Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī: Fighting Alongside the Ruler Against the Khārijites and Rebels is not Fitnah (Tribulation)

Shaykh ʿAllāmah Rabīʿ bin Hādī al-Madkhalī wrote:^[1]

If fighting occurs between a legitimate ruler and someone who rebels against him seeking to spread corruption, this does not constitute tribulation (fitnah) in any way. If you fight alongside a legitimate ruler, and others oppose him, rebelling against him out of a desire for worldly gain, or because they hold corrupt beliefs and wish to discard the truth, this is not tribulation (fitnah). This is because you are (in fact) supporting the truth against falsehood, and guidance against misguidance. The point is that if the Khārijites (secessionists) or Bughāt (transgressors) revolt against the ruler, it is (the duty) of the people to support him. Among the evidences for this is the (ḥadīth): “If a pledge of allegiance is given to two caliphs, then kill the latter of the two.”

Arabic text:

See also:

The above speech of Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله) was quoted by Shaykh Nizār bin Hāshim (حفظه الله) in a statement dated 22 June 2025, which is reproduced here:

Once again:

To subdue people of ignorance, desire, sowing of confusion, and those acting as agents, the “War of Dignity” is neither a war of tribulation (fitnah) nor (an act) of ignorance.

Question:

O Shaykh, we desire a response to those who say that the war in Sudan is a “nāzilah” (crisis, public emergency) in which only the senior scholars may give fatwās. Is (it the case that) the truth is always hidden in every such crisis? Furthermore, is the act of rebelling against a legitimate ruler a nāzilah that necessitates silence and not standing with him (against the rebels)? And if the senior scholars do not issue a fatwā regarding certain crises, or if we have not seen any such fatwās from them, what is obligatory upon the people?

Answer:

Imam Ibn Qudamah (رحمه الله) said in his book al-Mughnī (12/242):

It is obligatory upon the people to assist their leader in fighting against the Bughāt (rebels, insurgents), for (the reasons) we mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, and because if they were to withhold from supporting him, the rebels would overpower him, and corruption (fasād) would spread across the land.

Imām Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (رحمه الله) also noted a consensus on this matter, as recorded in his book al-Tamhīd (15/291).

Our Shaykh, ʿAllāmah Rabīʿ bin Hādī al-Madkhalī (حفظه الله) states in his book ‘Awn al-Bari (2/222):

We—and praise be to Allah—are upon the path of the senior scholars and their fatāwā. We have not opposed them, and nor shall we, if Allāh wills, ever do so, (following) the methodology of the Sharīʿyy (legislative) evidences. We have clarified this extensively, wrote about it, and quoted the statements and consensus of the scholars regarding (the matter).

Furthermore, our ruler and the commander of our army has mobilised his people and his subjects to for jihād and fighting against these Khārijites, and to destroy this exposed conspiracy against the people of Sudan and their army.

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said (regarding such a situation): “And if you are called to mobilise (for jihād and fighting), then mobilise.”

Thus, this is a crisis in which the ruler has already judged with what aligns with the truth and its supporting evidences, and therefore, it is obligatory to obey him and stand by him. In matters regarding war and its management in particular, the authority rests with those in command (wulāt al-ʾamr).

The (general) people, scholars, and students of knowledge are to follow their lead, provided it is a war of truth against falsehood and its people (as is the case with our war in Sudan, its ruling—and to Allāh belongs all praise—is as clear as the sun, and as manifest as the sky above the earth.) The only exception is if the ruler delegates the affair of the war and its ruling to the scholars, so that they provide guidance and issue a fatwa regarding it, (declaring it) permissible, obligatory, or prohibited.

Therefore, pay no heed to speech that is devoid of knowledge or evidence, nor to the speech of anyone (except the speech of) an authoritative scholar.

And what has come in the noble texts from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah as well as the foundational Islāmic texts (of creed and jurisprudence) and the fatāwā of scholars, both past and present regarding (the obligation) of fighting the Khārijites (secessionists), Bughāt (rebels), and Mufsidīn (spreaders of corruption) is not hidden to the beginner student of knowledge. “For indeed, it is not the eyes that are blinded, but it is the hearts within the breasts that are blinded.” (22:46-)

And the free (independent), fair-minded (just) Salafī who sincerely pursues the truth is sufficed with a hint, rendering many words and expressions unnecessary.

✍️ Written by:
Nizar bin Hashim al-Abbas
Wednesday, 22 Dhu al-Hijjah, 1446 AH

The context of the above statement is that a paramilitary led by a subordinate (Muḥammad Ḥamdān Dagalo) fought against the regular national and official army led by the president (Gen. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Burhān), and subsequently sought to split the nation by creating a rival government, being aided by foreign interests in the background. There was much killing (thousands killed daily), as well as raping, pillaging and displacement of millions from their homes. In this situation, where fighting occurs between legitimate authority and Khārijites and rebels causing corruption and seeking to split the nation, it is a fight between truth and falsehood and it is obligatory to assist the ruler, and this is by revealed text and consensus.

Some cast doubt about this foundation and publicly addressed the legitimate authority and the Khārijites and rebels with the same discourse of rebuke, while questioning the sensibility of the people of political and religious authority in Sudan.

So Shaykh Nizār first undertook the path of advice in private alongside clarification of the foundation itself in open, in order to lift the confusion and safeguard the integrity of the application of revealed guidance to decreed reality. He asked for a corroboration of the foundation and a supporting fatwa in affirmation and support of the truth and the just cause. He was subsequently belittled and threatened, and saw this is a gross violation of scholarly standard and duty. This treatment has been demonstrated to be a pattern of behaviour exhibited in differents events in various lands by a gang of people, who have entered turmoil into the ranks of Ahl al-Sunnah as the last of the prominent senior scholars began to pass away in recent years.

The truth in this matter, in the foundational dispute, is with Shaykh Nizār bin Hāshim, and he is supported in that truth without any hesitation or fear, as the revealed texts, the consensus of the scholars and the rulings of the scholars in such matters are on his side, and he is acting upon the instructions of legitimate authority.

To publicly interfere in the affairs of nations in relation to war and bloodshed, and to cause confusion between legitimate authority and Khārijites and rebels, entails violation of principles and foundations, especially when coupled with stubbornness and hostility towards the advocate(s) of truth in the matter.

Further, the combined activities of this group include:

undermining the foundations of the Sunnah (rulership, obedience, rebellion, war, bloodshed) in their practical application to events, Such as failing to distinguish between legitimate authority and the Khārijites, and open rebuke of the political and religious authorities of a nation, and distinguishing between an internal rebellion from within government and outside of it (ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī), and using the strife between the Companions to justify rebellious, seditious and secessionist activities (Ṣalāḥ Kantoush),
opposing the senior scholars in their rulings in these great and serious matters, and likewise, in their rulings and advice regarding ḥizbīs, innovators and those with methodological errors,
hostility or aversion towards well-known scholars, shaykhs and students, such as Shaykh Nizār, Shaykh ʿAlī al-Ḥudhayfī, Shaykh Shiḥāb who seek redress in matters pertaining to foundations, and are either humiliated, threatened or ignored,
horrendous ghuluww in figureheads, resembling that of the Ṣūfiyyah and Rāfiḍah,
lying to senior scholars in matters of war and bloodshed,
belittlement of senior scholars,
failing to establish justice in the disputes between Ahl al-Sunnah,
practising and enjoining blameworthy silence upon others to compromise the methodological clarity which would otherwise shine a spotlight upon them,
reframing methodological errors as personal disputes requiring arbitration (muḥākamah) and reconciliation (ṣūlḥ), only sowing the seeds for further disputes and divisions,
and more.

Every free-thinking, independent, fair-minded, just Salafi who is a sincere seeker of truth knows that all of these affairs combined indicate a great departure from the Salafī methodology and what it necessitates, and it is for no idle reason that severity and sternness has been shown towards this group, leading them to claim victimhood.

Note

Some have advocated the path of complete silence, despite acknowledging that these affairs (the deviations which have been proven) are as clear as they get and a re-run of the 1990s (affairs of rulership, rebellion and related issues). It was clarity that provided the foundation of unity and strength back then,and it is no different today, since the Salafī methodology does not change according to circumstances, expediencies and interests. As for silence in the midst of confusion, doubts, violations of foundations, then that is the basis of disunity and weakness.^[2]

If we return back to simple, basic principles such as “The Sunnah unites and Bidʿah divides”, then all a person has to do is look at the foundations of the Sunnah in the issue at hand, observe which shaykh(s) advocated for them, clarified them and defended them, and who opposed, or undermined, or failed to support them. Here, as a matter of obligation, a truthful Salafī is required to join and support the side of truth, so that there is a clear delineation between truth and error. This clear, open support and advocacy energises and strengthens the truth in the face of error and falsehood, providing a visible, discernible rope of truth, the same one mentioned in the āyah, “And hold fast, all of you, to the Rope of Allāh and be not divided.” (3:103-), which others (who may still be discovering the truth) are then able to recognise, see and hold on to as well.

The wisdom in this is that the errant are led to either recant when they see that the error and falsehood they fell into has been rejected by the people, if they were genuinely mistaken, or if they are following desires, they will have been exposed and Ahl al-Sunnah will have been protected from them. In either case, Ahl al-Sunnah venerate the truth, and they do not believe that anyone, no matter what their status, is more important than the foundations of the Sunnah.

Shaykh Bin Baz (رحمه الله) said in his lecture on the position of a believer regarding tribulations:^[3]

Every fitnah that occurs from the hand of any person among the Muslims, the Innovators, or the Disbelievers, it is examined so that the believer stands with the one who is correct, with the oppressed against the oppressor, and the one who is wrong. In this way, the truth is supported and the affairs of the Muslims remain in order, and through it, the oppressor is deterred from his oppression. The seeker of truth knows that the obligation (in the matter) is to cooperate upon righteousness and piety and not to cooperate upon sin and transgression, acting upon the saying of Allāh, the Sublime: “And cooperate upon righteousness and piety and do not cooperate upon sin and transgression.” (5:2).

In his refutation of the Ḥaddādī, ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Bāshmīl, Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hadī (رحمه الله) said:^[4]

Severe secrecy and obscurity surround you and surround your suspect activities and deception is your emblem and your cloak. But we—and praise is for Allāh—do not have a speck of deception, and we do not have except clarity (wuḍūḥ) and sincerity of purpose to Allāh, His Book, His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and to the generality of the Muslims, regardless of whether they are loyal to us or oppose us.

Whoever speaks the truth, we support him, and whoever spoke with falsehood and error, we refute his error with proof and evidences within the limits of our ability, and our books and cassettes testify to that.

And we free ourselves from the errors of men, all of them, whatever level of knowledge they may have reached and from them is al-Albānī, whose most important errors we have refuted and announced our innocence from them, and our scholars and brothers also refuted them, those whom we supported in what was correct in their refutations.

And we have established—and praise is for Allāh—that we do not worship except Allāh, and we do not follow except His methodology. We are not worshippers of rabbis and monks, nor (are we from) the Rawāfiḍ, and nor from the extreme Ṣūfīs who sanctify personalities and believe in their infallibility.

Shaykh Aḥmad (رحمه الله) said:^[5]

Therefore, it is obligatory upon the students of knowledge possessing acquaintance [with Islamic sciences], who know the Salafī methodology and know the other methodologies (that oppose it), it is obligatory for them to explain to others, and that they say and speak, and that they deliver sermons, and explain in every situation and on every occasion the truth that must be followed and the falsehood that must be abandoned and avoided.

As for those who remain silent from explaining the truth to the people, they are not excused for their silence, even if they said: “We are not with them.” They are not excused, even if they said: “We are not with the people of these misguided groups who have strayed from the path of truth”, unless they show rejection of what they are upon of misgudance.

Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله) said:^[6]

Whoever is truthful in his religion, and is really from Ahl al-Sunnah, he must study these affairs. It is not allowed for him to prefer the words of one person over another until he has truly understood the words of both parties and distinguished between the one who is right and the one who is wrong. After that, he should speak with whatever he holds as truth with Allāh (تبارك وتعالى).

As for speaking according to his desire, we seek refuge in Allāh from that, this is one of the methods of the people of misguidance and desires, refuge is with Allāh. There is no doubt that these two men erred (i.e. the two shaykhs) and went far in their error and in supporting falsehood. We ask Allāh to grant them repentance.

The principle with Ahl al-Sunnah is that everyone’s speech can be accepted or rejected. So whatever from his speech agrees with the truth, it is accepted, and whatever opposes it, it is rejected, especially if it is accompanied with desire, and refuge is with Allāh, so teach them these principles.

“And if you disagree among yourselves over anything then refer it back to Allāh and the Messenger” (4:59-), and Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim say: “The scholars are not cited as evidence, but evidence is (to be) cited for them.”

So Ibn Jibrīn and whoever is bigger than him, and Bakr Abū Zayd and whoever is bigger than him by hundreds of times, they are not a proof over Allāh, rather, the evidence is sought from them, and if they are unable (to provide) the proof, they are not granted the proof.^[7]

This is the manhaj that we strive to remain upon, with Allāh’s tawfīq and bounty, in veneration of the Sunnah and its foundations.

Footnotes

1. ʿAwn al-Bārī (Dār al-Muḥsin) 1/740.
2. As for salvaging an individual or continuing advice in private, there is no conflict between that and continuing to warn and clarify if the situation necessitates it, especially when there is stubbornness, hostility and the spreading of doubts about the foundations and about the verified truth. So when there are mashāyikh who openly clarify and warn and others who may make efforts to try to salvage the errant in private, there is no conflict, as both approaches serve a legislated purpose.
3. Mawqif al-Muʿmin min al-Fitan
4. Majmūʿ Muʿallafāt wa Rasāʾīl (9/495-496).
5. Al-Fatāwā al-Jaliyyah (p. 25).
6. Refer to: //abuiyaad.com/q/rabee-study-claims.
7. Meaning, assumed to have the proof by default.