Tuesday, 17 July 2018

Meanings of Khaatam al Nabeyyeen


In this article we would see and analyze what are meanings of words ‘khaatam al nabeyyeen’. Muslims say the meanings of these words are ‘last of Nabis’; whereas Qadyanis say the meanings are ‘Kamal e Nabuwwah. In this article we would see even if meanings ‘ Kamal e Nabuwwah’ are accepted, it would mean ‘last of Nabis’.  We have already seen in the article that
Quran says:

“Muhammad () is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the 'Nabis'. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing” (al-ahzab-40).

In this verse two statements have been given; the first statement is that Muhammad () is father of no man, and the second statement is that he [Muhammad ()] is the Messenger and last of the 'Nabis'. Apparently there seems to be no connection between these two statements. But actually there is a link between these two statements, and the link is that both statements contain predictions. Just ponder when this verse was revealed, many wives of Muhammad () were alive; any one of them could give birth to a male child and that male child might grow to become a 'rajul’/ man'. But if it happened so, this verse would have been proved to be wrong, because this verse states that our Nabi () is father of no man. So it was not to be happened so. Actually this verse contains a prediction that either no male child will be born to Muhammad's () wife, or if male child will be born, such child will not reach the age of puberty to become a man. We know this prediction turned out to be true. Similarly second statement also contains a prediction that after Muhammad () there will be no 'Nabi'. The verse also contains a third statement that “ Allah is knowing of all things; this third statement also suggests that the previous two statements are about Allah’s knowledge/information.

In the above quoted verse, word 'khaatama l nabeyyeen' means seal of the 'Nabis'. The word ‘khaatam’ is noun and its verb is  'khatam'; both in its noun and verb forms, it is is used in Quran in 'istilahi'/ idiomatic meaning (al-baqra-7; al-anam-46; al-jathiyah-23; Yasin-65). In its 'istilahi'/ idiomatic meaning, ‘khaatam’/seal means  closing something. In words, ‘khaatama l nabeyyeen’, word 'khaatam'/seal is noun and 'khaatam l Nabeyyeen' would mean ‘closing the chain of Nabis’.

Another 'istilahi'/ idiomatic meaning of word ‘khaatam’/ seal, in Arabic,  is 'validating/confirming'; but this meaning is less probable, in the above mentioned verse, for two reasons. First, for 'validating/confirming', Quran uses another word ‘musaddiq’ (e.g. al-baqra-89,101;al-imran-81); nowhere in Quran, word 'khaatam' or 'khatam' has been used for 'confirming'. Secondly, confirmation is a process in which identity/particulars of a person/thing is certified. Quran has certified identity of almost two dozen prophets, but this certification may not be called confirmation by Muhammad (
); it is confirmation by Quran. In other words, this confirmation is not something specific and confined to Muhammad (); it means such confirmation may not warrant a title of 'Confirming the Nabeyyeen'.

Our Nabi (
) has also mentioned, in his sayings, about a few prophets which have not been mentioned in Quran; but such prophets are, most probably, not more than single digit in number. Taking into account total number of prophets which are more than one lac, confirmation of such a small number of prophets by Muhammad () may not warrant the title of 'Confirming the Prophets'.  In short, ‘khaatam l nabeyyeen’s more probable meaning is 'closing the chain of Nabis' and the least probable meaning is 'Confirming 'Nabis'. The meaning 'closing the chain of Nabis' has been verified by Muhammad () himself through many ahadith; therefore the meaning ‘closing the chain of Nabis’ is most authentic meaning. 

Qadyanis say the most probable meanings of 'Khaatam al nabeyyeen' are ‘the most perfect nabuwwah/ ‘kamal e nabuwwah’. Actually ‘kamal e nabuwwah’ may be meaning of words ‘ khatim ul nabeyyeen’, not words ‘khaatam al nabeyyeen’. Khaatam al nabeyyeen’ and ‘khatim ul nabeyyeen’ are two different words. In the verse mentioned above, word ‘khaatam al nabeyyeen’ has been used which do not mean ‘kamal e nabuwwah’; rather it means ‘seal of the Nabis’. Seal is used for two purposes- for closing something or for certifying something. As discussed above, the most probable meanings are closing something- closing the chain of Nabis.  Even if meanings ‘certifying something are taken, Nabuwwah of Mirza Qadyani is not proved because certifying/confirmation is a process in which identity/particulars of a person/thing is certified, and Muhammad   has nowhere certified Mirza as a Nabi. 

 Though it is proved, as discussed above, khaatam al nabeyyeen does not mean ‘ kamal e nabuwwah’- kamal e nabuwwah is meaning adopted by qadyanis.  But even if it means 'kamal e nabuwwah', it means 'kamal e wahi'. No Nabi was partial or incomplete Nabi; every Nabi was complete Nabi. So ‘kamal e nabuwwah’ does not mean complete Nabi; rather ‘kamal e nubuwwah’ means ‘kamal e wahi’- a wahi which is complete in all aspects; which is complete guidance for humanity till Qiyamah, and after which there is no room for prophetic wahi. Therefore, 'khaatam al nabeyyen' means last Nabi , even if we take its meaning as 'kamal e nabuwwah'.

Having said all that, it may be noted that Quran is 'Words of Allah' and as such Quranic words have multiple meanings; all such meanings of a Quranic word are to be accepted, if they are not contradictory to each other, and not contradictory to any other Quranic verse by apparent meaning or by inference. On the basis of this principle of interpretation of Quran, all three meanings ('closing the chain of Nabis' and 'Confirming Nabis', and 'Kamal e Nabuwwah') of 'Khaatama l Nabeyyeen' may be adopted; because all three meanings are not contradictory to each other, neither are they contradictory to any other Quranic verse.
We may conclude Mirza Ghulam Qadyani’s claim for nabuwwah cannot be justified in the light of analysis given above.

Tuesday, 29 May 2018

State and Majority Will of the People (5)

In the previous parts of this article and we have seen that Pakistan’s system of justice has to be reformed to bring it in line with general and religious expectations of the people. We have discussed some deficiencies found in the system of justice and possible ways to remove those deficiencies. In the succeeding lines, we would discuss another obstacle found in the system of justice; this obstacle pertains to laws/ rules/ regulations governing the system of justice, and plays an important role in depriving the people of cheap and speedy justice. 

Unfortunately, the present system of adjudication gives too much weightage to procedures. Fair and speedy adjudication is buried somewhere, once entangled in unnecessary judicial procedures. In fact, procedures are implemented as scrupulously as laws are meant to be implemented. No doubt the procedures were devised to ensure fair adjudication, but now the procedures themselves have become a hurdle in the way of fair and speedy adjudication due to their length and complexity. These judicial procedures need to be simplified.  

Another aspect of the issue, that is pertaining to civil laws, is that procedures and laws are not separable; laws and procedures are combined while enacting  Civil Law Acts. Laws are those which contain legal notions whereas Procedures are actually a tool to implement laws but, in case of civil laws, procedures have been legislated as laws and given the status of laws. Such an unnecessary combination of laws and procedures makes the laws unduly complex. Once procedures are separated from the civil laws, the civil laws would become automatically simple. The author is not suggesting that civil laws should be completely separated from the procedures; some procedures are having such a vital importance that they should not be separated from the body of laws, but most of the procedures have been made unduly the part of laws, and it is quite feasible to separate them from the body of laws. Such a separation of procedures from civil laws would also enhance the acceptability of civil laws among the people. Most of the legal notions adopted in civil laws are in line with Islamic concepts of law, and as such can be readily accepted by the people. These are the lengthy and unnecessary procedures attached with civil laws which are giving un-Islamic color to the civil laws. Once procedures are separated from the civil laws, people would welcome the existing notions of civil laws as Islamic laws. However such civil law notions which are repugnant to Islamic concepts may be modified accordingly. The author does not think it is an easy task to separate procedures from laws; a well -focused effort is required for the purpose.

 Once procedures are separated from the civil laws, the courts may be given discretion asto how meticulously procedures are to be implemented in each individual case. SOPs may also be framed in this regard in order to avoid the possibility of misuse of discretion. It may be appreciated civil laws notions are not so many; civil laws are always based on these notions. It means, once separated from the procedures, civil laws would become automatically quite brief. In order to implement such a brief body of civil laws, we have to forego the system of adjudication we inherited from the British, in which procedures are made a part and parcel of the civil laws; instead of British system, we may adopt a system of adjudication in which procedures may be implemented only according to requirements, and may be ignored, when not necessarily required

We may conclude that in order to bring our state institutions in line with peoples’ general and religious aspirations, we need to reform our institutions not only structurally and procedurally but also legislatively. The objective of every system of justice is to impart justice but we are imparting injustice in the name of justice and spending annually billions of rupees for a failed cause. If we can reform our justice system by spending more on it so that it is enabled to meet the very objective it was established for, nothing would be better than it.

Monday, 28 May 2018

State and Majority Will of the People (4)

In part (3) of this article we have seen that increase in number of judges is necessary and basic requirement to bring Judiciary in line with peoples’ expectations. In this part of the article, we would discuss  how Police and Prosecution may be reformed.

Police is the first agency dealing with investigation. One is bound to be  surprised  that investigation has been left at the mercy of a grade 14 junior police officer called sub-inspector which is not essentially well trained in investigation because there is every possibility that most of experience of such investigation officer is relating to maintenance of law & order, instead of investigation. Because police is the first agency entrusted with investigation, many loopholes left in the investigation cannot be rectified at latter stages by the prosecution; many loopholes particularly pertaining to collection of evidence and forensic evidence which can be collected only at the time of occurrence of event/ crime, cannot be rectified latter when the case is sent to prosecution. It may also be appreciated that, presently, prosecution has limited power to restrain an investigation officer from committing blunders in investigation; for instance, the prosecutor can point out deficient evidence found in the investigation but a prosecutor cannot lead the investigation officer asto what kind of evidence should be procured. Keeping in view, wide powers invested in the investigation officer, the importance of reformed investigation process in the whole system of justice cannot be over-emphasized. Reformed investigation process is also important in another way. Actually loopholes left in the investigation are cashed on by incompetent and corrupt prosecutors and judges. The system of justice cannot be made corruption free without reforming investigation process.

In order to reform investigation process, a few things may be considered.

Firstly, investigation officers/ officials may be made a separate and specialized cadre. The investigation officers/ officials should not be transferable to law & order wing of police, and law & order officers/officials should not be transferable to investigation wing. The investigation wing should be made an elite wing of the police, in terms of pay and perks. The investigation of important cases may be entrusted to only senior officers. Special training programs may be initiated to equip investigation wing with advance skills of investigation. The investigation wing may be staffed preferably with  law graduates; in order to overcome shortage of law graduates, short law courses may be initiated in public and private sector universities/ colleges so that investigation officers/officials may be equipped with necessary legal knowledge. 

Secondly, the investigation officers should be made practically liable for defective investigation; presently, investigation officers are bold enough to conduct wrong investigation because ratio of punitive action against such investigation officers is almost zero.  For the purpose, a scoring system may be introduced. Every investigated case by every individual investigation officer should be allotted a score by the respective trial judge. The average score obtained by every individual investigation officer may be considered at the time of promotion of that officer; an officer obtaining lesser than a specified average score may be declared incapable of carrying on further the job of investigation; and such incapable investigation officer may be shifted to some other job in other wings of the police department. The author is not suggesting that whole performance of an investigation officer should be considered on the basis of scores allotted by the respective trial judge; but the score allotted by the judge should be made a substantial portion of overall performance evaluation of an investigation officer.  It may be appreciated such an accountability system may not be put in place without developing a software for performance evaluation of the investigation officers; such a software system has to be mutually used by the investigation wing and the subordinate judiciary. 

Thirdly, the investigation officials/ officers dealing with collection of forensic evidence should be a separate group within the investigation wing, and this group should be specially trained in skills of collection of forensic evidence.

Fourthly, we may forego ideal separation of powers and authorize respective judge of subordinate judiciary to supervise the investigation process. The ideal separation of power does not exist anywhere in the world; we should not sacrifice our system of justice on the altar of an ideal which does not exist anywhere. The present number of judges, being already over-burdened, cannot perform this supervisory role; but after the number of judges is increased by five or six times, it would be possible for the judges to perform this supervisory role. This supervisory role of the judge may be limited to ensuring that all possible relevant evidence is collected; the judge would not be creating an evidence; he would be only helping in collecting the relevant evidence. Such a supervisory role of judiciary does not run counter to any concept of justice. As the supervisory judge would be belonging to the lowest tier of the subordinate judiciary, if he does not work fairly, he may be held responsible by the higher tiers of judiciary. Such a check and balance would make the investigation officer as well as the supervisory judge work with utmost diligence and efficiency. Fair investigation is of utmost important because the courts do not remove the defects of investigation; rather they decide the cases on the basis of defects of investigation. In this way, whole system of justice becomes a hostage of defects created by an incompetent or corrupt investigation officer. The system of justice cannot be reformed effectively without reforming investigation process. If investigation process may be reformed by altering the present system of separation of power, nothing would be better than it. Moreover, the present system of separation of power –adopted in present system of justice- is not in line with justice system we find  in Islamic history. In Islamic history, we find that ‘Qazi’ was authorized to collect evidence on his own. In other words, if judge of subordinate judiciary is entrusted with supervisory role of investigation process, such a reformation would be not only in line with Islamic practice but also create a check and balance for the investigation officer and the judge to conduct fair investigation and trial respectively.
The prosecution system also has to be reformed. The proposed supervisory role of subordinate judiciary for investigation officers may also be adopted for supervision of prosecutors’ performance. Similarly the proposed scoring system adopted through subordinate judiciary for performance evaluation of investigation officers may also be adopted for prosecutors. The proposed performance evaluation software developed for the investigation officers may also be adopted for performance evaluation of prosecutors. In other words, a joint performance evaluation software system may be developed for investigation officers and for prosecutors, and such software system has to be mutually used by subordinate judiciary, investigation wing and prosecution department. The proposed performance evaluation system may cover all aspects of performance of investigation officers and prosecutors, and also help in removing the shortcomings/deficiencies found in the performance of investigation officers and prosecutors (for details pls see and and
We may conclude that investigation process and prosecution have to be reformed in order to bring system of justice in line with peoples’ general and religious aspiration (continued).