22147



Is it necessary in order to denounce evil that it be removed completely, or is it sufficient to reduce it
If I want to denounce some evil, but we cannot remove it completely but we are able to reduce it, should we get involved for that purpose? Or should we say that we have to either remove it completely or not do anything at all?

(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to convey the good news (that Dhul-Khalasah had been destroyed).   So when the messenger reached the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), he said, "O Messenger of Allaah! By Him Who sent you with the Truth, I did not come until I left it like a scabby camel." Then the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)  said, “May Allaah bless the horses of Ahmas and their men,” five times. 

The relevant points in this hadeeth are two: what he did to Dhul-Khalasah, and how he dealt with the one who used arrows for fortune-telling etc. 

And it says in al-Fath: “This hadeeth indicates that it is prescribed in Islam to remove things by which people may be tempted, be they buildings or other things, even if it is a person, an animal or an inanimate object.” (8/73) 

Another example is when Khaalid ibn al-Waleed (may Allaah be pleased with him) was sent to al-‘Uzza and he cut down the three gum-acacia trees and destroyed the house. When he told him what he had done, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told him that he had not done anything. He told him to go back and find that naked woman with dishevelled hair who was pouring dust on her head, and so he went back and killed her with a sword… When he came back to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and told him, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “That was al-‘Uzza” (Zaad al-Ma’aad, 3/414). 

It was narrated from one of the salaf that he passed by two boys who were playing in a hole in which there were pebbles with which they were playing. He blocked it up and forbade them to go there. Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 8/340 

But if the one who is enjoing good and forbidding evil is unable to remove the evil completely, then he should strive to reduce it as much as possible. 

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, when mentioning some of the lessons learned from the battle of Tabook, “We also learn that places of sin in which Allaah and His Messenger are disobeyed are to be burned and destroyed, as the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) burned the masjid al-diraar (a mosque built by way of harming and diselief, cf. al-Tawbah 9:107) and commanded that it should be destroyed. This was a mosque in which prayers were offered and the name of Allaah was mentioned, but it had been built to cause harm and divide the believers, and as a refuge for the hypocrites. In the case of places of this type, the ruler  has to put a stop to it, either by destroying it and burning it, or by changing its appearance and using it for a different purpose. If this was the case concerning a mosque built for harming and disbelief, then places of shirk whose cutodians promote taking those inside them as rivals to Allaah are even more deserving of being destroyed. The same applies to places of sin and immorality, such as bars and places of evil. ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab burned an entire village in which wine was sold, and he burned the shop of Ruwayshid al-Thaqafi and called him Fuwaysiq. [Ruwayshid comes from a word meaning “guided” and Fuwaysiq comes from a word meaning “immoral.” – Translator].  And he burned the fortress of Sa’d in which he was hiding away from people. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) wanted to burn down the houses of those who did not attend prayers in congregation or Jumu’ah prayers; the only thing that kept him from doing that was the woman and children who were not obliged to attend these prayers, as he told us. (Zaad al-Ma’aad, 3/571-572)

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid



 
 
 
 
All Rights Reserved for IslamQA©  1997-2009  : 86.68