Mr. Ghamdi in his new revelations has divided strategy for enforcement of Islam in three periods. According to Ghamdi, the first period pertains to our Nabi’s (ﷺ) period; in this period Muslims were allowed to enforce Islam through aggressive measures in Arabia Peninsula only. The second period belongs to companions of our Nabi (ﷺ); in this period the Muslims i.e. our Nabi’s (ﷺ) companions were allowed to enforce Islam through aggressive measures in the countries/empires to whom our Nabi (ﷺ) had given invitation through his (ﷺ) letters to embrace Islam. The third period pertains to common Muslims coming in Islam after our Nabi’s (ﷺ) companions; such common Muslims are not allowed to enforce Islam through aggressive measures; however they are allowed to enforce Islam through peaceful preaching only. We see, according to Ghamdi, Islam could be enforced through aggressive measures in first two periods; whereas it may be enforced through peaceful preaching only in the third period which is to last for -ever till Qiyamah. These views of Mr. Ghamdi may be learnt from the link http://video.dunyanews.tv/index.php/en/pv/Ilm-O-Hikmat/6893/ep-15926/ALL/2016-07-31.
It may be interesting to note that previously Mr. Ghamdi was convinced that Islam could be enforced through aggressive means in the first period only. Now he has graciously granted ex-post facto 'sanction' to our Nabi’s (ﷺ) companions as well to enforce Islam through aggressive means. But for granting that 'sanction', he has quoted a Quranic verse which does not prove his case. The authority quoted by Ghamdi is al-taubah-14:
“Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people” (al-taubah-14).
This verse is asking the Muslims to fight the non-Muslims so that Allah may punish the non-Muslims through the Muslims. Mr. Ghamdi explains these are not common Muslims rather they are our Nabi’s (ﷺ) companions which are being ordered to fight the non-Muslims. In other words, Ghamdi views that the word ‘kum’ used in this verse denotes only to our Nabi’s (ﷺ) companions; this word ‘kum’ may not be referred to common Muslims. If Ghamdi’s view is accepted it would mean the Muslims who were present at the time of revelation of this verse were allowed to enforce Islam through aggressive means. In other words, the Muslims embracing Islam after revelation of this verse were not allowed to adopt aggressive means. But as a matter of fact, many Muslims who embraced Islam after revelation of this verse and became companions of our Nabi (ﷺ) [e.g. Ikrama bin Abi Jahl] also included in the Muslim forces which adopted aggressive means against the non-Muslims; all such Muslims and our Nabi’s (ﷺ) companions would have to be labeled as waging an un-authorized war against the non-Muslims, IF Mr. Ghamdi’s view is to be accepted. And if Muslims/companions embracing Islam after revelation of this verse are also allowed to adopt aggressive means against the non-Muslims, there is no reason to suspend/cancel application of this verse for common Mulims embracing Islam after revelation of this verse.
Mr. Ghamdi cannot take stance that addressees of this verse were only Bane Ismael; because we know majority of companions (r.a) who invaded empires to whom letters were written by our Nabi (ﷺ) were non-Ismailia. If such empires were to be invaded only by Bane Ismailia, then non-Ismailia companions would be accused of waging an un-authorized war.
This is verse no.14 of al-taubah. In this verse and in the preceding 13 verses, we find nowhere that companions (r.a) were to fight only with the nations to whom letters were written by our Nabi (ﷺ). Rather verses no.12 and 13 command the Muslims to fight the non-Muslims who break their promises with the Muslims; who defame Islam; who plan to expel the prophet (ﷺ) ; and who first start war against the Muslims. By reading these verses combined, it becomes clear neither it were only Bane Ismailia companions (r.a) who were commanded to fight against the non-Muslims, nor were these only the empires/nations (to whom letters were written) that the companions were to fight against.
The principle to differentiate between what is specifically/exclusively applicable to our Nabi (ﷺ) and what is applicable to all Muslims generally has already been stated/explained in the article https://secondriseofislam.blogspot.com/2015/12/an-analysis-of-mr-ghamdis-basic.html.
This principle is reiterated in the following:
“ There is no second opinion that some verses are individually and specifically addressed to our Nabi (s.a.w.w) e.g. verses relating to number of wives, and as such commandments contained in such verses are not follow-able by the Ummah. But the principle of interpretation- based on the Quran- is that every verse individually addressed to our Nabi (s.a.w.w) cannot be taken as specifically addressed to our Nabi (s.a.w.w); only such verses are to be taken as specific to our Nabi (s.a.w.w), if commandments contained in such verses are separate and contradictory to commandments given to the Muslims”.
In the same manner, the principle to differentiate between what is specifically/exclusively applied to companions of our Nabi (ﷺ) and what is generally applied to all common Muslims is that any verse cannot be declared specifically applied to companions of our Nabi (s.a.w.w), if commandment contained in such verse is NOT contradictory to commandments given to common Muslims.
Because commandment of ‘qattal’ given in the verse mentioned above (i.e. al-taubah-14) is similar to so many commandments given to common Muslims, this verse cannot be rightly declared as applicable only to the companions of our Nabi (ﷺ).
Actually a general principle of interpretation of Quran is that primary addressees of every verse are the Muslims present at the time of revelation of such verse (of course the verses specifically/exclusively addressed to our Nabi (ﷺ) are exempted from this principle). Similarly the secondary addressees of every verse are the Muslims entering in the community of Muslims after revelation of such verse (again the above exemption applies).
In the light of above given principle, the verse al-taubah-14 is primarily addressed to Muslims present at the time of revelation of this verse; and the secondary addressees are the Muslims coming after the primary addressees till Qiyamah. Quran says:
“It is He who has sent among the unlettered a Messenger from themselves reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom - although they were before in clear error” (Jummah-2)
“And [to] others of them who have not yet joined them. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise” (Jummah-3).
These verses say that the person of our Nabi (saww) has been sent to unlettered people; the person of our Nabi (saww) purifies them, and teaches them the Book and wisdom; the person of our Nabi (saww) does it all to those also who have yet not joined such Muslims ( because they have not yet born or because they have not yet become Muslims). These verses show that Quranic verses [except exclusively addressed to our Nabi (ﷺ)] are applicable to primary as well as secondary addressees. As long as a verse is contained in Quran, it has its applicability. It is Allah’s authority to suspend or cancel applicability of any verse contained in Quran; Mr. Ghamdi is using Allah’s authority by canceling applicability of verse no. al-taubah-14 to common Muslims.
Mr. Ghamdi has got strong tendency to speak on religious and Muslims’ matters un-scrupulously. For instance he says political domination in this world is rotating among the nations. First world- wide political domination was entrusted to descendants of Ham. The second time political domination was given to descendants of Sam, and descendants of Ham never got political domination afterwards. The third time political domination has been given to descendants of Japheth, and descendants of Sam would never get it again. This is baseless theory, he is presenting. History shows that first time descendants of Sam got political domination in the age of Babylonian empires. After that Babylonian empire was overthrown by Persia i.e. descendants of Japheth. Again, descendants of Sam overthrew Persian empire in the age of Hazrat Omar (r.a); Arabs are descendants of Sam. Again Mongols and Turks i.e. descendants of Japheth overthrew Arabian empire. We see History does not endorse Ghamdi’s theory that political domination once got by one race cannot be overthrown by the previous dominating race.
In the next part we would see what may be the most pertinent strategy to enforce Islam in present age (continued).