Can Qadyanis be Declared non-Muslims?

One of the objections raised against declaring Qadyanis as non-Muslims, is that “Emaan” is something really personal, something hidden in the heart, not likely to be judged by a third person. To put it in other way, whether or not a person has faith or ”Emaan” is something to be judged only by that very person or by Allah Almighty. Therefore no person can be declared a non-Muslim, if that person himself claims to be a Muslim. Let us analyze this viewpoint in the light of Quran and Sunna.

The Quran says “he who obeys the Messenger (saw), obeys Allah (Nisa-80). In this verse, the way of obedience to Allah has been described. In other words, Islam is nothing more and nothing less than our Nabi’s Sunnah which is the best interpretation of the holy Quran, and a Muslim is he who believes in and act upon our Nabi’s Sunnah. More does a person follow our Nabi’s Sunnah, the greater Muslim he/she becomes. The holy Quran says “those who have faith, enter in Islam fully (Baqra-208). It means all Muslims do not follow our Nabi (saw) fully; every person is the Muslim to the extent he follows Sunnah of our Messenger (saw).

The opposite of word “ Muslim / having faith” is word “ kafir / not having faith”. A non-Muslim/ kafir is he who does not have faith in our Nabi’s Sunnah. Here it is important to note that not having faith in Sunnah is something different from not acting upon the Sunnah. A person may not act upon a certain portion of Sunnah due to laziness, greater indulgence in worldly matters, or due to suspicion whether or not certain “ahadith” have been rightly attributed to the Messenger (SAW); but, in spite of all that, he may not be termed as disbeliever/ not having faith in Sunnah, as long as he believes in righteousness of sayings and actions of the holy Messenger (saw). Disbelievers or persons not having faith in Sunnah are those who disbelieve in the truthfulness/ righteousness of Sunnah, knowing it that what they disbelieve has been rightly attributed to the Messenger (saw).

Qadyanis don’t have faith in our Nabi’s authentic Sunnah; they reject all those ahadith which run counter to Mirza’s claims of prophet hood though these ahadith are found to be rightly attributed to Muhammad (saw) when judged on the same authenticity criteria which is approved by Qadyanis in case of some other ahadith accepted by Qadyanis. In other words, Qadyanis use the same authenticity criteria selectively. In other words, they don’t have faith in many authentic ahadith.

Our Nabi’s Sunnah is the only way to achieve Allah’s love (Al-Imran-31). Our Nabi (saw) has to be focused on as the only center of following for the Muslims; anybody else may be followed by the Muslims, only if the Messenger’s authentic Sunnah endorses such following. In other words, following to anybody other than Muhammad (saw) has to be subordinated to the Muhammad’s (saw) authentic Sunnah. Whoever choses a person - other than the Messenger (saw) - as the center of following and does not subordinate such following to the Messenger’s (saw)  Sunnah, is a non-Muslim.

Qadyanis have chosen Mirza Ghulam Qadyani as  center of following; and such following is not subordinated to our Nabi’s Sunnah which is known to be rightly attributed to our Nabi (saw). Whenever a conflict arises between our Nabi’s Sunnah and Mirza’s views, Qadyanis follow Mirza’s views. The examples are numerous. Our Nabi (saw) has stated “Jihaad” as his “khulq/ conduct”, whereas Mirza Qadyani banned “Jehaad”. Our Nabi (saw) and Quran state that he is the last of prophets, but Mirza claims he was also called by Allah a prophet.

The futility of Mirza’s claim for “Nabuwwat” is even more exposed, when his claim is judged on the basis of his actions/ performance. Islam is based on Quran and Sunnah. The linchpin of Mirza’s argumentation was the argument that Muslims did not understand Quran and Sunnah in the proper context and in the correct manner. But it is amazing to know that he did not write any “tafseer” of Quran so that the “ignorant” Muslims might rectify their understanding of Quran ( he did make interpretation of some verses). He also did not do any work of sifting huge collection of “ahadith” so that the Muslims might know what hadith was correct and what was not (he did make his views about some ahadith). Is it not strange and unbelievable that a person was receiving “Wahi” but he was not separating the right from the wrong out of sources of Islam? The answer is very simple; the sifting of huge collection of ahadith and writing “tafseer” of Quran required lot of knowledge which Mirza Qadyani was lacking in. One may argue that Muhammad (saw) also did not give detailed account of what was right and what was wrong in the previous divine Books. Therefore it is not objectionable if Mirza did not give such detailed account about interpretation of Quran and Books of Hadith. Such a argument would not be valid. Muhammad (saw) did not need to give such detailed account about the previous divine Books, because after coming of Muhammad (saw), Muslims were required to establish “Deen/ Shariah” on the basis of Quran and Sunnah, not on the basis of previous divine Books that is why Muslims were not required to have correct version of previous divine Books. But Qadyanis still require a valid account of ahadith and valid interpretation of Quran.

Briefly speaking, our Nabi’s Sunnah is the second name of Islam. One who does not have faith in authentic Sunnah is a non-Muslim. Not having faith in Sunnah means disbelief in Sunnah which has been rightly attributed to Muhammad (saw). Qadyanis are the people who don’t have faith in Muhammad’s (saw) authentic Sunnah. They have chosen Mirza Qadyani as the center of following and such following is not subordinated to Muhammad’s (saw) Sunnah. Whenever there is conflict between Muhammad’s (saw) authentic Sunnah and Mirza’s views, they follow Mirza’s views.

It is evident from this discussion that Qadyani religion is based not only on particular beliefs but also particular practices; when they follow in their actions Mirza Qadyani as compared to Muhammad (saw), they show their disbelief in Islam. Because Islam is reflection of “Emaan/ beliefs”, we can say that Qadyani religion has nothing to do with Islamic beliefs/ Emaan.

Emaan/ belief is not always something to be judged only by the concerned person and Allah; it is not always a personal thing- hidden in heart, not likely to be judged by a third person. Emaan/ beliefs are always translated into practices, and when practices are made public, they can’t be labeled as personal and hidden matters. 

When Qadyanis made their un-islamic beliefs and practices public, such beliefs and practices no longer remain private or hidden. Such beliefs and practices which are made public can be judged by third person, by the society. Qadyani “Emaan” may also be judged by the “Ulema” and the society. According to Muhammad (saw) “Emaan” increases with good deeds, and decreases with bad deeds”. It means Emaan is always based on deeds and vice versa. Because deeds which are made public can be judged by public, it means “Emaan” can be judged by public.

Once a companion of Nabi (saw) was about to kill a non-believer in a battle. That non-believer started reciting “kalma”. The companion killed him, assuming that non-believer was reciting “Kalma” just to save his life. When our Nabi (saw) came to know this incident, he did not approve it. The recitation of “kalma” was an act; this was the last act of that person, after which he did not make any act which refuted his 'Emaan'; basing on his last act, “Emaan” of that person was presumed by the Messenger (saw). In Islam, “Emaan” is always based on practices; in other words, lack of “Emaan” is also based on practices. Qadyanis’ practices are un-islamic; they don’t have “Emaan”. Recitation of “kalma” by Qadyanis is just like recitation of “kalma” by “munafqeen” of Madina. In other words, Qadyanis can be rightly declared non-Muslims and they have been rightly declared non-Muslim.

Rebuttal of Qadyaniat

Mirza Qadyani claims he is alike (maseel) to Hazrat Isa (as), and alike to all other prophets(as) including our Nabi (saw). This concept of likeness describes that a person capable of cultivating qualities /characteristics of some other person becomes alike (maseel) spiritually to that other person; this alike person (maseel) can claim all the attributes specifically associated with the original person. Such likeness is spiritual only not physical one. It means though alike person (maseel) and the original person have different physical entities, but in terms of spiritual attainments they are similar. If the original person is a prophet, his “maseel” may also be a prophet. In line with this concept, Mirza Ghulam Qadyani claims to have attained all spiritual achievements attributed to Muhammad (saw) including prophethood which is alike (maseel) to prophethood of Muhammad (saw). [Refrences: Rohani khazain (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.22, p-521. vol.18, p-212. vol.16, p- 258,259,270. Malfozaat Hazrat Masih Maood (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.3, p-270. Kalmatul fasl (by Mirza Bashir) p-113, p-105].

This concept of likeness is completely unscientific, totally mythical, and logically baseless.

With advancements in Genetics, scientists are increasingly advocating that human personality/ traits are based on genetic set-up. Two persons can’t have similar genetic set-up (unless they are cloned); it means two persons can’t have similar personality traits; in other words, two persons can’t have completely similar worldly/ spiritual achievements. Not to speak of complete similarity, two persons can’t have any one spiritual quality to the same degree, because the trait/genes composition relating to that quality can’t be the same in two persons. According to science of Psychology, human personality is shaped, to much extent, on the basis of environment he/she is subjected to. Two persons subjected to different environments can’t cultivate completely similar personality. Mirza’s claim to be alike (maseel) to Muhammad (saw) in terms of spiritual attainments is un-scientific.

Logically too, the concept of likeness is not tenable. The whole mankind has been directed in Quran to follow Muhammad (saw); this direction is forever and compulsory for every human to achieve Allah’s love. It was also compulsory for Mirza Qadyani to follow Muhammad (saw) if he wanted Allah’s love. Now the moment the follower and to be followed are elevated to the same spiritual level, the person to be followed no longer remains a person to be followed. But Muhammad (saw) is the person to be followed forever by whole mankind. It means no one can be a “maseel” to Muhammad (saw) in spiritual attainments. Secondly, Muhammad (saw) has been declared as “universal rehmat” forever; it means primary/basic source of Allah’s “rehmat” among the creations is Muhammad (saw). There can’t be another primary/basic source of Allah’s “universal rehmat” after Muhammad (saw); there can’t be two primary/basic sources of Allah’s universal rehmat. If  two entities are taken as basic sources, it would mean no one is basic source. It means no one can be a “maseel” to Muhammad (saw) in spiritual attainments. Thirdly, all attributes of Muhammad (saw) are not cultivable; they can’t be developed through effort and deeds. Prophethood is also “wahbi”- it is bestowed upon whoever is chosen by Allah ( of course, it was bestowed upon the person who is the best among the people in terms of his deeds); but nobody can make a claim for Prophethood on the basis of his deeds. Similarly out of attributes of Muhammad (saw), which are described through his names, many are “wahbi” and can’t be attained through effort. A few such “wahbi” attributes are: Rasul; Nabi; Muhammad; Ahmad; Mehmood; Aqib; Yasin; Taha; Ha-mim; Tasin; Mujtaba; Mustafa; Qasim; Mansur; Khatam-al-anbiya; Awwal; Akhir; Zahir; Batin; Rasheed; Munji; Mahdi; Fatih; Mutahhar; Hasib; Habib; Murtaza; Sahib; Shafi; Shaheed; and Muhrrim. All these attributes should not be understood with only the literal meanings of these words, because only literal meanings of these words fall short of explaining true nature of these attributes; acctually specific meanings, based on literal meanings, are associated with all these names. For example, Nabi literally means a person telling about unseen; but as per specific meanings-based on literal meanings- “Nabuwwat” is a designation bestowed by Allah upon a chosen person for the guidance of mankind. No one can attain all these “wahbi” attributes through effort and pious deeds. In other words, no one can be “maseel” to Muhammad (saw).

Mirza Qadyani’s claim of likeliness to our Nabi (saw) is marred with so many contradictions. For instance, at one place he says “all spiritual attainments of Muhammad (saw) have been bestowed upon him”. [Ref.Malfuzaat Hazrat Masih Maood (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.3, p-270]. But at other place he says “spiritual quality pertaining to name of “Muhammad” (which is “jalali” in its nature) is not to be manifested; now the spiritual quality pertaining to name of “Ahmad” (which is cool like Moon) has manifested itself in his form. [Ref.Rohani Khazain (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.17, p-445/446]. This way he admits that all spiritual qualities of Muhammad (saw) have not been bestowed on him. It means he himself contradicts his claim of likeliness to Muhammad (saw).

The futility of Mirza’s claim for “Nabuwwat” is even more exposed, when his claim is judged on the basis of his actions/ performance. Islam is based on Quran and Sunnah. The linchpin of Mirza’s argumentation was the argument that Muslims did not understand Quran and Sunnah in the proper context and in the correct manner. But it is amazing to know that he did not write any “tafseer” of Quran so that the “ignorant” Muslims might rectify their understanding of Quran ( he did make interpretation of some verses). He also did not do any work of sifting huge collection of “ahadith” so that the Muslims might know what hadith was correct and what was not (he did make his views about some ahadith). Is it not strange and unbelievable that a person was receiving “Wahi” but he was not separating the right from the wrong out of sources of Islam? The answer is very simple; the sifting of huge collection of ahadith and writing “tafseer” of Quran required lot of knowledge which Mirza Qadyani was lacking in. One may argue that Muhammad (saw) also did not give detailed account of what was right and what was wrong in the previous divine Books. Therefore it is not objectionable if Mirza did not give such detailed account about interpretation of Quran and Books of Hadith. Such a argument would not be valid. Muhammad (saw) did not need to give such detailed account about the previous divine Books, because after coming of Muhammad (saw), Muslims were required to establish “Deen/ Shariah” on the basis of Quran and Sunnah, not on the basis of previous divine Books that is why Muslims were not required to have correct version of previous divine Books. But Qadyanis still require a valid account of ahadith and valid interpretation of Quran.

We can conclude that concept of likeness is completely unscientific, totally mythical, and logically baseless.

Islam and Emaan- establishment of systems

It is a common attitude among the Muslims that they believe themselves to be Muslims and having faith/Emaan, but still they consider un-islamic systems (under which they are living their collective life) as having no bearing on their Emaan/Islam. Let us have a critical look into this attitude.

First, we look into relation between “Emaan” and Islam. “Emaan” is to believe in Islam, and Islam is to practice “Emaan”. Islam and “Emaan” in terms of Quran are two sides of the same coin. “Deen” is nothing more than practicing certain beliefs. Islam is reflection of “Emaan”. When belief aspect of “Deen” needs to be emphasized, word “Emaan” is used; when deeds aspect of “Deen” requires to be stressed upon, word “Islam” is used. That is why both actions and beliefs are enjoined in Quran to people having faith; whenever these people having faith are addressed, duties are assigned to them both in the form of actions and beliefs. It means “ahl-e-emaan” are supposed to perform enjoined actions and entertain enjoined beliefs simultaneously in order to be labeled as “ahl-e-emaan”. According to the Holy Messenger (saw), “Emaan” enhances with good deeds, and decreases with bad deeds; this saying also manifests the fact that “Emaan” is to believe in Islam, and Islam is to practice “Emaan”; Islam is “Emaan” in the form of actions. In other words, “Emaan” is included in Isalm; and Islam is included in “Emaan.”. However, on the basis of Hujurat-14, Islam and “Emaan” have been described by some scholars as different things. This verse (Hujurat-14) states “The bedouins say, "We have believed." Say, "You have not [yet] believed; but say [instead], 'We have submitted,' for faith has not yet entered your hearts. And if you obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not deprive you from your deeds of anything. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." The scholars who describe Islam and “Emaan” as different things on the basis of this verse, they give to word “aslamou” the meaning of “embracing Islam”. But actually word “aslamou” in this ayah means “ to be submissive ( to Islamic state); it does not mean “embracing Islam”. It means in this ayah mention has not been made about the Muslims, rather it is about rural Arabs which had not embraced Islam by that time, but which had become subservient to Islamic state. Hence, we can conclude that, for a Muslim, Islam and “Emaan” are not exclusively different things rather they are included into one another in Quranic terminology. However if a non-Muslim adopts Islamic system, he can do it without embracing 'Eman'; but in order to become a Muslim, a person has to adopt both 'Eman' and Islam as two things included into one another. But it does not mean every Muslim has equal level of 'Eman' in his/her Islam; every Muslim has distinct 'Eman' which is different from that of other Muslims.

After ascertaining that Islam and “Emaan” are included into one another, we now dwell on what Islam or “Emaan” is. Briefly speaking, Islam is what has been ordained to do or not to do in the Quran. Our Nabi (saw) has stated five organs of Islam - to witness that there is no worthy of being worshipped except Allah; to offer prayers; to pay zakat; to have fasting in the month of Ramadhan; and to perform Hajj. To profess that no one is worthy of being worshipped except Allah means all injunctions and commandments ordained in the Quran have to be complied with. In other words, in order to become Muslims or ahl-e-emaan, we have to comply with commandments/duties ordained in Quran. There is no denying fact that Quran enjoins personal as well as collective duties. In fact every duty assigned in Quran has two facets- personal and collective. On the one hand, person is required to comply with the duty assigned; on the other hand, persons are required to establish system so that the assigned duty may be performed collectively. The collective portion of every duty can be performed only through establishment of systems. In other words, Islam/Emaan and establishment of Islamic systems are the same thing.

The Quran says “he who obeys the Messenger (saw), obeys Allah (Nisa-80). In this verse, the way of obedience to Allah has been described. In other words, Islam is nothing more and nothing less than our Nabi’s Sunnah which is the best interpretation of the holy Quran, and a Muslim is he who believes in and act upon our Nabi’s Sunnah. More does a person follow our Nabi’s Sunnah, the greater Muslim he/she becomes. The holy Quran says “those who have faith, enter in Islam fully (Baqra-208). It means all Muslims do not follow our Nabi (saw) fully; every person is the Muslim to the extent he follows Sunnah of our Messenger (saw). There is no second opinion that Muhammad (saw) set up Islamic state by establishing systems. The more we establish Islamic systems, the greater we will become Muslims or ahl-e- “emaan”. Islam/Emaan is establishment of Islamic systems, and establishment of Islamic systems is second name of Islam/Emaan.

Islam, Emaan and Qadyaniat

One of the objections raised against declaring Qadyanis as non-Muslims, is that “Emaan” is something really personal, something hidden in the heart, not likely to be judged by a third person. To put it in other way, whether or not a person has faith or ”Emaan” is something to be judged only by that very person or by Allah Almighty. Therefore no person can be declared a non-Muslim, if that person himself claims to be a Muslim. Let us analyze this viewpoint in the light of Quran and Sunna. First, we will dwell on concept of Islam and “Emaan”. Secondly, we will describe concept of Qadyaniat and its critical analysis, and lastly, we will focus on how far it is justifiable to declare Qadyanis as non-Muslims.

At the first stage, we need to clarify that Islam and “Emaan” or faith in terms of Quran are two sides of the same coin. "Emaan" is to believe in Islam, and Islam is to practice "Emaan". “Deen” is nothing more than practicing certain beliefs. Islam is reflection of “Emaan”. When belief aspect of “Deen” needs to be emphasized, word “Emaan” is used; when deeds aspect of “Deen” requires to be stressed upon, word “Islam” is used. That is why both actions and beliefs are enjoined in Quran to people having faith; whenever these people having faith are addressed, duties are assigned to them both in the form of actions and beliefs. It means “ahl-e-emaan” are supposed to perform enjoined actions and entertain enjoined beliefs simultaneously to be labeled as “ahl-e-emaan”. According to the Holy Messenger (saw), “Emaan” enhances with good deeds, and decreases with bad deeds; this saying also manifests the fact that “Emaan” is to believe in Islam, and Islam is to practice “Emaan”; Islam is “Emaan” in the form of actions. In other words, “Emaan” is included in Isalm; and Islam is included in “Emaan.” However, on the basis of Hujurat-14, Islam and “Emaan” have been described by some scholars as different things. This verse (Hujurat-14) states “The bedouins say, "We have believed." Say, "You have not [yet] believed; but say [instead], 'We have submitted,' for faith has not yet entered your hearts. And if you obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not deprive you from your deeds of anything. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." The scholars who describe Islam and “Emaan” as different things on the basis of this verse, they give to word “aslamou” the meaning of “embracing Islam”. But actually word “aslamou” in this ayah means “ to be submissive ( to Islamic state); it does not mean “embracing Islam”. It means in this ayah mention has not been made about the Muslims, rather it is about rural Arabs which had not embraced Islam by that time, but which had become subservient to Islamic state. Hence, we can conclude that, for a Muslim, Islam and “Emaan” are not exclusively different things rather they are included in one another in Quranic terminology. However if a non-Muslim adopts Islamic system, he can do it without embracing 'Eman'; but in order to become a Muslim, a person has to adopt both 'Eman' and Islam as two things included into one another. But it does not mean every Muslim has equal level of 'Eman' in his/her Islam; every Muslim has distinct 'Eman' which is different from that of other Muslims.

After ascertaining that Islam and “Emaan” are included into one another, we now dwell on what Islam or “Emaan” is. Briefly speaking, Islam is what has been ordained to do or not to do in the Quran. Our Nabi (saw) has stated five organs of Islam - to witness that there is no worthy of being worshipped except Allah; to offer prayers; to pay zakat; to have fasting in the month of Ramadhan; and to perform Hajj. To profess that no one is worthy of being worshipped except Allah means all injunctions and commandments ordained in the Quran have to be complied with. The Quran says “he who obeys the Messenger (saw), obeys Allah (Nisa-80). In this verse, the way of obedience to Allah has been described. In other words, Islam is nothing more and nothing less than our Nabi’s Sunnah which is the best interpretation of the holy Quran, and a Muslim is he who believes in and act upon our Nabi’s Sunnah. More does a person follow our Nabi’s Sunnah, the greater Muslim he/she becomes. The holy Quran says “those who have faith, enter in Islam fully (Baqra-208). It means all Muslims do not follow our Nabi (saw) fully; every person is the Muslim to the extent he follows Sunnah of our Messenger (saw).

The opposite of word “ Muslim / having faith” is word “ kafir / not having faith”. A non-Muslim/ kafir is he who does not have faith in our Nabi’s Sunnah. Here it is important to note that not having faith in Sunnah is something different from not acting upon the Sunnah. A person may not act upon a certain portion of Sunnah due to laziness, greater indulgence in worldly matters, or due to suspicion whether or not certain “ahadith” have been rightly attributed to the Messenger (SAW); but, in spite of all that, he may not be termed as disbeliever/ not having faith in Sunnah, as long as he believes in righteousness of sayings and actions of the holy Messenger (saw). Disbelievers or persons not having faith in Sunnah are those who disbelieve in the truthfulness/ righteousness of Sunnah, knowing it that what they disbelieve has been rightly attributed to the Messenger (saw). There is no second opinion that the holy Quran is also the Sunnah of the holy Messenger (saw). Sunnah is the best interpretation of the holy Quran. In other words, the Messenger’s (saw) Sunnah is the second name of Islam. We may conclude that Disbelievers are those who do not have faith in Quran or authentic Sunnah.

Qadyanis don’t have faith in our Nabi’s authentic Sunnah; they reject all those ahadith which run counter to Mirza’s claims of prophethood though these ahadith are found to be rightly attributed to Muhammad (saw) when judged on the same authenticity criteria which is approved by Qadyanis in case of some other ahadith accepted by Qadyanis. In other words, Qadyanis use the same authenticity criteria selectively. In other words, they don’t have faith in lot of authentic ahadith.

Our Nabi’s Sunnah is the only way to achieve Allah’s love (Al-Imran-31). Our Nabi (saw) has to be focused on as the only center of following for the Muslims; anybody else may be followed by the Muslims, only if the Messenger’s authentic Sunnah endorses such following. In other words, following to anybody other than Muhammad (saw) has to be subordinated to the Muhammad’s (saw) authentic Sunnah. Whoever choses a person - other than the Messenger (saw) - as the center of following and does not subordinate such following to the Messenger’s (saw) authentic Sunnah, is a non-Muslim.

Qadyanis have chosen Mirza Ghulam Qadyani as the center of following; and such following is not subordinated to our Nabi’s Sunnah. Whenever a conflict arises between our Nabi’s Sunnah and Mirza’s views, Qadyanis follow Mirza’s views. The examples are numerous. Our Nabi (saw) has stated “Jihaad” as his “khulq/ conduct”, whereas Mirza Qadyani banned “Jehaad”. Our Nabi (saw) and Quran state that he is the last of prophets, but Mirza claims he was also called by Allah a prophet because he is alike (maseel) to Hazrat Isa (as), and alike to all other prophets(as) including our Nabi (saw). [Refrences: Rohani khazain (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.22, p-521. vol.18, p-212. vol.16, p- 258,259,270. Malfuzaat Hazrat Masih Maood (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.3, p-270. Kalmatul fasl (by Mirza Bashir) p-113, p-105].

This concept of likeness describes that a person capable of cultivating qualities /characteristics of some other person becomes alike (maseel) spiritually to that other person; this alike person (maseel) can claim all the attributes specifically associated with the original person. Such likeness is spiritual only not physical one. It means the alike person (maseel) and the original person have different physical entities, but in terms of spiritual attainments they are similar. If the original person is a prophet, his “maseel” may also be a prophet. In line with this concept, Mirza Ghulam Qadyani claims to have attained all spiritual achievements attributed to Muhammad (saw) including prophethood which is alike (maseel) to prophethood of Muhammad (saw). This concept of likeness is completely unscientific, totally mythical, logically baseless.

With advancements in science of Genetics, scientists are increasingly advocating that human personality/ traits are based on genetic set-up. Two persons can’t have similar genetic set-up (unless they are cloned); it means two persons can’t have similar personality traits; in other words, two persons can’t have completely similar worldly/ spiritual achievements. Not to speak of complete similarity, no two persons can have even one spiritual quality to the same degree, because the trait/genes composition relating to that spiritual quality can't be same in two persons.

According to science of Psychology, human personality/ traits are shaped, to much extent, on the basis of environment he/she is subjected to. Two persons subjected to different environments can’t cultivate completely similar personality traits. Mirza’s claim to be alike (maseel) to Muhammad (saw) in terms of spiritual attainments is un-scientific.

Logically too, the concept of likeness is not tenable. The whole mankind has been directed in Quran to follow Muhammad (saw); this direction is forever and compulsory for every human to achieve Allah’s love. It was also compulsory for Mirza Qadyani to follow Muhammad (saw) if he wanted Allah’s love. Now the moment the follower and to be followed are elevated to the same spiritual level, the person to be followed no longer remains a person to be followed. But Muhammad (saw) is the person to be followed forever by whole mankind. It means no one can be a “maseel” to Muhammad (saw) in spiritual attainments. Secondly, Muhammad (saw) has been declared as “universal rehmat” forever; it means primary source of Allah’s “rehmat” among the creations is Muhammad (saw). There can’t be another primary source of Allah’s “rehmat” after Muhammad (saw); there can’t be two primary sources of Allah’s rehmat. It means no one can be a “maseel” to Muhammad (saw) in spiritual attainments. Thirdly, all attributes of Muhammad (saw) are not cultivable; they can’t be developed through effort and deeds. Prophethood is also “wahbi”- it is bestowed upon whoever is chosen by Allah ( of course, it is bestowed upon the person who is the best among the people in terms of his deeds); but nobody can make a claim for Prophethood on the basis of his deeds. Similarly out of attributes of Muhammad (saw), which are described through his names, many are “wahbi” and can’t be attained through effort. A few such “wahbi” attributes are: Rasul; Nabi; Muhammad; Ahmad; Mehmood; Aqib; Yasin; Taha; Ha-mim; Tasin; Mujtaba; Mustafa; Qasim; Mansur; Khatam-al-anbiya; Awwal; Akhir; Zahir; Batin; Rasheed; Munji; Mahdi; Fatih; Mutahhar; Hasib; Habib; Murtaza; Sahib; Shafi; Shaheed; and Muhrrim. All these attributes should not be understood with the literal meanings of these words; rather specific meanings are associated with all these names. For example, Nabi literally means a person telling about unseen; but as per specific meanings, “Nabuwwat” is a designation bestowed by Allah upon a chosen person for the guidance of mankind. No one can attain all these “wahbi” attributes through effort and pious deeds. In other words, no one can be “maseel” to Muhammad (saw).

The futility of Mirza’s claim for “Nabuwwat” is even more exposed, when his claim is judged on the basis of his actions/ performance. Islam is based on Quran and Sunnah. The linchpin of Mirza’s argumentation was the argument that Muslims did not understand Quran and Sunnah in the proper context and in the correct manner. But it is amazing to know that he did not write any “tafseer” of Quran so that the “ignorant” Muslims might rectify their understanding of Quran ( he did make interpretation of some verses). He also did not do any work of sifting huge collection of “ahadith” so that the Muslims might know what hadith was correct and what was not (he did make his views about some ahadith). Is it not strange and unbelievable that a person was receiving “Wahi” but he was not separating the right from the wrong out of sources of Islam? The answer is very simple; the sifting of huge collection of ahadith and writing “tafseer” of Quran required lot of knowledge which Mirza Qadyani was lacking in. One may argue that Muhammad (saw) also did not give detailed account of what was right and what was wrong in the previous divine Books. Therefore it is not objectionable if Mirza did not give such detailed account about interpretation of Quran and Books of Hadith. Such a argument would not be valid. Muhammad (saw) did not need to give such detailed account about the previous divine Books, because after coming of Muhammad (saw), Muslims were required to establish “Deen/ Shariah” on the basis of Quran and Sunnah, not on the basis of previous divine Books that is why Muslims were not required to have correct version of previous divine Books. But Qadyanis still require a valid account of ahadith and valid interpretation of Quran.

Briefly speaking, Qadyani concept of likeness (maseel) is logically baseless.

The foregoing discussion may be summarized by stating that Islam and “Emaan” are two sides of the same coin; they are one and the same thing. Our Nabi’s Sunnah is the second name of Islam. One who does not have faith in authentic Sunnah is a non-Muslim. Not having faith in Sunnah means disbelief in Sunnah which has been rightly attributed to Muhammad (saw). Qadyanis are the people who don’t have faith in Muhammad’s (saw) authentic Sunnah. They have chosen Mirza Qadyani as the center of following and such following is not subordinated to Muhammad’s (saw) Sunnah. Whenever there is conflict between Muhammad’s (saw) authentic Sunnah and Mirza’s views, they follow Mirza’s views. We have also seen that Qadyani concept of likeness (maseel) runs counter to Quran and Sunnah and is untenable logically.

It is evident from this discussion that Qadyani religion is based not only on particular beliefs but also particular practices; when they follow in their actions Mirza Qadyani as compared to Muhammad (saw), they show their disbelief in Islam. Because Islam is reflection of “Emaan/ beliefs”, we can say that Qadyani religion has nothing to do with Islamic beliefs/ Emaan.

Emaan/ belief is not always something to be judged only by the concerned person and Allah; it is not always a personal thing- hidden in heart, not likely to be judged by a third person. Emaan/ beliefs are always translated into practices, and when practices are made public, they can’t be labeled as personal and hidden matters. When Qadyanis made their un-islamic beliefs and practices public, such beliefs and practices no longer remain private. Such beliefs and practices which are made public can be judged by third person, by the society. Qadyani “Emaan” may also be judged by the “Ulema” and the society.According to Muhammad (saw)"Emaan" increases with good deeds, and decreases with bad deeds". It means Emaan is based on deeds.

Because deeds when made public can be judged by public, Emaan can also be judged by

public.

Once Hazrat Khalid bin Walid was about to kill a non-believer in a battle. That non-believer started reciting “kalma”. Hazrat Khalid bin Walid killed him, assuming that non-believer was reciting “Kalma” just to save his life. When our Nabi (saw) came to know this incident, he did not approve it. The recitation of “kalma” was an act; this was the last act of that person after which he did not make any act which refuted his 'Emaan'; basing on his last act, “Emaan” of that person was presumed by the Messenger (saw). In Islam, “Emaan” is always based on practices; in other words, lack of “Emaan” is also based on practices. Qadyanis’ practices are un-islamic; they don’t have “Emaan”. Recitation of “kalma” by Qadyanis is just like recitation of “kalma” by “munafqeen” of Madina. In other words, Qadyanis can be rightly declared non-Muslims and they have been rightly declared non-Muslim.

Jehaad and Ijtehaad- two facets of one process

The Quran is a book having multi-layered meanings.It requires a lot of efforts to discover in-depth and multi-dimensional meanings of the Quran. That is why Allah has enjoined upon mankind to contemplate over Quran. On the other hand, Allah has also enjoined upon mankind to think about their conditions- both external and internal including physical,socio-economic,political as well as psychological, moral and intellectual conditions- so that external issues/deficiencies-relating to external environment- and internal issues/deficiencies-relating to human intellect and soul- may be addressed.

These are two basic injunctions regarding "fikr" - contemplation about Quran and contemplation about human conditions-which have been enshrined in Quran. Holy Quran is the "Book of Guidance" as to how to live in a better way in the prevailing human conditions; it implies what has been enjoined upon human beings is to understand human conditions and find out Quranic solutions to any issues pertaining to such human conditions. "Jehaad" is understanding the nature of human conditions and understanding of Quranic guidance/text, and "Ijtehaad" is finding out Quranic solutions to any issues/deficiencies prevailing in such human conditions-both external and internal- by applying so far hidden/known meanings/inferences of the Quran.

"Jehaad" and Ijtehaad are complementary to each other; without "Jehaad", we can't undertake "Ijtehaad"; without understanding of human conditions and Qaranic text,we can't apply Quranic solutions addressing to issues/deficiencies pertaining to human environment and human soul and intellect. "Jehaad" and "Ijtehaad" are two phases of one process; both phases combined lead mankind to fulfill the purpose of their lives.Both "Jehaad" and "Ijtehaad", are endless processes in a Muslim society; we can't afford even to think about quitting any one of these processes.

To understand human conditions-both external and internal- is called "Jihaad" in the Way of Allah, If such a venture is taken in compliance with Allah's injunctions. Any person who is capable to peep into and understand human conditions is qualified to undertake "Jehaad", and any person who is capable of applying Quranic solutions to any issues pertaining to human conditions is qualified to undertake "Ijtehaad";( the rest may follow the "mujtahid", and may contribute to the process by extending physical support to the process). Everyone is capable of undertaking "Jehaad" at varying degree, depending upon level of his understanding of human conditions and Quranic guidance. But everyone is not capable of undertaking "Ijtehaad", because "Ijtehaad" is conducted on the basis of collective understanding of people about the issue/deficiency under consideration. Therefore, persons only having thorough understanding of human conditions and Quranic texts/guidance can undertake "Ijtehaad".

It is clear from foregoing that in case of both Jehaad and Ijtehaad, these are the prevailing human conditions which are the subject-matter of "Jehaad" and "Ijtehaad"; it implies that understanding of Quran in the perspective of past human conditions-i.e. when Quran was revealed- is not enough. In other words, "tafseer bil rawayat"(tafseer on the basis of "shan-e-nazool"), is not enough. Tafseer bil rawayat (tafseer on the basis of "shan-e-nazool" may helps in understanding some layers of Quranic wisdom; but it is not enough to understand all layers of Quranic wisdom.In order to undertake "Jehaad" and "Ijtehaad" in the proper context, it is essential to interpret Quranic texts not only through "tafseer bil rawayat" but also through other principles of interpretation derived from Quran and Sunnah.

Allah has gifted human beings with faculties of intellect; and Allah has made it obligatory for mankind to contemplate over Quran. It means human intellectual faculties must be free to think over Quran; they should not be confined to think over Quran through "tafseer bil rawayat". But one thing should be kept in mind; the function of human intellect is to prove Quran, not to contradict Quran. The outcomes of human intellect must be subordinated to/supported by  what has been enshrined-directly or by inference- in Quran and Sunnah; only with this condition, human intellect is free to think over Quran.

Marriage with Non-Muslim Women

It is commonly believed that Muslim men are allowed to marry non-Muslim “Ahl-e-kitaab” women. Let us thrash out this matter in the light of Quranic injunctions.

Before scrutinizing the Quranic verses in this regard, the term of "Ahl-e-kitaab" needs to be understood. This term, in Quran, has NOT been used to mention any particular religion; in fact, the Quran uses this term to describe those peoples who were following any book revealed before Quran. These peoples, in Quranic terminology, are not essentially Jews or Christians; these may also be Muslims. This fact is endorsed by the Surah Hashr-2 which reveals that " this is He who expelled from their houses those who became "kafir" out of "Ahl-e-kitaab"; it means all "Ahl-e-kitaab" are not “kafir”. At other places too( e.g. Ale Imran-113, 114) in Quran, mention has been made about "ahl-e-emaan" among the “Ahl-e-kitaab”. Briefly speaking, the term "Ahl-e-kitaab" in Quran, is used to mention group of people who were given revealed books before Quran; this group of people includes Jews and Christian as well as Muslims which-before having belief in Quran- believed in books revealed before Quran.

The Quranic text which is mostly relied upon to justify Muslim men's marriage with non-Muslim "Ahl-e-kitaab" women is Surah Maidah-5 which states that "..... food of those who were given scriptures before you is lawful for you (Muslims)……. and lawful are for you "Muhsanaat" of those who were given Book before you(Muslims). In this verse, the word "Muhsanaat" is mistakenly used with meanings "free and pious women"; in fact, in this verse, its meanings are "married women". In fact, this word “Muhsanat” has also been used with the same meanings - i.e. married women - in the Surah Nisa-24.

A superficial analysis of Maidah-5 reflects that lawfulness of food of "Ahl-e-kitaab" for the Muslims is conditional one. For instance, if any "Ahl-e-kitaab" offers pork to a Muslim, such food would not be lawful for the Muslim. Similarly, lawfulness of "Muhsanaat"-married women- from "Ahl-e-kitaab" is also conditional one. There are two conditions described in the Quran in this regard. One condition has been enshrined in Surah Baqra-221 which forbids Muslims from marrying "Mushrikaat". And the second condition has been clearly elaborated in Surah Al-Mumtahanah- 10 which states that :"........ And hold not to marriage bonds with disbelieving women. From the direction " hold not to marriage bonds with disbelieving women", it is clear that not only marriage with non-muslim women is forbidden but also such previous marriage bonds which existed before revelation of this verse have been directed to be broken up. Surah Maidah-5 describes a general principle that Muslims are allowed to marry married women from "Ahl-e-kitaab"; whereas exceptions to this principle have been enjoined in Baqra-221 and Mumtahanah-10. Keeping in view these two exceptions and the fact that the group of "Ahl-e-kitaab" includes both non- Muslims and certain Muslims as well, we can clearly conclude that if non-believing women from "Ahl-e-kitaab" and " Mushrikaat" from "Ahl-e-kitaab" are not allowed to be married by the Muslims , then only one group of women from the "Ahl-e-kitaab" is left, which is lawful for the Muslims under Maidah-5, and that is the group of Muslim women from the "Ahl-e-kitaab".

It is quite clear from this analysis that word "Muhsanaat" used in Surah Maidah-5 means "married women"; it is misunderstanding to infer from this word that "all free women-Muslim or non-Muslim- belonging to 'Ahl-e-kitaab', are lawful for the Muslim men. Actually term "Ahl-e-kitaab" is used to denote both non-Muslim and Muslim groups of "Ahl-e-kitaab; only Muslim women from "Ahl-e-kitaab" are lawful for the Muslims.

Alliance with Non-Muslims

The present dismal scenario overridden with bomb blasts and almost daily loss of innocent lives in Pakistan particularly and in the Muslim world generally forces every thinking mind to unearth the reality of various factors responsible for this fiasco. Let us have a critical look into the causes leading towards the confusion which actually provides breeding ground for creating this blood tainted scenario.We shall confine our argumentation to the religious roots of this troublesome disaster.

The root cause of this disaster befalling on innocent Pakistani citizens is that perpetrators of this disaster think they are justified in blasting innocent Pakistani citizens in the settled areas because Pakistan is in alliance with USA and NATO forces, which are killing tribal Pakistanis.

Let us have a look at what Quran says about'alliance with non-muslims. The Surah Al-Mumtehenah-1 reveals that " O, Muslims, don't be dependent/allies with enemies of Me and your's". Surah Al-Mujidilah-22, reveals that " you will not find any peoples who believe in Allah and the Day of Judgement that they would be reliant/allies with those who are hostile to Allah and His Messenger..... (SAW). Who is to be considered as enemy and hostile to Allah and Muslims? It is further elaborated in The Al-Mumtehnah-8, which states " Allah does not forbid you from dealing with kindness and justice with those who do not fight against you in connection with Deen and do not expel you from your houses".The verse 9 of the same chapter states " Allah forbids you from being dependent/allies with those who fought against you in connection with Deen and who expelled you from your houses and their supporters;those who will be dependent/allies with them, are wrong-doers".

From these verses, it is crystal clear that Muslims are forbidden from making alliance with such non-muslims who fight against muslims in connection with Deen, and expel muslims from their homes; and who are their supporters in such fight and expulsion.

These verses clearly constrain Muslims from forging alliance with the USA and NATO Alliance. Upto this stage, tribal Pakistanis are right in their opinion that Pakistan's alliance with the USA and NATO forces is un-islamic and forbidden in Islam. But the way they are responding to this un-islamic alliance is equally un-islamic in its nature. The tribal Pakistanis are failing in appreciating that Pakistani citizens are not in alliance with the USA; it is only governmental authorities which are in alliance with USA. Therefore, any act, on the part of tribal Pakistanis, which is playing havoc with the lives of innocent Pakistani citizens, is as much un-islamic and forbidden as is kiiling of tribal Pakistanis at the hands of USA and Pakistani authorities combined.

Aqamat-e-Deen

Islam assigns two types of duties to people; firstly on individual level and secondly on collective level.In fact Every duty assigned in islam has two phases (individual and collective). For instance,zakat (taking wealth from the rich and giving t...o the poor) as an individual duty is fulfilled, when individual pays it; but when it comes to collective level, only payment of zakat by individual is not suffice; at collective level, there has to be a system of zakat to take wealth from the rich and give away to the poor. An individual's duty to pay zakat is one phase of the duty; the other phase of this duty is to have or to strive for the establishment of system of zakat at the collective or state level. A person can't defray his duty of zakat completely, without establishment of zakat system; he has to go through both individual and collective phases of his duty, in order to defray his duty completely.

Similarly, all duties assigned in islam have two phases (i'.e. individual and collective) e.g. duties aiming at personal purification and collective purgation , relating to all moral, social, political and economic spheres. Fulfillment of these two phases of every assigned duty, is called Aqamat-e-Deen. Islam has not left adoption(at individual level) and establishment (at collective level) of Deen to human instincts; if God had left it to human instincts, there would be no need to sending revelation and the messenger(SAW).

There is no denying fact that collective life of people is always regulated by establishing institutions, and it is not a work of accident to establish a system; it always requires some planning, effort and devotion of capable selected/ chosen people of society to establish these institutions. Muslims can't go through collective phase of their duties without establishing islamic institutions .

Aqamat-e-deen, at the individual level, is the matter of "adoption of deen", but at the collective level, it is the matter of "establishment of Deen". Aqamat-e-deen is just like adoption and establishment of any other system. For instance, if we want people to adopt a democratic system, we first establish institutions of democratic political system , and then ask people to act accordingly; similarly if we want people to adopt capitalist system, we first establish institutions of capitalist system and then ask people to act accordingly. It is strange to preach adoption of Deen without establishing islamic systems at collective level. No islamic duty may be defrayed completely without fulfilling collective part of that duty. In other words,adoption of Deen at individual level is not enough until Deen is established at the collective level.

The viewpoint that we should first reform individual characters of Muslims and then establish our Deen/ islamic systems, is also not tenable due to very simple fact that we would require 18 crore years to mould 18 crore Pakistanis; you would appreciate that such a viewpoint would lead us to forget about establishment of our Deen. On the other hand, establishing Deen first would make the task much easier, because due to force of system/Deen, the people , not willing to mould themselves, would also be compelled to go along the system. So our focus should not be conversion of whole masses, rather our focus should be selected, skillful, capable, devoted people (NOT narrow-minded like some Talibans) which could install Islamic political, social, moral and economic systems first and then ask common people to abide by those systems/Deen to embrace obedience to Allah in their collective life. Look at the life of holy Messenger (SAW); in 13 years of 'Makki' period, only a few hundred people got converted, because there was no establishment of institutions in Makka. But in 11 years of "Madni" life, lacs of people were converted, because institutions were established in Madina. Make your task easier, achieveable and practicable by establishing islamic institutions first and then asking people to abide by such institutions.

Function of Human Intellect

In fact, many sectarian controversies emanate from the fact that many islamic scholars do not subordinate their wisdom / logic to revealed knowledge; rather they subordinate revealed knowledge to their logic/wisdom. Quran commands human beings to utilise their intellectual faculties, but function of of intellectual faculties is to prove revealed knowledge, not to contradict it. According to the Quran which states that " whoever becomes alive, he becomes alive due to logic; whoever dies, he dies due to logic", human intellect is a double edged sword; it can set you on the right path as well as on the Satanic path.In my humble understanding,if function of intellect is confined to proving revealed knowledge, intellect will not detract human beings. So whenever an Islamic scholar reaches a conclusion/ idea which is not mentioned in the revealed knowledge (Quran and Sunnah), or not endorsed, by inference, by revealed knowledge, he should keep on thinking over the issue untill his conclusion is endorsed by the revealed knowledge. If any idea/conclusion contradicts the revealed knowledge, it must be rejected outrightly.

REBUTTAL OF JAVAID GHAMDI

The current intellectual scenario in Pakistan has been particularly set in the backdrop of controversies as to what kind of state system should be adopted and how it should be adopted. Among other shades of this debate, the most important is the discourse as to what Islamic principles and approaches should be adopted to rebuild and reform state system in Pakistan. In this connection, Mr. Javeid Ghamdi presents some views which are not tenable when judged on established and internationally approaved principles of interpretation of Islamic texts.For instance, he opines that one can adopt 'Din' in his individual life without establishing islamic systems; he portraits that adoption of "Din" in individual sphere is to take precedence over establishment of Islamic systems which would naturally come into existence when people would have adopted "Din" in individual sphere. So people should not take special pains to establish Islamic systems at first stage; they should focus only to reform their personal lives/ characters at the first stage.Let us analyze Mr. Ghamdi's views in the succeeding lines.

Islam assigns two types of duties to people; firstly on individual level and secondly on collective level.In fact Every duty assigned in Islam has two phases (individual and collective). For instance, duty of payment of Zakat(taking wealth from the rich and giving away to the poor) as an individual's duty is fulfilled, when individual pays Zakat; but when it comes to collective level, only payment of Zakat by individual is not suffice; at collective level, there has to be a system of Zakat to take wealth from the rich and give away to the poor. An individual's duty to pay Zakat is one phase of the duty; the other phase of this duty is to strive for and establishment of system of Zakat at the collective or state level.He can't defray his duty of Zakat completely, without establishment of zakat system; he has to defray both individual and collective phases of his duty simultaneously.

Similarly, all duties assigned in Islam have two phases (i'.e. individual and collective) e.g. duties aiming at personal purification and collective purgation, relating to all moral, social, political and economic spheres. Fulfillment of these two phases of every assigned duty, is called Aqamat-e-Deen. Islam has left neither adoption(at individual level) nor establishment (at collective level) of "Din" to human instincts.

There is no denying fact that Islam deals with both individual and collective matters of mankind. Social collective matters are managed through a system. We can't imagine any social system without institutions. In other words, a social system always operate through the institutions. The establishment of institutions is neither a work of accident nor a natural outcome of individuals' pious actions, as Javaid Ghamdi is preaching; institution-building always requires some planning,skill and expertise of capable selected/ chosen people of the society. The Muslims can't defray their collective duties without establishing Islamic institutions through sheer planning, capability, devotion and skill. Only after establishing such institutions, we can ask people to mould their lives accordingly and lead their collective lives accordingly.

Aqamat-e-Din, at the individual level, is the matter of "adoption of "Din", but at the collective level, it is the matter of "establishment of "Din". Aqamat-e-Din is just like adoption and establishment of any other system. For instance,if we want people to adopt a democratic system, we first establish democratic institutions, and then ask people to act accordingly; similarly if you want people to adopt capitalistic system, you first establish capitalist institutions and then ask people to act accordingly. Mr. Ghamdi's logic is strange; he is preaching adoption of "Din" without establishing the Islamic systems.

The viewpoint that we should first abide by Islamic injunctions individually, is also not tenable due to very simple fact that we would require crores of years to mould 18 crore Pakistanis to establish Din; it may be appreciated that such approach would lead us to forget about establishment of our Din. On the other hand, establishment of "Din"/system at the first stage would make the task much easier, because due to force of system/Din, the people , not willing to mould themselves, would also be compelled to go along the system. So, at the first stage, our focus should not be character reformation of whole masses; rather our focus should be selected, skilled, capable, devoted people (NOT narrow-minded like some Talibans) which could install Islamic political, social,moral and economic systems. After establishment of such Islamic systems/institutions, we can ask common people to abide by such system/Din to submit to God's will in their collective life. Look at the life of holy Messenger (SAW); in 13 years of Makki period, only a few hundred people got converted. Why? because there was no institution-building. But in 11 years of Madni life, lacs of people were converted, because institutions were established there in Madina. Make your task easier and practicable by establishing Islamic institutions first and then asking people to go along these institutions.

Mr. Ghamdi has remarked that Islam does not require a common person to establish Islamic system; it is not a correct view. In Quran, whenever a duty is assigned, it is not only assigned to an individual but also to whole Ummah ( except where duty is assigned to the Messenger (SAW). That is why, in such cases, for the addressees, gramatically plural form (not singular form) is used. It means, all the Muslims are to contribute in establishment of "Din" through whatever capacities and capabilities they have; if any person is unable to contribute in terms of knowledge, skill or authority, he can contribute by offering physical, active or even silent support.

In fact, many sectarian controversies emanate from the fact that many Islamic scholars do not subordinate their wisdom / logic to revealed knowledge; rather they subordinate revealed knowledge to their logic/wisdom. Quran commands human beings to utilise their intellectual faculties, but function of of intellectual faculties is to prove revealed knowledge, not to contradict it. According to Quran " whoever becomes alive, he becomes alive due to logic; whoever dies, he dies due to logic". Human intellect is a double edged sword; it can set anyone on the right path as well as on the Satanic path.In my humble understanding,if function of human intellect is confined to prove revealed knowledge, it will not detract us. It would be more wise, if an Islamic scholar who reaches a conclusion/ idea which is not mentioned in the revealed knowledge ( Quran,Sunnah), or endorsed, by inference, by revealed knowledge, he should keep on thinking over the issue until his conclusion is endorsed by the revealed knowledge; however any idea/conclusion which contradicts the revealed knowledge must be rejected straightaway.

"Qattal" and its Imperatives

In Surah Al-Fath (28) Islam has been described as destined to be enforced over all other systems. This verse states: "He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religions. And Allah sufficeth as a Witness". In addition to peaceful means,the approach to get Islam enforced over other systems/din is, if required, 'Jihad bil saif', as has been mentioned in Surah al-taubah-29 which states that " Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled".

There are two types of 'Quranic' verses relating to "qattal" in terms of type of direction; first are those in which direction is in the form of "order"(e.g. al-taubah-29); second are those in which direction is in the form of "permission"(e.g.Surah Al-Hajj-39-41). The first type of verses are relating to domination/enforcement of Islam over the other systems/religions. The second type of verses are relating to self-defense;   relating to Muslims who are subjected to injustice and suppression; relating to Muslims who are not ruling nation but want to establish Islamic system over themselves (all three situations may be inferred from Surah Al-Hajj-39-41). In this second type of verses, Muslims are permitted to undertake "Qattal"; the word "uzen" used in verse al-hajj-39 means "permission".

Therefore, we should not confuse "order of qattal" with "permission of qattal".The "order of qattal" is meant for domination/enforcement of Islam over other religions/systems. Whereas "permission of qattal" is meant for three situations, as mentioned above, adduced from sura al-hajj-39-41 in which Muslims may have or may not have capacity to launch "qattal". That is why in those three situations Muslims are not ordered rather are permitted to launch "qattal", keeping in view their conditions/capability. In other words, in these three situations, Muslims are permitted to launch 'qattal' if they have capability to launch 'qattal'. It may please be noted that all three situations in which 'qattal' is permitted (not ordered) pertain to non-ruling Muslim nations. It means order of "Qattal" to get Islam  dominating/ enforcing over other systems does not apply to non-ruling Muslim nations (i.e. people/nation not having authority to enforce laws); rather it applies only to ruling Muslim nations (i.e. people/nation having authority to enforce laws). However non-ruling Muslim nations are permitted to wage 'qattal' in three situations i.e. for self-defense; for liberation from non-Muslim  subjugation; and for establishment of Islam over themselves, if they have enough capability for success. All these three objectives/situations of 'qattal' by non-ruling Muslim nations are adduced from the situations mentioned in al-hajj-39-41. 

Non-ruling Muslim nations (i.e. people/nation not having authority to enforce laws) are not ordered to wage 'qattal', if they are obstructed to establish Islam over themselves. But if Muslims are ruling nation (i.e. people/nation having authority to enforce laws) and they are obstructed by force from establishing Islam over themselves, in that case Muslims are ordered to wage 'qattal'.  The Muslims (ruling nations) are, all the times, under obligation to establish Islam over themselves (surah  Ale Imran-85; al-fath-28).

We may conclude that establishment of domination/enforcement of Islam over other systems, is the duty assigned to Muslims (ruling nation), and for that purpose they are ordered to launch "Jihad bil Saif". Non-ruling Muslim nations are not ordered to wage 'qattal' for domination/enforcement of Islam over other systems/'din'. However non-ruling Muslim nations are permitted to wage 'qattal' keeping in view their capability for three objectives i.e. self-defense; for liberation from non-Muslim subjugation; and for establishment of Islam over themselves.

Importance of Sunnah

Quran Pak's meanings are multi-layerd; every person can have access to the layer of meanings according to its capacity. The more a person gets access to  layers of meanings of Quran, the more learned he is; but all persons do not have equal access to layers of meanings of  Quran. As we know Quran is guidance to become obedient to Allah; as such all people, having ordinary knowledge and the learned ones, have right to avail complete guidance as enshrined in Quran. But ordinary people who don't have access to all layers of Quranic meanings can't avail complete Quranic guidance to achieve complete obedience to Allah. For such ordinary people, Allah has graciously bestowed a priceless gift of " Sunnah"- which is based on such layers of   Quranic meanings which are essential to be known for spiritual elevation. The ordinary people can avail complete Quranic guidance for spiritual elevation by following "Sunnah".

Muslims can't get glory without obedience to Allah- without establishing Allah's given systems, as understood by the holy Prophet; rise up to put on concerted efforts to change your systems on the basis of "Sunnah".

Corruption Remedy

we see absolute corruption in Pakistan. The reason is monopoly of some social groups in their respective fields; when these groups involve in corruption,they develop monopolized system of corruption in their respective fields. In our system of governance monopoly and corruption are intertwined and reinforce each other. If we want to eliminate corruption from our society, we need to break up monopolies of groups involved in corruption. One of these major corrupt and monopoly groups is bureaucracy which develop monopolized system of corruption through their national or provincial cadres.We need to break up monopoly of bureaucracy to eliminate corruption; in other words, we need to abolish national and provincial cadres of bureaucracy; we need to split up these national and provincial cadres into ministerial or departmental cadres which, on the one hand, would eliminate monopolized corruption, and,on the other hand, would provide room for development of specialization which would further enhance efficiency in service delivery.

Second Rise of Islam

Dear People,
Second Rise Of Islam is about to begin most probably in sep 2025 after a decline of 500 years, and will culminate into Islamic domination later on (InshaAllah). This rise will continue for one thousand years.Don't wait for end of world; end of world is not going to happen at least in the next one thousand years. We need to establish Islamic systems in order to achieve second rise of Islam; Muslims! rise up to welcome this new era and change your systems to replace them with Islamic ones.
ARIF MIAN