Author: Dr. Sarmad Adel Sahib Harbi
University of Karbala – College of Islamic Sciences – Department of Arabic Language

Those interested in the affairs of thought often draw upon the theories and methodologies produced by the sciences in their approaches and reflections. Thought grows and evolves through engaging with scientific accomplishments, which form a primary pillar of intellectual activity. It is no surprise that postmodern philosophy, after undergoing a difficult process marked by various stages, tends to embrace multiplicity and transformation rather than reliance on the fixed and stable. This has led to the emergence of a range of methods capable of destabilizing and questioning modernity itself. One of the most prominent of these methods is deconstruction, a key approach in philosophical and critical analysis. Deconstruction aims to reconsider the concept of relationship, revealing that everything is relational, and every relationship is shaped by some form of power. This awareness has, over time, illustrated the dualities that have governed meaning-making systems, such as self/other, master/servant, black/white, poetry/prose, present/absent, absolute/relative, order/chaos, original/secondary, and central/marginal. These oppositions are typically defined by an unequal power dynamic between what is central and what is marginal.

The article then focuses on two key points. The first reveals how the central/marginal duality reinforces the center while nullifying the margin, creating a conflict similar to the struggle between the inferior and the superior. The second point indicates that deconstructive reflection on these relationships exposes their temporary nature, allowing for a reversal of roles, where the subordinate can become dominant and vice versa. This allows for the possibility of shifting margins to centers and centers to margins. Consequently, boundaries become more fluid, and the concept of a fixed center is replaced by multiple, moving centers, all operating under mechanisms of sorting, erasure, displacement, and concealment.

This construction of oppositional relationships provides an entry point for the article’s exploration of the principles of the Hussaini Revolution, focusing on how “enjoining good and forbidding wrong” moved from being a marginal issue to a central one in this divine struggle.

Initially, enjoining good and forbidding wrong was regarded as a branch of Islamic teachings. However, some theological schools in Arab-Islamic civilization, such as the Mu’tazila, argued that it was an essential principle of the faith, not just a subsidiary. Despite this, over time, due to the dynamics of power and exclusion, the significance of this principle diminished, becoming more marginalized.

Although fluctuating in importance, “enjoining good and forbidding wrong” is considered a duty in Islamic foundational texts (the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the sayings of the infallible Imams). This duty, while present in other religions, has had a more profound impact in Islam, possibly due to the strong sense of unity and solidarity among Muslims, especially in building the state and fostering spiritual, educational, and ethical projects. This sense of responsibility contrasts with other religions where enjoining good and forbidding wrong is often linked to a specific priesthood, rather than to the general community.

The article suggests that the shift in behavior in the Muslim community, leading to social isolation and detachment from collective struggles, contributed to the decline in the practice of this principle. The oppressive policies of the Umayyad regime, particularly under Yazid ibn Muawiya, further pushed this principle into the margins, leaving the Muslim community passive and disempowered, with the belief that humans were powerless to affect their fate.

Against this backdrop, Imam Hussein (peace be upon him) sought to restore the vitality of Islam and its capacity to mobilize individuals and communities. By embodying the principle of enjoining good and forbidding wrong, he sought to shift it from the margins, imposed by the oppressive regime, to the center, reaffirming it as a core Islamic principle, as validated by the Qur’an and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Imam Hussein’s stand during the revolution went beyond merely reasserting the centrality of this principle. It elevated it to one of the three main principles of the Hussaini Revolution, alongside the refusal to pledge allegiance to Yazid and the call from Kufa. Through his actions and speeches, Imam Hussein declared that he had not risen out of arrogance or to spread corruption but to seek reform in the Ummah, to enjoin good and forbid wrong.

In this context, the article concludes that the martyrdom of Imam Hussein in Karbala, and the bloodshed that followed, elevated “enjoining good and forbidding wrong” from a marginal idea to one of central importance in Islamic thought. Today, this principle is viewed as essential for any movement aimed at genuine societal change.

Peace be upon Hussein, Ali ibn Hussein, the sons of Hussein, and the supporters of Hussein (peace be upon them all).