Praise be to Allah and Blessings and Salutation be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah, His household and those who are loyal to him..

When Allah (SWT) decrees a Command (Yaqdi Amran), He says to it: “Be” (Kun) and it is (Fa-yakoun).

One of the matters that Allah (SWT) decreed with a final decree that is not revocable is in His saying, “Wa Atea’ou Allah Wa Atea’ou Ar-rsul Wa Uli Al-Amr Minkum” which means “..Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with Authority among you”.  He also said, “Wa Makana Limu’minin Wala Mu’minah Edha Kadya Allahu Warasulahu Amran An Yakun Lahum Alkhyaratu Min Amrihim” which means “It is not fitting for a believer, man or woman, when a Command has been decided by Allah and His Messenger, to have any option about their decision”.  He (SWT) also said, “Wal-Amru Yaouma-ezzin lil-lah” “.. The Authority that Day will be wholly with Allah”.  And He said, “Eilyhi Yarje-au Alamru Kullah” which means “..And to Him goes back every Command”.

These and other Noble Verses where the word “Command or Authority” (Amr) and its derivatives are mentioned will help shed some light on the issue on hand here.  The subject matter is obedience to those who are charged with Authority (Ulu Al-Amer).  Which command of these commands is meant here?

Is the meaning of “those in Authority” restricted to rulers only?
Does any share of this command go to a father, mother, teacher, boss at work, and people of the judiciary system?

Can we define “those in command” as any one who is charged with an affair of people’s affairs regardless of any other consideration like religion, sect (Madh-hab), political party or doctrinal affiliation as long as he does not issue a command that contradicts Allah’s commands?

The question is: if a ruler is non-Muslim in a country that has Muslim minority or majority (e.g. Lebanon), is it obligatory to obey him –although he’s non-Muslim- as long as he does not interfere with Islamic beliefs?
In other words, if a non-Muslim ruler maintains people’s freedom to practice the rituals of their religion, and did not interfere in its affair by addition, omission, alteration, modifying, or force people (Ekrah); would he still be considered of Uli Al-Amr?  Or does the word “among you” in the verse necessitates Islam as a condition for such a ruler?
Alternatively, is it possible that the word “Uli Al-Amr” includes people of Expertise in every specific Field/Matter?

Dear reader, this subject matter has been controversial, so where do you stand on this issue knowing that “..Lilah Alamru Min Kabli Wamin Ba’di” “..With Allah is the command in the Past and in the Future..”?

There is no Power or Might except with Allah

The Editor : Original Arabic text in Behira Wal-Akalim Journal- Issue # 228

Filed under: Let It Be Good, O' Allah on October 3rd, 2011