Enjoining Good and Forbidding Evil in Islam

• Introduction
• Quranic Verses
• Hadith (Prophetic Teachings)
• Historical Context
• Scholarly Commentary (Classical and Contemporary)
• Differences Among the Four Schools of Law
• Philosophical and Theological Analysis
• Miracles and Divine Help Associated with This Principle
• Modern Application and Guidance for Today
• Recommended Books (Classical and Modern, Perspectives)

Introduction

Enjoining good and forbidding evil (Arabic: al-amr bi-l-maʿrūf wa-n-nahy ʿan al-munkar) is a fundamental Islamic duty that means commanding what is right and prohibiting what is wrong . In Islam, God charges every Muslim community with this responsibility as revealed in the Qur’an and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad . This principle is central to Islamic doctrine – it is the basis for maintaining a moral society and is considered one of the defining characteristics of the Muslim ummah (community) . Muslims are expected to encourage one another to do good deeds and to kindly prevent or stop one another from doing evil or harmful acts.

In Arabic, maʿrūf means something “known” or recognized as good (in line with Islamic teachings and sound customs), and munkar refers to what is “denied” or recognized as evil . In other words, Islam calls on believers to promote virtues that are commonly acknowledged as right, and to oppose vices that are known to be wrong. This duty is so important that the Qur’an praises those who fulfill it and condemns those who neglect it. It was a mission of all the prophets and a key reason the Muslim nation is considered a just and best nation in the Qur’an . Fulfilling this obligation is seen as an act of faith and caring – it helps keep the community healthy and protected from moral decay.

Put simply, enjoining good and forbidding evil means actively promoting goodness and justice, and intervening (in appropriate ways) to stop wrongdoings. A Muslim should first apply this principle to oneself and one’s immediate circle, then extend it to society at large. Islamic scholars note that every Muslim is responsible at some level: first by correcting their own behavior, then guiding their family, then helping their neighbors and community, and so on . This creates a ripple effect of goodness. If people ignore this duty, corruption can spread unchecked, and the society may lose Allah’s blessings. For this reason, the Quran and Hadith repeatedly emphasize this principle as a duty for the whole community, not just authorities . In the sections below, we will explore where this command appears in the Qur’an and Hadith, how it was practiced throughout history, what scholars say about it, differences in interpretation among Islamic schools, and how Muslims can apply it today.

Quranic Verses

The Qur’an contains numerous verses instructing believers to enjoin good and forbid evil. Below is a comprehensive list of major verses (translated into English) that address this principle:

• Qur’an 3:104 – “Let there arise from among you a group of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong. They are the ones who will be successful.”

• Qur’an 3:110 – “You are the best nation ever raised for mankind: you enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah.” This verse teaches that the Muslim community’s excellence depends on carrying out this duty. Early commentators like Mujāhid and Imam al-Qurṭubī noted that Muslims are “the best of peoples only if you enjoin good and forbid evil” – meaning this honor is conditional on performing these duties.

• Qur’an 3:114 – “They believe in Allah and the Last Day, and enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and hasten to do good deeds. And these are among the righteous.” (This verse praises certain People of the Book who embraced Islam and upheld these virtues.)

• Qur’an 7:157 – Describing the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him): “He commands them to do good and forbids them from evil, allows for them all good and pure things and prohibits all evil and impure things…” . This shows that part of the Prophet’s mission was to teach people to uphold good and shun evil.

• Qur’an 9:67 – “The hypocrites, both men and women, are alike: they enjoin what is evil and forbid what is good…” . (This is the opposite behavior, shown by hypocrites. In contrast, true believers do the opposite.)

• Qur’an 9:71 – “The believing men and women are guardians of one another: they encourage good and forbid evil, establish prayer and pay alms-tax, and obey Allah and His Messenger...” . This highlights that all believers, male and female, support each other by promoting good and preventing wrong.

• Qur’an 9:112 – It praises believers with certain qualities: those who repent, worship, and praise God, “…who encourage good and forbid evil, and who observe the limits set by Allah. And give good news to the believers.”

• Qur’an 22:41 – “They are those who, if We establish them in the land, establish prayer, pay alms, enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil. And with Allah rests the outcome of all affairs.” This verse shows that when true believers have authority, they will actively promote virtue and prevent vice as part of just governance.

• Qur’an 31:17 – Luqmān advises his son: “O my dear son! Establish prayer, encourage what is good and forbid what is evil, and endure patiently whatever befalls you. Surely this is a resolve to aspire to.” Here, a father teaches his child to stand up for right and face challenges with patience, implying this duty starts at the individual and family level.

• Qur’an 5:78–79 – “Curses were pronounced on the disbelievers among the Children of Israel by [the tongues of] David and Jesus, son of Mary. That was because they disobeyed and persistently transgressed. They used not to forbid one another from the wrongs they committed. Evil indeed was what they used to do.” This passage warns that previous communities were cursed by God because they failed to forbid evil. It underlines the grave consequences when a society neglects this duty.

These verses (among others) establish enjoining good and forbidding evil as a Qur’anic command. The Quran makes it clear that this is not an optional act – it is portrayed as a defining trait of righteous believers and a key duty of any Islamic society. Doing it leads to success and Allah’s mercy , while ignoring it leads to corruption and possibly Allah’s punishment .

Notably, one verse, Qur’an 5:105, says: “O you who believe! Take care of yourselves. Those who go astray will not harm you if you are rightly guided….” This might sound like “mind your own business,” but it does not cancel the obligation to promote good. The first Caliph, Abu Bakr al-Ṣiddīq, explained that people misunderstood this verse. He said: “O people! You recite this verse, but interpret it wrongly. I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: ‘If people see an oppressor and do not stop him, Allah will likely punish all of them.’” . In other words, “taking care of yourself” in the Quran includes correcting others when you can, so that evil doesn’t spread to harm everyone. This understanding, taught by Abu Bakr, reaffirms that Muslims must not become complacent by thinking individual piety alone is enough – they are responsible to address wrongs around them too.

Hadith (Prophetic Teachings)

The Hadith – sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ – further emphasize enjoining good and forbidding evil. Many authentic (ṣaḥīḥ) narrations guide Muslims on this duty. Here are some of the most significant hadiths on the topic:

• Changing Wrong by Hand, Tongue, or Heart: The Prophet ﷺ said, “Whoever among you sees an evil action, let him change it with his hand. If he cannot, then with his tongue (by speaking out). If he cannot, then with his heart – and that is the weakest form of faith.” . This famous hadith (recorded in Sahih Muslim) outlines a three-tiered method for forbidding evil:

  1. “By hand” – take action to stop the wrong physically if you are able to (and have the authority to do so).
  2. “By tongue” – if you cannot physically stop it, then speak out against it; give advice or warning.
  3. “By heart” – if even speaking out is not possible, at least dislike the evil in your heart (do not accept it), which is the minimum level of faith.
     This hadith shows that everyone has some level of responsibility. At the very least a believer should object internally to wrongdoing, and if possible, try to verbally discourage it or physically prevent it when appropriate. It also implies one should use the mildest effective method – start with advice (tongue) unless one has proper authority to use force (hand).

• “Enjoin good or else…”: The Prophet ﷺ solemnly warned his followers: “By the One in Whose hand is my soul! You must enjoin good and forbid evil, or Allah will soon send upon you a punishment. Then you will call upon Him (in prayer) but He will not answer you.” (Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2169). This hadith (reported by Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamān in Jami’ al-Tirmidhi) stresses that neglecting this duty can bring about Allah’s displeasure on the whole community. In other words, if society abandons the promotion of good and prevention of wrong, collective suffering or unanswered prayers may result. It highlights enjoining good and forbidding evil as a condition for divine help and mercy. A similar narration from the Companion Abu Darda’ states that if people abandon this duty, Allah may set a tyrant over them and refuse to answer the prayers of even their righteous members . This underlines how serious the obligation is in Islam.

• Parable of the Sinking Ship: Prophet Muhammad ﷺ gave a vivid analogy to illustrate why stopping wrongdoing is necessary for everyone’s survival. He said: “The example of those who obey Allah’s commands and those who violate them is like a group of people on a boat. Some are on the upper deck and some on the lower deck. When the people in the lower deck need water, they have to go to the top and disturb the others. So they think, ‘If we drill a hole in our part of the boat, we can get water directly and not bother those above us.’ Now, if the people on the upper deck let them drill the hole, the entire ship would sink. But if they stop them, they will save everyone.” (Sahih al-Bukhari 2686). This parable (found in Sahih al-Bukhari) shows that sins and wrong actions are not just “personal” matters – their effects can harm the whole community, just like a hole in a ship harms all passengers. Therefore, preventing someone from “drilling the hole” (doing something wrong) is actually an act of saving everyone, including the wrongdoer. This hadith provides a logical and practical rationale: enjoining good and forbidding evil is necessary to prevent collective ruin.

• Duty to Intervene to Avoid Collective Punishment: The Prophet ﷺ also said, “If people see evil being committed and do not try to change it, Allah may include all of them in His punishment.” . Similarly, it’s narrated that he said no group remains safe if sins are rampant among them and they do nothing to stop it . These teachings, found in collections like Sunan Abī Dāwūd and Ibn Mājah, reinforce the point that turning a blind eye to wrongdoing is itself a sin that can invite disaster on everyone. It is often quoted in connection with the verse about the Children of Israel being cursed for not forbidding each other’s sins .

• Speaking Truth to Power: One of the greatest forms of enjoining good and forbidding evil is to stand up to injustice, even in front of a powerful ruler. The Prophet ﷺ said, “The best type of jihad (striving) is to speak a word of truth before a tyrannical leader.” (Reported in Sunan Abu Dāwūd and others – graded ḥasan). This means that correcting a ruler’s wrongdoing or injustice—despite the personal risk—is a highly meritorious act in Islam. It shows that no one is above advice or criticism in wrongdoing, and Muslims should courageously uphold justice. In fact, Islamic history has examples of scholars and righteous individuals who confronted caliphs or governors with sincere counsel, embodying this hadith.

• “Religion is Sincere Advice”: While not explicitly mentioning “forbidding evil,” a well-known ḥadīth highlights the spirit behind enjoining good. The Prophet ﷺ said, “Religion is sincerity (naṣīḥa).” The companions asked, “To whom?” He replied, “To Allah, His Book, His Messenger, and to the leaders of the Muslims and their common folk.” . Naṣīḥa means giving genuine advice or seeking the best for others. Thus, part of being a good Muslim is to advise and guide each other (both leaders and regular people) towards what is right. This includes reminding others to do good and avoid wrong in a kind, caring manner. Enjoining good and forbidding evil is essentially an expression of sincere care: you want the best for your brother or sister, so you won’t silently watch them harm themselves or society by sinning.

In summary, the Hadith literature makes it clear that every Muslim has a role in maintaining the moral fabric of society. One should do so wisely and within one’s capacity – if you can change a wrong directly (and justly), you should; if not, speak up; if you truly cannot even speak, at least reject it in your heart . The Prophet ﷺ balanced this duty with other teachings: for example, he taught gentleness and wisdom in correcting others, and warned against hypocrisy (i.e. one should practice what one preaches) . He also emphasized that stopping wrong should not be done in a way that causes a bigger wrong. All these hadiths serve to empower Muslims to actively promote virtue, while also setting guidelines on proper etiquette and priorities when doing so (as we will discuss later).

Historical Context

Throughout Islamic history, the principle of enjoining good and forbidding evil has been applied in various ways. It started with Prophet Muhammad ﷺ himself and continued through the eras of caliphs, scholars, and Islamic societies:

• Prophet’s Example: The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was the first to implement this principle in the Muslim community of Madinah. He would personally teach and correct his companions with kindness. For instance, if he saw someone doing something wrong (even unintentionally), he would advise them gently. A famous example is when he saw a Bedouin urinating in the mosque; the companions rushed to stop the man harshly, but the Prophet told them to leave him and simply clean the area afterward, then he explained to the man that mosques are not places for such actions. This gentle correction is an example of forbidding a wrong (inappropriate act) with wisdom. The Prophet also sent letters to neighboring rulers, inviting them to Islam (which is enjoining the ultimate good of worshiping God alone and doing righteousness). Thus, his whole mission exemplified this concept: spreading goodness and suppressing evil in society.

• Rightly-Guided Caliphs: After the Prophet’s death, his successors (the Khulafā’ al-Rāshidūn, or rightly-guided caliphs) continued to uphold enjoining good and forbidding evil as part of governance. The first caliph, Abu Bakr, as mentioned, publicly reminded Muslims not to misunderstand their duty . The second caliph, ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, was known for his strong public moral sense – he would patrol at night to check on the welfare and conduct of his people, and he appointed officials to oversee the marketplaces to ensure fair dealing and prevent cheating (a form of promoting good and preventing economic injustice). There are accounts of ordinary people even correcting Caliph Umar if they thought he was mistaken, and Umar welcomed such feedback – a testament to the culture of mutual enjoining of good, even towards leaders. This early period set a precedent that rulers and ruled alike were subject to the duty of commanding right and forbidding wrong.

• The Institution of Hisbah: As Muslim lands grew, a more formal system arose to implement public morality and fair practice. This was the development of the ḥisbah institution, especially in the classical era (around the time of the Abbasid Caliphate and later). Hisbah refers to “accountability” or oversight to ensure Islamic norms are upheld. A special official called the Muḥtasib (sometimes called “market inspector” or “ombudsman”) was appointed by the government to enforce good conduct in public life . The muḥtasib’s duties included supervising markets (to prevent fraud, enforce honest weights and measures ), checking that public moral standards were maintained (for example, breaking unlawful gatherings, or destroying contraband like illicit alcohol) , and mediating minor disputes on the spot. The muḥtasib did not hold trials for serious crimes (those were for judges), but he could levy on-the-spot penalties for infractions that were openly admitted or observed . This position existed in many Muslim cities and was considered a practical way to fulfill the Quranic command at a community level. The concept of hisbah was elaborated by scholars like al-Māwardī and later by Ibn Taymiyyah in separate treatises, indicating its importance in Islamic governance .

• Scholarly Engagement: Many classical scholars wrote about enjoining good and forbidding evil, indicating how integral it was to Islamic thought. Imam al-Ghazālī (1058–1111 CE) devoted an entire chapter (Book 19) of his famous work Iḥyā’ ‘Ulūm al-Dīn (“Revival of the Religious Sciences”) to this duty . He provided detailed guidance on who should carry it out, when it is required, and how to balance it with wisdom. Al-Ghazālī stressed starting with oneself and one’s household first, then the wider community, echoing the gradation he described: “Every Muslim has the duty of first setting himself to rights, and then, successively, his household, his neighbors, his town…” reaching to “the ends of the earth.” . This illustrates a bottom-up approach: a morally upright society starts with morally upright individuals and families. Another scholar, Imam al-Nawawī (13th century), lamented in his time that “this matter of enjoining good and forbidding evil has mostly been neglected, with only a few traces of it left, despite its great importance.” . He and others, like Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim, wrote fatwas and books addressing questions like “Is this duty fard (obligatory) on everyone or just some?” and “What are the limits of a private person’s intervention?”. Their debates helped shape the differing views in various schools (discussed in the next section).

• Public Morality and Law: In many Muslim societies, enjoining right and forbidding wrong was not only an individual ethic but also part of law enforcement and community norms. For example, during certain periods, forbidden items (like wine or idols) would be confiscated and destroyed as part of the muḥtasib’s role . There are historical accounts of pious scholars or individuals taking initiative to break wine barrels or musical instruments (viewed as forbidden by some jurists) in order to stop public violations . While these actions were controversial at times, they were driven by a zealous adherence to the principle. However, scholars also warned against overzealous or unlawful vigilante actions. They discussed conditions – such as ensuring that forbidding an evil would not lead to a worse outcome (like violent chaos). If stopping one wrong would cause a greater wrong, many scholars said to refrain in that case (this principle of choosing the lesser of two evils comes from the Quran and hadith understanding of harm).

• Sectarian and Political Use: The duty of commanding right and forbidding wrong was so fundamental that even various Islamic sects and movements invoked it. For instance, some early rebel groups like the Kharijites used “forbidding evil” as a slogan against rulers they deemed sinful. In the 8th–10th centuries, there were cases of political rebels (among Kharijites, some Shi’a factions, and even some factions) who justified uprisings by claiming the rulers committed evil and must be opposed in line with this principle . However, mainstream scholars generally discouraged armed rebellion except under very extreme tyranny, because rebellion often led to greater harm (civil war) . They preferred other means of forbidding the evil of unjust rulers – such as sincere advice, negotiation, or peaceful protest, aligning with the Prophet’s teaching of speaking truth to power rather than instantly using violence.

• Modern Era: In more recent history, the concept continues to influence Muslim communities. In some modern Muslim-majority countries, governments established official bodies sometimes called “Committees for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice.” For example, Saudi Arabia has (or had) a religious police force under this name, and the Taliban in Afghanistan and the government of Iran have or had similar departments . These bodies employ officers who patrol and enforce certain Islamic codes (like dress code, prayer attendance, segregation rules) as an implementation of hisbah. Their presence shows an attempt to institutionalize the Quranic command. However, the effectiveness and methods of such “religious police” have been widely debated. In some cases, their powers were curbed due to public criticism (e.g. Saudi Arabia significantly limited its religious police’s authority in 2016) . On the other hand, many grassroots Islamic movements and organizations also encourage members to engage in social welfare, anti-corruption campaigns, and moral education, viewing these as part of enjoining good and forbidding evil.

Throughout all these historical phases, one thing is clear: the ideal of enjoining good and forbidding evil remained a core value. Its methods and emphasis evolved – from personal moral correction in the Prophet’s time, to a state function in classical times, to a mix of state and societal efforts in modern times. Whenever Muslim societies adhered to this principle with wisdom and justice, they saw improvements in social morality and justice. Conversely, when it was ignored or misused, they experienced moral decay or backlash. The historical record thus supports the Islamic view that this principle is essential for a healthy community.

Scholarly Commentary (Classical and Contemporary)

Islamic scholars, both classical and contemporary, have extensively discussed enjoining good and forbidding evil. They agree on its importance but offer insights on how to do it properly. Below are some key viewpoints:

• Consensus on Obligation: There is a consensus (ijmā‘) among scholars that enjoining good and forbidding evil is obligatory in Islam . Imam al-Nawawī stated, “The Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the Muslim Ummah all affirm that enjoining good and forbidding evil is an obligation.” . In other words, this duty is not a matter of personal choice or supererogatory piety; it is a required practice in religion, just like prayer or fasting, though its exact parameters can vary. Many scholars classify it as a farḍ kifāyah, meaning a collective obligation on the community (explained below), while certain situations may make it a personal obligation.

• Individual vs. Collective Duty: Scholars have debated whether every single Muslim must actively enjoin good and forbid evil at all times (farḍ ‘ayn) or if it suffices that some people in the community take on this role (farḍ kifāyah). Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah explained it this way: “This is a duty that the entire Ummah is obliged to fulfill. It is what the scholars call a collective responsibility – if a group of society undertakes it, the rest are absolved. But if no one does it, the whole community is sinning.” . This “collective duty” view is considered the standard position of the majority of pre-modern scholars . It implies that Muslims can organize among themselves so that some focus on this task (for example, scholars, community leaders, or a hisbah officer), and not every single person has to be “policing” at all times – yet everyone should be prepared to do it when needed. Some scholars, like Al-Ghazālī and others, noted that in certain moments it becomes individual: for instance, if you are the only one present when something wrong is happening, then it’s your personal duty at that moment to try to stop it . They reconciled both views by saying initially everyone is responsible, but if some fulfill it, others are not blameworthy .

• Limits of Authority (Who Should Enforce): A critical discussion in classical scholarship is about who is permitted to use force or authority to stop wrong. All scholars agree any Muslim can verbally advise or remind others to do good, as long as they do it correctly. But using the “hand” (physical power or legal power) was often restricted to those in authority. Imām Al-Nawawī (a 13th-century Shafi’i jurist) explicitly said: “Changing the wrong by hand (i.e. coercive action) is the domain of the ruler or state; changing by tongue is the role of the scholars; and the common Muslim’s role is to hate it in his heart.” . Many jurists in the Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafi’i schools held similar views that ordinary individuals should not take enforcement into their own hands without permission . They feared that unregulated vigilantism could lead to chaos or abuse. Instead, they taught that if a wrong requires forceful stopping, it should be done by the government or its appointed officials (like the muḥtasib). Indeed, as one scholar put it: “The view that punishment is to be inflicted only by the state, not by individuals, is widespread if not almost universal (among jurists).” .

  However, other scholars (including many Hanbali scholars and some from other schools) believed that qualified believers can act to stop wrong directly if certain conditions are met . They argue that if a Muslim has the proper knowledge and it’s within their power to physically stop a blatant evil immediately, they should do so rather than wait for authorities – as long as doing so doesn’t create a bigger problem. They often cite examples like preventing someone from harming an innocent person on the spot – any bystander should intervene if able. These scholars read the hadith “change it with your hand” as a general directive not limited to rulers. Classical jurists thus struck a balance: yes, stop wrong, but don’t cause greater fitna (chaos). They set conditions: one must have knowledge that something is truly wrong in Islam, one should generally have authority or reasonable chance of success, and one must not cause a bigger harm by stopping it. They also emphasized using gradual measures – e.g. start by speaking gently before resorting to any physical intervention.

• Wisdom and Etiquette: Across the board, scholars stressed that enjoining good and forbidding evil should be done with wisdom, kindness, and patience. A harsh or arrogant approach can backfire and push people further into wrongdoing, or cause animosity. Ibn Taymiyyah advised: “Three things are essential: knowledge (knowing what is truly right/wrong) before you enjoin or forbid; kindness while enjoining or forbidding; and patience after enjoining or forbidding (because you might face resistance).” . This is a beautiful summary – one must know what one is talking about (so you don’t end up forbidding something that isn’t actually haram, or commanding something not required), one must be gentle and not aggressive in the act of advising, and one must be patient if the advice isn’t immediately heeded or if one is mistreated in return. Many scholars like Imam al-Ghazālī and Imam al-Nawawī echoed similar points, urging gentle admonition, good manners, privacy when correcting someone (to avoid embarrassing them), and so on. The Qur’an itself instructs believers to “invite to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and good preaching” (Qur’an 16:125) – which applies to enjoining good as well. Contemporary scholars continue to emphasize these prophetic etiquette. For example, they advise that naseehah (sincere advice) should be given privately when possible, not as public shaming, and with compassion. They also caution against being overzealous in trivial matters while ignoring major issues – one should prioritize forbidding truly harmful evils over things that are merely disliked or debatable.

• Scholars on Neglecting the Duty: Many classical scholars warned that if Muslims abandon this duty, the consequences are dire. We saw Nawawī’s comment that in his time the practice had dwindled . Another scholar, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, stated that enjoining good and forbidding evil is the very reason Allah established the Muslim nation; if it is lost, the whole purpose of the community is at risk. Some even listed the “sins of the tongue (not commanding right or speaking against wrong)” among the grave sins if done out of apathy or fear. On the other hand, scholars also warned about improper application: for example, the Khārijites in early Islam were criticized by mainstream scholars for their extreme, unmerciful approach – they killed sinners in the name of forbidding evil, which Islam does not condone in that manner. So scholars like Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik taught against such extremism, promoting a more measured approach.

• Contemporary Scholars: Modern scholars uphold the same principles but often adapt the advice to current contexts. Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, for instance, has written about the priorities of the Islamic movement, arguing that Muslims today should focus on major evils like injustice, corruption, and moral decay, rather than getting bogged down in minor personal faults. He emphasizes wisdom (ḥikmah) and good exhortation, aligning with the classical advice of kindness. Mufti Taqi Usmani and others have spoken about enjoining good in pluralistic societies: they say Muslims should exemplify the good themselves and use courteous dialogue to share Islamic moral values with others. Contemporary da’wah organizations often train their volunteers in interpersonal skills, citing that how you forbid evil can determine whether the person reforms or rebels.

  Many scholars today also integrate this concept with modern social issues. For example, forbidding evil can mean speaking out against drugs, alcoholism, abuse, corruption, and injustice in society. Enjoining good can mean encouraging education, community service, caring for the environment, and upholding human rights within an Islamic framework. In this way, they show that the principle is not just about rituals or private sins, but about the common good of society. They also often note that in non-Muslim majority contexts, Muslims should still practice this principle, but through advice and setting a good example, since they do not have Islamic legal authority there. The core message from scholars old and new is: This duty is vital, but it must be done rightly – with knowledge, justice, humility, and foresight.

Differences Among the Four Schools of Law

All four major schools of thought (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali) recognize enjoining good and forbidding evil as an important duty, but they have nuanced differences in interpretation and implementation guidelines:

• Hanafi: The Hanafi school generally holds that enjoining good and forbidding evil is a collective obligation (farḍ kifāyah) unless no one is doing it . Hanafis emphasize using non-violent methods unless one is in a position of authority. Classical Hanafi jurists tended to restrict the use of force to the government. They taught that a private individual should advise or admonish the wrongdoer, but not physically punish them. For example, the 13th-century Hanafi scholar ʿIsmatullah of Saharanpur wrote that if Allah wanted people to simply “mind their own business,” He wouldn’t have sent messengers – indicating we must advise each other – but he also implies we do so with proper decorum . Hanafis also prioritize avoiding greater harm: if speaking out will likely cause a bigger fitna (turmoil), they may delay forbidding the evil until a better opportunity. In summary, Hanafis fully support the duty but often err on the side of caution and order, preferring that the state or its delegate handle forcible prevention of evil.

• Maliki: Maliki jurists similarly view the duty as generally communal. They allow private individuals to speak out against wrongs and even to censure publicly visible sins, but they usually do not permit individuals to inflict punishment. Malikis historically had a concept of Hisbah too, often integrated into the role of government-appointed judges or officials. A well-known Maliki jurist, Ibn al-Arabi, wrote that forbidding evil could be done by hand “only by the one in authority,” otherwise it leads to anarchy. However, Malikis do allow that if one directly witnesses something like an assault or an unjust act, one can step in to stop it physically – essentially as an act of defense of the innocent, which is part of enjoining good. Malikis, like others, stress gradualness: first naṣīḥa (advice), then stronger admonishment, and if one has authority or it’s an immediate necessity, then action. In practice, pre-modern Maliki regions (like Muslim Spain and North/West Africa) had muḥtasibs to handle most enforcement.

• Shafi’i: The Shafi’i school has a rich discussion on this topic, especially by Imam al-Ghazālī and later by Imam al-Nawawī. They too regard it as a communal duty with individual scope in certain cases . Shafi’is are often quoted (through Nawawī) as saying the common person’s role is mainly by tongue and heart, not hand . They often delineated that scholars and those with proper knowledge should do the “tongue” part (preaching, teaching right and wrong), and rulers do the “hand” part (legal enforcement) . That said, Shafi’i texts do allow that if an individual has the ability to stop a wrong (like preventing vandalism or breaking a haram instrument in one’s vicinity) without causing bigger trouble, it is sometimes meritorious to do so. Al-Ghazālī’s guidelines in Iḥyā’ – which influence Shafi’is and others – include ensuring that the evil is definitely occurring, that the person doing it is not excusably ignorant, and that intervening will likely improve the situation rather than worsen it. Shafi’is, in essence, focus on proper procedure and qualifications: the one who enjoins or forbids should ideally have knowledge and wisdom. They also specify that if the wrong can be stopped by a lesser action (a word instead of force), one must choose the lesser action.

• Hanbali: The Hanbali school (to which scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qudamah belonged) is often seen as the most forward about individual responsibility in this area. Hanbali scholars strongly encourage believers to take initiative in enjoining good and forbidding evil, even without a formal position, provided they stay within Islamic guidelines. They frequently cite the Prophet’s hadith of the “hand, tongue, heart” as applying to any capable believer . Ibn Taymiyyah wrote a treatise on Hisbah where he addresses both the ruler’s role and the common Muslim’s role. He affirms that if one sees an evil, one should change it with hand if one can – but importantly, he and other Hanbalis include the caveat of being “qualified believers” . Qualification means knowledge of what Islam considers evil and good, and wisdom to do it correctly. Historically, in some Hanbali-dominated communities (like certain periods in Baghdad or Damascus), scholars themselves would sometimes carry out hisbah activities. For example, it’s recorded that Hanbali scholars would confiscate wine or break musical instruments in public according to their juristic opinion that those are evils – these acts were controversial but show the Hanbali zeal for direct action. Yet Hanbalis also wrote that if confronting a wrong would likely result in a bigger tumult or one’s own life in danger without benefit, one could postpone or limit the action. Essentially, Hanbalis lean towards maximizing the responsibility of individuals (encouraging personal initiative in correction) while still valuing wisdom.

Despite these differences, all schools agree on the fundamentals: Enjoining right and forbidding wrong is mandated by Islam; it should be done for the sake of Allah, not out of pride or anger; it requires knowledge of Islamic rulings; and it must observe Islamic ethics (no vigilante injustice). In modern times, the practical differences among the schools are less apparent, as most scholars from all four schools would advise a similar moderate approach: encourage good through da‘wah (inviting, educating), and forbid evil by peaceful means or through law if in authority, always avoiding disorder. The classical debates mainly help us understand various scenarios and ensure balance between being too lax and too aggressive.

Philosophical and Theological Analysis

Islam’s approach to enjoining good and forbidding evil can be seen as a comprehensive system for moral accountability that is superior to many alternatives, both logically and theologically. Here’s an analysis of why this Islamic approach is considered balanced and effective:

• Collective Moral Responsibility: Unlike purely individualistic moral systems which say “live and let live” or “everyone mind their own business,” Islam recognizes that individual actions have social impact. The Islamic approach creates a sense of collective responsibility: everyone looks out for the moral well-being of each other. This is analogous to a community of people on a ship (as in the Prophet’s parable) – if one is doing something that could sink the ship, it’s in everyone’s interest to intervene (Sahih al-Bukhari 2686). Secular philosophies often rely on law enforcement to handle harmful actions, but law enforcement usually steps in after harm is done or only for major crimes. Islam’s concept encourages preventing harm at an earlier stage through personal intervention. It is proactive rather than reactive. From a logical standpoint, this can prevent a lot of damage – for example, if community members successfully discourage a youth from drug abuse early on (enjoining the good of sobriety, forbidding the evil of intoxication), that might save him and others from crime or health crises later. So, Islam’s approach fills a gap where legal systems or personal ethics alone might fail; it mobilizes the whole community in upholding virtue.

• Balance Between Personal Freedom and Social Good: A common alternative in modern discourse is libertarian-style personal freedom (“I can do what I want as long as I’m not hurting anyone”). Islam agrees that there is a private sphere of actions, but it defines “hurting anyone” in a broader sense. In Islamic theology, sin is not just a private matter between an individual and God; public sins or injustices affect the spiritual health of the whole community and invite divine displeasure . Also, even what seems like a private vice (say, substance abuse or adultery) can have ripple effects – family breakdown, normalizing of immorality, etc. Islam’s solution is not a draconian surveillance state; rather, it is a community of conscience where neighbors and friends gently correct each other. Importantly, Islam still respects privacy – for instance, spying is forbidden. If someone’s sin is truly private and hidden, Islam does not tell us to go hunt for it. The Prophet ﷺ said, “Whoever covers the faults of a Muslim, Allah will cover his faults on the Day of Judgment.” The duty to forbid evil applies when the wrong is manifest or harms others. So the Islamic approach tries to protect public morality while safeguarding personal privacy. This is arguably more balanced than some secular systems that either: (a) ignore public morality altogether, or (b) impose moral uniformity via authoritarian laws. Islam empowers individuals and communities to handle many issues at a personal level before they escalate to needing state intervention.

• Moral Cohesion and Brotherhood: Philosophically, one could view enjoining good and forbidding evil as a form of moral solidarity. The Quran says believers are “guardians/protectors of one another” . It creates a bond much like a caring family. If you truly care about someone, you won’t say “not my problem” when you see them doing something destructive; you’ll try to help or advise. In a society where everyone actually does this duty, there is a strong sense of brotherhood/sisterhood. Contrast this with societies where people are taught never to “interfere” – sometimes neighbors won’t even help each other in emergencies due to apathy or fear. Islam fosters a caring interventionism: not out of nosiness or superiority, but out of sincere concern (naṣīḥa). The theological underpinning is that Allah wants goodness for people, and uses believers as instruments to promote that good among each other. This is superior to a scenario where moral truths are left ambiguous or where society is morally indifferent. Islamic theology holds that truth and morality are not relative; there are definite virtues and vices. Thus, encouraging others towards virtue and away from vice is seen as objectively beneficial for their hereafter and their worldly life. It’s an act of compassion and “saving others from harm,” analogous to pulling someone away from a fire.

• Preventing Social Decay: History and sociology show that when wrongdoing is unchecked, it tends to spread. For example, if minor forms of corruption (like petty bribery) are ignored in a community, they often grow into major corruption that cripples institutions. Or if public indecency and immorality face no pushback, they often become normalized over time, affecting family structures and crime rates. Islam’s solution is to have a built-in check: as soon as wrong sprouts, someone will speak up or try to rectify it. This can nip problems in the bud. Other systems might rely solely on punitive law (after the fact) or on individual moral strength (which varies greatly). The Islamic method creates a supportive environment where doing good is encouraged by peers and doing bad faces social disapproval. It’s well-known in psychology that peer influence is powerful. Islam harnesses that power for good – ideally, the peer pressure in a Muslim society should be pressure to pray, to be honest, to be charitable, etc., and pressure against lying, cheating, lewd behavior, etc. When done as intended, this produces a morally uplifting atmosphere that is hard to achieve in systems where morality is seen as entirely personal.

• Holistic and God-Centered Approach: Theologically, amr bi-l-ma’rūf (enjoining good) isn’t just about social engineering; it’s about obeying God’s command and helping each other attain salvation. Muslims believe guidance ultimately comes from Allah, but that we are responsible to convey and remind. The Quran says, “Let there be a group among you inviting to all that is good…” . So it’s a divine order, and fulfilling it is an act of worship. This God-centered motive ideally keeps the act pure – one is doing it not to feel superior or to gain power over others, but to seek Allah’s pleasure and reform society for His sake. Alternatives like secular humanism also encourage doing good for society’s sake, which is noble, but Islam adds a spiritual dimension: even if the wrongdoer doesn’t appreciate it, Allah rewards the one who tried. Additionally, Islam teaches that hearts can change by Allah’s will, and one of the means for that is believers advising each other. So, you could say Islam’s approach combines spiritual accountability with social responsibility. A purely secular approach might lack the spiritual incentive and only rely on human conscience or fear of law; Islam provides multiple layers of motivation (faith, fear of God, hope for reward, love for others, community duty, etc.) . This makes the drive to enjoin good and forbid evil very powerful and resilient, theoretically superior to an approach that appeals only to one dimension (like civic duty alone).

• Comparison with Alternatives: In some other religious or philosophical systems, there is either no concept of enjoining good/forbidding evil, or it’s very limited. For instance, some strands of thought promote a “non-judgmental” stance to the point of moral relativism – they hesitate to label anything as truly evil, so they won’t tell others to stop it. This can create moral confusion and lack of direction. Islam, by contrast, lovingly “judges” the act, not the person – believers are supposed to hate the sin but still care about the sinner’s guidance. On the other extreme, some regimes (political or religious) have enforced morality in very harsh, top-down ways (e.g. the Inquisition in medieval Europe, or some 20th-century totalitarian regimes imposing their ideology). Islam’s ideal is different: it’s neither “anything goes” nor “force everyone to be righteous at gunpoint.” It functions through persuasion, education, and communal bonds, resorting to authority only for clear-cut public harms. This middle path is arguably superior because it aims for genuine internal reform of people rather than surface compliance or, conversely, rather than societal apathy.

In sum, Islam’s approach to enjoining good and forbidding evil is designed to create a morally healthy society by engaging all members in moral upkeep. It is a system that encourages proactive goodness, curbs evil through gentle social mechanisms, and aligns with deep human principles of caring and responsibility. When contrasted with a society where everyone is an island (and thus vice and virtue are purely personal), the Islamic model fosters a connected community where people uplift each other. And compared to a draconian system of enforcement, the Islamic model (as taught by the Prophet and scholars) prefers mercy, advice, and gradual correction, which is more likely to win hearts. This approach, rooted in divine guidance, has an impressive track record – the early Muslim community transformed the Arabian Peninsula from a tribal society with many vices into a relatively just and ethical society within a generation, a change that historians have often admired. The principle of enjoining good and forbidding evil was one of the engines of that transformation.

Miracles and Divine Help Associated with This Principle

While enjoining good and forbidding evil is primarily a moral duty, Islamic tradition does mention instances that could be seen as miracles or divine signs related to it. Here are a few noteworthy points:

• Divine Protection for the Righteous: The Quran gives an example in the story of a town (often identified as a community of Israelites by the sea) where some people broke God’s law (fishing on the Sabbath) and others tried to advise and stop them. When punishment came on the wrongdoers, the Quran says: “We rescued those who used to warn against evil, and seized the wrongdoers with a dreadful punishment.” . This indicates a sort of miraculous deliverance – the group that fulfilled the duty of forbidding evil was saved by Allah from a disaster. Those who stayed silent or disobeyed were punished. This event is sometimes cited in tafsīr (Quranic exegesis) to show that Allah’s help and even miraculous protection can descend upon those who uphold this duty. It’s as if enjoining good acts as a shield against divine wrath.

• Blessings and Victory: Islamic history has examples where communities that actively encouraged good and eliminated evil practices saw divine blessings in the form of social harmony, victory over enemies, or relief from calamities. One could view these as miraculous outcomes. For instance, in the battle of Badr (624 CE), the Muslims were vastly outnumbered yet won – Muslims believe one reason for divine aid in Badr was that the Muslims, despite being few, were committed to enjoining each other to good (like steadfastness, brotherhood, obedience to the Prophet) and forbidding evil (like arrogance, disunity, etc.). The Quran (3:123-EN) reminds them that Allah helped at Badr. While not a “miracle” in the flashy sense, it’s seen as a divine intervention tied to the community’s righteousness.

• Miraculous Courage: There are stories of individual Muslim saints and scholars who showed almost miraculous courage and effect when carrying out this duty. For example, it is narrated about Said ibn Jubair, a pious scholar, that when he stood up to the tyrant Hajjaj (forbidding his injustices), Hajjaj – who was a fearsome governor – became unnerved and eventually, according to some stories, faced divine punishment. Such stories are often told to inspire the belief that speaking truth to power can bring about miraculous changes or at least that Allah supports those who do, in unseen ways.

• The Miracle of Societal Transformation: One might say the rapid spread of Islam and the moral transformation it brought in the 7th century was itself a miracle. Within a few years, people who used to bury their baby daughters alive (an evil custom in pre-Islamic Arabia) completely abandoned the practice and began valuing daughters as Islam enjoined good treatment of children and forbade infanticide. The elimination of such deeply ingrained evils in a short time is seen by Muslims as a sign of the power of Allah’s guidance. This wasn’t magic – it happened through believers teaching and reminding each other, which is exactly enjoining good and forbidding evil in action. In that sense, every reformation or positive revolution in Islamic history is attributed to this principle.

• Barakah (Blessing) in Communities: Traditional Muslim communities often believed that if they collectively promoted virtue and suppressed vice, Allah would send barakah (blessing) in their provision, weather, and overall well-being – sometimes in ways beyond material explanation. For example, rain in due season or avoidance of plagues were seen as divine favors tied to communal righteousness. Conversely, droughts or epidemics were sometimes linked (cautiously) to widespread sins and negligence in forbidding evil. While these are matters of the unseen, the Quran does link moral behavior with worldly outcomes at times. For instance, Surah Al-A’raf 7:96 says if the people of the towns had believed and been righteous, blessings from heaven and earth would have opened for them. Such verses reinforce the idea that enjoining good (which promotes belief and righteousness) can literally bring about fortuitous events which one might call miraculous.

• Karamat of the Enjoiners: In Islamic tradition, a karamah is a miraculous occurrence granted to a righteous person (other than prophets). There are anecdotes that some individuals known for commanding right and forbidding wrong experienced extraordinary events. For example, it’s told about Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) that as caliph, he once publicly forbade some wrong and Allah caused even his enemies to fear him from thousands of miles away (as in the famous story where a Muslim commander in Persia heard Umar’s voice calling him, as a vision, to not charge rashly, saving the army – considered a karamah of Umar’s righteousness). While such stories are hard to verify, they serve to illustrate the belief that Allah strengthens those who uphold His commands in remarkable ways.

In summary, while Islam doesn’t associate enjoining good and forbidding evil with flashy supernatural miracles in the way of, say, Moses parting the sea, it strongly teaches that divine favor, help, and protection accompany this practice. Communities that implement it properly often see what one might call blessings that feel miraculous. And in the Hereafter, Muslims believe the reward for sincerely enjoining good (and the souls saved by it) will be manifest – that itself is the greatest miracle, a sinner turning into a righteous person because someone cared to advise them. The Quran beautifully states that on the Day of Judgment, those who influenced others positively will receive a share of the others’ rewards, like an ongoing charity.

Modern Application and Guidance for Today

Applying “enjoining good and forbidding evil” in today’s world requires wisdom and adaptation, but the core principle is very much alive and needed. Here are some ways it translates to modern life, along with guidance for Muslims:

• Start with Yourself and Family: As always, one must practice what one preaches. In modern application, this means a Muslim should first ensure they are trying their best to do the good and avoid the wrong in their own life. One’s example is powerful. Parents should lovingly teach their children right from wrong (the family is the first line of enjoining good). For instance, a mother encouraging her kids to be honest in school and a father forbidding foul language at home are doing this duty. Luqman’s advice to his son (31:17) remains a model: establish prayer, encourage good, forbid evil, and be patient . In a sense, every parent, teacher, or mentor is a muhtasib (moral guide) for those under their care.

• Gentle Advice to Others: In a diverse society, commanding right and forbidding wrong often takes the form of friendly advice or reminders. Muslims are encouraged to do this with kindness and empathy. For example, if a friend has fallen into harmful habits (say, substance abuse or not fulfilling obligations), a Muslim should privately talk to them, offering help and guidance. The tone matters: it should be out of genuine concern, not condemnation. The earlier-mentioned advice of Ibn Taymiyyah about knowledge, kindness, and patience is extremely relevant here . Modern guidance would say: be sure of the issue (don’t assume something is haram without knowledge), approach with compassion (maybe start by mentioning something positive, then address the issue gently), and be patient (change might not happen overnight and you might face denial or anger initially). For instance, advising a peer to pray regularly might involve explaining the spiritual and mental benefits of prayer rather than scolding them.

• Using Modern Platforms Wisely: Today, enjoining good can even be done through social media, blogs, and community programs. Many Muslims use platforms like YouTube, Facebook, etc., to spread reminders about faith, charity, good manners, and so on. This is essentially inviting to good on a broad scale. However, one must be cautious: online, it’s easy to become harsh or get into unproductive arguments (“forbidding evil” in comments sections can turn into fruitless debates or rude exchanges). Guidance for modern Muslims is to maintain prophetic etiquette even online – that means no insulting, no embarrassing others publicly, and verifying information before labeling something evil. In an era of misinformation, enjoining good might also mean clarifying misconceptions about Islam or about moral issues.

• Engaging in Positive Activism: Enjoining good today often overlaps with what people call social activism or community service. For example, working to feed the hungry, clean up the environment, or campaign against pornography and drugs in the community – all these are enjoining good and forbidding evil in a broader sense. Islam’s principle gives spiritual weight to these actions. A Muslim might join or form community organizations that promote virtue (like honesty in business, modesty in public, fairness in media) or fight social ills (like corruption, racism, exploitation). When doing so, it’s important Muslims uphold justice and avoid any illegal or extremist methods. The Prophet ﷺ forbade vigilante injustice and emphasized staying within moral bounds even when opposing evil. So, a Muslim protest against some wrongdoing should remain peaceful and truthful. The superiority of Islam’s approach would be lost if one fought evil with evil methods.

• Working with Authorities: In countries with Muslim governments or even in non-Muslim countries, Muslims can urge authorities to enact just policies (that’s enjoining good at a governmental level) and to eliminate unjust laws or practices (forbidding institutional evil). For instance, advising a local representative to ban exploitative businesses or to support charitable initiatives is part of this duty. In Muslim-majority contexts, scholars and citizens alike should continue the tradition of giving sincere advice to leaders – speaking out against corruption, encouraging justice and welfare policies, etc. Even though it can be risky, it is a duty. Many contemporary scholars do this through writing open letters or through private counsel to those in power. When done wisely, it can lead to significant positive changes.

• Respecting Freedom and Context: In a globalized world, Muslims often live among people of other faiths or no faith. How to forbid evil in such a plural context requires tact. Obviously, Islam does not allow imposing Islamic rules on non-Muslims who don’t share that faith (except in an Islamic state to a certain extent of public law). So a Muslim today wouldn’t, for example, enforce the Islamic dress code on a non-Muslim neighbor – that’s not the scope of this duty. However, they might still forbid evil in the universal sense: e.g. if a Muslim sees anyone (Muslim or not) abusing a child or committing theft, they should try to stop it or report it, because those are universally recognized wrongs and also forbidden in Islam. For issues that are more specifically religious (like drinking alcohol, which Islam forbids but others may not), a Muslim would generally advise another Muslim about it. To a non-Muslim friend who drinks, a Muslim might choose to simply exemplify sobriety and explain its benefits rather than “forbidding” since the friend isn’t bound by Islamic law. Thus, part of modern wisdom is knowing your audience – we are tasked to invite everyone to good (including faith), but the approach differs between advising fellow Muslims (who share the moral framework) and non-Muslims (where persuasion and dialogue about Islam’s merits come first). The Islamic approach still stands out as encouraging engagement rather than isolation. Even in secular societies that say “don’t judge,” Muslims can gently share their moral perspectives. Often, people appreciate a caring suggestion if it’s given respectfully.

• Avoiding Extremes: One practical guidance for today is to avoid two extremes: complete neglect or fanatical enforcement. Complete neglect is when a community says “we’re all Muslims but we won’t tell each other anything, even if someone never prays or harms others; it’s not our business.” This attitude leads to the erosion of Islamic values over time. On the other hand, fanatical enforcement is when people become so harsh that they create fear and resentment – for example, a person who publicly shames others for minor mistakes, or a group that takes punishment into their own hands unlawfully. The middle path is principled yet gentle. In some places, unfortunately, vigilante mobs have attacked individuals for alleged moral crimes – this is not the prophetic way and causes more harm (an example of “forbidding evil” without knowledge or mercy, which itself becomes an evil). Contemporary scholars universally condemn such actions, urging the proper channels (education, counseling, due process in law).

• Education and Revival: A long-term modern application is through education. Imams, teachers, and parents should educate about what is truly ma’rūf (good) and munkar (evil) in Islam, because one can’t enjoin or forbid correctly if these concepts are muddled. In the modern world, media and cultural trends can sometimes invert perceptions (making a vice seem normal and a virtue seem strange). Thus, solid Islamic education and moral training are essential so that Muslims recognize right and wrong based on Quran and Sunnah, not just social trends. Equipped with that, they can then positively influence society around them.

Moving forward, Muslims should remember that enjoining good and forbidding evil is a collective task – it works best when the whole community encourages it. Mosques and community centers can host programs that promote virtue (like charity drives, modest fashion shows, honesty in business workshops) and discourage wrong (like anti-drug campaigns, marital counseling to prevent injustice, etc.). By addressing contemporary issues under the guidance of this timeless principle, the Muslim community can tackle problems proactively.

Finally, an important modern advice is to combine enjoining good with compassion and understanding. For example, if someone is struggling with a sin (say an addiction or not wearing hijab or any issue), simply “forbidding” it harshly might not help – they might need support, counseling, or a gradual path to change. The goal is not to assert dominance of morality, but to genuinely reform and help each other. Keeping that sincere intention, and making dua (prayer) for those one advises, puts barakah in the efforts.

In conclusion, enjoining good and forbidding evil in today’s world means being a positive influence wherever you are – standing up against wrong when you see it (within legal and moral limits), and being a voice that reminds others of goodness. It’s about being an ambassador of Islamic values through both words and deeds. When Muslims practice this wisely, they benefit not just their own communities but society at large, by advocating for ethical conduct, justice, and compassion for all.

Recommended Books (Classical and Modern, Perspectives)

For readers interested in learning more or doing a deep dive into this topic, here are some mainstream books and writings (classical and contemporary) on Enjoining Good and Forbidding Evil:

• “Kitāb al-Amr bi’l Maʿrūf wa’n-Nahy ʿan al-Munkar” – by Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazālī (11th century). This is Book 19 of his magnum opus Iḥyā’ ʿUlūm al-Dīn. In it, al-Ghazālī provides an in-depth analysis of the duty, conditions for its exercise, and many examples. (Available in English as part of translations of The Revival of the Religious Sciences).

• “Enjoining Good and Forbidding Evil” – by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (14th century). This is a treatise (sometimes published as a small book) extracted from Ibn Taymiyyah’s Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā. It outlines the Qur’anic basis, the collective duty concept , and practical methodologies and etiquette for this obligation from a Hanbali perspective. (English translations by Salim Morgan and others exist, and it’s often titled “Enjoining Right & Forbidding Wrong: Ibn Taymiyyah”).

• “Public Duties in Islam (The Institution of the Ḥisbah)” – by Ibn Taymiyyah, translated by Muhtar Holland. This work focuses on the role of the muḥtasib and the proper implementation of commanding right and forbidding wrong in governance and society. It’s a valuable resource to understand how Islamic civilization operationalized this principle historically.

• “Riyāḍ al-Ṣāliḥīn” (Gardens of the Righteous) – by Imam al-Nawawī (13th century). While not a book solely on this topic, this famous hadith compilation has chapters on enjoining good and forbidding evil that gather many relevant hadiths with commentary. It’s a highly recommended book for general Islamic ethics, including this principle, and widely available in English.

• “Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong in Islamic Thought” – by Michael Cook (Princeton University Press, 2000). This is a comprehensive academic study (by a Western scholar) of the history of this concept in Islamic scholarship across different sects and times. It’s not a traditional scholar’s book, but it is highly regarded for its breadth, covering , Shi’a, Mu’tazilite views, etc., and gives a lot of insight into how various scholars approached the duty. (For serious readers interested in scholarly analysis and historical detail).

• “Hisbah” – by Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi (Arabic: al-Ḥisbah fī al-Islām). A modern book that revisits the concept of hisbah (moral oversight) from a contemporary perspective, discussing how to apply it today without falling into extremism or negligence. (It might only be in Arabic, but it reflects a moderate approach).

• “Islamic Awakening: Between Rejection and Extremism” – by Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. In this work, Qaradawi addresses various issues of reform in the Muslim world and touches on enjoining good and forbidding evil, especially cautioning against extreme interpretations. He emphasizes prioritizing major issues and using wisdom.

• “Minhāj al-Qāṣidīn” (Path of the Wayfarers) – by Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī (12th century). This is an abridgment of al-Ghazālī’s Iḥyā’, and it includes the sections on commanding right and forbidding wrong. It’s a bit easier than the full Iḥyā’ and still classical. (There is an English translation known as “Mukhtaṣar Minhaj al-Qasidin”).

• Contemporary Fiqh Manuals and Articles: Many modern fiqh books and articles have sections on this duty. For example, “Fiqh al-Sunnah” by Sayyid Sabiq has a section on it. Also, online fatwa sites like Islam Q&A (islamqa.info) have numerous Q&A entries about how to handle specific situations, which have been compiled by Shaykh Muhammad Salih al-Munajjid. These can serve as practical guides.

• “Reviving the Balance: The Duty to Command Good and Forbid Evil” – a short booklet by Jamaal al-Din Zarabozo (a contemporary scholar). It’s written in English and outlines the basics of the concept for a general audience, stressing moderation and mercy.