Explanation of the Hadith “Forbidding Evil with the Hands, Speech, and Heart”

On the authority of Abu Sa’eed al-Khudree (ra) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say,

“Whoso- ever of you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then [let him change it] with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart — and that is the weakest of faith.”

Muslim

عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيّ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ سَمِعْت رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه و سلم يَقُولُ:

“مَنْ رَأَى مِنْكُمْ مُنْكَرًا فَلْيُغَيِّرْهُ بِيَدِهِ، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ فَبِلِسَانِهِ، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ فَبِقَلْبِهِ، وَذَلِكَ أَضْعَفُ الْإِيمَانِ” .

[رَوَاهُ مُسْلِمٌ].

A munkar (منكر) is something that is known in the Sharīʿah as being prohibited. So it is not a munkar unless it is ḥarām in Islam.

The obligation of changing this evil occurs when a person ‘sees’ the evil, as is in the ḥadīth; so knowledge of the evil taking place is not enough to make it obligatory. Included in this is when a person hears the evil, a hearing which is absolutely clear, such as he hears a man with a non-maḥram, then this can become obligatory to change it. Also when a person hears music, for example.

Anything less than ‘seeing’, should be dealt with by naṣīḥah.

We are told to change this munkar, but not to punish the doer. So there is a difference between punishment and changing; it is not always the same.

Example: If a man is drinking wine, then to change the evil does not necessarily mean that you have to deal with the one drinking that wine, but it means that you change the evil itself.

“Let him change it with his hand” – this is if the person is able to do that. If not, then it is not obligatory. An example of when one is capable of changing the evil is if it occurs in one’s house, for example. But if it occurs in someone else’s house, or under the wilāyah (control/authority) of someone else, then you do not have qudrah (ability) to change that evil; rather, you should give naṣīḥah to the one whose house it is.

Taghyeer (تغيير) – to change – does not always mean removing. It could mean removing it, or to censure it with the tongue by saying “that is ḥarām” or to believe that it is ḥarām. This is why these three ways are mentioned in this ḥadīth.

“And if he is unable to do so, with his tongue” – It is known that we can’t always remove something with our tongues. So if we explain to the one who is doing the evil, then you have ‘changed’ it.

“And if he is unable to do so, then with his heart – and that is the weakest of faith” – Changing it with the heart is to believe that it is ḥarām, to keep away from it, disassociate oneself from it and hate it.

The Prophet ﷺ is reported to have said:

إِذَا عُمِلَتِ الْخَطِيئَةُ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَانَ مَنْ شَهِدَهَا فَكَرِهَهَا وَأَنْكَرَهَا كَانَ كَمَنْ غَابَ عَنْهَا وَمَنْ غَابَ عَنْهَا فَرَضِيَهَا كَانَ كَمَنْ شَهِدَهَا

“If a sin is committed, the one who is not present but is pleased with it is like the one who did it. And one who witnessed it but didn’t do it, is like the one who did it.”

Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4345 Grade: Hasan (fair) according to Al-Albani

This shows that the one who is pleased with an evil is like the doer of it.

Therefore, the one who sees an evil should get up at least, as the one who hates something would never sit in that place. Allah says:

فَلَا تَقۡعُدُواْ مَعَهُمۡ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُواْ فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيۡرِهِۦٓ إِنَّكُمۡ إِذٗا مِّثۡلُهُمۡۗ

“…do not sit with them unless they start to talk of other things, or else you yourselves will become like them….” (Sūrah al-Nisā’ 4:140)

As for changing an evil, it is connected with ability, by consensus of the people of knowledge.

Some scholars also say that changing an evil is connected with benefit. If a person has a strong feeling that by him saying something it will benefit the one who he is censuring, then it is obligatory to censure it. However, if it is not of benefit, in his opinion, then it is not obligatory upon him to censure. This is in accordance with the statement of Allah:

فَذَكِّرْ إِن نَّفَعَتِ الذِّكْرَىٰ

“So remind, if the reminder benefits.” (Sūrah al-Aʿlā 87:9)

This is the opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah, and some actions of the ṣaḥābah seem to indicate this opinion, when they entered the ruler’s palace who had evil things there, and they did not censure that.

The majority of scholars actually say that to censure is obligatory.

However, the opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah seems to be strongest, because if the person won’t benefit from the reminder, the āyah suggests not to censure. What is required is to hate it and change it in the heart.

And that is the weakest form of īmān – because the one who doesn’t hate evil or deem it to be ḥarām is on dangerous ground with regards to one’s īmān.

Censuring an evil is only allowed if a person is certain that censuring that evil will not lead to a greater evil:

1. The evil is changed to something which is a greater evil – it is ḥarām to censure this evil, by consensus of the scholars.
2. The evil is changed to something which is better – it is obligatory to censure, by consensus.
3. The evil is changed to another evil equal to it – subject to ijtihād.
4. The evil is changed to another evil (you don’t know if it is worse or not) – don’t censure it.