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).
No comments:
Post a Comment