A. The Degrees of Enjoining the Good and Forbidding the Evil
A person who takes responsibility for Enjoining what is good and forbidden what is evil not absolutely free to act in any manner; they must work within the limits of Islamic law. Primarily, the responsibility of commanding what is good and forbidding what is wrong falls upon rulers and statesmen, as seen in the Ministry of Commanding the Good and Forbidding the Evil. Da’wah (inviting others to the faith) is considered one of the religious obligations, and neglecting this duty can lead to unfortunate consequences.
In this article, we will discuss the discourse surrounding commanding what is good and forbidding what is wrong at the community level, specifically for the general Muslim populace. This endeavor should be undertaken using appropriate methods and within the bounds of Sharia, so that society is liberated from various crises and nurtured according to Allah’s commands and guidance.
Allamah Ibn Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, in his explanation of the command to promote good and the prohibition of evil, particularly in the section on denying evil, outlined four levels and degrees for the method of rejecting evil, which are as follows:
1. The negation is removed and is replaced with the affirmation of what is known as good.
2. The denials should be limited, though not completely eradicated from society in general.
3. This negation should be destroyed, but another negation similar to it should take its place.
4. This negation will disappear, but a worse negation will ensue.
The majority of scholars, including Ibn Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, hold that the first two forms are legitimate, whereas the third form is considered ijtihad. This means that it may be permissible under certain circumstances but not permissible in others. However, the fourth category is definitively illegitimate and forbidden.
From this classification, it can be concluded that the purpose of commanding good and prohibiting evil is to replace evil with good. Additionally, a person who intends to prevent others from committing evil and protect society, humanity, and the Islamic community from corruption should propose and keep in mind permissible (halal) options. Otherwise, the invitation will be ineffective and counterproductive, potentially leading to confusion. However, if one introduces good as an alternative to evil and the audience understands the depth of the issue through knowledge and logic, they will be more inclined to accept good as an alternative to evil and embrace it wholeheartedly.
In the second point, it is stated that in some societies, certain evil actions have become so entrenched that it is very challenging to eliminate them from society all at once. For this reason, the aim of the calling individual is that if they cannot completely eradicate the corruption, they can at least dry up the roots of this corrupt tree so that, over time, its growth will cease, ultimately leading to its destruction. Therefore, negativity is gradually removed rather than eliminated suddenly and forcefully.
In the ijtihad and the third part of this classification, it is noted that sometimes certain evils, though minor in terms of guilt and harm, can have widespread and significant negative consequences in terms of their societal impact. In such cases, the inviter—based on their understanding of the society and its prevailing conditions—recognizes that forbidding this evil may provoke reactions that lead to even worse consequences. Consequently, in this scenario, they may first replace the dominant negative influence with a different negation that has a more limited geographical impact than the prevailing negation in society. Over time and gradually, they can then begin to remove the layers of negativity from the Islamic community in a similar manner.
These methods can be clearly observed in the prohibition of wine in the Holy Qur’an, where Allah Ta’ala, taking into account human conditions and the society of Makkah, prohibited wine in three progressive stages and over time.