a wrong when doing so would entail the loss of a greater good. Indeed, forbidding it in that case would amount to barring people from Allah’s path and striving to put an end to obedience to Him and His Messenger and to the performance of good deeds. If, however, the wrong predominates, one should forbid it, even if this entails the loss of a lesser good. Enjoining that good, when it necessarily entails a greater wrong, would amount to enjoining wrong and striving to bring about disobedience to Allah and His Messenger. If the inseparable good and wrong are equal in weight, neither should be enjoined or forbidden. Thus, when good and wrong are inseparable, sometimes enjoining is appropriate, sometimes forbidding is appropriate, and sometimes neither is appropriate. This concerns particular, actual cases.

As general categories, however, right is to be enjoined without qualification, and wrong is to be forbidden without qualification. In the case of a single individual or group, their right conduct is to be enjoined and their wrong conduct forbidden; what is praiseworthy in them is to be praised, and what is blameworthy censured. This is subject to the condition that enjoining a good does not entail losing a greater good or bringing about a greater wrong, and that forbidding a wrong does not entail bringing about a worse wrong or losing a good that outweighs it. When the matter is unclear, the believer seeks clarification until the truth becomes clear to him. He does not undertake an act of obedience except with knowledge and intention. If he abandons it, he is disobedient: failing to enjoin when it is obligatory is a sin, and enjoining when it is forbidden is a sin. This is a vast subject, and there is no