 |
 |
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||
 |
|
||||||||
 |
Tuesday December 09, 2003 08:43:36 AM |
 |
|
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||
 |
Jihad
JIHAD IN THE PRESENT TIME By: Hafiz Abdul Salam Bin Muhammad QUESTIONS: Has jihad now become binding on every Muslim? If so, on what authority? As a matter of fact, no prophet ever started Jihad (i.e. fighting with sword) until and unless he had set up and established an Islamic state. But we have still not been able to set up one. Suppose if Jihad has become incumbent, why is it so that we do not start it in Pakistan while the atrocities and persecution inflicted on the Muslims in Kashmir is a common scene in Pakistan also? Clarify it with sound arguments. If we cement only the outer parts of the building of Islam but utterly neglect its inner parts and they remain hollow, is it of any use? Please explain. ANSWERS: As long as Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) was in Makkah, he was not allowed to fight against the disbelievers, though they (disbelievers) persecuted him and his followers. Then he migrated to Madina. But the disbelievers even then were not ready to abandon the chase and leave him alone. So, at last, Allah made it permissible for him to fight. Sanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged; and Allah is indeed able to give them victory. (Al-Hajj: 39) Then, a step forward, Allah made it binding on the Muslims to fight in His way. Warfare is ordained for you, though you dislike it. (Al-Baqarah: 216) And now for all times to come Allah has made it binding on the Muslims to continue their fighting against the disbelievers till the following objectives are achieved. THE FIRST OBJECTIVE OF JIHAD: THE SECOND OBJECTIVE: THE THIRD OBJECTIVE: THE FOURTH OBJECTIVE: THE FIFTH OBJECTIVE: THE SIXTH OBJECTIVE: THE SEVENTH OBJECTIVE: THE EIGHTH OBJECTIVE: HAVE WE ACHIEVED THE DESIRED OBJECTIVES? JIHAD WITHOUT AN ISLAMIC STATE ONCE MADE OBLIGATORY, JIHAD WILL ISLAMIC STATE AND KHALIFA OWE TO JIHAD IS JIHAD, AT PRESENT, FARDH-E-AIN THE SIGN WHICH SHOWS THAT ONE FARDH-I-KIFAAYAH CONTINUES TO BE FARDH-I-AIN WHY DO WE NOT DO JIHAD IN PAKISTAN? FALSE EXCUSES AND PRETEXTS TO EVADE JIHAD: THE FIRST EXCUSE: THE SECOND EXCUSE: THE FIFTH EXCUSE: THE SIXTH EXCUSE: THE SEVENTH EXCUSE: =============================================================== Elimination of Persecution Every Muslim is bound to continue fighting against the disbelievers as long as they in any part of the world have power and strength enough to persecute the Muslims and as long as a person desiring to accept Islam is reluctant to do so jut because he fears to be persecuted and tortured by the disbelieves and it he somehow enters the fold of Islam, he becomes a target of their (i.e. the disbelievers?) oppression. Allah Ta?ala has said: And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong doers. (Al-Baqarah: 193) Dominance of Islam Until Islam as a Way of Life dominates the whole of the world and until Allah?s Law is enforced everywhere in the world, it is binding and incumbent upon the Muslims to fight on against the disbelievers. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. But if they cease, then lo! Allah is Seer of what they do. (Al-Anfaal: 39) Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) has said: I have been ordained (by Allah) to fight on against people till they testify that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah?s Messenger, and they offer Salat perfectly, and pay Zakat, so it they perform all that, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by (Islamic) Law and their accounts and reckoning rest with Allah. (Both Bukhari and Muslim reported it) To Force the Disbelievers to Pay Jizya The Muslims are to go on fighting against the disbelievers till they feel themselves subdued and readily pay the Jizya. Fight against those who To Help the weak and the Oppressed If anywhere in the world, the weak and feeble are being oppressed a persecuted; it is incumbent on the Muslims to continue fighting against the oppressors till the weak and feeble are made free of this oppression and tyranny. And what is wrong with you that you fight not in the Cause of Allah, and for those weak, ill-treated and oppressed among men, women and children, whose cry is: ?Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors, and raise for us from you one who will protect, and raise for us from you one who will help. (Al-Nisa: 75) To Seek Revenge for the Murder of a Muslim If the disbelievers kill a Muslim, revenge and retribution has been prescribed. However if a Muslim ever happens to murder a Muslim, the relatives of the murdered Muslim can agree to accept Diyyat and set free the murderer, or if they like, they can grant him (i.e. the murderer) because they belong to the same Islamic brotherhood. But to seek revenge on a disbeliever is binding except that he accepts Islam. O ye who believe ?Retribution is prescribed for you in the matter of the murderer.? (Al-Baqarah: 178) In 6 A.H., the Messenger al Allah (PBUH) approached Makkah with no other intention than to perform Umrah. He had no intention, at all, to fight, but the disbelievers would no allow him to perform Umrah. Even then he avoided fighting. He sent Uthman (God be Pleased with him) as an envoy to Makkah to negotiate. Negotiations prolonged and Uthman?s (God be Pleased with him) arrival was considerably delayed. The Muslims began to suspect a foul play o the part of the Quraish. Somhow they came to believe that Uthman (God be Pleased with him) had been murdered at the hands of the Quraish. When Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) learnt this news, he declared that they (the Muslims) would depart from that place only when they had taken the revenge for Uthman?s murder. Then fourteen hundred companions of the Prophet (PBUH) took a solemn pledge at the hand of the Prophet (PBUH) that they would sacrifice their lives to avenge the death of Uthman (God be Pleased with him). When the news of this pledge reached the disbelieves, they at once dispatched Uthman (God be Pleased with him) back to Allah?s messenger (PBUH) and his companions (God be Pleased with him). (Mukhtasar Seeratur Rasool, and Seerat Ibn-e-Hashsham) It goes without saying that the Muslims had taken this solemn pledge to avenge the death of Uthman (God be Pleased with him). Allah Ta?ala put his seal of approval and pleasure on this oath and made it public forever through the Holy Qur?an. Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave their Bai?a (pledge) to you (O Muhammad PBUH) under the tree: (Al-Fath: 18) In 8 A.H. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) sent Harith Bin Umair Azdi (God be Pleased with him) with a letter addressed to the ruler of Basra. On his way to Basra, he was intercepted and martyred by Shurahbeel Bin Amr Ghassani who was the governor of the Balqa of Sham (Syria) on behalf of the Caesar. When Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) got this sad news,, he was greatly shocked. He at once arranged and organised an army of 3000 men. It was the largest army ever mobilized so far by the Prophet (PBUH) excepting the occasion of the War of the Trench (the Ghuzwa of Al-Khandak). He (Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) appointed Zaid Bin Haritha to lead the army and ordered him to reach the scene of Harith?s murder. There he was, first, to invite the people of that place to enter the fold of Islam and believe in Allah and if they accepted this invitation, they were not to be harmed. Otherwise, the Muslims were to seek help from Allah and fight against them. This was the famous battle of Mauta and in it three thousand Muslims fought against two hundred thousand disbelieves. Three commanders of the Muslim army were blessed with martyrdom one after the other. At last, Khalid Bin Waleed, the Sword of Allah, came forward, took the command of the Muslim army and Allah, at his hands, and granted victory to the Muslims. (Ar Raheeq ul Makhtoom) To teach a further lesson to the people of that area, Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) commanded to start yet another military campaign against the people of that place. This time Usama son of Zaid Bin Haritha was to lead the mission which was accomplished in the reign of Caliph Abu Bakr (God be Pleased with him). To Punish those who violate their oaths If a nation break their pledge after giving word, it is incumbent on the Muslims to fight them. But it they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack you religion with disapproval and criticism then fight (you) the leaders of disbelief___ for surely their oaths are nothing to them ___ so that they may stop (evil actions). (Al-Tawba: 12) The Muslims who fight against the people who back their pledge and violate their oaths (after their covenant) have been promised six good things by Allah Ta?ala. Fight against them so that (1) Allah will punish them by your hands and (2) disgrace them and (3) give you victory over them and (4) heal the breasts of a believing people, (5) and remove the anger of their (believers?) hearts (6) Allah accepts the repentance of whom He wills. Allah is knowing, All-Wise. (Al-Tawba: 14, 15) An 6 A.H. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) came to a peace agreement with the Quraish of Makkah to be in effect for ten years. (For the cause of peace) he had agreed even to such hard and stiff terms as were very shocking to the Muslims. But, in 8 A.H., the Quraish, without caring and honouring a bit for the clauses and conditions of the treaty, participated in a military campaign against Banu Khuza?ah, a proven ally of the Muslims, and thus they broke their pledge. Upon this Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) invaded Makkah with ten thousand devoted and faithful companions and conquered it. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) had reached an agreement for peace and mutual co-operation with the Jewish tribes settled in Madina. But they (the Jews) refused to honor this peace treaty. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) laid siege to Banu Qainqa and Banu Nazair. They, at last, surrendered themselves to the Prophet (PBUH) and he ordered them to leave Madina and settle somewhere else. Another Jewish tribe, Banu Qurayza (who had been his i.e. the Prophet?s ally, but deserted to the hostile camp at the Battle of al Khandaq (The Trench) were also besieged by Allah?s Messenger. Their adult men were killed and women and children were taken prisoners. To Fight to Defend If a people launch an offensive against the Muslims, it is obligatory for the Muslims to fight to defend themselves. And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors. (Al-Baqarah: 190) At the Battle of the Trench, when ten thousand disbelievers from all corners of Arabia attacked Madina, Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) commanded all the Muslims to participate in the battle to resist the aggression. At the battle of Tabuk, he commanded all the men who could fight to leave the Arabian Peninsula and fight the enemy who had attacked the Muslims. Despite the face that in those days? times were very hard for the Muslims. To Recapture the Occupied Territory If any territory belonging to the Muslims is occupied by the disbelievers, it is prescribed for the Muslims to drive the disbelievers out of that place and restore their possession of the land. And slay them wherever you find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out. (Al-Baqarah: 191) The battle banu Israeel fought under the command of Talut (whose mention has been made in Sura Al-Baqarah) had no other objective than to reclaim and repossess the Muslim territories. Allah Ta?ala has approved and quoted the saying of the Mujahideen participating in this battle. They said: Why should we not fight in Allah?s way when we have been driven out of our dwellings with our children. (Al-Baqarah: 246) The Muslims who were but a small group, by Allah?s Grace and Help, overwhelmed the disbelievers who were a mighty host. Dawood (God be Pleased with him) killed the enemy?s commander Jalut and put the disbelievers to rout. Thought the immediate cause of the attack on Makkah by Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) was the violation of the conditions of the peace Treaty on part of the Makkans, yet the fact should not be disregarded that the Makkans had driven the Muslims out of their hearth and home in Makkah, so through the conquest of Makkah they, following the teachings of the Holy Qur?an, were able to get back their land. Now let us, in the light of the foregoing discussion, reconsider the question raised by you and decide if Jihad, in the present circumstances, has become obligatory for the Muslims or not. Whether Jihad, at present, is Fardh-i-Ain (strictly obligatory for each and every Muslim) or Fardh-i-Kifaayah (generally obligatory whose performance by an adequate number would absolve all) will be discussed later. HAVE WE ACHIEVED THE DESIRED OBJECTIVES? I have enumerated eight objectives which the Qur?an has set for Jihad and the Muslims are not to stop Jihad against the disbelievers till these objectives are achieved. Let us see if these objectives, or even some of them, have been achieved or not. 1. To go on fighting is prescribed for the Muslims till persecution and mischief persists. Let me know whether the hurdles obstructing the way of the people who desire to believe, and persecution and oppression, on the part of disbelievers, have ended in any part of the world or not. Furthermore, may I know if the oppressed shoodars (Untouchables) of India, who want to take refuge in the lap of Islamic equality, can enter the fold of Islam without any fear of undergoing persecution? If the answer to all these questions is NO and certainly it is a plain NO, how can we still be suspecting that Jihad has not become obligatory for the believers? 2. To fight on is incumbent on the believer still the way of Life (i.e. Deen) prescribed by Allah dominates and overwhelms the whole of the world. Now the question arises whether these days Allah?s Deen alone is ruling the world and whether the World Order has Islam at its roots or it is based on disbelief. We need to know if Economy is being run according to the commands given by Allah Ta?ala quite free from interest and usury of whether we are forced and pressed, by he disbelievers, to follow the economic system based on interest and usury and if the limits imposed by Allah are being observed in the world or not. There can be no two answers to these questions. Islam is certainly nowhere dominant in the world. If it is so, the fact is established that Jihad is obligatory for the believers. 3. Fighting is obligatory till the disbelieving powers and states are subdued and they pay Jizya with willing submission. Have the disbelievers anywhere in the world agreed to come under the protection of the Muslims by paying the Jizya? Do they feel themselves subdued by the Muslims in any part of the world? No. Rather, at present, it is Muslims who feel themselves subdued and humiliated before the disbelievers, and it is again the Muslims who have been forced to pay tribute to them (the disbelievers). The disbelievers are plundering and exploiting all the wealth and resources belonging to the Muslims through the World Bank and IMF. Should we not make any struggle to free ourselves from this state of utter disgrace? Why should we still not regard Jihad so obligatory? 4. When the weak are being oppressed and persecuted in any part of the world, it is obligatory to fight on (against the oppressors) till they (i.e. the weak) are delivered from this oppression and brutality. Can you name a single point in the world where the Muslims are not being harassed and oppressed? How should you not listen to the oppressed who are crying and calling for help and deliverance in India, Kashmir, Philippine, Chechnya and Bosnia? How should we ask for some further proof to regard Jihad as obligatory in the presence of impeccable verses of the Qur?an, and viewing how our brothers have been undergoing sheer brutalities at the hands of the disbelievers? 5. If a Muslim is killed by the disbelievers, it is obligatory to avenge his death. Hundreds and thousands of the Muslims have been and are being killed in India and Kashmir. Modest and virtuous Muslim women are being raped and molested there by the Hindus. Are we not to retaliate against these brutalities? Twenty five hundred thousand Muslims were mercilessly butchered in 1947. We are still to avenge their death. Twenty five thousand of the Muslim women who were kidnapped in 1947 by the Hindus and the Sikhs are still in their possession, giving birth to Hindus and Sikhs. Who is going to exact full retribution for such heinous and inhuman crimes committed by the disbelievers? In China, Russia, Albania, and Yugoslavia millions of innocent Muslims were put to death in the name of Revolution. The rest were forced to convert to Communism. A few months back in Bosnia 23 thousand Muslims were slaughtered just in a day. How long will we have to await before we settle scores with the brutal Serbs? 6. When a people breaks its pledge, it is incumbent to fight it. It has occurred time and again that the disbelievers break their treaties they have made with the Muslims. We need not go into remote past to find out such examples. We can quote many such instances from the contemporary history. After the establishment of Pakistan India was bound to protect and safeguard the life, property and mosques of the Indian Muslims in the light of the Liaquat ? Nehru Pact. But it never cared to honour this pact. Every other day the Muslims are massacred there in large numbers. Their houses, shops and factories are burnt to ashes. The Pakistan Embassy/High Commission has several times been attacked. Thousands of mosques including the historic Babri Mosque have so far been demolished in India. Last but no least, India is still not ready to honour its promise to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir. 7. If any Muslim sate of the Muslims anywhere in the world, face aggression, it is incumbent on all the Muslims to resist the aggression and fight to protect and defend their Muslim brothers and themselves. These days? seven and a half Lac Indian troops are extirpating the kashmiri Muslims. In Burma, the Burmese Muslims are being butchered mercilessly and driven out of their hearths and homes by the Buddhists. The Serb beasts backed by the whole Christian world and actively supported by the Communists, are devastating the whole of Bosnia and trying to exterminate the whole race of Bosnian Muslims. Chechnya has been assailed by the Russian army and the Muslims there are struggling for their survival. Let me draw your attention to the fact that the animals also fight to shield and protect their young ones even if they have to loose their lives. If a dog or a cat happens to attack chicks, the hen does not seek any legal opinion (a Fatwa) from a jurist as to whether it is lawful for her to retaliate or not. She simply stands on the defensive and fights on against the cat or the dog, though she is quite weak before them. How ridiculous on our part it is that we are still trying to ascertain whether Jihad has become obligatory or not, and whether it is lawful for us to retaliate or not. 8. if the disbelievers occupy a territory belonging to the Muslims, it is incumbent on the Muslims to drive the disbelievers out of that place and restore their possession of the land. a) Spain that had been Muslim territory for more than eight hundred years was captured by the Christians. They (i.e. the Christians) literally and practically wiped out the whole Muslim population. Now it is our duty to restore Muslim rule to this land of ours. b) The whole of India, including Kashmir, Hyderabad, Assam, Nepal, Burma, Behar and Junagadh was a Muslim territory. We lost this vast territory and it fell into the hands of the disbelievers just because we disregarded Jihad. c) Palestine is held by the Jews. Even our First Qibla, Bait-ul-Muqaddas is under their illegal possession. So many other lands and territories which once belonged to and were ruled by the Muslims, are now held by the disbelievers, and are awaiting the Muslim Mujahideen so that they might restore them to their real possessors. I hope that these details would suffice to convince my brothers that, under the present circumstances, Jihad, to all intents and purposes, has become obligatory for the Muslims. JIHAD WITHOUT AN ISLAMIC STATE Now we go back over to the second part of your question and analyze and review it. You have claimed that no prophet ever started Jihad with the sword until and unless he had succeeded in establishing an Islamic state, and as we have not yet been successful in establishing it, how can we start Jihad with sword? As regards the foregoing Prophets and their Ummahs, any detailed and authorized account of their affairs is missing, so to ascribe anything to them is simply to make a claim that cannot be ever proved. Even if we know full well their affairs, we should not be forgetful of the fact we are the Ummah of Muhammad (PBUH) and his way of life alone should be and can be a model for us. So I shall base my arguments on and prove my standpoint from the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH). It is a proven and established fact that the revelation of Islamic dictates had been through a gradual process that took twenty ? three years for its completion. Some of these dictates and injunctions wee given in Makkah and some in Madina. And the Muslims followed them as they were revealed. But when once they were given, they are to be followed by the Muslims undeviatingly and faithfully till the Day of Judgment with the only exception that is manifest from the following verses of the Holy Qur?an: Allah burdens not a person beyond his scope (and capacity). (Al-Baqarah: 286) So keep your duty to Allah and dear Him as much as you can. (Al-Taghabun: 16) Now we cannot deviate from or suspend the enactment of a dictate or an injunction on the pretext that it was revealed or enforced after the establishment of the Islamic State in Madina, so it is no more obligatory to follow it in the present circumstances when there is no Islamic State anywhere in the world. If we follow this logic, it will lead to very odd conclusions. Let us consider the following facts: 1. Azan (call for Prayer), Iqaamat (call for Congregational Prayer) and Congregational Prayers, were made obligatory after the establishment of the Islamic State in Madina. 2. Zakat, Sadaqaat and Ushr (poor-due and alms etc) were also made obligatory only after the establishment of the Islamic State. 3. Fasting in Ramadan was made obligatory when the Islamic State was in the second half of its second year. 4. Alcoholic drinks were forbidden in the sixth or seventh year of the Islamic State. 5. Mut?a (marriage valid for a stipulated period only) was made unlawful only at the Conquest of Khyber when Islamic State has successfully completed its six years. 6. Domestic donkey was also declared Haraam (forbidden) at the same time (i.e. at the conquest of Khyber). 7. The verses banning and forbidding usury and interest were the last once revealed to Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) (in about 10 A.H.). In Sahih Bukhari, it has been reported from Abbas (God be Pleased with him). The very last verse that was revealed to Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) was that pertaining to (the prohibition of) usury and interest. (Tafseer Ibn-e-Katheer VoI.1, p. 275) Now, following the aforementioned logic of yours, we can safely conclude that as an Islamic State is now nowhere to be seen in the present times, it means: a) Azan, Iqaamat and Congregational Prayers are now not obligatory. b) Zakat and Ushr have also lost their obligatory status. c) Alcoholic drinks are quite lawful and no restriction can be imposed on them and no penalty can be given to one who uses them. d) Muta also, at present, can be ?enjoyed? freely. e) We need not fast in the month of Ramadan. f) The meat of domestic donkeys can also be relished. g) Business transaction based on interest and usury is also quite lawful. Let me further your logic: It can be said that even if an Islamic State comes into existence: a) Alcoholic drinks shall remain Halal (lawful and permissible) till six more years pass. b) Mut?a shall also remain lawful for about the same period. c) The donkey?s meat shall remain halal till ten more years pass. d) Penalties for Zina (illegal and illicit sexual relations), theft, slander and libel shall remain suspended for as many years as they were not enforced by Allah?s Messenger after the establishment of the Islamic State in Madina. Nearly the same logic is followed by the people who say it is not proper to impose the penalty for committing Zina until and unless the society is reformed amorally, and it is wrong to cut off the hands of a thief without eliminating poverty and bringing the members of a society to a common economic level. No, my brother, this is no logic to follow. It makes no difference whether an order was passed or an injunction made or a thing was declared obligatory or unlawful and forbidden before or after the establishment of the Islamic State. What has once been declared obligatory shall remain so till the Hour is established. We are to perform this obligation whenever we have the capacity. Similarly what has been forbidden, whether before or after the establishment of the Islamic State, is, and shall remain, forbidden forever. Such is also the position with Jihad. No doubt, it was made obligatory gradually. First, the Muslims were not allowed to fight. At Madina it was first made simply permissible to fight, and then it was made obligatory. But once it was declared obligatory, it is, and it shall remain, obligatory till the Day of Judgment. Those who want to flee from this obligation have invented many excuses. Sometimes they say that it is not lawful to fight or do Jihad with the sword till the establishment of the Islamic State. Sometimes they express the opinion that it is not permissible to fight without a Caliph. Sometimes they remark that it is not permissible to fight when our number is no adequate. But none of these forms a genuine excuse for giving up Jihad. ONCE MADE OBLIGATORY, JIHAD WILL Jabir Bin Samrah reported: Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: This religion (i.e. Islam) will never cease to exist and a group of people (Usba) among the Muslims will continue to fight for its protection until the Hour is established. (Muslim) Al ? Qamus ? an authentic lexicon of the Arabic Language explains ?Usba? thus: ?Usba? is a group of people, horses or birds that consists of 10 to 40 members. ?Usaabah? also implies the same meaning. This hadith of Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) decides the matter once and for all that Jihad will never stop, whether there exists an Islamic State or not. The Muslims will continue to perform this obligation whether with a large army or with a group of only ten or twenty people. If the existence of an Islamic state or the existence of a Caliph is declared necessary for the performance of this duty, we cannot continue, at present, to fight for the Cause of Allah because these days neither does there exist an Islamic state nor does there exist any caliph. If we discontinue (to do) Jihad on this pretext, what explanation can we offer for the above mentioned saying of Allah?s Messenger (PBUH)? Let me know whether this prediction made by the Prophet (PBUH) be considered true or false. The above discussion sufficiently proves that the existence of an Islamic State or a Caliph does not matter in this regard. This principle goes so far as in case a Muslim does not find even a single companion to stand by him, he can go on fighting all by himself. Then fight (O Muhammad (PBUH( in the Cause of Allah, you are not tasked (held responsible) except for yourself, and incite the believers (to fight along with you). (An-Nisa: 84) In 6 A.H. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) made a peace treaty with the disbelievers in Makkah (that was to remain valid) for ten years. The peace Treaty consisted of many clauses, including a certain one (that was quite distressing for the Muslims and) which said that in case a Makkan embraced Islam and went to Allah?s Messenger (to take shelter), he would be handed over back to Makkans. After making this treaty, Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) retuned to Madina. Now it so happened that in Makkah a young Quraishi, Abu Baseer by name, embraced Islam and came over to Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) at Madina. The Makkans sent two men to Madina to bring him back. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) delivered him up to them. On the way back (to Makkah), they camped at Zul Halaifah and started eating dates. Abu Baseer addressed on of them and said, ?By Allah, you possess an amazingly bright and fine sword. Could I have a look at it?? He handed it over to him. Abu Baseer at once put him to the sword. The second one fled from there and came straight to Allah?s Messenger (PBUH). Running as he entered the Mosque, Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) and said, ?BY Allah! My companion has been killed and I also fear to be killed?. Abu Baseer, chasing the man, also approached there. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: He would kindle a war if he had some others to stand by him. Hearing the Prophet?s words Abu Baseer believed that he would be handed over to the enemy. So he fled from Madina and reached the sea coast on the way to Syria. Abu Jandal Bin Suhail, another Makkan newly converted to Islam, who was being persecuted in Makkah at the hands of the Makkans, also managed to escape and joined Abu Baseer. Now it so went on that whosoever entered the fold of Islam among the Qureshies (of Makkah) would escape and join Abu Baseer until they formed a fair ? sized group (usaaba). By Allah, whenever they learnt that a caravan of the Makkans was on its way to Syria, they would fall upon it, kill the men and snatch their goods. The Makkans finding themselves quite helpless before them, begged Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) by Allah and by their ties of Kinship to do away with that particular clause and send a message to Abu Baseer and his companions that whosoever approached him (Allah?s Messenger (PBUH)) would be guaranteed peace and safety. So Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) sent them the message to this effect. (Sahih Bukhari, with reference to Mishkawat-ul-Masaabih, Kitab-us-Sulh) The hadith cited above tells us: 1. Abu Baseer all by himself started fighting against the disbelievers without waiting for any companions to join him. Afterwards he had some companions to stand by him and he got himself engaged in guerrilla war. This very act of his was quite in accordance with Allah?s command: Then fight (O Muhammad PBUH) in the Cause of Allah, you are not tasked (held responsible) except for yourself, and incite the believers (to fight along with you). The first time he took sword was with a view to defending himself and saving his life. Afterwards he himself started attacking the disbelievers. In other words, he also launched offensives against the enemy. 2. Abu Baseer did not carry out these activities under the command of a Khaleefa (caliph) because Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) had handed him over to the Makkans. He himself was his commander when he all by himself put one of his enemies to death and afterwards he led himself and his companions to launch offensives and engage in guerilla activities. 3. He could not find refuge in the Islamic State of Madina. This First Islamic State rather refused to extend is help to him because it had entered into a Peace Treaty with the enemy, and it is quite plain that he was not yet able to establish an Islamic State of his own. Notwithstanding these facts he went on fighting and gradually he had strength enough to defend himself as well as to give refuge and protection to the oppressed Muslims. He subdued and humiliated the disbelievers to an extent that they, finding themselves quite helpless before him and his companions, had no other way than to do away with the inhuman clause which they themselves had got included in the treaty. 4. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) did not condemn the activities of Abu Baseer. Rather keeping silent he, in cat, seconded them. But it is a pity that a few days back a ?big? philosopher tried to lessen the worth and importance of Abu Baseer?s valorous deeds saying that they amounted to nothing but tumult and clamor. To sum up, the episode relating to Abu Baseer, sufficiently and categorically proves that a believer is quite free to start a war against the disbelievers, particularly when it is with a view to saving his life. The establishment of an Islamic state and the existence of a caliph cannot be regarded as necessary conditions for it. If it comes to that a believer has no one to lead him, he himself is his own leader and commander. Those waiting for the fulfillment of these self-imposed conditions are bound to lose their freedom, honour, lives and property. ISLAMIC STATE AND KHALIFA OWE TO JIHAD FOR THEIR EXISTENCE AND ESTABLISHMENT In Muharram 656 A.H. the Tartars invaded Baghdad, devastated the whole city and put to death the Khaleefat-ul-Muslimeen Mostesam Billah. For three and a half years (till Rajab 659 A.H.) the Muslims had no Khalifa. If they had given up Jihad on the pretext that it (Jihad) is not permissible in the absence of a Caliph, they would have been wiped out from the world for ever. But they continued fighting against the tartars in small groups or as was possible for them till they defeated the Tartars several times at various places and at last succeeded no only in shielding themselves but also in restoring the institution of Khilafah by appointing a new Khaleefa (Caliph). Sheikhul Islam Imam Ibn-e-Taimiyyah says that those who fought the Tartars are the blessed people to whom fits the following prediction made by the Prophet (PBUH). A group of people from my Ummah will always remain triumphant on the right path and continue to be triumphant (against their opponents). He who desecrate them shall not be able to do them any harm. The will remain (triumphant) till Allah?s Command is executed (i.e. Qayama is established). (Majmooah Fatawa Sheikhul-Islam Ibn-e-Taimiyyah page 416, 531 volume 28). To tell the truth, if, unluckily, the Khilafah ceases to exist or God forbid, if Islamic State are wiped out totally from the earth for some reason or other, then Jihad is and will be the only auspicious thing that kindles the hope for and assures and ensures the restoration and re-establishment of the Khilafah and Islamic State. IS JIHAD, AT PRESENT, FARDH-E-AIN Earlier in this article the fact has categorically been established that Jihad has become obligatory for the present day Muslims because we have not yet been able to achieve the eight objectives the Qur?an has set for Jihad. Now we come to another important issue, which you have raised in your question, i.e. whether now Jihad has become Fardh-i-Ain. Let us being with determining the difference between Fardh-i-Ain and Fardh-i-Kifaayah. Fardh-i-Ain in the strict obligation whose performance is binding on each and every Muslim personally and individually such as Salat (prayers), and Saum (Fasting). Fardh-i-Kifaayah is the general obligation whose performance by an adequate number of believers absolves all of them but if it is not performed by adequate number as sinful and guilty. In the beginning, like Fardh-i-Ain it is incumbent on all the Muslims but afterwards a distinction is made between them. So far as Fardh-i-Kifaayah is concerned, if it is performed by an adequate number of people, all the Muslims are absolved of it but Fardh-i-Ain is the strict obligation whose performance by one does not absolve the other. (Al-Mughni Wa Asharah-al-Kabeer Li Ibn-i-Qadamah, The Book of Jihad) The Muslim Jurists have described Funeral Prayers as an example of Fardh-i-Kifaayah. Offering funeral prayers over a Muslim who has passed away and his burial in a proper and befitting manner is obligatory for the Muslims. If such a sufficient number of Muslims participate in it that it is preformed in a proper and satisfactory way, all the Muslims living in that place shall stand absolved but if it is not attended by proper number of people or if it is not attended by any one, all the Muslims of that locality shall be deemed sinful and guilty. We have already proved that Jihad is obligatory for the Muslims till the achievement of the eight objectives the Qur?an has set for Jihad, and I have cited many verses of the Qur?an to this effect. Now the question is whether Jihad is Fardh-i-Ain like Salat and Saum and each and every Muslim shall personally perform his duty in this regard or if it is FARDH-E-KIFAAYAH and if it is performed by a sufficient number of the Muslims, it will absolve all. Some scholars are of the opinion that it is Fardh-i-Ain and they quote all the above-cited verses of the Holy Qur?an in its evidence. In Tafseer Qrtabi, ?We have it through Mavardi that Saeed Bin Musayeeb was of the opinion that Jihad is always strictly obligatory for every Muslim personally. (Al-Jame Li Ahkaam-ul-Qaran by Qartabi Vol. 3 p 38 and Tafseer Tabri Vol. 2 p 201). But majority of the Muslim scholars regard it as Fardh-i-Kifaayah. Their arguments are as follows: Allah Ta?ala says: And it is not (proper) for the believers to go out to fight (Jihad) all together. Of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may get instructions in (Islamic) religion, and that they ay warn their people when they return to them, so that they may beware (of evil). This verse conclusively demonstrates that to set out for Jihad is not obligatory for every Muslim, and if a group from among the Muslims leaves for it, it will suffice all. Another verse of the Qur?an reads as: Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home) except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.) and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised well (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward. (An-Nisa: 95) This verse is categorical to his effect that to those of the believers who do not strive in the way of Allah with their wealth and lives, also, Allah has promised good but they are lower in rank. If Jihad were Fardh-i-Ain, how could Allah promise well to those who sit still at home? It is reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: Whoever believers in Allah and His Prophet, establishes the prayer, observes saum (keeps fasts) in the month of Ramadan, it will be a promise binding upon Allah to admit him to Paradise, no matter whether he fights in the Cause of Allah or remains in the land where he was born. The people said: Should we not give this good news to others? He (PBUH) said: Paradise has one hundred grades which Allah has reserved for those alone who fight for His Cause and the distance between each of the two grades is like the distance between the heavens and the earth. So whenever you ask Allah (for something), you should pray for nothing less than Al-Firdous because Al-Firdous is the most excellent and highest part of the Paradise and above it is the throne of the Merciful (i.e. Allah), and from it gush forth the canals of Paradise. (Bukhari reported it) We learn from this hadith that a Muslim, who fulfills all the conditions laid down in the Hadith, shall be admitted to Paradise, whether he leaves his home and sets out for Jihad or he stays at home. If Jihad had been strictly obligatory personally for each and every Muslim, how could this happy news be extended to all the Muslims (weather they fight or not)? Let me explain. Struggle and fighting against the disbelievers is a comprehensive process very vast in its nature and scope and it cannot be carried out successfully and duly unless all the classes of the Muslim community, under an Ameer (leader or commander), participate in it. Though the most outstanding and illustrious among them are those Mujahideen who actually fight against the enemy in the battlefield and surely they outrank the others, yet it is wrong to regard them as the sole participants of this greater struggle (i.e. Jihad) to the exclusion of all other Muslims. In fact, there are so many other people who share their struggle and if they fail to perform their duties duly, we are bound to loss the whole struggle going on against the disbelievers. Those who equip the Mujahideen with arms, ammunition and other necessary articles, those who provide food to them, and those who look after and take care of the houses and families of the Mujahideen are all a part of this struggle and should be, and are, ranked with the Mujahideen who fight in the battlefield. In the same way, to have a sincere intention to take part in Jihad, to get and keep oneself ready for this purpose, to incite others to set out for Jihad, to get oneself trained in the art of warfare, and to train others for Jihad are all the foundation stones on which Jihad is built. The following hadiths should help clarify this matter. 1. It is reported on the authority of Zaid Bin Khalid that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: One who equips a warrior in the cause of Allah with arms is like one who actually fights and one who looks after his (a Mujahid?s) family properly in his absence, is also like one who actually fights. (Both Bukhari and Muslim narrated it) 2. It is reported on the authority of Abu Saeed that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) sent a force to Banu Lihyan (who are from Banu Huzail) and said: One man from every two (should set out on this expedition) and the reward (will be divided) between the two. (Muslim narrated it) 3. It is reported on the authority of Ans that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: Strive and fight against the polytheists with your wealth, life, and tongue. (Abu Daud, An-Nisai, and Ad Darmi narrated it) 4. It is reported on the authority of Sahl Bin Hunaif that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: Whosoever sincerely seeks martyrdom from Allah, will be raised, by Allah, to the rank of a martyr even if he died on his bed. (Sahih Muslim narrated it) 5. It is reported on the authority of Ibn-i-Abbas that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said on the day of the Conquest of Makkah: There is no Hijrah now )after the Conquest of Makkah), but (only) Jihad (in the Cause of Allah) and sincere intention (remain). So when you are asked to set out (on an expedition undertaken for the Cause of Allah), you should (readily) set out. (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim) These Ahaadith prove that he who prepares and equips a Mujahid (a person who is fighting in the Cause of Allah), virtually shares that war and one who looks well after the house and family of a Mujahid shares that war, and one who sends his brother to fight (in the Cause of Allah) and himself stays behind to look after his brother?s affairs, is also participating in Jihad. Struggle against the polytheists is through property, life and tongue. Through sincere intention and resolution to participate in Jihad and seek martyrdom, one can be blessed with the reward and rank of a person who actually fights and is martyred in the battlefield. The whole discussion can be summed up as follows: i. If Jihad means to set out on a military expedition, it is strictly obligatory to leave, provided his leader sacks him to set out on it. In this particular case no one can sit at home excepting that whom the leader of the Muslims himself has ordered to stay back and he also will be regarded as one who is actually fighting. At the Battle of Tabuk, every able-bodies Muslim was ordered by Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) to set out on that expedition excepting those few who were appointed to look after the affairs of Madina (in the absence of Allah?s Messenger (PBUH). There were some those who, merely out of lethargy, failed to accompany Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) on this expedition. They were strictly chastised by Allah. ii. If Ameer of the Muslims has not ordered everyone to leave for Jihad, then it is FARDH-E-KIFAAYAH because, in normal circumstances, it is not possible for the whole male adult population to set out for an expedition. Nor is it advisable so far as the war strategy and tactics are concerned because we cannot continue fighting without ensuring the defence of our cities and homes. If the Muslims are participating in the War in such proper number as is sufficient to counter the enemy, then it is not incumbent on others to set out for the War front. And one who sets out for Jihad in such circumstances, deserves the hundred grades in Paradise which Allah has exclusively reserved as a reward for those who fight in His Cause. (Not equal are those of the believers who sit at home) and (And it is not proper for the believers to go out to fight all together support this conclusion. So does the Hadith ?One who sits at homo??..? iii. But if by Jihad we mean to nourish a sincere intention to fight in the cause of Allah, or to acquire proper war skills or to get military training, or to develop arms and war equipment for it according to one?s capacity and resources, or to help Mujahideen prepare for it, or to look after the families and houses of the Mujahideen, then it is obligatory for every Muslim and to try to avoid it amounts to hypocrisy. Same are dictates concerning Amr Bil Maruf and Nahi Anil Munkir (enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong) It is reported on the authority of Abu Saeed Khudri that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: He who among you sees something abominable and evil, should modify it with his hand and if he has not strength enough to do it, then he should do to with his tongue, and if he has not strength enough even to do it, then he should abhor it from heart, and that is the least of Iman (faith) or the lowest degree of Iman (faith). (Muslim narrated it) The Muslim scholars have regarded modification and elimination of evil as FARDH-E-KIFAAYAH. If people in adequate numbers perform this duty, all are absolved. But so far as exhortation (to advise and preach each other to keep away from abominable) is concerned, it is enjoined on every one. And it is also necessary that we abhor evil from the heart and resolve (in our hearts) to modify it whenever we have strength enough. But if someone does not even detest evil, he has no faith at all. Likewise, participation in Jihad against the disbelievers in any form is binding on the Muslims and if a Muslim has never even intended to fight against the disbelievers, his faith is not without traces of hypocrisy. It is reported on the authority of Abu Umama that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: He who never took part in a battle, nor did he help someone prepare for it, nor did he look well after some Mujahid?s house and family, shall meet with some calamity caused by Allah before the Day of Judgment. (Abu Daud) Abu Huraira reports that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: He who died but did not fight in the way of Allah, nor did he express any desire or intention for Jihad, he died with a part of hypocrisy. (Sahih Muslim) THE SIGN WHICH SHOWS THAT ONE We learn from the above mentioned Ahaadith that it is enjoined upon every Muslim to have some kind of participation in Jihad or at least to have a desire in his heart to set out on Jihad. An explicit sign of this desire Allah Ta?ala Himself has stated in Sura Tawbah. And if they had intended to march out, certainly, they would have made some preparation for it. (At-Tawbah: 46) We learn from this verse that if a person does not prepare for war, nor does he build his body for it, nor does he learn any arms, nor does he learn to ride, nor does he learn any art used in the war, nor does he make ready the equipment used in the war, he, in fact, is disobeying Allah and living a life which is not without traces of hypocrisy. FARDH-I-KIFAAYAH CONTINUES TO BE FARDH-I-AIN Some brothers try to satisfy themselves and others saying that when it is not strictly obligatory for us to set out for Jihad, it makes no difference if we do not take part in it. Under this pretext the Muslim Ummah, excepting a small number, has given up Jihad, although they are being disgraced everywhere by the disbelievers. They have also been disregarding the fact that if an adequate number of people are not performing such an obligation (as is considered Fardh-i-Kifaayah), it continues to be Fardh-i-Ain (strict obligation whose performance is binding on every Muslim who has capacity enough). For example, if a city or town has many doctors or physicians, every one of them is bound to treat the injured and the patients. But if and adequate number of them are performing their duty, all shall stand absolved from the duty. Otherwise, they all will regarded as sinful. Similarly if a person is drowning, all the persons who know how to swim and are present there are bound to struggle to save his life. But when any one of them jumps into the river and saves the drowning man all will be absolved. Otherwise they will not be excused merely because they have claimed that it was only Fardh-i-Kifaayah, and not Fardh-i-Ain. Nor can it be any excuse that he could not save him because his father had disallowed him to do so. The arguments and evidences in favour of the obligation of Jihad, found in the Holy Qur?an and the Sunnah, are as numerous as cannot be enumerated here. But the sum and substance of all of them is that it is a general obligation whose performance by a proper number of people will absolve all, but if no one is performing it, it is strictly obligatory for every Muslim who has capacity and strength enough (to perform it). Let us now once again go back over to the eight objectives the Qur?an has set for Jihad and decide if so many Muslims are now engaged in Jihad as are sufficient to achieve these objectives: i. To end persecution and tumult ii. To enforce Islamic World Order. iii. To force the disbelievers to pay Jizya. iv. To protect and shield the weak and the oppressed from oppression. v. To avenge the millions of the Muslims who were and are being mercilessly slaughtered in various parts of the world. vi. To punish those who broke the covenant made with the Muslims. vii. To restore our possession of the Muslim territories now occupied by the disbelievers, such as Spain, India, Bait-ul-Muqaddas, Turkistan etc. viii. To defend and protect the Muslims continuously facing offensives from the disbelievers all over the world. If it is not so and certainly it is not so, all the Muslims who have capacity enough but do not take part in Jihad are, in fact, living a sinful life. If is the need of the hour that we should at once give up this attitude marked with lethargy and ignorance. Nor should we use the discussion concerning Fardh-i-Kifaayah and Fardh-i-Ain as an excuse or pretext to flee from Jihad. WHY DO WE NOT DO JIHAD IN PAKISTAN? Another question raised by you regarding Jihad reads as: If Jihad is obligatory to end persecution and oppression in Kashmir, why do we not start it in Pakistan which is also torn with oppression? I regret to point out that you have not been able to see through the essential difference between the utter brutalities and atrocities inflicted on the Kashmiri Muslims by the savage Hindus and the disregard for law and order which is a common scene in Pakistan and which is surely pitiable. Pakistan has its foundation on La Ilaha Illallah. There is no God but Allah -, but the Indian flag has on it the emblem of Weer Chaker which stands for Hinduism. We can press the Pakistani rulers to enforce Islam honouring the promise they had made in this regard. They do not at least outwardly and apparently, disown Islam though they do follow a policy based on hypocrisy towards Islam. But the Indian rulers are avowed disbelievers. I think you know the difference between a hypocrite professing the Kalima (the Islamic Creed) and an out ? and ? out disbeliever. Some companions of Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) asked for permission to kill the hypocrites for their exceeding insolent attitude. But Allah? Messenger (PBUH) did not allow them remarking that (in that case) people would say that Muhammad (PBUH) killed his own companions. My brothers, do you which that we stop fighting against the disbelievers and, instead, set to killing our own brothers who declare their belief in the Islamic Creed. The restlessness and violence you find in Pakistan is, in fact, a kind of civil war that is going on among the Muslims alone and it aims at nothing but capturing power (ironically, though, it is also instigated by India). It is not a struggle between Islam and disbelief. In India the Muslims are being slaughtered just because they profess Islam. Their property is plundered, their women are disgraced and molested and their mosques are razed to the ground. You must have read that Bal Thakray has stated it in clear words that the Indian Muslims have been left with three options only. They should leave the sub-continent, or they should convert to Hinduism or be ready to lose their lives. Have Pakistani Muslim also been left with these three options only? In India the Babri Mosque, that has always been an outstanding symbol of Islam, was reduced to rubble. Not only this. Hundreds of other mosques were also demolished along with it. Let me know if it also happens in Pakistan that mosque are demolished to be replaced by Hindu temples. In India no Muslim dares to slaughter a cow because it is a god to the Hindus. Is it the same in Pakistan? In India, if you recite aloud the Azan (call for prayer), the Hindus and the Sikhs come to violence. Do we have it in Pakistan also? In India and Kashmir, the Hindu Army is massacring the Muslims. In Kashmir alone six and a half Lac Indian troops have been deployed to crush the Muslims. Let me know if we in Pakistan are also being killed by the Hindus or other invaders just because we are Muslims? If it is not so, how could you not get to this very plain point that to liberate the Muslims from the clutches of the disbelievers, unity among the Muslims, regardless of the existing differences among them, is the first and foremost pre-requisite. The disbelievers, while attacking the life, property and honour of the Muslims, never care to ascertain whether they belong to the Hanfi Sect, or to the Ahl-e-Hadith Sect, or even if one belongs to the Muslim League or to the People?s Party. They will never let us go unharmed till we are converted to Hinduism. Allah Ta?ala has stated this fact explicitly in the Qur?an thus: Never will the Jews nor the Christians be pleased with you (O Muhammad PBUH) till you follow their religion. (Al-Baqarah: 120) Lest any one misinterprets my standpoint and claims that we are not interested in freeing Pakistan from wrong, I think it proper and advisable to state it categorically that it is our utmost desire to have in Pakistan a just Islamic society where no one is wronged and which is quite free from violence and oppression. But let me put it emphatically that Jihad is the key to the solution of the problems Pakistan is facing at present. As soon as we start fighting against the disbelievers. But if we persist in keeping away from Jihad against the enemy, we are bound to go on fighting among ourselves. I hope that now, by the Grace of Allah, you will have grasped the matter in its true context, viewing all its aspects. Would you let me remind you of the oppression, wholesale massacre, wrongs and persecution we underwent in 1947 at the hands of the Hindus? Do not forget we still to avenge it. It really pains me very much whenever I happen to find any of my Muslim brothers equalizing India and Pakistan, as he, then, is following and advocating the Hindu point of view. May Allah help my brothers comprehend the matter in all its aspects? Now we come to thee last part of your question: if we cement and strengthen only the outer part of the building of Islam but utterly neglect its inner parts and they continue to be hollow, what use is it? Explain. My brothers! Through Jihad alone we can strengthen the outer as well as the inner parts of the building of Islam. Only those with a sense of honour can do Jihad against the disbelievers. Our rulers who are devoid of any sense of honour cannot dare to fight against the disbelievers. He who fights the disbelievers for a cause no other than their disbelief is surely a true believer, a Man of Faith and it will be through his agency that Allah Ta?ala will bless us with inner (as well as outer) establishment, strength and integrity. So let us make our sincere and utmost efforts to ensure that Jihad against the disbelievers continues and all the Muslims join in the performance of this sacred duty. FALSE EXCUSES AND PRETEXTS TO EVADE JIHAD: My esteemed Brothers! When a person is not able to do anything or he does not wish to do it, he, instead of admitting slackness and lethargy on his part, invents excuses to silence his conscience. His baser self and sensual appetites deceive him into believing and taking pride in his supposed dignity and importance. But, as a matter of fact, those who raise objections against the Jihad going on in Kashmir and many other parts of the world are not sincere in their intentions. Such poor fellows feel themselves put in a strange dilemma. They, on the one hand, want to flee from Jihad and at the same time they wish to shield themselves against the charge of opposing Jihad. So they behave in a ridiculous manner. They claim that they do believer in Jihad. But when asked why, then, they do not take part in it, they argue that they would have participated in it, but owing to such and such reasons, and because of these and those facts, and in view of this and that hurdle and obstruction, and regarding the conditions concerning Jihad, they have reservations about it. In fact, all these excuses and apologies prove nothing but that they are not sincere to the cause of Jihad. My argument is based on the following verse of the Qur?an: And if they had intended to march out, certainly they would have made some preparation for it, but Allah was averse to their being sent forth, so He made them lag behind, and it was said (to them), ?Sit you among those who sit (at home).? (At-Taubah: 46) May I know many among these esteemed scholars can load and unload a rifle and in case they are equipped with one, whether they can hit the target. If they cannot, ten, does it not signify that they are not true in their claims and they just gossip? No doubt, what Allah says in true. They may have some excuses, of whatever sort they are, for not marching forward to the war front but what hinders them from attending a military camp to prepare themselves for Jihad if they sincerely intend to take part in it? When they do not even make preparations, in the light of the Quranic dicision they just lie and they are not sincere to the cause of Jihad. ?Jihad cannot be carried out without a Khaleefa? The first excuse they put forward to avoid Jihad goes as that: Jihad is no permissible without a Khaleefa (Caliph) and now when there does not exist the institution of Khilafah, how can they take part in it? There is no such condition as the existence of a Khaleefa for Jihad, as is evident from the following hadiths. Jabir Bin Sumrah (God be Pleased with him) narrated. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: This religion will never cease to exist and a group of people from the Muslims will continue to fight for its cause till the Hour is established. (Sahih Muslim with reference to Miskhat-ul-Masabeeh) (It is important to note that the word used here by Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) is (will go on fighting) and no (struggle hard). Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) foretells that fighting in the Cause of Allah will continue till the Hour is established and owing to it this religion (of Islam) will continue to exist. Now Khiaafah was abolished in 1924. following the logic put forward by my brothers now need to raise armys. We are but to polish the shoes of these disbelievers. We are to serve the disbelievers devotedly and humbly and live our lives enjoying the sweet sleep of peace and rest. You have just found out a tailored argument and pretext that absolves you from any responsibility of setting out on Jihad in the absence of a Khaleefa. My brothers, Matters do not go as that. In this particular situation we are all the more bound to fight so as to establish and restore Khilafah. This is that our deen (i.e. Islam) demands from us. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) has said: A group of people (from my Ummah) will continue to fight for the cause of truth, and whoever shows his enmity towards them, will not be able to harm them and one who deserts them will (also) no be able to cause them any harm. So this is the prediction made by the Prophet (PBUH) and his prediction could not but turn out true. It is not permissible to seek help from the polytheists in the course of fighting. Some scholars claim that it is not permissible for up to fight aided and supported by the polytheists. They quote the following hadith in evidence. At the Battle of Badr a certain person approached Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) and said: Let me accompany you (in the battle field.) Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: Are you a Muslim? He said: No. Hearing this, Allah? Messenger (PBUH) said: Go back, you are a polytheist and I whall not seek help a polytheist. My brothers, after a close study of the Prophet?s life, we conclude (and that is what this hadith signifies) that we should not ascertain how reliable he is or when we are powerful enough to do without any help from others. But if a polytheist is our (proven) ally and he supports us as he shares a common objective with us, Allah?s Messenger?s (PBUH) life evidences satisfactorily that it is quite permissible to get their support. Allah Ta?ala by His Grace raised among the disbelievers such persons as helped and supported Allah?s Messenger (PBUH). Several examples can be quoted in this regard. 1. Abu Talib was a disbeliever but he declared: By Allah! I will not let anyone approach you (PBUH) till they bury me deep in the earth. Let me know whether Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) appreciated this support from his uncle or he said to him: Uncle, you are a disbeliever. So keep away from me. I am sorry I do not want any help form you. 2. The disbelievers boycotted Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) and his followers. They would not have any business dealings with them. Social relations, visits and even verbal contacts with them were discontinued. The Muslims had to eat leaves of trees. The condition of children was all the more miserable. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) and his followers and supporters were confined in the Shib of Abu Talib (a narrow pass on the eastern outskirts of Makkah). It all lasted for a period of three years. These were really very hard times for Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) and his companions. At that time of distress Banu Hashim and Banu Muttalib, who had not yet accepted Islam, stood by the Prophet (PBUH), and confined themselves also in the Shib of Abu Talib. Did Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) ask them to stay away as they were polytheists and he did not need any support from a polytheist? 3. Disappointed with the Makkans Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) went to the people of Taif hoping that he (PBUH) might get some support from them, though they were polytheists. 4. From Taif, Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) again set out on the way back to Makkah. But he could not safely enter Makkah because the blood-thirsty Makkans were after him. Zaid, who accompanied the Prophet (PBUH), said: Allah?s Messenger (PBUH), how could we enter Makkah? Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: Allah will surely provide relief and He will verily support His religion and Prophet. When he was a short distance from Makkah, he dispatched aman with a message to Mutim (who was a polytheist) asking hism to help him enter Makkah under his shelter. Mutim had many sons. He, alongwith his sons, responded to the Prophet?s appeal. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) entered Makkah surrounded by the sons of Mutim (who were fully armed), alongwith Mutim marching ahead and announcing. ?O people, I have given shelter to Muhammad (PBUH). No one should even think of doing him any hard.? Abu Sufyan approached Mutim and asked him whether he had been converted to Islma (surrendering himself to Allah?s Messenger PBUH). Mutim told him that he had not embraced Islam, he had only given him i.e. the Prophet (PBUH) shelter. Abu Sufyan said if it was so, they would honour the protection given by him and no one would do him (The Prophet Peace be Upon him) any harm. 5. When Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) decided to migrate to Medina, he hired a man to guide him on his way to Madina. Sahih Bukhari makes it explicit that he was a polytheist but he was an expert guide. Now if on his way to Madina, Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) had a skirmish (with the disbelievers), and his guide who was a polytheist, sided with him, do you think, he would have asked him not to side with him, saying that he was a polytheist and he did not want his help? Some people say that this all happened before the Battle at Badr, and they claim that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) never asked polytheists for help afterwards. When making such claims they quite forget the Hudaibiyah Treaty. Among the terms agreed on in this Treaty, one allowed every person or tribe to enter into an alliance with the Muslims or the polytheists of the Quraish whichever one he or they liked. Thus Banu Khuza?ah allied with Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) and Banu Bakr confederated with the Quraish. Now it so happened that banu Bakr, helped and supported by the Quraish, attacked Banu Khuza?ah, without caring a bit for the conditions of the Treaty. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) to avenge Banu Khaza?ah, attacked the Quraish. It is reported in Musnad Ahmad that at that time Banu Khuza?ah also took part in the battle accompanying the Prophet (PBUH). It is well known that Banu Khuza?ah then were still disbelievers. Only a few of them had accepted Islam. It goes without saying that they had allied with the Prophet (PBUH) as they had not still entered the fold of Islam. If they had accepted Islam, then they would have been the very part of the Muslims not their allies or confederates. In Musnad Ahmed (Vol. P 179) it is reported on the euthority of Abdullah Bin Aamir that then Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) had conqured Makkah, he commanded the Muslims to stop fighting. However, he allowed Banu Khuza?ah to behead any person belonging to Banu Bakr, wherever he was found, because they had violated and disregarded the Treaty and committed an act of treachery. When three quarters of the day passed, the Prophet (PBUH) asked banu Khuza?ah also to stop fighting and killing Banu Bakd as they had avenged their won killings full well. The incident we have narrated above, it be note, took place after the Battle at Bard. Thus this instance goes to prove that Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) accepted the help offered by the disbelievers even after the Battle at Badr. The flee from the Jihad going on in Kashmir: Some people point out that we are fighting in Kashmir supported by the Pakistani rulers but they (the Pakistani rulers) are Taghut (Friends of Satan) and they support and defend disbelief. Not only this but in their opinion, the whole of our country is pervaded with disbelief and polytheism. Then furthering their standpoint, they ask us why we do not do Jihad here in Pakistan and why we consider Kashmir more important in this regard. My brothers! Disbelievers are of various kinds. There is a disbeliever who does not witness that there is no Go but Allah, and Muhammad (PBUH) is His Messenger. There is another disbeliever who witnesses it. A distinction should be made between them. He who does not believe in the Kalima (i.e. There is no Got but Allah, and Muhammad (PBUH) is His Messenger), fights against us just because we believe in it. But he who believes in it will never fight against us for this belief of ours. Instead, he becomes our brother owing to his belief in Kalima (i.e. the Islamic Creed). He has entered the fold of our deen (Islam). Now if he, in our judgment, has deviated from the right path, we should try to bring him back to the right path by preaching and instruction. We should struggle to make him realize his fault. We should invite him to the right conduct but in no case raise arms against him (unless he himself proceeds to fight us). We may regard him as one deviated from the right path and one at fault. We should also admonish him saying that he is committing an act that amounts to disbelief and polytheism. But we should and shall not wage a war against him or them. If we fight against those who believe in the Kalima (i.e. Islamic Creed), how can we fight against those who do not believe in it. In Sahih Bukhari a hadith reads as: Once Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) was distributing goods among his companions. A person approached him and said: O Muhammad (PBUH)! Be just. Fath-ul-Bari collecting different traditions, quotes some other such improper words uttered by that person. Fox example, he went so far that he said. ?O Muhammad (PBUH), you have not done justice at all.? (My brother, Can such a person be regarded as a Muslim? But remember he had declared his belief in the Kalima i.e. the Islamic Creed). Some companions of the Prophet (PBUH) said: Allah?s Messenger! Allow us to behead him. Bu Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) refused to give this permission and said: Let him go. People will say that Muhammad (PBUH) kills his own companions. My Brothers, Have we no example to follow in Allah?s Muhammad (PBUH)? Some people object to this standpoint of ours sying that it ultimately leads to the conclusion that we regard those who call upon any one other than Allah and worship graves as on the right path, and that we regard those who are nurturing a grudge against the companions of the Prophet (PBUH) as following the right path. My brothers, we do not, at all, believe that they are following the right path. We understand that their beliefs in this regard. But remember they declare their belief in this Kalima i.e. the Islamic Creed. When we put the Qur?an before them, they will never say, ?Go back. We do not believe in this Quran?. Maybe some of their religious scholars have such an opinion, but they, too, dare not express it publicly. A person who declares his faith in the Islamic Cred can never be believed and expected to utter such words. It is just impossible. The Kharijees revolted against Ali (God be Pleased with him) and declared him and Uthman as Kafirs (disbelievers), though Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) had explicity announced that they both would go to Paradise. Let me know if a person refuses to accept the command given by the Prophet (PBUH), can he be termed a disbeliever or not. Surely those Kharijis were disbelievers but such ones as professed their belief in Islam also. Thus Ali (God be Pleased with him) said to them: You will have your share of allowances, you will have your share of the war booty, you are free to visit our mosques to offer prayers but keep it in mind, we will not let you go unpunished if you create mischief. And when the created mischief and murdered Khabbab (God be Pleased with him) and his slave-girl, Ali (God be Pleased with him) asked them to hand over to him the person who killed them. They said: we have all participated in this act of murdering Khabbab. Upon this, Ali (God be Pleased with him) said: Then be ready to fight. And afterwards they all were put to death. Only ten among them were able to spare their lives. As a principle, if even the disbelievers want to live in peace with us after agreeing on a peace treaty, we are bound to honour their lives and property and let them live in peace, and here ironically these are our brothers who declare their belief in Islam and who are living in peace with us against whom you want us to wage a war! My Brothers, if you consider it lawful to fight against your own brothers who declare their belief in Islamic Creed, then you should yourselves go ahead and proceed to this ?much needed? fight. Mind, we are already busy on a certain front. This particular one is inviting you. Why do you hesitate to accept this invitation? No, my dear brothers, this is no way to follow. Our insight into and close study of the teachings of the Qur?an and Sunnah do not allow us even to think so. We are no to fight against our brothers. Our duty towards them is to help them disern the truth from untruth and right from wrong. The fault lies with us as we have never bothered to convey them to teachings or the Qur?an, I their true concept and context. We have always been busy raising and chanting empty slogans of ?Long live?..? and ?Deth on ??.!? It is high time we review our course of action and change our conduct in this respect. Should we stop helping the oppressed Kashmiris Some people, to evade Jihad, have invented a very odd excuse which ultimately leads to the conclusion that we should discontinue supporting the oppressed in case some Taghut (disbelievers and polytheists) some forward to help them (i.e. the oppressed). A Mujahid from abroad, who had perhaps fallen a prey to such doubts and suspicions called on our esteemed Hafiz Muhammad Saeed and argued as to why should we fight along with Taghut (He was obviously referring to the alleged support which the Pakistani government was or is extending to the cause of Jihad in Kashmir). Hafiz Muhammad Saeed asked him how he would behave if his house caught fire and a fire-engine belonging to this taught came to his rescue to put out the fire; whether he would appreciate the fire ? fighters or he would not let them put out the fire; By Allah, he was stunned and had not a word to say in support of his argument. In case our house is one fire, not only should we accept the help offered by the Government men but we should also join them and together make efforts to extinguish the fire. If the Government of Pakistan fulfills its duty towards the Kashmiris and wages a war against the Hindus to protect and shield the Kashmiri Muslims (who are, at the moment, being mercilessly and brutally butchered) and to guard their mosques (which are being razed to the ground), how logical on our part will it be to keep back from fighting accompanying the Government on the pretext that it has not still enforced Islamic laws thoroughly here? Another objection raised against the Jihad going on in Kashmir is that because of the activities of the Mujahideen, Muslim women are reed in Kashmir. The Mujahideen hit the target, and run away. But in the aftermath, the Hindu forces, in retaliation, crack down on the Muslim population, massacre the youth and rape the women. My brothers, I think even the Hindus cannot plead their case in such a clever way. If the proposition put forward by my brothers had been true, the Kashmiri Muslims surely would have showed a great hatred and enmity towards the Mujahideen forces fighting in Kashmir. But, quite the contrary, they love them so dearly, even more than their own children. The facts quite disprove their hypothesis. The Hindu forces dare to humiliate and molest the Muslim women only where the Mujahideen have no hide-outs. But wherever they (the Mujahideen) have their hide-outs, the Indian forces do not dare to commit such a heinous crime though they may inflict other atrocities on them, because they (the Hindu forces) know full well that such a brutality is avenged promptly the Mujahideen. First of all we are to strive against our own baser Salf, then again Satan (the Devil), then against worldly desires and materialistic pursuits on our pat, and if these efforts of our meet with success, only then we are to do Jihad against the enemy. Some brothers of ours put forward a very ?beautiful? sequence ? which we are to follow strictly before we fight the enemy. They say that we, at first, are to strive against our baser Salf, then against the Satan (the Devil), then against materialistic and worldly desires and approach (towards life), and if we go through all these steps successfully, only then are we to strive against the enemy. It means first of all the we should fight against our own baser Salf, and if we come out of it victoriously and overwhelm it, only then can we proceed to the net step, i.e. striving against the Satan or the Devil and if we meet with success in this struggle also, only then we can proveed to the third step i.e. striving against the materialistic and worldly desires to subdue and overpower them and if we succeed in this struggle also, (and how can we be sure that we have successfully gone through all these steps is yet another question), only then it is permissible for s to proceed to the last step and be involved in fighting against the enemy (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists). O servants of Allah, Did Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) ever impose such conditions, restrictions and sequence on his companions? You cannot quote such an instance. Consider the Conquest of Makkah. Ten thousand Muslims participated in this expedition. Within hours two thousand Mujahideen (newly converted to Islam) joined them. They had not straightened their prayers. Nor had they been purified yet. Notwithstanding it they were ordered to set out for war at Human. Why were they not asked to follow the series of steps which are, according to my brothers, strictly to be observed before setting out on Jihad? My brothers, if Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) has not imposed such restrictions, who are we to insists on them and why should we do so? As a matter of fact Khanqahi Nizam (mystic order or Sufism) has been designed with no other purpose than to dampen the spirit of Jihad. That is why the courses of studies prescribed by the Government also lay too much stress on Tasawwuf (Sufism). Iqbal, in fact, points out this conspiracy hatched by our enemies when he says: Keek him (i.e. the Muslim) busy merely in invoking God?s name, and editating (early in the morning). Confirm his temperamental inclinations Towards mysticism or Sufism. O Servants of Allah, how ironical it is that when it is time to fight against the enemy, we are being advised to fight against our own self. Iqbal has very beautifully diverted our attention to this fact: Which saucy and sprightly fellow has inscribed this line on the Mehrab (niche) in the mosque? ?How ignorant these people are who went to prostration, when it was time to stand up!? These brothers of ours are our well-wishers but in a strange way. When it is time to stand up, (in salat) they advise us to prostrate, and when comes the time to prostrate (while offering prayers), they ask us to stand up. But we should do only what is proper and which befits the occasion. When it is proper to stand, who should stand and when it is befitting to prostrate, we should prostrate. In fact, these brothers of mine are working under a delusion. They suppose that he who fights in the Cause of Allah, does not strive against self, Satan or Dunya. They think that he alone who retires to a cottage or shrine and utters the words ?Haq Hoo? repeatedly, is engaged in Jihad. Satan has misled them in this respect. As a matter of fact, it is not possible for a person to fight and sacrifice his life in the Cause of Allah without, at the same time, subduing and overpowering his baser self and Satan, and without breaking with the worldly desires and materialistic pursuits. Fighting in the way of Allah is a comprehensive process in which all the above discussed steps go simultaneously. By Allah, I have witnessed young Mujahideen in Ma?skar Ummul Qura choked with weeping for the fear of Allah. There is having seen landlords owning hundreds of acres of land, and highly qualified and educated youth. Surely they have their own ambitions and desires. They have their dreams and visions of a life of luxury. They have their near and dear ones they have their parents. They have their wealth and property. But they have left everything for the cause of Jihad. They have sacrificed their comforts and luxuries. They are bearing the pain of separation from their parents, brothers, sister, wives and children. They have given up their dreams and visions, their desires and aspirations. For what? Just to offer their lives in the way of Allah. Just to meet with martyrdom. Is it possible to offer such sacrifices and make such a heroic struggle without fighting, simultaneously, against the Satan and self, and without giving up worldly pursuits and belongings? These Mujahideen, following the Sunnah of Prophet (PBUH) have full beards; they have their pajamas above their ankles. They try their utmost to follow each and every Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH). Is it not fight against one?s baser self? So, my dear brother, shed off the delusion you are in. if you really want to fight against Satan and Self, for it the proper field is the battle ? field. In Nisai we have a hadith that reads as: A son of Adam set out on the way of Allah to enter the fold of Islam. Satan approached him and said: What are you going to do? Are you going to give up the religion your forefathers followed? He said: Go away. I and not to follow you. He, by the Grace of Allah, embraced Islam. Now it so came to him that he had no other way but to leave his mother ? land and migrate to some other country. Satan once again approached him and said: O man, these are the streets where you played. Here there are your friends and companions. Here there are your loved and dear ones. Shall you leave this land and this atmosphere? That person said: Go away, O Satan. I am not the one who will follow you. Thus he was successful in making Hijra (migration). Now he intended to set out for Jihad. Satan once again approached him while he was on his way to Jihad and said: You will surely be killed. (Nisai and Musnd Ahmad both quote the Satan?s words: (you will be killed). Some other person will marry your widow. Your children will turn orphans. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: he once again did not pay any attention to Satan and continued to proceed to Jihad. Allah?s Messenger (PBUH) said: Allah has undertaken to admit such a person to Paradise, no matter whether he is martyred, or he falls ill on his way and dies, or he is drowned, or he falls off the animal he is riding and dies or he is killed in an accident. So my brothers, we should once and for all decide to follow the way of Jihad instead of taking refuge in false excuses. And if we find ourselves unable to proceed to Jihad, we should, at least, extend our support to Mujahideen. We must not be ensnared in the delusions and misunderstanding, created and spread by Satan. Allah guide us o the straight way! Ameen! We should not spoil our Akhirah (the world hereafter) to gain the Dunya (the worldly goods).
|
 |
|
||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jama'at-ud-Da'awa Pakistan. 2002