Concept of Life in Islam and “Ghazwat ul Hind” (1)

      

We have already seen in the article https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2012/04/concept-of-life-and-death-in-quran.html  that concept of life in Islam is more than merely biological functioning of human body. In Islam concept of life is relating to capability to obey Allah and His Rasool (ﷺ); and death is lack of such capability. 

We have also seen  in the same article this Quranic concept of ‘life and death’ holds good not only in apparent earthly life but also in life after this apparent earthly life. Some People remain alive even after physical death. Quran says: “And do not say about those who are killed in the way of Allah , "They are dead." Rather, they are alive, but you perceive [it] not (al-baqra-154).  It does not mean physical death does not occur to ‘shuhuda’; it does occur to them, but despite physical death they are blessed with capability of obeying Allah and His Messenger (saw); that is why they are called ‘alive’. This life of ‘shuhada’ and others is relating to this apparent world. Quran says: “And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead; nay, they are alive (and) are provided sustenance from their Lord” (ale Imran-169). In this verse, we (i.e. the people of this apparent world) are being directed that we should not take/consider ‘shuhada’ as dead; it means ‘shuhada’ are not dead in this apparent world as well as in the next world. This verse is requiring us to attach the same concept of life with 'shuhuda', which we attach with people living in this apparent world.

  In the ranking of blessed people ‘shuhuda’ come after  ‘rusul’, ‘Nabis’, and ‘siddiqueen’ (al-nisa-69); it means all of them are alive even after passing through this apparent earthly life. Quran says about such people: " It is Allah that takes the souls  at death; and those that die not (He takes) during their sleep. Those on whom He has passed the decree of death, He keeps back (from returning to life), but the rest He sends (forward for second life) for a term appointed verily in this are Signs for those who reflect (al-zumar-42). This verse describes that Allah takes souls of all persons who die. He also takes souls of those who do not die during their sleep. He withholds (from second life) souls of those who have been decreed as dead; and those who have not been decreed as dead are sent (forward for second life).  

 It may be noted that after earthly life, human soul is moved into 'uqba' (for details plz see my article ' Journey of Human Soul'); all souls in 'uqba'  live according to natural laws existing in the world of 'uqba'. Some souls in 'uqba' are declared alive and others are declared as dead. The souls which have compensable pious deeds in uqba are declared 'alive' in uqba; the souls which do not have compensable deeds in 'uqba' are declared dead in 'uqba' (for details plz see my article 'Non-Muslims' Paradise'). Out of such souls which are declared alive, some souls are allowed to interact with this earthly world. But all alive souls in 'uqba' are not allowed to interact with this earthly life/world.  Such alive souls out of 'uqba world' which are allowed to interact with this apparent earthly life/world are called 'Aulia Allah'; these are souls of 'saleheen', 'shuhuda', 'siddiqueen' 'Nabis' and 'Rusul'.

Now the question arises what is the nature of life of ‘Aulia Allah’ after their death; how do they interact with the apparent world? If all souls in ‘Uqba’ live according to natural laws of ‘Uqba’ [in ‘Uqba’ material body is not allowed to perform life functions; only soul can perform life functions- this fact is evident from the truth that human body is left behind in this apparent world], then how can Aulia Allah (after death) interact with this apparent world in which material body is required to perform life functions? The answer is that Aulia Allah can perform life functions after death through material bodies of other humans which are alive in this apparent world.

This concept of Aulia Allah’s life after death is essentially different from concept of incarnation found in Hindu religion. Incarnation is about taking over consciousness of a person by some superior deity. But Aulia Allah do not perform life functions through taking over consciousness of some living human body; the consciousness of living body remains free to decide as to what advices of Aulia’s are to be complied with and what advices are not to be complies with. It may also be appreciated that Aulia Allah after death act only under  Allah’s direction, just like angels do; after death Aulia have lost their free will. It other words, after death, Aulia act only as Allah’s agency as angels act as Allah’s agency. Actually the good deeds performed by Aulia after death  are the product of their good intentions developed (but not actualized) during their apparent life span.  

This concept of Aulia Allah’s life after death also explains why our Nabi (ﷺ) promised the Muslims for ‘Ghazwat ul Hind’. As we know that Ghazwa has not occurred during apparent life span of our Nabi (ﷺ), this concept of Aulia Allah’s life after death explains how the promise made by our Nabi (ﷺ) about ‘Ghazwat ul Hind’ is being/ would be fulfilled. In the next part of this article, we will describe ‘Ghazwat ul Hind’ in detail in the light of concept of Aulia Allah’s life after death as described above.

From the foregoing, we may conclude that Aulia Allah can perform life functions in this apparent world after their death in this world (continued).

Kalam u Allah and Nabi’s (ﷺ) Words

          

It is objected that Quranic words were uttered by our Nabi (ﷺ). If it is so, how Quranic words may be declared as Allah’s Words-Kalam u Allah.

We have already seen in article https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2014/03/concept-of-infallibility-of-prophet-and_8.html that Quranic Words were shown as written words to our Nabi (ﷺ) by Gabriel (a.s). It means our Nabi (ﷺ) did not produce Quranic Words/ Kalam u Allah; rather our Nabi (ﷺ) just narrated Quranic Words to the people around. Our Nabi (ﷺ) was the first narrator/ ‘Ravi’ of the Quran to the people of his (ﷺ) generation. After this first generation, every generation has ben narrating Quran to the next generation and in this way Quran has reached to the present generation. In other words, it is through process of narration that Quranic Words have been protected by Allah. 

Similarly in the same article mentioned above, we have seen that  Quran was revealed to mind/conscious of our Nabi (ﷺ); it means when Quranic Words were revealed to our Nabi (ﷺ), at the same time understanding/meanings of Quran were also revealed to our Nabi (ﷺ). These Quranic meanings were revealed to our Nabi (ﷺ) through “wahi e khafi”. This “wahi e khafi” is Allah’s Ideas which were translated into words either by Gabriel (a.s) [e.g. hadith e qudsi] or were translated into words by our Nabi (ﷺ) [hadith e nabvi (ﷺ)]. A Nabi (a.s) always recieves "wahi" in the form of Wahe e Khafi"; whereas a Rasool (a.s) always receives wahi in the form of Allah's Words (e.g. Quran). A prophet who is Rasool and Nabi combined receives wahi as a Rasool in the form of Allah's Words (e.g. Quran), and as a Nabi, in the form of wahi e khafi (e.g. Hadith; through wahi e khafi understanding/meanings of Allah's Words are revealed).  It means non-belief in Hadith is actually non-belief in 'nabuwwat'. (for details plz see ;
https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2011/09/wahi-and-intuition.html ; and all three parts of article https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2014/03/hujjiat-e-sunnah-essentiality-of-sunnah.html. The nature of “Wahi e Khafi” is just like any person is given advice to act in a certain way; and that person  acts as he was advised. In the same way, through ‘wahi e khafi’, our Nabi (ﷺ) was taught about meanings of the Quran, and our Nabi (ﷺ)  acted according to meanings of Quran. The basic difference between an angel and a prophet is that an angel does not have capability to act against the commandment of Allah; but a prophet has such capability though he (a.s) does not exercise such capability.

The Quranic meanings, revealed to our Nabi (ﷺ) through “wahi e khafi”, were also narrated by our Nabi (ﷺ) to the people of his (ﷺ) generation  through what we call “HADITH”. After that first generation, every generation has been narrating those Quranic meanings/ “ahadith”  to the next generation and in this way the Quranic meanings/ “ahadith” have reached to the present generation. 

From the foregoing we can see that both Quranic Words and Quranic meanings/ “ahadith” have been transmitted to the present generation through narration/ ‘rawayat’. If any person does not believe in narration/ ‘rawayat’, he in fact does not believe in true meanings of Quran, and he does not believe in Nabuwwat of our Nabi (s.a.w.w). The difference between authenticity level of Quran and Hadith is that Quran is protected in Words; whereas though Hadith may not be protected in  words but Hadith is protected in meanings. It does not mean whole body of Hadith is rightly assigned to our Nabi (ﷺ) but the true Quranic meanings embodied in ahadith may be exacted from this whole body of Hadith. The persons who do not believe in the process of narration/ ‘rawayat’ actually want to deprive present age Muslims of the true meanings of Quran so that such persons may change the meanings of Quran to implement their nefarious designs (some innocent people also have joined such negative persons). 

In the two parts of article  https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2016/07/change-and-changeability-in-islamic.html we have seen that dominant Islamic Thinking in every age of Muslims was in line with dominant Islamic thinking of the previous age. Though, in most cases, every generation of Muslims has been emphasizing Islamic Principles different from the Islamic Principles emphasized by the previous generation but Islamic Thinking adopted by every generation was based on Quran and Hadith, and was order of the day. As against this dominant and positive Islamic Thinking which may be called as “Collective Islamic Thinking of All Ages”, some negative thinking also has been produced by some people in every age; but fortunately such negative thinking was always carried by a small minority, and was rejected by Collective Islamic Thinking of All Ages”. In the present age, the small minority  heralding the ideology of non-belief in narration/ “Hadith” has also been rejected by “Collective Islamic Thinking of All Ages”.  

  

Strategy for Enforcement of Islam and Ghamdi’s New Revelations (2)

In the part (1) of this article we have seen Mr. Ghamdi’s views that Islam could be enforced through aggressive means in the periods of our Nabi (ﷺ) and his (ﷺ) companions ONLY are not viable when analyzed logically and on the basis of Quran.  Ghamdi’s these views are quite baseless because there are so many verses which command-  apart from Nabi’s (ﷺ) companions- common Muslims as well coming after the companions (r.a) to adopt aggressive means to enforce Islam.

Ghamdi’s third view that common Muslims- the Muslims coming after companions (r.a) - can only adopt method of preaching to enforce Islam is also nullified in the light of verses commanding common Muslims to adopt aggressive means to enforce Islam. 

Now question arises what is the most pertinent and effective strategy for enforcement of Islam in the present age. In this article we would address this question.

Regarding enforcement of Islam in the present age, we have had a detailed discussion already in (4) parts of article https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2015/01/enforcement-of-islam-vs-propagation-of.html. In this article Firstly we have seen that Muslim minorities (non-ruling nations) living in non-Islamic states where those Muslim minorities have never been a ruling nation, should adopt peaceful means i.e. preaching, to enforce Islam in such non-Islamic states, if they do not have capability to adopt aggressive means.  The Muslim minorities living in western countries should not take resort to aggressive means due to two reasons: first they don’t have capability to adopt such aggressive means to enforce Islam in such non-Islamic states, and secondly, after becoming politically a part of ruling non-Islamic nations/states, they remain no longer non-ruling Muslim minorities. After becoming a part of ruling non-Islamic nation,  they themselves become ruling non-Islamic nation. It may be appreciated that there is difference between non-Muslim and non-Islamic. A non-Islamic state/nation may also be a Muslim state/nation, if such Muslim state/nation have not adopted Islamic systems in their state/nation.  Secondly we have seen that subjugated Muslims nations which have been subjugated by the non-Muslims in the states/areas where previously such subjugated Muslims were a ruling nation, are under obligation to adopt all means to get liberation from the non-Muslims’ subjugation and enforce Islam over themselves; such subjugated Muslim nation may adopt aggressive measures/qattal as well- if they have the capability to adopt such aggressive measures/qattal- to win freedom from the subjugating non-Muslim nation/state. If subjugated Muslims adopt option of war against the occupying non-Muslim state/nation, all Muslims are under obligation to support such subjugated Muslims.

Thirdly we have seen that ruling Muslim nations are all the time under obligation to enforce Islam over themselves. They are also under obligation to enforce Islam over other non-Muslim nations, IF they have the required capability, and IF they have first enforced Islam over themselves. In case of subjugated Muslims, they are NOT required to enforce Islam first on themselves. The reason is obvious subjugated Muslims cannot enforce Islam while they are subjugated. The ruling Muslim nations may use force/aggressive means-if required- in order to enforce Islam over themselves and others.

Now we dwell on the topic of enforcement of Islam in ruling Muslim nations only.

The above mentioned three categories of Muslims- i.e. Muslim minority/non-ruling nation, subjugated Muslims and ruling Muslim nations- are authorized to use force, if required, to enforce Islam,  and if they have capability; but such use of force is subject to conditions given in the above mentioned article. One condition is that ruling Muslim nation can use force to enforce Islam over themselves but if they want to enforce Islam over others, they would have to establish Islam first over themselves.  If any smaller segment of a ruling Muslim nation wants to enforce Islam over themselves, and the parent ruling nation is not willing to establish Islam over themselves, it is not possible for such smaller segment of nation to establish Islam over themselves without practically breaking up from the parent ruling nation. But, it may be appreciated, no smaller segment of a ruling Muslim nation is authorized either to use force against the parent ruling Muslim nation nor to opt for break-up from the ruling Muslim nation, for enforcement of Islam over themselves- because it is prerogative of Muslim nation to use force, it is majority of Muslim nation which is allowed to use force; it is authority of majority people of parent ruling nation to use force for enforcement of Islam over themselves. 

Similarly, in modern age, no ruling Muslim nation have minority Muslim nation which may have permission to use force against the ruling Muslim nation for enforcement of Islam over themselves; all minority Muslim nations living in ruling Muslim  nations have become politically integrated with the ruling Muslim nations to the extent enough to make such minority Muslims a proper part of such ruling Muslim nations. In other words, no Minority Muslim nation living with a ruling Muslim nation can act as a minority Muslim nation, nor may break-up from the parent ruling Muslim nation for enforcing Islam over themselves.

 It may also be appreciated that, in old ages, ruling Muslim nation might have minority Muslim nations which had not been enough politically integrated with the ruling Muslim nation and had maintained their status of minority Muslim nations, and as such had permission to use force against the ruling Muslim nation for enforcement of Islam over themselves.  For the purpose, such minority Muslim nations had the option of breaking- up from the ruling Muslim nation.
  

In modern age, if any smaller segment of a ruling Muslim nation wants to enforce Islam over themselves, they would have two options: FIRST is to get support of majority of Muslims of the parent nation, and once such majority support has become available, Islam (through taking over the state apparatus)) may be enforced by use of force over entire ruling nation.  The SECOND option- in case of non-availability of majority support- is to install Islamic institutions gradually in the ruling state/nation-  state support is NOT required to establish all Islamic institutions; many Islamic institutions  may be established WITHOUT gaining majority support or without taking over the state apparatus and without use of force. Installation of Islamic institutions in a Muslim society/nation is the second name of enforcement of   Islam.   And, if support of majority Muslims becomes available as a result of establishment of Islamic institutions,  use of force may be resorted to complete the process of Islamization of the Muslim society. However the process of establishment of Islamic institutions should be continued whether or not support of majority Muslims is up-coming. It will be the prevailing situation in the ruling Muslim state/nation which will decide as to what option is required to be adopted.  Keeping in view the fact that, in most of Muslim states, the Islamist groups- which are practically struggling for enforcement of Islam- are in minority, the author’s view is that - in present age- most suitable option for majority of Muslim states/nations is the second one. It may be appreciated that Muslims of a ruling Muslim nation or a subjugated Muslim nation, are all the time under obligation to enforce Islam over themselves, and that decision-making in an Muslim state/society is based on majority views  subject to rectification by men of knowledge and piety; but use of force for enforcement of Islam is the right of Muslim majority only.

 It may be appreciated that Hazrat Imam Hussain challenged Yazeed's regime because Yazeed was not allowing the Islamic institutions already established to function according to Islamic principles. Imam Hussain's policy was to amass majority support. Out of twelve provinces, Yazeed had majority support from two provinces i.e. Syria and Egypt; whereas Imam Hussain had majority support from three provinces i.e. Makkah, Madinah and Yemen. Imam's strategy was to get hold of Kufa first so that majority support might be obtained from four provinces which were east of Kufa and these four provinces might be cut off from Yazeed's supporter provinces which were in the west of Kufa. In this way Imam could get majority support in eight out of twelve provinces, and resultantly might dethrone Yazeed through force (it may be noted Imam never used force first in this campaign of amassing majority support; however after amassing majority support, Imam could use force). The strategy was excellent   but was foiled due to betrayal of Kufa.

 Quran says:

Faint not nor grieve, for ye will overcome them if ye are (indeed) believers (ale- Imran-139).

This verse says if we are believers of Islam- means if we enforce Islam- we will be dominant- means we will be stronger. In other words, Islam and strength of a Muslim state/nation reinforce each other; Islam enhances strength of a Muslim state, and strength of a Muslim state enhances enforcement of Islam. It implies if all Islamist groups- instead of fighting against their respective states- start supporting their respective states (not the rulers) and start adding to strength of their respective states (not strength of rulers), such respective Muslim states would become more capable of enforcing Islam after getting more strength. We have the example of Turkey; the more strength this state is gathering, the more it is becoming capable of enforcing Islam. The above mentioned verse implies whenever a Muslim nation would get stronger, they would return to their origin i.e. Islam, through establishment of Islamic institutions. However this principle applies only to ruling Muslim nations; it does not apply to such puppet Muslim nations which have been given power by non-Muslim nations. Therefore this rule does not apply the Muslim states like Kashmir, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Lybia, where certain groups of Muslims have been bestowed upon ruling power by the non-Muslim nations. All these Muslim nations are subjugated Muslim nations ( for details plz see https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2015/01/enforcement-of-islam-vs-propagation-of.html (concluded).