“Public opinion” is a broad, uncontrollable concept with multiple definitions for its distribution among various fields, including the political, social, psychological and media. With regard to Islamic civilization, public opinion has historically been one of the strongest centers of societal influence as a vessel of belonging and the title of identity, especially since the Islamic experience was based on enabling society to form self for its components and voluntary management of its affairs to be the mainstay of the nation's vitality.

Therefore, the public has always been the subject of conflict between religious scholars, thought bearers and politicians, and the point of conflict between the intertwined among the leaders of the sects, the methods, and the jurisprudential and intellectual sects; Each group addresses the public with its doctrine, presents it with its ideas and market its positions. Proceeding from that fact; We find that human studies today are all directed to the public as a study, analysis and extrapolation of their opinions and behavior, to determine how to attract them or deal with them in line with the desires of social actors.

Returning to the Islamic religious, social and political heritage; We will find that the "public" were not marginalized in the public affairs of knowledge and reality, but they were the central substance of the two categories of scholars and princes, as they are the subject of contentment, acceptance, sovereignty and fear at the same time. In addition to the "popular censorship" they had, which often prompted them to move from a position of opinion to a position of action, and what this led to in terms of revolutions and social gifts that filled the political and social history of Islamic civilization.

But that old interest in public opinion is hardly ever found today in the studies of Arab and Islamic political sciences.

It is a great knowledge gap that this article came to draw attention to, and it attempts to fill in part of it by monitoring a brief history of Islamic public opinion as it formed a revolution in Islamic political thought, revealing its theoretical position among the ancient Muslim elites, and reviewing the features of its societal roles, its realistic manifestations and the multiple drivers of its action. and its effective mechanisms.

My terms have preceded.

The scholars of Islam - of their different affiliations - were interested in discussing the phenomena of popular public opinion and its role in the movement of the public life of societies, as it is the center of gravity in Islamic civilization.

It is the vessel of belonging, the stable of identity, and the orbit of action.

Therefore, we may be surprised by their use in the past of terms such as “public opinion”, which is semanticly equivalent to the term “public opinion” in its most common sense today as the position adopted by the majority of a society in a particular issue and for which it works;

We find in Abu Hayyan al-Tawhidi (d. after 400 AH/1010 AD) - in 'Al Muqabisat' - that he said: "We do not think that everyone who was in the time of the philosophers reached the goal of their best. landed on him."

Rather, we read the same expression “public opinion” according to al-Shahristani (d. 548 AH / 1153 AD) - in his book 'Al-Milal wa al-Nahl' - although with a semantic slightly different from the common concept today of this expression, which we mean here in this article;

He quotes the Greek Euclid (d. 265 BC) as saying: “Be alarmed by what looks like a rational, evaluative “public opinion” and accuse everything else!”

Also, they may have expressed "public opinion" with the term "social body";

As we shall see later.

Hence, we find scholars addressing the public’s relationship with knowledge and science in many fields;

For example, we see linguists who are interested in monitoring and controlling the linguistic deviation of the "public", and they compose works on it, as did Imam al-Kasai (d. 189 AH / 805 AD) when he wrote his book 'What the Common Composers for', as well as Abu Bakr Al-Zubaidi Al-Andalusi (d. 379 AH / 990 AD) wrote a book 'The melody of the commoners'.

We also see historians interested in monitoring the activities of public opinion at all times.

As for Sharia scholars;

Scholars have tried to make the faith of the common people strong and their religious commitment deep;

They examined the role of the public in formulating the "Shari'a opinion", especially in the two main areas: the doctrinal (the principles of religion) and the legislative (the principles of jurisprudence);

They examined what the “common person” (relative to the common people) needed in the validity of belief and ijtihad, and determined the status of his position in them, the space in which he worked, and the extent of his opinion in them.

and in general; Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606 AH / 1209 AD) presents to us a summary of the discussions of scholars regarding the position of the public in the ranks of people on the ladder of knowledge, and what should be affiliated with the public according to his position of knowledge; He says - in his book 'Al-Majsoul' - that the ranks of the one working with knowledge are three: "Either he is a purely layman, or a scholar who has not reached the level of ijtihad, or a scholar who has reached the level of ijtihad." Then he made it clear that if a person was a scholar, then the scholars permitted him to consult a scholar, and if he was a scholar who did not reach the level of ijtihad, then the public agreed that it is not permissible for him to imitate another scholar.

A free choice and

with obligating the “public” scholars to ask them for a referendum on rulings;

Imam al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH / 1111 AD) draws the attention of his fellow scholars to the necessity of looking at the philosophy of religion and the purposes of the Sharia, so he invites them to persuade the public to mention the legal evidence for them coupled with the doctrinal and jurisprudential opinions so that their souls rest. However, belief should be based on evidence by which their hearts may be at ease.

Al-Ghazali says in “Ijjam Al-Awwam on the Science of Kalam”: “If you say: the layman does not dwell on religious beliefs except with evidence, is it permissible for evidence to be mentioned to him? And between others? And if you prevent, how can you prevent him and his faith is not complete without him? And the answer: I allow him to hear the evidence of the knowledge of the Creator and His Oneness, and of the sincerity of the Messenger, peace be upon him, and on the [prove] of the Last Day…”.

Imam Al-Ghazali was very busy with the issue of the public and their relationship to the sciences and theological principles. In his book 'Al Qisas al-Mustaqim'; Al-Ghazali refers the general public to the wise Qur’an and its evidence in the “Osoul” (beliefs), and in the “Furoo’” (worships, transactions, and the like) he refers them to what is agreed upon among scholars. Addressing the commoner, he says: “Do not preoccupy your heart with the sites of disagreement unless you have emptied all that is agreed upon.” He advises him if he is confused about a matter in which there is a difference of opinion among the fuqaha’, then he says: “Strive with yourself, and see: which of the imams is best in your opinion, and what is correct is more important to your heart,” then act upon it!

And if the public is required to refer to the scholars of her time for a referendum on the problems presented to it;

This raises an important question about how the layman knows the scientific qualification of a scientist;

It is the question that al-Shahristani posed - in 'Al-Mil wa'l-Nahl' - without deciding on it. He said: "Then, does the layman know that the mujtahid has reached the limit of ijtihad? Likewise, when does the mujtahid himself know that he has fulfilled the conditions of ijtihad? There is a consideration!"

But Imam Al-Suyuti (d. 911 AH / 1506 AD) answers this question;

It is reported - in 'Refutation of the One Who Goes to Earth' - from some scholars that "the common man imitates the one whose name appeared in the country, and his name became popular in the people's tongues", and from others: "He says to the scholar: Do you strive [so] I imitate you? imitate it.” Then this last saying is preferred if the scholar is just and trustworthy in his religion.

It is really remarkable that the scholars proved to the public among the imitators their right to choose their jurists who they trust in their fatwas, and even made one of the methods of this choice to test them until they are assured of their scientific qualifications. This Imam al-Juwayni (d. 478 AH/1085 CE) states - in his book 'Al-Ghayathi' - that "the mufti (= the commoner and similar) must consider a kind of consideration in appointing the mufti that he imitates and adopts, and he does not have the right to review in his issues every person who has knowledge."

This indicates that the common man is not devoid of some type of ijtihad, otherwise he would be lazy in the highest thing in his life, which is religion and its teachings.

Related to this is the non-exclusivity of the public’s association with the tradition of a particular jurist, as they have - in the most likely statements - the right to refer to whomever they like from the various jurists trusted with their knowledge, and the evidence for this is “what the consensus of the Companions signed on justifying a public referendum for every scholar on an issue, and that it was not reported from anyone. From the predecessors stoned the common people in that.”

According to Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Amidi (d. 631 AH / 1234 AD) in his book 'Al-Ihkaam fi Usul al-Ahkam'.

Guaranteed accountability

Not only did the jurists decide the right of the public to choose its scholars and muftis and test them before this choice, but they also proved to them the right to question the jurist or the mufti for his legal evidence for the jurisprudential opinions he presents to it, so that Imam al-Baqlani (d. 402 AH / 1012 AD) obligates The questioner is to test whoever he wants to imitate.”

According to what was quoted by Al-Juwayni in Al-Ghayathi.

Imam Ibn Hazm (d. 456 AH / 1065 AD) also states that - in 'Al-Ikma fi Usul al-Ahkam' - saying: "And this [the commoner] is required if the jurist asks him, so he says to him: From where did you say this? He learns from that how much his energy has reached him. And he understood it.”

This same opinion is also confirmed by Imam Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi (d. 463 AH/1072 AD) - in his book 'Al-Faqih and Al-Mutafaqah'- by saying: "If the jurist answers him about a question, it is permissible for him to ask him about his answer: did he say it on the basis of an effect or an opinion?"

This is an important feature in rationalizing public opinion when it is formed by voluntary choice and by jurisprudential opinions of scholars with scientific and popular credibility.

Because based on this is the issue of the necessity of convincing the public - considering that it is the responsibility of the jurist - of the soundness of opinions before imitating them.

Far from the details of the disagreement among scholars regarding the permissibility of the public imitating scholars in beliefs or not;

The mere presence of the common people in the doctrinal and doctrinal lessons is evidence of the public opinion’s status and position in the Islamic heritage, and proof that the public’s outlook was positive to the extent that some of them made a compromise between the common and the mujtahid in the prohibition of imitation in beliefs!

Imam Al-Asnawi (d. 772 AH/1370 AD) sees - in 'Nahayat al-Sul' - that "it is permissible for the common people to have a referendum in the branches.., and they differed in the fundamentals (= beliefs).. the majority agree that neither the mujtahid nor the commoner is permissible!!

Theorizing about the public’s position in the scientific space does not stop at the level of establishing their right to choose their scientific references and questioning them regarding the authenticity of their opinions on dogmas and jurisprudence.

Rather, we find a strong presence of “public opinion” in the study of jurisprudential consensus among the scholars of “Usoul al-Fiqh,” and the issue of the confirmation of news frequency in the Prophet’s “Sciences of Hadith.”

Islamic scholars have debated whether the common people are part of the jurisprudential “consensus” expressing the “infallibility of the nation”;

In this regard, Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi says - in 'Al-Faqih and Al-Mutafaqah' summarizing the discussion on this topic - that "the consensus is on two kinds: one: the consensus of the elite and the public, such as their unanimity on the qiblah that it is the Kaaba, and on fasting Ramadan..., and the other beating: it is the consensus of the elite and not the public." ".

An authentic component,

and Imam Al-Amidi - in his book 'Al-Ahkam' - conveys the various opinions regarding the extent to which the "public opinion" is considered in the convening of the consensus, and discusses its evidence, suggesting its consideration of the validity of the consensus, and then summarizes the discussion, giving them great weight in the credibility of this consensus if they are part of it;

He says: "In general, this issue is discretionary, but the unanimous protest when the common people enter it is definitive and without them it is speculative."

What al-Amidi decided is what al-Juwayni affirmed before him - in his book 'Al-Talkhis' - but in another form that is based on the distinction between the "consensus of the nation" and "the consensus of the nation's scholars", despite his preference that the disagreement of the common people does not undermine the consensus;

He saw, “If we include the common people in the rule of unanimity, then we will say with the 'unanimity of the nation’, and if we do not include them in the ruling of unanimity - or full moon (= appeared) from some sects of the common people in disagreement - it is not said that the unanimity of the nation is, for the common people are most of the nation and the majority; We say: I gather the scholars of the nation.

This differentiation between: “the consensus of the nation” and “the consensus of the nation’s scholars” has its significance in granting the consensus a definitive power in its first kind, as it expresses the whole of the nation and not only the knowledgeable segment in it, which means giving public opinion “legislative power” on the side of the scholars.

This is the basis of the principle of "the infallibility of the nation" that Islamic scholars such as Al-Ghazali, Al-Amidi and Ibn Taymiyyah talked about (d. 728 AH / 1328 AD).

Al-Ghazali has proven this principle - in the topic of consensus from his book 'Al-Mustafa' - by saying: "It is permissible to err in an ijtihad that is unique to individuals. The infallibility of the nation is without difference.

Al-Amidi states - in 'Al-Ihkaam' - that "the Islamic nation is infallible" because this is "evidenced by the audio evidence (= transmission)", and then clarifies that this "infallibility [derived] from the characteristics of the social body (= public opinion) from the special (= scholars) and the common people” are people, and there is no doubt that “the social body has strength that individuals do not have” on their own;

As Imam Badr al-Din al-Zarkashi (d. 794 AH / 1392 AD) says in his book 'Al-Burhan'.

As for Ibn Taymiyyah, he was exposed - in 'Minhaj al-Sunnah' - to what “the scholars mentioned in the wisdom of the infallibility of the nation” Islamic; He affirmed that "this nation has no prophet after its prophet, and its infallibility took the place of prophethood, so none of them can change anything from the religion except that God establishes someone who shows his mistake in what he changed, so the nation does not meet on misguidance!" Thus, we realize that Islamic scholars decide that one of the most important components of societal public opinion is its connection with the mechanism of "definitive consensus" which is "consensus of the nation" and not only "consensus of scholars".

And if the scholars discussed - as we have seen - the status of the public, then they gave it a large space in choosing and giving preference to scholars and opinions, and made it an original component in the mechanism of the nation’s consensus and thus a necessary part for its complete infallibility;

The common people also had - besides the scholars themselves - a great contribution to the process of selection and differentiation among the scholars themselves, so their inclination towards some of them was enough to put him on the path of "scientific leadership" leading to historical immortality.

A popular selection, and

this is in fact linked to the freedom of voluntary affiliation and organization that allowed the Islamic community to be formed in doctrinal affiliations, doctrinal and behavioral methods, and even in professional and functional ties;

These sects, methods and links were among the most effective incubators of public opinion in the Islamic civilizational space.

One of the factors that led to the spread of the fiqh doctrine or the Sufi order was the public rally around it and the formation of a current of public opinion supporting it.

This does not come through automatic selection;

Rather, it is through the interaction between public opinion and men of sects and methods, between these sects and methods and the reality in which they live, and between them and the freedom of choice and belonging that the public enjoys.

Therefore, if the public accepted a scholar, a jurist or a Sophia as an educator and multiplied in the presence of his councils, this presence was considered as evidence of the strength of that scholar and the durability of his doctrine or method, and the translators praised him in the books of translations and doctrinal classes.

This Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH / 1374 AD) says - in 'Sharh Muslim' - in the translation of the updated Imam Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah (d. 235 AH / 850 AD), the author of 'The Workbook': "About thirty thousand men gathered in the council of Abu Bakr!"

It is not surprising that this huge number in the assembly of this imam;

At the time, science councils were often held in open spaces that contained tens of thousands, and the council included “listeners,” each of whom conveyed the Sheikh’s words to those present around him.

The great position of Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 AH / 870 AD) among the public opinion in his country was one of the reasons for his ordeal and his expulsion from it.

Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH / 1347 AD) narrated - in 'The Biography of the Nobles' - that "when Abu Abdullah [Bukhari] came to his city Bukhara, domes were erected for him on a league (= 5 km) from the country, and the general people of the country received him until he did not remain It is mentioned that he received it, and dinars, dirhams, and a lot of sugar were sprinkled on it!!

But this huge celebration aroused the jealousy of some of the country’s famous scholars. They claimed to the Emir of Bukhara - by the Tahirid state - Khalid bin Ahmed al-Dhuhli (d. 270 AH / 978 AD) that Imam al-Bukhari “showed a disagreement with the Sunnah,” so the emir warned him “the people of Bukhara, and they said: We do not leave him.” So the emir ordered him to leave the country, and he went out to Samarkand, where he died!!

And Imam Al-Ghazali in Baghdad alone had three hundred stable students attending to him, and about that he says in his book “The Rescuer from Error”: “And I am blessed (= tested / afflicted) by teaching to three hundred group of students in Bagdad (= Baghdad).”

Al-Dhahabi narrates that the hadith preacher Shams al-Din Muhammad bin Yahya al-Ta’i al-Wasiti (d. 633 AH / 1236 AD) “was ahead of his peers in the Egyptian lands, and he received more acceptance from the public”!

A supportive public, and

perhaps the popularity of some scholars has reached a great level, with which it is described - in the books of biography and history - as “the common people were his party” or he was “the sheikh of the public”;

They said, for example, that the preacher of Basra and its ascetic Abdul-Baqi bin Al-Hassan Al-Shamoukhi (d. 485 AH/1092 AD) "was famous for his asceticism and goodness and commanded good, and the common people were his party..., and his funeral was a party (= great)";

According to Golden in the 'History of Islam'.

Al-Dhahabi translated the Andalusian speaker, jurist and hadith of Ibrahim bin Yusuf al-Malqi (d. 611 AH / 1214 AD), known as Ibn al-Nisa’, and said that he “narrated ‘Al-Muwatta’.., and its jurist was a memorizer of opinion, a writer, and the science of theology prevailed over him, so he headed in it.., and the public was his party”! !

He also said about Imam Majd al-Din Ali bin Wahb al-Manfaluti al-Maliki (d. 667 AH / 1268 AD) that "he was one of the famous scholars and the aforementioned imams.. he was highly regarded among the private and the public.. he sought a lot to fulfill people's needs!"

Perhaps in this dimension of service to people that occurred in the biography of this imam - and he is the father of the great imam Ibn Daqiq al-Eid (d. 702 AH / 1302 AD), who is described as “the revival of the seventh hundred” - what strengthens his position with the common people, as he teaches them the provisions of their religion and serves them in their worldly needs!

In the translation of Hebat Allah Marwazi (d. 522 AH / 1128 AD);

Imam Ibn Hajar (d. 852 AH / 1448 AD) said about him - in 'Lisan al-Mizan' - that he is "a lot of hadith that is preserved and accepted by the public, but he was not trustworthy", meaning the technical standards of the people of hadith.

In the translation of Al-Shahristani Al-Ash’ari, the historian Ibn Khallikan (d. 681 AH / 1282 AD): “And he became very popular with the common people.”

In contrast;

The scholars used to preserve the right of the common people to sit with them and attend their lessons to benefit and be provided with what they could of knowledge, and they refused to be stratified in science so that only people from the sons of princes and dignitaries could attain it.

Among the examples of this is what al-Dhahabi mentions - in “History of Islam” - that the hadith Imam Abu Dawud al-Sijistani (d. 275 AH / 888 AD) - who is the author of “Sunan Abi Dawood” - once asked him for the second man in the Abbasid court, Prince Ahmed Al-Muwaffaq (d. 278 AH / 891 AD) to allocate a council for his sons to take from him the hadith, “The children of the Caliphs do not sit with the common people”!

The imam refused his request, saying: “As for this, there is no way to it, because people are equal in knowledge..;

Indeed, many scholars used to single out the general public in gatherings in which they would hear the hadith of the Prophet and teach them about their religion;

Among them is the Andalusian scholar and martyr Abu al-Qasim Ahmed bin Muhammad al-Amini al-Mursi (d. 622 AH / 1225 AD), who al-Dhahabi said - in 'History of Islam' - that he "was proficient in transmission and mental arts, and jurisprudence prevailed over him on the way of the predecessors..., and he had a hand in medicine." knowledge of hadith, and a general assembly for the public.”

Al-Sakhawi (d. 902 AH / 1496 AD) says - in 'The Brilliant Light' - as a translator of the modern jurist Muhammad bin Muhammad Al-Ghazi Al-Shafi'i (d. 885 AH / 1480 AD) that he "read the hadith to the common people in his country," as he tells that Ibrahim bin Ahmed Al-Tanoukhi Al-Shafi'i (d. 888 AH). / 1483AD) “Read [Sahih] Al-Bukhari to the common people in the Umayyad and Nasiri mosques” in Damascus.

Intense competition.

These are examples of the acceptability of the believers and the public to the scholar, whether he is a jurist, hadith, preacher or theologian. There is another level related to the public's turning away from a jurist or scholar for a sectarian or emotional reason, and so on.

This is the Sufi Imam al-Muhasabi (d. 243 AH/857 AD);

Ibn Khallikan said in his translation of Wafayat al-A’yan: “Ahmed bin Hanbal (d. 241 AH/855 AD) hated him because of his consideration of theology and his classification in it.., so he hid from the common people, and when he died, only four people prayed for him!!”

The public’s rejection of a scholar does not mean that he is truly wrong or a straying method; Rather, the witness here is the strength of the word of public opinion when the public gathers around one world or separates from another, regardless of what lies behind that position. one of the reasons; As we saw in the story of Imam al-Bukhari, although the public remained standing beside him as long as he was in his country, despite the alienation of the authority from him.

Most of the scientific clashes that took place between scholars, sects and sects were and still are - in fact - a dispute over public opinion and the masses of the public, which indicates that it is the center around which everyone is clashing and fighting over it. This appears in the 'Letter of analogy' written by Al-Jahiz (d. 255 AH / 869 AD) to the Mu'tazilite judge Abu Al-Walid Ibn Abi Duad (d. 239 AH / 853 AD), in which he fears the influence of the Hanbalis and exaggerates his reputation among the public because "the predominance of those who were with him .. and the oppressed are from It was upon him.. but just as we fear them, we hope for them..and we covet them.. Then you know what we were in from.. terrifying the scholars of the theologians!

Although Al-Jahiz is the one who narrates - in the message “Separating Between Enmity and Envy” - the saying: “Recommend the mob well, for they put out the fire, (and drive out the drowned), and block the spouts (= breaches of the flood)”;

He was very hated by them, always attacking them, and warned against their agreement and bloc around a visionary leadership that would lead them to their goals, as if he was more influenced by the saying of the poet Khaled bin Safwan Al-Tamimi (d. water";

According to Ibn Abd Rabbo (d. 328 AH / 940 AD) 'The Unique Contract'.

Al-Jahiz sees - in the 'Message of the analogy' - that "the common people... if it is spread (= scattered), then its matter is easier, and the duration of its turmoil is shorter, and if it has a clever, obedient leader, managing and imitating imam, then greed is cut off [from their victory], and the truth dies and is killed. Righteousness!!

He adds, apparently, that he means here the Hanbalites and others of hadith: “The truth is that the speakers are free (= deserving) to fear the common people who depend on authority and power, number and wealth, and on obedience to the mob and the lowly!

Al-Jahiz says that those he calls “common people” were opposed to speech before “the ordeal of the creation of the Qur’an” and refused to debate the theologians on this issue, which is supported by the fact that he meant by the common people here the people of hadith.

And the words of Al-Jahiz - with what he had at that time within the Mu'tazilite and authoritarian elite - prove that the public had a great influence on scholars, groups and intellectual currents, and that those elites were angry at the tendency of the public with their opponents from the people of hadith.

Perhaps in the position of Al-Jahiz and Khalid bin Safwan - two writers from the Mu'tazila - from the public, it is possible to compare the position of the "rational current" in the past with the position of its contemporary "counterpart" when it takes on the "public" for its support for its intellectual opponents belonging to the "conservative current".

Historical roles in

view of the facts of history; We find that the common people were the mainstay of major change movements and the influential role in their success, such as the transition of the caliphate from the Umayyads to the Abbasids in the late first third of the second century AH / eighth century AD, and the subsequent emergence of independent states from the center of the caliphate since the end of the same century, and then the emergence of the era of Sultans in the fourth century AH / tenth century AD, as well as various partial revolutions such as the Zanj revolution (255-270 AH / 869-883 AD) and the sedition of the

movements of bullets and thieves

, and the fluctuations that occurred throughout the ages of Islam and across its vast geography.

Rather, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, believed the most in his message at the beginning of the da’wah. They are the underdogs, not the leaders, as they were engaged with revelation and the message, just like the elite. All sane, adult members of the nation were charged with its teachings. Scholars of evidence (= mujtahids) have a condition for making consensus a legal, binding proof.

According to Al-Amdi.

Moreover, these common people had great roles in the battles and invasions to establish the state of Islam and other roles in the pledge of allegiance to the caliphs, but the most important and remarkable role is their movement against the Rashid Caliph Othman bin Affan (d. 35 AH / 656 AD), may God be pleased with him, who began a peaceful protest against some of his policies as “The imam of the public” according to the description of al-Mughirah bin Shu’bah (d. 50 AH / 671 AD) according to al-Dhahabi in “History of Islam”, then this protest deviated from its course until it ended in the tragedy of his martyrdom.

The updated historian Omar bin Shabbah Al-Basri (d. 262 AH/876 AD) - in his book 'The History of the City' - narrates that the Lady Mother of the Believers Aisha (d. 58 AH / 679 AD), may God be pleased with her, said to Othman when people asked him to dismiss Abdullah bin Saad Ibn Abi Sarh ( T. about 40 AH / 661 AD) about the state of Egypt: "The companions of Muhammad, peace be upon him, came to you and asked you to dismiss this man, but you refused!"

Perhaps this position of Aisha was stemming from what was known about her from her insight into the positions of public opinion and interest in the interests of the common people, until the Tabi’i Imam Ata bin Abi Rabah (d. 115 AH / 734 AD) said about her: “Aisha was the most knowledgeable and knowledgeable of people, and the best opinion of the people in the public”;

According to al-Dhahabi in 'Al-Sir'.

The truth is that in that it was in compliance with the words of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him: “The religion is sincerity… to God, His Messenger, the leaders of the Muslims and their common folk” (Narrated by Imam Muslim).

The demand of the Companions was an expression of the desire of public opinion at the time, and this is evidenced by the saying of Ali bin Abi Talib (d. 40 AH / 661 AD), may God be pleased with him - “and he was the speaker of the people” according to Ibn Shabba - to the Caliph Othman: “They asked you (= the public) as a man in his place. A man, and they have claimed (= with him) blood before him, so remove [him] from them and judge between them, and if he has a right [to them], then do justice to them from him.”

Othman responded to the request of the common people, and even said to them: “Choose a man to appoint over you in his place.”

An inherent interest, and

this indicates the position of the public in the collective mind of the community of the companions of the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, represented in Ali and Aisha, may God be pleased with them, and their realization that the philosophy of governance aims to satisfy the common people and implement what they want as long as it is consistent with the guidelines of the public interest, considering the imam as their representative and representative managing their affairs. This is due to the sheer need and necessity and the impossibility of managing a group without a president.

Perhaps the Companions derive this from the Almighty’s saying: “And say work, and God will see your work and His Messenger and the believers”; (Surat Al-Tawbah / Verse: 105); This verse gives public opinion [believers] in Islam the right to control its official authorities and its various societal components, and in that the scholar Rashid Rida (d. It follows the pleasure of God and His Messenger, and that they do not converge on misguidance... [as in] the hadith.. "My nation will not converge on misguidance"..., and in its meaning is the saying of Ibn Abbas (d. 169 AH / 785 CE): What Muslims see as good is with God good!

Al-Amidi holds that the opinion of the public must be respected when pledging allegiance, and that the pledge of allegiance to some people is not sufficient except on the condition of the nation’s approval, meaning that they are representatives of the nation in this case, not tyrannical by its command without it.

He quotes the words of Abu Bakr Al-Baqlani in this regard: “This must be attended by witnesses and just evidence, to stop the quarrel and the occurrence of disagreement between people.”

The scholars’ report on the status of public opinion - or “public opinion” in the expression of the ancients - in concluding the political pledge of allegiance to the one who takes power represents a great perception by the jurists of the people’s reference in political legitimacy.

This is the subject of an agreement among scholars who spoke about the rulings of the Imamate.

We find in Al-Ghazali deciding - in 'The Secrets of the Interior' - that the rightly-guided Caliph Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (d. 13 AH / 635 AD) "had only Umar pledged allegiance to him (Ben al-Khattab d. 23 AH / 645 AD) and all creation remained in opposition to him, or they were divided into an equal division in which he is not distinguished. He is victorious over the defeated, when the imamate has been convened for him.”

Ibn Taymiyyah also confirms - in "Minhaj al-Sunnah" - the legitimacy of the entire nation in the pledge of allegiance to its princes;

He says about the pledge of allegiance to Al-Siddiq: “If it is estimated that Umar and a group with him pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr, and the rest of the Companions refused to pledge allegiance, he would not have become an imam with this, but rather became an Imam by swearing allegiance to the majority of the Companions.”

He says about the pledge of allegiance to Al-Faruq: “Likewise, when Abu Bakr entrusted him with [the caliphate] Omar, he only became an imam when they pledged allegiance to him and obeyed him.

Al-Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah are firmly established here politically - despite their differing schools of theology, jurisprudence and behavior - to the issue of the centrality of the nation in selection and acceptance first, and to the issue of submitting the will of the majority secondly, which is what is entrenched in the modern political system, but it was known in the past - in Muslim political thought and practice - as "" public allegiance.

تقليد راسخ
وكانت تلك البيعة العامة تقليدا سياسيا يحرص عليه -حتى ولو كان شكليا- مَنْ وصلوا إلى السلطة ولو بالقوة؛ كما فعل العباسيون حين أعلنوا انتصار ثورتهم في معقلها الكوفة، فـ"خرجوا جميعا إلى جامع الكوفة فبويع (أبو العباس السفاح ت 136هـ/754م) وخطب في الناس..، ثم نزل السفاح ودخل القصر، وأجلس أخاه (أبا جعفر المنصور ت 158ه/776م) يأخذ بيعة العامة"؛ طبقا للذهبي في ‘السِّيَر‘.

واستمرّ هذا التقليد طيلة عهود الحكم المتعاقبة حتى سقوط الخلافة العباسية ببغداد على أيدي التتار سنة 656هـ/1258م؛ وكان من آخر من حفظت لنا كتب التاريخ التزامه بهذا الرسم السياسي الخليفة العباسي الظاهر ابن الناصر (ت 623هـ/1226م)؛ فقد بايعه أولا "أهله وأقاربه من أولاد الخلفاء" ثم كبار المسؤولين: "نائب الوزارة" (= رئيس الوزراء) و"أستاذ الدار" (= مدير ديوان الخليفة) و"قاضي القضاة"، ثم "بويع يوم عيد الفطر البيعة العامة..، فكان.. أستاذ الدار.. هو الذي يأخذ [له] البيعة على الناس"؛ وفقا للذهبي في ‘تاريخ الإسلام‘.

ينقل النويري (ت 733هـ/1333م) -في ‘نهاية الأرب‘- عن أمير تونس إبراهيم بن أحمد الأغلبي التميمي (ت 289هـ/902م) قوله إن الرعية هم "مادّة الـمُلْك، فإن أباح [الأمير] ظُلمَهم لم يصل إليه نفعهم ولحقه الضرر، وصار النفع لغيره"؛ ولذا كان التنافس قائما بين الفقهاء والسلاطين على كسب مواقف الرأي العام ودعم عامة الشعب، والسعي لتأمين خطرها "لأن العامة إذا انتكثت للخاصة وتنكرت للقادة.. كان البوار الذي لا حيلة له والفناء الذي لا بقاء معه"؛ طبقا لرأي الجاحظ في ‘رسالة الحنين إلى الأوطان‘.

ومن هنا يمكن فهم أن الخليفة العباسي المأمون (ت 218هـ/833م) إنما غضب من علماء "المحنة" خوفا من تأسيس مرجعية موازية له مدعومة من "رأي العامة" وتؤثر في تصوراتهم، وخاصة المحدِّثين -بقيادة الإمام أحمد بن حنبل- الذين كانوا حينها يستطيعون التأثير في العامّة؛ كما يُفهم من كلام الجاحظ السابق.

بل إن الذهبي يلمح -في ‘السِّيَر‘- إلى أن المأمون لم يستطع إعلان موقفه من "خلق القرآن" إلا بعد وفاة الإمام يزيد بن هارون السُّلَمي (ت 206هـ/821م)، وكان يقول: "لولا مكان يزيد بن هارون لأظهرتُ [القول بأن] القرآن مخلوق، فقيل: ومن يزيد حتى يُتَّقَى؟ فقال: ويحك! إني لأرتضيه لا أن له سلطنة، ولكن أخاف إن أظهرته فيردّ عليّ فيختلف الناس وتكون فتنة"!! ولا غرابة في خشية الخليفة من عالم "يقال إن في مجلسه سبعين ألفا" من الأتباع بعد أن "احتفل محدثو بغداد وأهلها لقدومـ[ـه].. وازدحموا عليه لجلالته"؛ طبقا للذهبي.

ولذا كانت العامة -طوال العصور- إحدى أدوات الضغط السياسي والاجتماعي والديني، بما كانت تلجأ إليه من أساليب الاحتجاج السلمية والعنيفة. فنحن نجد مثلا -طبقا لرواية النويري- أنه لمـّا استبد بحكم مصر الحاكمُ بأمر الله الفاطمي (ت 411هـ/1021م) وأفسد حياة أهلها بل وادّعى الألوهية؛ تحرَّك العامة أولا للاحتجاج السلمي على الأوضاع سنة 410هـ/1020م، ووضعوا في الطرقات "صورة (= تمثال) امرأة.. عُملتْ من قراطيس، وفى يدها جريدة (= سعف نخيل) عليها ورقة فيها سَبٌّ للحاكم وأسلافه وذكره بقبيح الفعال"!

فاعل أصيل
ونجدُ كثيراً في كتب التاريخ أنّ العامّة كانت لهم مواقع في الحياة السياسية والاجتماعية، أي كانوا فاعلين وليس منفعلين فحسب؛ وخاصة إذا وقع ما يعتبرونه انتهاكا للمحرمات أو المقدسات الدينية، أو حدث مستوى لا يطاق من تردي الأوضاع الأمنية والمعيشية.

ومن أمثلة ذلك أن السيوطي تحدث -في ‘تاريخ الخلفاء‘- عن "ثورة الحَرَّة" سنة 63هـ/684م التي كان وقودها عامة الناس بقيادة جمْع من الصحابة -مهاجرين وأنصارا- بالمدينة المنورة على حكم الأمويين في عهد يزيد بن معاوية (ت 64هـ/685م)؛ فقال: "وكان سبب خلع أهل المدينة له أن يزيد أسرف في المعاصي"!

وكان للرأي العام سطوة يفرض بها مطالبه بشأن من يتولى إدارة شأنه اليومي؛ فالإمام ابن كثير (ت 774هـ/1372م) يحدثنا -في ‘البداية والنهاية‘- أنه في سنة 194هـ/810م "خَلَع أهل حمص نائبهم فعزله عنهم الأمين" الخليفة العباسي (ت 198هـ/814م)، ثم ولّى عليهم واليا جديدا هو عبد الله بن سعيد الحَـرَشي (ت بعد 202هـ/817م) ففتك بهم، وقتل كثيرا منهم ليُخمد تمردهم لكنهم لم يخضعوا، وبعبارة ابن كثير: "ثم هاجوا فضرب أعناق كثير منهم أيضا"!

وفي ما ورائيات تلك الرواية ندرك أنّ أرض الشام كانت خصيبة بمجتمع مدني فاعل ومُتحرّك وضاغِطٍ، استطاع أن يعزل نائباً ويثور على آخر رغم ما تعرض له. ونجد في عبارة ابن كثير لفتة لطيفة، فقد نسب "خلع" الوالي إلى أهل حمص، ولم ينسبه إلى وجوهها وأعيانها وأهل الحل والعقد فيها!

وفي مثال مشابه حصل بعد قرون في مصر، مما يوحي بتواصل ظاهرة الرأي العام الضاغط زمنيا وتمددها جغرافياً؛ يقول ابن حجر -في ‘إنباء الغُمْر‘- إنه في أحد أيام سنة 775هـ/1374م "اجتمع العوام بالمصاحف وسألوا [الأمراءَ] أن يعزلوا علاء الدين بن عرب (ت بعد 781هـ/1379م) عن [ولاية] الحسبة، فعُزِل". ويقول إنه في سنة 791هـ/1389م "اجتمع العوام فشكوا من المحتسب، فأحضره.. [الأميرُ] وضربه مئتيْ عصا وعزله".

مشروعية لازمة
فمسألة تولية الولاة وعزلهم لم تكن أمراً سلطانيا صرفا كما قد يظن البعض، بل كانت لمقبولية المؤمنين ورضا العامة -وهو ما يُسمَّى اليوم في العلوم السياسية بـ"السيادة الشعبية" أو "المشروعية الشعبية"- مدخلا مهما في ذلك. ولذلك كان الخلفاء الراشدون حريصين على استرضاء العامة؛ فقد جاء في ‘صحيح البخاري‘ أنه "شكا أهل الكوفة سعدا (= سعد بن أبي وقاص ت 55هـ/676م) إلى عمر، فعزله [عنهم] واستعمل عليهم عمارا (= عمار بن ياسر ت 37هـ/658م)"، وكان ذلك سنة 22هـ/644م حسب قول الذهبي في كتابه ‘العِبَر‘.

وقد قال الإمام ابن بَطَّال القرطبي (ت 449هـ/1058م) -في ‘شرح صحيح البخاري‘- تعليقا على هذا السلوك العُمَري الذي تكرر في أكثر من بلد: "وفيه أن الوالي إذا شُكيَ به أنه يُعزَل إذا رأى ذلك الإمامُ (= السلطان) صلاحا له ولمن شكا به، وإن كذب عليه في الشكاية؛ لأن سعدا أثنى عليه أهل الكوفة خيرا غير شيخ منهم، فعزله عمر ورأى ذلك صلاحا للرعية والسياسة لها، لئلا يبقى عليهم أمير وفيهم من يكرهه.. وربما يؤدي ذلك إلى ما تسوء عاقبته" بسبب تمرد الرأي العام واضطراب الأحوال.

يعرض المؤرخ الجَبَرْتي (ت 1240هـ/1822م) -بنحو متكرر في كتابه ‘عجائب الآثار‘- تفاصيل وقائع الاحتجاجات الشعبية في مصر خلال العهد المملوكي/العثماني التي كان يلتحم فيها علماء الأزهر مع مطالب الرأي العام، فكانوا -بالتحالف مع التجار والأعيان ضد الأمراء حينئذ- يقودون تحركات العامة، التي كانت تؤدي غالبا إلى إعلان إضراب عام تغلق خلاله الأسواق ويوقف الدراسة في أروقة جامع الأزهر، حتى يتم تنفيذ مطالب جموع الشعب ويُردع المعتدون.

فقد قال الجبرتي إنه في سنة 1199هـ/1785م "ورد الخبر بوصول باش (= باشا: الوالي) مصر الجديد إلى ثغر الإسكندرية وكذلك باش جدة، ووقع قبل ورودهما بأيام فتنة بالإسكندرية بين أهل البلد وآغَات (= حرّاس) القلعة والسِّرْدار (= قائد الجند) بسبب قتيل من أهل البلد قتله بعض أتباع السردار، فثار العامة وقبضوا على السردار وأهانوه وجرّسوه (= شهّروا به) على حمار وحلقوا نصف لحيته، وطافوا به البلد وهو مكشوف الرأس وهم يضربونه ويصفعونه بالنعالات"!

ومن ذلك أيضا ما يرويه في أحداث سنة 1209هـ/1794م قائلا إنه حضر إلى شيخ الأزهر عبد الله الشرقاوي (ت 1227هـ/1812م) أهالي قرية تابعة لمدينة بلبيس، واشتكوا إليه من بعض متنفذي المماليك الذين "ظلموهم وطلبوا منهم ما لا قدرة لهم عليه، واستغاثوا بالشيخ فاغتاظ وحضر إلى الأزهر وجمع المشايخ.. وقفلوا الجامع وأمروا الناس بغلق الأسواق والحوانيت، ثم ركبوا.. واجتمع عليهم خلق كثير من العامة وتبعوهم" إلى مقرات المسؤولين عن البلاد، حيث خاطبوهم قائلين "نريد العدل ورفع الظلم والجور وإقامة الشرع…، وانحطّ (= انتهى) الأمر على أنهم تابوا ورجعوا والتزموا بما شرطه العلماء عليهم، وانعقد الصلح على أن… يكفوا أتباعهم عن امتداد أيديهم إلى أموال الناس".
مخاوف سلطوية
يحاول السلاطين عادة تنحية العامة عن الاهتمام بالسياسة وقضاياها؛ ولذا فإنّ المؤرخ الصفدي (ت 764هـ/1363م) يروي -في ‘الوافي بالوفيات‘- أن الخليفة العباسي الناصر لدين الله (ت 622هـ/1225م) عزل أحد المسؤولين في الدولة عن منصبه، وكتب له قائلا: "ما عزلناك لخيانة ولا لجناية ولكن للملك أسرار لا تطلع عليها العامة". أي أن النخبة كانت حريصة على عدم معرفة العامة بمجريات الأمور، وذلك لتجنب غضبهم وثوراتهم.

وفي ترجمة الوزير العباسي المصلح ظهير الدين الرُّوذْرَاوَرِي (ت 488هـ/1095م)؛ يقول ابن خلِّكان: "وولِيَ الوزارةَ للإمام (= الخليفة) المقتدي بأمر الله (ت 487هـ/1094م) بعد عزل [الوزير] عميد الدولة أبي منصور ابن جهير (ت 493هـ/1100م)..، وخرج (= ظهير الدين) بعد عزله ماشياً يوم الجمعة من داره إلى الجامع، وانثالت (= تدفقت) عليه العامة تصافحه وتدعوا له، وكان ذلك سبباً لإلزامه بالقعود في داره".

وعلى ما يبدو؛ فإن السلطة تخوفت من تأثيره في العامة وتذكيرهم بأيامه السعيدة ففرضوا عليه الإقامة الجبرية، وذلك لأن غضب رؤوس القوم -كالعلماء والأعيان- محدود ويمكن كبحه واحتواؤه، بيد أن غضب العامة بخلاف ذلك. ومن ذلك أيضا ما حكاه ابن الجوزي (ت 597هـ/1201م) -في ‘المنتظم‘- من أنه في سنة 330هـ/942م "قام رجل من العامة في جامع الرصافة والإمام يخطب، فلما دعا للمتقي لله (الخليفة العباسي ت 357هـ/968م) قال له العامي: كذبت، ما هو بالمتقي! فأخِذ وحُمِل إلى دار السلطان".

وحاول الأمراء معرفة سلوك العامة والقواعد التي تحكم اجتماعاتهم وتصرفاتهم، في عملية أشبه ما تكون بدراسات علم الاجتماع السياسي في عصرنا؛ فابن الأزرق الغرناطي (ت 899هـ/1494م) يخبرنا -في ‘بدائع السِّلك‘- أنه "يُحكى أن أبا جعفر المنصور [العباسي] توقف أياما عن الخروج إلى الناس، فقالوا هو عليل فكثروا القول، فدخل عليه وزيره الربيع (بن يونس ت 169هـ/785م) فقال: يا أمير المؤمنين أدام الله لك في البقاء أن الناس يقولون [الشائعات عنك]! قال: وما يقولون؟ قال يقولون إن أمير المؤمنين عليل (= مريض)!!

فأطرق [المنصور] مَلِيًّا، ثم قال يا ربيع: مالنا وللعامة! إنما تحتاج العامة إلى ثلاث خلال، فإذا جعلت لهم فما حاجتهم: إذا أقيم لهم من ينظر في أحكامهم وينصف بعضهم من بعض، وإذا أمنت سبيلهم حتى لا يلحقهم خوف في ليل ولا في نهار، وإذا سُدَّتْ ثغورهم من أطرافهم حتى لا يصل إليهم عدوهم. ونحن قد فعلنا ذلك كله لهم؛ فما حاجتهم إلينا؟!".

وكانت السلطة مهما بلغت قوتها تعمل حسابا للعامة وتخشى صنيعها؛ ومن ذلك أن الطبري يذكر -في تاريخه- أنه في سنة 284هـ/997م "عزم المعتضد بالله (العباسي ت 289هـ/902م) على لَعْن معاوية بن أبي سفيان (ت 60هـ/681م) -رضي الله عنه- على المنابر، وأمر بإنشاء كتاب (= مرسوم) بذلك يُقرأ على الناس"، ولم يتخلّ عن ذلك حتى خوّفه خاصته من رجال دولته من "أن تضطرب العامة ويكون منها عند سماعها هذا الكتاب حركة"، وما سينجم عن ذلك من سخط شعبي سيستغله ضده خصومُه من العلويين الثائرين بنواحي الدولة.

وتلك الرواية تُظهر احتياج الخلفاء والسلاطين إلى كسب ولاء العامة لإحداث توازن مع جماعات مناهضة ومعارِضة، لا سيما إذا ثارت وهاجت تلك الجماعات، فيخشى السلطان ألا يجد نصيرا من العامّة، وربما تحالفوا مع خصومهم ضدهم.

استثناء لافت
رغم أن الصورة المستقرة في الأذهان تُرسِّخ دور كثير من العامة فيما يشهده المجتمع من انحرافات اجتماعية ومبتدعات دينية؛ فإن كتب التاريخ تفتح أعيننا على صور أخرى مغايرة كان فيها قطاع واسع من عامة الناس واقفا في صف الإصلاح، وداعما للمصلحين من الأمراء والعلماء والوجهاء، انسجاما مع التوجه الشرعي الذي أتاح للرأي العام حق التشكل من خلال مسؤولية "الحِسبة" المجتمعية بالأخذ على يد الظالم، وحق تحمُّل وأداء الشهادات عند الترافع القضائي، وأعراف التكافل الاجتماعي لعون الضعفاء على مواجهة أعباء الحياة.

وهكذا كان كثير من العامة منخرطين في مجال الإصلاح المجتمعي دعما للعلماء والفقهاء، وعونا لمؤسسات الدولة في بسط الأمن الاجتماعي، وبالتالي كان إسهام الرأي العام في الحضارة الإسلامية يتعدى مجرد "اقتراح الرأي" وصياغة المزاج الشعبي، ليصل أحيانا كثيرة إلى مستوى ممارسة "الرقابة الشعبية" وتفعيل آليات الضبط الاجتماعي الإيجابي.

ومن أغرب صور ذلك الدَّور ما يحكيه ابن الجوزي -في ‘المنتظم‘- من أنه في سنة 329هـ/941م اضطربت الأوضاع السياسية والأمنية ببغداد، فـ"اجتمعت العامة في جامع دار السلطان، وتظلمت من الدَّيْلم (= عساكر البويهيين) ونزولهم في دورهم بغير أجرة، وتعديهم عليهم في معاملاتهم، فلم يقع إنكار لذلك [من السلطان]؛ فمنعت العامة الإمامَ من الصلاة وكسرت المنبرين..، ومنعهم الديلم من ذلك فقتلوا من الديلم جماعة".

ونلاقي نماذج من انخراط عامة الشعب في مساعي ردع من يخرجون على المستقر لدى أغلبيتها من تعاليم الدين ومسائل العقيدة؛ فنجد مثلا الحافظ ابن حجر يترجم -في ‘لسان الميزان‘- للقاضي شعْبَوَيْه بن سهل الرازي (ت 246هـ/860م)، فيقول إنه "ولّاه المعتصمُ (الخليفة العباسي ت 227هـ/842م) القضاءَ والصلاة بجامع الرصافة [ببغداد]..، وكان مبغضا لأهل السنة مُتَنِّقِّصاً لهم.. وكتب على باب مسجده: القرآنُ مخلوق!.. فأحرق العامة بابه".

وقد كان يحصل أحيانا أن يوظِّف بعض أهل العلم والزهد شعبيتَه العظيمة في ملاحقات خصومه الفكريين، وربما جمع في ذلك بين سطوة العامة وسلطة الساسة؛ كما في قصة المحدِّث الزاهد أحمد بن محمد الباهلي البصري المعروف بغلام خليل (ت 275هـ/888م) وحملته على صوفية بغداد؛ فقد وصفه الذهبي -في ‘تاريخ الإسلام‘- بأنه كانت له "جلالة عظيمة ببغداد"، وكان "«شيخ العامة» بها وصالِحَهم ورأسَهم في الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر، على ضعفه [العلمي]..، وفيه حِدَّةٌ وتسرُّع"!!

وخلاصة هذه الواقعة -التي شغلت أهل العراق حينا من الدهر- أن غلام خليل استنكر "خوض الصوفية في دقائق الأحوال التي يذمها أهل الأثر (= المحدثون)..، فلم يزل.. يذكرهم في مجالسه ويحذّر منهم، ويُغْري بهم السلطان والعامة.. تحريضا عليهم..؛ فانتشر في أفواه العامة أن جماعة من أهل بغداد ذُكِر عنهم الزندقة"! ثم وظف الرجل علاقاته في بلاط الخليفة وأسرته حتى مالت إليه "الدولة والعوامّ لما هو عليه من الزهد والتقشف..، فطُلب القوم (= الصوفية) وفُرِّقَ الأعوان (= رجال الأمن) في طلبهم.. وكانوا نيفا وسبعين نفسا، فاختفى عامتهم"!!
مواقف جريئة
ويندرج في تلك الأنشطة مقاومة العامة لمظاهر الفرعونية السياسية؛ ومن ذلك ما ذكره ابن الجوزي -في ‘المنتظم‘- من أنه في سنة 411هـ/1021م "استقرّ أن يُزاد في ألقاب جلال الدولة (= السلطان أبو طاهر السلجوقي ت 435هـ/1044م) شاهِنْشاه الأعظم: ملِك الملوك، فأمر الخليفةُ (= القائم بأمر الله العباسي ت 467هـ/1074م) بذلك فخُطب له به [في الجوامع]، فنَفَر العامةُ ورمَوْا الخطباءَ بالآجُرّ ووقعت فتنة"!!

وفي واقعة احتجاج شعبي أخرى؛ يقول ابن حجر -في ‘إنباء الغُمر‘- إنه في سنة 775هـ/1373م "لازم شخص من العوام الصياح تحت القلعة (= مقرّ السلطان): اقتلوا سلطانَكم تَرْخُص أسعارُكم، فأُخِذ وضُرب بالمقارع وشهر"!! وهذه الحادثة تدل أيضا على خشية القصر حينئذ من توسع وازدياد مثل تلك التحركات الفردية المناهضة، كما أنها مؤشر على شجاعة العامة وإقدامهم وتحريكهم للمياه الراكدة، حتى ولو تعرضت حياتهم للخطر ورزقهم للزوال.

وفي ترجمة عبد الرزاق الجركسي المؤيدي (ت 868هـ/1463م) يقول السخاوي -في ‘الضوء اللامع‘- إنه تولّى ولاية حلب بالشام "فلم يُحمْدَ فيها ورُجِم من أهلها فصُرِف (= عُزل)..، واستقر به [الأمر] في نيابة الشام (= دمشق) فلم تحمد سيرته أيضا لطمعه وشُحِّه وشَرَهه وإسرافه على نفسه إلى أن مات بها..، وسُرَّ أهل دمشق بموته كثيرا، ومَنَع العامةُ من دفنه فلم يُدفَن إلا بعد يومين"! فهنا نجد العامة يفرحون بموت الظالمين والمفسدين ويجهرون بذلك، وهذا نوع من الضغط الاجتماعي الذي يُرهِب كل من يعمل بالسنن السيئة في الشأن العام.

وفي حلب أيضا تحرك العامة سنة 1184هـ/1772م لممارسة الضغط على السلطة؛ حيث "اجتمع جم غفير من العلماء والعوام ودخلوا المحكمة الشرعية وطلبوا رفع بعض بدع وأمور منحرفة عن الدين، فأجيبوا إلى ما طلبوا"؛ وفقا للمؤرخ كامل الغزي (ت 1351هـ/1933م) في ‘نهر الذهب في تاريخ حلب‘.

ومن المواقف النبيلة للعامّة في ضبط عدوان المحسوبين على رجال السلطة ما يخبرنا به الجبرتي من أنه بعدما قام بعض الجنود والأمراء بنهب بيوت الناس بأحد أحياء القاهرة سنة 1200هـ/1785م؛ تحركت جماهير العامة "وحضروا إلى الجامع الأزهر ومعهم طبول.. وبأيديهم نَبَابِيت (= جمع نَبُّوت: عصا)"، وذهبوا إلى الشيخ أحمد الدَّرْدِير المالكي (ت 1201هـ/1786م) "فوافقهم وساعدهم بالكلام".

وقد احتوى الشيخ الدَّرْدِير بذلك الكلام غضب جماهير المحتجين، ثم خاطبهم قائلا: "في غد نجمع أهالي الأطراف والحارات وبولاق ومصر القديمة، وأركب معكم وننهب بيوتهم كما ينهبون بيوتنا، ونموت شهداء أو ينصرنا الله عليهم"! وعندما أحس المسؤولون بالخطر "ذهبوا إلى الشيخ الدَّرْدِير وتكلموا معه وخافوا من تضاعف الحال، وقالوا للشيخ: اكتب لنا قائمة بالمنهوبات ونأتي بها من محل ما تكون"!

وهكذا نجد أن الزعامة الشعبية للعلماء لم تكن فقط بسبب المكون العلمي في شخصياتهم، وإنما لإسهامهم في رفع المظالم عن عامة الشعب، ولذلك فهي زعامات يخلقها الرأي العام لسد فراغات السلطة حين تنسحب من الميدان وتتخلى عن مسؤوليتها.