the leaders of the people of Medina, some of them conceded to him and some of them refused. Some of them said to him: “How can I pledge allegiance to you when you have shown up in a city in which there is no wealth which you can use to help you in employing the men.” Some of them stayed in their houses and did not come out.
As for what happened with Mansūr, he prepared his armies to go to Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah, at the head of them was ‘Īsā bin Mūsā. When ‘Īsā bin Mūsā arrived at Medina, its people fled and left Muhammad and a few of his companions, and they were approximately three hundred men. The two armies clashed and many of the army of Muhammad were killed and most of them fled. Muhammad remained with a small troop. Then he remained on his own, with no one with him. Then he was killed and his head was severed and sent to al-Mansūr.
Sixth: A mention of the rebellion of Ibrāhīm bin ‘Abdullah bin Hasan, in Basra, 143 AH
Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah sent his brother, Ibrāhīm, to Basra, and they agreed to come out on the same day. When the news of his brothers coming out reached Ibrāhīm, he came out in Basra and a large number of the people of Basra came to him from all sides and pledged allegiance to him. Al-Mansūr sent soldiers to observe them on every road leading to Basra, then kill them and bring their heads to be hanged in Kufa as a warning to the people. Then al-Mansūr sent a large army to fight Ibrāhīm. Ibrāhīm came out with his army and the two armies met. The army of Ibrāhīm was defeated. Ibrāhīm remained along with a few men, then Ibrāhīm was killed and his head was severed and sent to al-Mansūr.
Despite the fact that these historical experiences deal with a time that is not ours, and circumstances that are not ours, and events which may differ in parts or agree in other parts to our events. However, these events hold for us the greatest of lessons and the most lofty of experiences. Great lessons, immense benefits, and dazzling wisdom are found in this great history. Is there anything better than our history for us to take lesson and heed from? It is the wisdom of generations which comes to us in an easy manner; in a series across a number of pages. It is the lesson of Islamic history for every generation after that great generation… and those great figures of the past tried it… the wise of the early generations used to say:
Ask the one who has tried, since he has discovered the reality, came across the obscure and knows what you do not.
A person cannot live two lives, or live his life twice; one life to try things out and make mistakes and another life to learn from the mistakes he made. The intelligent one is he who takes heed from others and learns from them.
Examples of Rebellion against the Rulers in modern times
When this historical reality was hidden from some of those who call to revival in the Islamic lands, they themselves plunged into such determined attempts. Their nation tasted misfortunes because of these attempts and the call to Islam lost much of its gains and blood was spilt and innocent lives were lost. The only one to benefit from all of this were the enemies of the Islamic nation, before this group knew of the error of what they set out to do and the negative consequences of doing so and its aftermath, in order to turn back from it. But when did they do so?!
From these modern and well known examples:
(a) The Islamic Group (Al-Jamā‘a al-Islamiyya) in Egypt
The group adopted the methodology of confrontation and violence in changing evil. Events progressed and clashes increased between the two sides and armed clashes occurred between individuals of the police. Victims fell from both sides and blood was spilt and lives were lost. Others were pursued and a large group of practicing youth were thrown in prison, whether they were from those who adopted this ideology or not, to the point that everything became confused and they spent the best years of their lives behind bars. Troubles happened between the two sides and everyone lost out. The only ones to benefit were the enemies lying in wait for the Islamic nation.If those people had learnt the lessons from history they would not have gone down this path of theirs and they would have responded to the advice of the people of knowledge to cease from it. However, the command of Allah is ever a destiny decreed.
Perhaps Allah, Glory be to Him, wanted for this umma a right path; that broad sectors of the proponents of this ideology return to the right way and to admit their mistakes. There is no doubt that this is something that those who do so should be praised for, as well as those who help them to do so.
Except that this returning to the truth and these admissions of guilt should not make us forget the reason for this sickness and this deviance, which caused the umma to taste misfortunes and the call to Islam met dangerous regression as a result of it, in addition to disfigurement of Islam, whether deliberate of otherwise, and its portrayal as a religion which urges violence and killing and its own people kill each other in the name of jihad!!!
(b) The Islamic Group in Algeria
The Algerian Islamic Group appeared as an organization which adopted violence as a response to the strong blow which the Algerian authorities delivered during an attempt at democracy, when a verdict was issued to cancel the results of the parliamentary elections in which the Islamic Salvation Front (aka FIS) won a majority of seats in February 1992. The group aimed to overthrow what they described as “The secular system” which, according to what the group believed, cancelled the choice of the Algerian public and its movement toward establishing an Islamic country.
The second party which the finger is pointed at for causing violence is the Islamic Salvation Front and their military wing: “The Army of Salvation.” It is said that before the cancellation of the results of the parliamentary elections by the Algerian system, the Front adopted political struggle and refused violence and clashes with the authorities. The Front was able, as a political group which was recognized in 1989, to build a foundation in most states of Algeria, under the leadership of Shaykh ‘Abbās Madani, which enabled the Front to succeed in the elections.
Accompanied by the cancellation of the election results were actions of provocation and large-scale arrests by the Algerian authorities against the apparatus of the Islamic Salvation Front, which brought the situation to a head and pushed the Front into adopting the military option.
The callers to Islam in Algeria were able to exercise a considerable margin of freedom. This was a blessing from Allah the Exalted which he blessed them with, after considerable restriction and bitter persecution throughout the time of Houari Boumediène. During this time of ease, the callers to Islam were dominant in the mosques as lecturers, preachers and teachers. Monitoring from the Ministry of Islamic Affairs was lessened, in accordance with similar ministries in Arab countries. Those visiting Algeria in the month of Ramadhan would imagine that all of the people – men and women – had gone to the mosques to perform the tarāwīh prayer. On top of that, the tide of communism had particularly receded, and secularism had receded in a general sense.
The time of forming a party came, followed by the state and parliamentary elections. The Islamists won with an overwhelming majority. The army moved and their leadership implemented what France desired in Algeria. From what their leadership did was to cancel the parliamentary elections.
The Islamists thought that they were capable of realizing their goals by way of strength after the political option was closed in their faces, so they announced jihad. Since the year 1992, Algeria lives in a state of incomparable disarray. Uncountable prisons are expanding, the mosques are deserted apart from the elderly and are dominated by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs. There are many groups of jihad, and there was much killing and looting. No one is safe, not the rulers and not those who are ruled over, and the whole world talks of acts of genocide, which included the elderly, women and children, and occurred in cities, villages and upon the roads. People everywhere around the globe saw images of mutilated dead, sending chills down the spine. In the absence of the call to Islam, corruption spread in its various shapes and forms and psychological illnesses became numerous. In addition to all of this, the victory that was promised by those who declared the jihad has not been achieved, because their estimates were wrong, as there was no preparation for the jihad, there was no capability.
After this long trial, that which our scholars warned about has been proved and that which history testifies to. A small amount of corruption was repelled with a huge amount of it and a lesser evil was repelled with an evil which was greater. The callers to Islam were killed without defying their enemies. The evil consequences were prevalent over the good, and every Muslim who thinks with a right mind wishes that the matters of calling to Islam and those who call to it remained as they were before the elections of 1991.
May Allah have mercy on Shaykh-ul-Islām Ibn Taymiyya when he said in Minhāj-us-Sunna:
There is almost no known group who rebelled against a person in authority except that their rebellion caused a corruption that was greater than the corruption which it sought to remove.
1 The Quran, Sura Hūd :100.
2 The Quran, Sura Yūsuf :109.
3 i.e. the killing of ‘Uthmān.