Monthly Renaissance
Renaissance
Islamic Journal·Pakistan
Articles
All ArticlesWritersTopics
Issues
All IssuesSpecial Issues
QueriesE-BooksSupport
Monthly Renaissance
Renaissance
Islamic Journal·Pakistan

A journal of Islamic research in continuous monthly circulation since 1991. Published by Al-Mawrid.

Read
ArticlesIssuesQueries
Browse
WritersTopicsE-Books
About
AboutTeamSupportContact
Monthly Renaissance
EST. 1991 · LAHORE
MADE WITH ♥ BY TABLETURNERR.COM
© 2026 AL-MAWRID
Archive/Vol. 12 · № 12/Conditions of Revolt against an Islamic State
ARTICLE ID q395
In this issue
The Political Directives of IslamThe Political Law of IslamPolitical Parties: Origins and NormsThe Political System of Pakistan: Points to Ponder

Reading
5 min · 905 words
Political Issues
— Political Issues —

Conditions of Revolt against an Islamic State

DS
Dr. Shehzad Saleem
December 2002 · 5 min read

What are the conditions of rebelling against an Islamic State?

The rebellion against an Islamic state can take two forms:

1. The rebels refuse to submit to the authority of the state and in doing so remain peaceful and patiently bear any aggression of the government that they may encounter as a result.

2. The rebels resort to militancy and armed warfare.

Islam imposes certain conditions on both these options. Before these conditions are explained, it needs to be appreciated that rebelling against Muslim rulers even when all the conditions are fulfilled never becomes obligatory upon Muslims. They can still choose to live under their rule.

I now turn to the conditions:

Case 1

If the first course outlined above is adopted then the following three conditions are required:

First, the rulers of the Muslims are guilty of openly and deliberately denying Islam or any of its directives.’ Ubādah Ibn Sāmit reports:

دَعَانَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَبَايَعْنَاهُ فَكَانَ فِيمَا أَخَذَ عَلَيْنَا أَنْ بَايَعَنَا  عَلَى  السَّمْعِ وَالطَّاعَةِ فِي  مَنْشَطِنَا وَمَكْرَهِنَا وَعُسْرِنَا وَيُسْرِنَا وَأَثَرَةٍ عَلَيْنَا وَأَنْ لَا نُنَازِعَ الْأَمْرَ أَهْلَهُ قَالَ إِلَّا أَنْ تَرَوْا كُفْرًا بَوَاحًا عِنْدَكُمْ مِنْ اللَّهِ فِيهِ بُرْهَانٌ (مسلم: رقم ١٧٠٩)

The Prophet called us to pledge allegiance to him which we did. We had been asked to pledge to the following: ‘We shall listen and obey whether willingly or unwillingly whether we are in difficulty or at ease, and even when we do not receive what is your right and that we shall not contest the authority of our rulers’. The Prophet of God said: You can only rise against them if you witness outright Kufr in any matter from them, in which you have a clear evidence from God. (Muslim: No. 1709)

The underlined portion of the Hadīth, which states this condition of rebellion, is actually based on 4:591 according to which Muslims are asked to obey their ‘Muslim’ rulers. This is indicated by the word ‘مِنْكُمْ’ (among you) which qualifies the word ‘اولو الْأَمْرِ’ (those in authority) in the verse. The implication being that they are required to obey the rulers as long as they remain Muslims. However, if these Muslim rulers do something which violates their status as Muslims, then these rulers are no longer required to be obeyed. In other words, only rulers who deny the requisites of being a Muslim in spite of being convinced about them are the ones who are actually implied here. Anything less than this does not suffice for the Muslims to rise against them.

Second, Muslims are not democratically able to change their rulers. The basis of this condition is found in the Qur’ānic directive of ‘أَمْرُهُمْ شُورَى بَيْنَهُمْ’ (Their system is based on their consultation)2. According to this directive, the rulers of Muslims should be democratically elected to office. Consequently, if Muslims are able to change their leadership by democratic means, resorting to rebellion and revolt is actually a violation of this principle. It amounts to revolt against the masses and not the rulers. This, according to the Sharī‘ah, is spreading disorder in the land and is punishable by death in the most exemplary manner. The Prophet (sws) is reported to have said:

مَنْ أَتَاكُمْ وَأَمْرُكُمْ جَمِيعٌ عَلَى رَجُلٍ وَاحِدٍ يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَشُقَّ عَصَاكُمْ أَوْ يُفَرِّقَ جَمَاعَتَكُمْ فَاقْتُلُوهُ. (مسلم: رقم ١٨٥٢)

You are organized under the rule of a person and someone tries to break your collectivity apart or disrupt your government, execute him. (Muslim: No. 1852)

Third, those who are undertaking this uprising are in majority and united under the leadership of one person. The basis of this condition also exists in the verse referred to above (42:38). In fact, it is a natural corollary of the principle stated in the verse: only the person who has the mandate of the majority is their legitimate ruler. If the person who is leading the uprising has the clear backing of the majority behind him, it means that the previous one has lost his mandate to rule. The majority is now willing to accept a new person in his place.

Case 2

If the second course is adopted, then besides the above mentioned three conditions, a fourth one must also be fulfilled: those who take up arms in revolt must establish their government in an independent piece of land. There is a consensus among all authorities of Islam that only an Islamic State has the authority to wage a militant struggle. No group, party or organization has the authority to lift arms.3

It is evident from this discussion that if Muslims intend to rise and rebel against their government they must fulfill certain conditions. If they do not do so, they have no right whatsoever to publicly refuse submission to their rulers. Moreover, even in the worst of circumstances, rebellion never becomes obligatory.

 

 

1. The verse reads:

يَاأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُوْلِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا (٥٩:٤)

O people who believe! Obey God and obey the Prophet and those of you who are in authority, and if you disagree among yourselves in any matter, refer it to God and the Prophet if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. This is better and more seemly as regards the consequences. (4:59)

2. 42:38

3. For details see the article ‘No Jihād without the State’ Renaissance, June 2002, Dāu’l-Ishrāq, Lahore.

 


DS
Dr. Shehzad Saleem

View all articles →
— Related reading —

The Kashmir Issue: Javed Ahmad Ghamidi’s Perspective

(Adapted from Dunya TV programme: A discussion with Javed Ahmad Ghamidi) It is important to understand the changes that have occurred in political thought throughout the world in order to develop a st...

Javed Ahmad Ghamidi · 11 min

What does Islam Want: Autocracy, Oligarchy or Democracy? – an exposition of Ghamidi’s understanding

[Part 4 of 4] 04. Legislation, a prerogative of ulama ? Our clergy insists that, rather than an elected parliament or legislature consisting of the laity, they must have the right to debate about and...

Dr. Junaid Hassan · 24 min

What does Islam Want: Autocracy, Oligarchy or Democracy? – an exposition of Ghamidi’s understanding

[Part 3 of 4] ‘Amruhum shūrā baynahum’ : Common Criticisms and Misconceptions In the preceding discussion, we introduced the Quran’s principle for governing a collective system of Mu...

Dr. Junaid Hassan · 14 min
Tools

Cite
Dr. Shehzad Saleem (2002). Conditions of Revolt against an Islamic State. Monthly Renaissance, 12(12).