How can the Hadith "Obedience is only in what is good" be reconciled with the Hadith "Listen and obey the ruler, even if he whips your back and takes your money, then listen and obey"? Is the second Hadith specific to rulers who do not follow the guidance of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, or is it general?

The intended meaning of the obligation to obey the ruler in what is good, even if he is oppressive, is not to obey him if he commands disobedience. Obedience is only in what is good. Accordingly, the apparent meaning of the hadith is the obligation to listen and obey the ruler, even if he disobeys Allah, provided he does not command disobedience to Allah. This is because the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "Listen and obey, even if he whips your back and takes your wealth." This indicates the obligation to obey him even if he does not obey his Lord. However, if he commands disobedience to Allah, there is neither listening nor obedience.