Mafhum al Khuruj 'Ala Al Hakum al Dzolim: Dirasah Muqaranah Li Fikr Muhammad Said Ramadhan al Buthi wa Yusuf Qardhawi

The Arab Revolution, also known as the Arab Spring, emerged in late 2010 to early 2011 due to the political crisis in most Arab countries. This revolution is a people's movement that wants to overthrow (change) the dictatorial regime in power and implement a democratic system in their country. One of the most prominent issues that caused controversy from the revolution was the issue of rebellion against the unjust ruler (al-Khuruj 'ala al- Ḥakim), especially in the view of Islamic law. This study seeks to examine the thoughts of al-Buṭi and al-Qaraḍawi in the problem of al-Khuruj 'ala al-Ḥakim, especially in the context of the Syrian revolution, where both of them had close views before the revolution, but became opposite after that. This research discusses to what extent the social cognition is involved in the legal istinbaṭ process, by looking at the influence of the social environment, affiliation and media discourse, which also shape a person's mental model in viewing a particular case. Furthermore, this study examines the relationship between al-Buṭi and al-Qaraḍawi’s discussion in the Syrian revolution and the contribution of al- Imamah theory in the contemporary context. This research is a library research with the nature of the research a comparative study, and the data is requested and examined directly from its primary sources, which are the books of Sa’id Ramaḍan al-Buṭi and Yusuf al-Qaradawi. This research uses three approaches; normative approach, historical approach, and comparative approach. The normative approach is based on Islamic teachings, especially in the jurisprudential theory of the issue of al-Khuruj 'ala al-Ḥakim. It uses a historical approach intended to obtain the complete biography of al-Buṭi and al- Qaradawi. The comparative approach is used to compare the views of al-Buṭi and al-Qaradawi. regarding the issue of al-Khuruj 'ala al-Ḥakim and the Syrian revolution. The study found that: (1) al-Buṭi rejects resistance to the leader, both before and after the Syrian revolution, and considers it a fitnah because according to him the leader has not yet reached the real limit of kufr. As for al-Qaradawi, there was a change of opinion, at first he limited armed resistance to the leader and considered it the attitude of the Khawarij, but after the outbreak of the Syrian revolution, he supported the revolution and the opposition in the armed resistance movement against the leader in Syria. (2) Aspects that cause differences in opinion between the two are due to differences in understanding the hadith that command patience over the injustice of leaders, differences in the criteria of the Ḥakim that must be obeyed, differences in the legality of revolutions and differences in political and ideological tendencies of these two figures. (3) Judging from the use of arguments and methodology, al-Buṭī is more consistent than al- Qaradawi when compared to before and after the revolution. By implementing the approach of critical discourse analysis approach of the Teun A. Van Dijk model, it can be seen that there is involvement of social cognition in the legal istinbat process that was issued by both of them in the form of a fatwa when responding to the revolutionary movement in Syria, assuming that al-Buṭi's attitude is inseparable from the influence of his social environment. while al-Qaradawi is influenced by the discourse developed by the media, in addition to the difference in affiliation of the two so that it raises pro and contra attitudes towards the Syrian revolution. In relation to contemporary al-Imamah theory, the concept of opposition has also developed along with the development of a comprehensive concept of nation-state leadership, so this study shows that contemporary scholars no longer consistently follow what was formulated by previous scholars, they further develop al-Khuruj' ala al-Ḥakim as pressure or demand, not limited to forms of violent opposition as classified by previous scholars in their books