Not stopping a person who is
committing a forbidden action while one is powerful and strong enough to stop
him is compromising the religion. Not interfering with a person who commits
forbidden actions is either due to reverence toward him or due to reverence to
persons surrounding him or due to one’s weakness of religious ties. It is
necessary to stop a person who commits forbidden (harâm) actions or disliked
actions (makrűh) when there is no danger of instigation, e.g., there is no
possibility of harming one’s religion or worldly interests or harming others.
Not stopping him or keeping quiet would be forbidden. Giving in from the religion,
(doing “mudâhana”), shows that the person is showing consent toward the
violation of the laws of Allâhu ta’âlâ. Mostly, keeping quiet is a
virtue. But, when there is a need to distinguish between right and wrong or
good and evil, one should not keep quiet. When Rasűlullah ‘sall-Allâhu
’alaihi wa sal-lam’ was asked, “O
Messenger
of Allah! Ancient people were punished with earthquakes. They were buried under
the ground. But there were pious (Sâlih) people among them,” he
answered, “Yes, pious people were also destroyed together. For, they kept
quiet while others were rebelling against Allâhu ta’âlâ and they did not keep
away from those sinners.” The following hadîth-i-sherîfs communicate, “Some of my Ummat
(Muslims) will rise from their graves as monkeys or pigs. They are the people
who mix with those who rebel against Allâhu ta’âlâ and who eat and drink
with them.” And, “When Allâhu ta’âlâ gives knowledge to a
scholar, He receives a promise from him as He did with prophets.”
He (’âlim) promises that he will not refrain from stating what he knows when it
is necessary. The following hadîth-i-sherîf and
âyat-i-kerîma show that compromising the religion, i.e., doing mudâhana
is prohibited (harâm): “If one does not say the knowledge given to him by Allâhu ta’âlâ when the situation
requires him to speak out, they will put a collar made of fire on his neck on
the day of Qiyâmat.” The thirty-sixth âyat-i-kerîma of Sűra Nisâ
of the Qur’ân al-kerîm purports: “Should those who are
endowed with true knowledge and guidance hide the bounty, may they be steeped
in condemnation, both from Allâhu ta’âlâ and from all those who
themselves have already incurred condemnation!”
The opposite of mudâhana is ‘ghayrat’, or ‘salâbat’.
The fifty-fourth âyat-i-kerîma of Sűra Mâida of the Qur’ân
al-kerîm purports: “... people making jihâd in the way of Allâhu ta’âlâ, and never afraid of
the reproaches of such as find fault. ...” This
âyat-i-kerîma informs us that it is necessary for those who have religious “ghayrat”
and “salâbat”
to make jihâd by using their property, life, speech and penmanship for the sake
of Allâhu ta’âlâ. Rasűlullah
‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sal-lam’ states in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “Tell the truth even if it is extremely
bitter.” A ‘zâhid’ person saw a group playing musical instruments in the
presence of the fourth Umayyad Caliph Marwân bin Hakem, and broke their
instruments to pieces. Thereupon Marwân ordered that he should be shut in with
the lions. Among the lions, he presently began to perform namâz. The lions came
by him and began to lick him. So the guards took him back to the caliph. When
the caliph asked him if he had not been afraid of the lions, he answered, “No.
Fear of them did not even occur to
me.
I spent the entire night pondering.” “What did you ponder about?” “When the
lions licked me, I pondered on whether their saliva was najs, (i.e. canonically
foul to nullify the prayer termed namâz); I pondered on whether Allâhu ta’âlâ would accept my prayer.” [Marwân bin
Hakem was killed in 65 hijrî “683 A.D.”.]
If a person is not able to do Amr al-ma’rűf and Nahy anil munkar because of his fear that his and others’ security might be undermined, keeping quiet in order not to raise instigation in this situation is called “doing mudârâ,” which is permissible, and even blessed enough to produce the thawâb deserved for almsgiving, provided that his heart should be willing to stop the harâm being committed. Mudârâ should be done mildly and with a smiling face. Mudârâ can also be exploited as a teaching method. Imâm Ghazâlî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ stated: “There are three groups of mankind. The first group are like nutrition. They are necessary for everyone at all times. The second group are like medicine. They are needed at times of necessity. The third group are like diseases. They are not needed but they annoy other people. Such people ought to be handled with mudârâ for security’s sake.” Mudârâ is a permissible method. In fact, it is mustahab in some cases. Management of home affairs done without mudârâ towards the wife may cost a man a peaceful family life. Someone came to visit Rasűlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sal-lam’. He said, “Let him come in. He is a lowly person.” When the visitor came in, he spoke with him in a soft and sweet manner. After he left, they asked him as to why he talked to him sweetly. He said, “The person who will be in the worst place in the next world ‘Âkhirat’ is the one who is offered honors or gifts in order to secure your self from his harm in the world.” It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Even though it is permissible to talk behind people who commit harâms frankly and without feeling any shame, it is equally justifiable to treat them with mudârâ for protection against their harm. However, mudârâ should not be watered down into mudâhana.” Mudârâ entails relinquishing some worldly interests for the sake of protecting religious and worldly values against harm. Mudâhana, by contrast, means to compromise your religious values in return for worldly advantages. Mudârâ employed against a tyrant should not be contaminated with a praisal of the tyrant or an approval of his tyrannies.