certifired_img

Books and Documents

Radical Islamism and Jihad (28 Oct 2019 NewAgeIslam.Com)



Refutation of the Jihadi Ideology Through the Principle of Zahir and Nass Related to the Quranic verse 9:5 Quoted To Justify Acts of Violence In 21st Century-Part 3



By Ghulam Ghaus, New Age Islam

26 October 2019

This part of the Refutation is based on the jurisprudential principle of Zahir and Nass and that when they conflict with each other the Nass is preferred.

Before delving into the subject, we would like to define Zahir and Nass. Linguistically the term Zahir means ‘apparent’, ‘plain’, manifest and ‘clear’ etc. Technically, Zahir means “whatever becomes apparent to a listener from his hearing only” or in the words of Imam Bazdawi “It (Zahir) is a name for every speech the aim of which became apparent to listener by its wording” whereas Imam Sarakhsi defines “what can be understood by pure hearing without thinking..” Zahir has a clear meaning and yet is susceptible and open to the possibility of an alternative interpretation. The main reason of this is that its apparent meaning is not always in harmony with the context in which it takes place because Zahir is not the principle theme of the text.  

Nass denotes a clear text which clarifies the reason why a sentence is expressed. The implication of Nass is that which is aimed by the speaker, while the meaning of Zahir is not meant by the speaker. 

An example is thus given that when some disbelievers of Makka claimed that both ‘bay’ (trade) and ‘Riba’ (usury) are the same. The Quran refers to their statement, “That is because they say: “Trading is only like ‘Riba (usury)’”, (2:275).

So in response to these people and to differentiate between trade and usury, Allah Almighty revealed the verse “But Allah has permitted trading (bay’) and has forbidden Riba (usury)” (2:275)

This verse is Nass in its showing differentiation between both of these terms ‘trade’ (bay) and ‘usury’ (Riba) as not being the same. And this verse is Zahir in its meaning that trade is lawful and usury is prohibited.

The ruling of Zahir and Nass is to act upon both of them. However if there is a conflict between the two, a preference is given to the Nass over the Zahir.    

Let us ponder over the Zahir and Nass related to the verse 9:5 “kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them”. This verse is Zahir in its commanding the believers to kill the Mushrikin wherever they are found, whereas this verse is Nass in its commanding the believers to fight against the religious persecutors and violators of peace-treaty in the state of war. The purpose of this verse being revealed was to grant permission of killing the religious persecutors and the militants in the state of war; as this was the situation of “kill or be killed”. The very purpose can be understood easily if all the war-related verses are taken into account, such as the verses “And if any one of the Mushrikin seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know” (9:6), “And fight in God's cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression; for, verily, God does not love aggressors” (2:190).

Thus we find that the verse 9:5 is Nass to involve several points; 1) fighting should be on the basis of persecution and not account of religious belief, 2) fighting should take place after the peace-treaty is dismissed and the war is declared, 3) fighting should take place in the state of war. These three points were the main purpose of this verse being revealed. On the contrary, the Zahir of this verse demands that since the word mentioned in this verse is Mushrikin and that is in plural form, so all of them should be killed everywhere. However the Nass (the purpose of the revelation of this verse) goes against the Zahir (apparent meaning) of this verse. And this is very popular principle also taught in the textbooks of Madrasas that when the Nass and Zahir conflict with each other, the Nass is always preferred. 

In other words, let me repeat that the command of fighting against the Mushrikin of Arab was revealed because they had persecuted the Muslims and violated the peace-treaty, and not because they had committed Shirk or Kufr. And it is in this sense that this verse is Nass. As for the Zahir of this verse, this is not in harmony with the Nass of this verse and there is consensus among the scholars of the past (Salaf) and of the present that when Zahir and Nass oppose each other, a preference is always given to Nass and not to the Zahir, so as to get better understanding of the Quran.

Having understood the verse 9:5 under the principle of Zahir and Nass, it would not be correct for the ISIS or any other similar outfits to deduce the ruling of killing the Mushrikin in the context of 21st century which is dominantly different from the context of the early days of Islam.   

Related Articles:

Refutation of Jihadi Ideology That Uses the Verse, ‘Kill the Mushrikin Wherever You Find Them’ To Justify Terrorism in 21st Century: Linguistic Analysis of the Word ‘Mushrikin’ Part-1

Refutation of Jihadi Ideology: Who Are The Mushrikin Mentioned In The Quranic Verse 9:5? - Part 2

A regular Columnist with NewAgeIslam.com, Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi Dehlvi is an Alim and Fazil (Classical Islamic scholar), with a Sufi-Sunni background and English-Arabic-Urdu Translator. He has also done B.A (Hons.) in Arabic, M.A. in Arabic and M.A in English from JMI, New Delhi. He is Interested in Islamic Sciences; Theology, Jurisprudence, Tafsir, Hadith and Islamic mysticism (Tasawwuf).

URL:  http://www.newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/ghulam-ghaus,-new-age-islam/refutation-of-the-jihadi-ideology-through-the-principle-of-zahir-and-nass-related-to-the-quranic-verse-9-5-quoted-to-justify-acts-of-violence-in-21st-century--part-3/d/120109

New Age IslamIslam OnlineIslamic WebsiteAfrican Muslim NewsArab World NewsSouth Asia NewsIndian Muslim NewsWorld Muslim NewsWomen in IslamIslamic FeminismArab WomenWomen In ArabIslamophobia in AmericaMuslim Women in WestIslam Women and Feminism




TOTAL COMMENTS:-   32


  • Zionist sites like MEMRI are the darlings of anti-Islamic hate merchants like Hats Off.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/9/2019 5:46:11 PM



  • dear mr GGS, what are doing on MEMRI - an islamophobic, racist, zionist, jewish hate site?
    at least according to the most moderate muslim in the 1400 year history of the faith - mr ghulam mohiyuddin.
    i thought MEMRI tv is only watched by shameless murtads and apostates.
    et tu?
    By hats off! - 12/9/2019 3:43:00 AM



  • Mr. Sultan Shahin always says, “The clergy is required to counter the exclusivist Jihadi theology of violence and supremacism”.
    So who is this clergy required to counter such and such things? Is this clergy meant by him or is it a general call?
    By Hamid Ansari - 12/9/2019 2:27:04 AM



  • For example, A and B are two different countries. Both are living in the state of war. Sometimes it happens that both fight continuously and sometimes they take a break while fighting. Sometimes one of the groups comes from the battlefield to its safe land of country on the condition of losing all its weapons or otherwise during the fighting. After they gain weapons again, they again rush to the battlefield. The scholars expressed such a fighting “offensive fighting”. Such a fighting was from both sides. To say, it was the common practice of those days when the war used to take place for the expansionist reaons. There could be no reason why they should have considered such an offensive fighting to be wrong, given their age and need of time.

    But today, the situation has changed and something that was not a crime is regarded equally all a crime. Today all have agreed to live peacefully and in accord with the Charters of United Nations. Breaking the agreement is tantamount to deception, which is extremely disliked practice in Islam. The classical textbooks witness that if you need to fight your enemies, you will first have to make declaration. This means you can’t deceive even your own enemies.

    So the same thing (“offensive fighting”) which could be justified for certains reasons in the past can not be justified with the loss of those reasons in the present. Henceforth, it would be injustice to ignore all the reasons, causes and conditions which are in clear disharmony with those of the past.

    (Continued)     


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/9/2019 2:22:34 AM



  • Will it not be fine to make an objective assessment whether or not the past scholars might be rightful in giving religious justification for “offensive fighting” in some cases, because then the ‘offensive fighting’ was actually meant for ‘defensive fighting’. Will it not be solid to silence the cries of jihadists, if we say it today that waging or intitiating “the offensive war” will be a crime, as per Islamic perspective itself, which does not allow anyone to break the rules of war, that is, when you make treaties, you should abide by the treaties, whatever it may be. From this perspective, how can it be that Islam allows offensive fighting in today's context?  

    (Continued)      
    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/9/2019 1:02:08 AM



  • Comment 1 on “Offensive fighting”……..

    “Kuwaiti Islamic scholar Sheikh Muhammad Hammoud Al-Najdi said in a show that aired between July 3 – 11, 2019 on Al-Ma’ali TV (Kuwait) that offensive Jihad is a concept that exists in Islam even though some people deny its existence” (Memri)

    Yes, there is a term in Arabic “جهاد هجوميto mean ‘offinsive Jihad’, yet many do not try to make all round study, specially the eras where ‘offsensive fighting’ was very common and widespread in both the fighting groups. This was popular when the desire of expansion was equally rooted in the minds of both Muslims and non-Muslims. There was no agreement as such among the countries related to the United Nations. They had to wage ‘offensive fighting’ for the defence.

    To understand it, we need to understand the terms; offensive and defensive Jihad.

    Offensive Fighting means, a person who initiates fighting. Today after we all have agreed to live by the Charters of United Nations, we have a justification to say that those who initiate fighting against or attacking a country and its citizens are the ones who have committed the crime of waging “offensive fighting”, because today we describe such an offensive act as a crime.

    Centuries back, if we take into account we find a complete opposite scenario. There were the times when the people had no treaties of peace. Instead, the tribes, groups, communities, all had fear from one another, wanted to weaken one another. Sometimes it happened that they initiated fighting thinking that if they would not initiate, their enemies would initiate and eliminate their community. Such was the attitude prevalent in the expansionist age. So the use of “offensive fighting” was actually meant for defensive fighting, because they had the notion that if they do not offend their enemies, they will be offended by their enemeis. So "offensive fighting" was not an idea that could be considered a criminal act against violating the treaty of peace. It could have been a criminal act in those parts of the past where sometimes treaties of peace were promised and then the violation by any means, whether by means of offensive fighting, was known as a criminal act. But in some parts of the past, especially after two centuries of Islam, when there were no treaties of peace, several countries and towns were living in the state of war, and where all were equally eager to initiate offensive fighting and win the land of their oppents and capture their properties. On the contrary to this attitude, in 21st century, the countries of the world have trusted one another, agreed to abide by the treaties of peace. In this age, “offensive fighting” is a crime, because it violates the rule of “pledging”, “promising” and then fulfilling it. Today, it is a crime in the opinions of all countries but in the past nearly all citizens of the world did not see “offensive fighting” as a crime because the same term used to do for them the work of defense.

    (continued)      


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/9/2019 12:51:36 AM



  • Common people don’t understand technical explanation or usages. Therefore when we come across some fatawas we simply get or hear the ruling that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam.
    They work like a doctor who simply gives medicine. They do not teach doctorship. However, there are the people who take interest and want to know why something has been given as a ruling to condemn acts of terrorism. Now the question is for such aspirants, it would be better first for them to gain what is necessary to understand classical texts, such as, usul (mythodolgoy), language, rehotric, literature, nahw, sarf, tafsir, hadith, usul hadith, maqasid, history. It is not sufficient for them to use simply borrorwed criticism and be ignorant of the answers.
    There remains another question; have those who have earned such required branches of study succeeded to address or resolve modern challenges? Have they really come across the challenges or simply are they living a life, with no idea what is going on in the world?
    They must ask themselves many questions as such and do look for the ways to achieve welfare of the society, community and country in all parts of the globe. To reach this part of enlightenment, they will have to first attempt an honest approach, a genuine feeling towards speeches of God Almighty, and a thanking attitude for the blessings of Allah Almighty. only then they can achieve the real objective, otherwise they will remain with attitudes of doubtful people who always see the world with the specs of doubt. 


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/8/2019 10:29:05 PM



  • یہ بھی خیال رکھیں کہ ائمہ کرام نے مذکورہ بحث میں ایک معروضہ قائم کرکے اس کا جواب بھی قلمبند کیا ہے ۔وہ یہ کہ جب آپ کے بقول امر بالفعل تکرار نہیں چاہتا تو نماز اور روزہ وغیرہا بار بار ادا کرنے کے لیے واجب کیوں ہوتے ہیں حالانکہ امر تو قرآن میں ایک  ہی بار ہوا ہے اس کا جواب یہ ہے کہ صیغہ امر سے اصل میں عبادات واجب نہیں ہوتیں ، وہ تو اپنے اسباب سے واجب ہوتی ہیں ۔چنانچہ پانچوں نمازوں کے اوقات اپنی اپنی نماز کا سبب ہیں ۔ان پانچوں میں سے ہر وقت میں اللہ کی خاص رحمتیں نازل ہوتی ہیں اس لیے ہر وقت اپنی نماز کا سبب ہے ، چنانچہ نمازوں کا اصل وجوب تو اوقات سے آتا ہے اور امر یعنی اقیموالصلوۃ طرفی النھار وغیرہ اس واجب کی ادائیگی کا مطالبہ کرنے کے لیے ہے جو سبب کے ذریعے پہلے سے واجب ہو چکا ہے ۔

    اسے ایک مثال سے سمجھیں کہ اگر یہ حکم دیا جائے کہ اپنی بیوی کو نان ونفقہ دو ، تو غور کا مقام یہ ہے کہ آخر شوہر پر نان ونفقہ کیوں واجب ہوا تو ہمیں معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ اس کے وجوب کا سبب نکاح ہے یعنی کے نکاح کے سبب سے خرچہ وغیرہ اس پر لازم ہوا ، معلوم ہوا کہ جب تک سبب پائی جائے گی مسبب بھی واجب رہے گا ، یا یوں سمجھیں کہ جب تک وہ بیوی نکاح میں رہے گی تب تک خرچہ اس کے شوہر پر شرعا واجب رہے گا ۔

    اسی طرح ایک مثال لیں کہ کسی نے یہ حکم دیا کہ تم نے جو چیز خریدی ہے اس کی قیمت ادا کرو ، تو یہاں سبب خریدنا ہے او رواجب قیمت ادا کرنا ہوا لہذا  ایک چیز کو خریدنا ایک بار ہوگا تو قیمت ادا کرنا واجب بھی ایک بار بار ہوگا ، اگر بار بار خریدنے کا عمل ہوگا تو بار بار قیمت ادا کرنا ہوگا ، یعنی سبب بار بار ہوگا تو مسبب یعنی یہاں قیمت ادا کرنا بھی بار بار واجب ہوگا ۔

    ان دونوں مثالوں کو سمجھنے کے بعد اب یہ سمجھیں کہ نماز کے وجوب کی ادائیگی کا سبب اس کا وقت ہے لہذا جب جب وہ وقت پایا جائے گا نماز کی ادائیگی واجب ہوتی رہے گی ، اگر سبب تکرار کے ساتھ وقوع پذیر ہوگا تو مسبب بھی تکرار یعنی نماز کے وجوب کی ادائیگی بھی تکرار کے ساتھ واقع ہوتی رہے گی ۔ جب بھی فجر کا وقت آئے گا نفس وجوب نماز فجر ثابت ہوجائے گا ۔

    اس سے قبل کمینٹ  میں ‘‘امربالفعل تکرار کا تقاضہ نہیں کرتا ہے ’’والے قاعدہ پر گفتگو کی تھی اور یہ واضح ہوا تھا کہ جب امر بالفعل مطلق ہو یعنی لزوم اور عدم لزوم کے قرینے سے خالی ہو تو تکرار کا تقاضہ نہیں کرتا ، لہذا یہ بات درست ہے لیکن جب یہی جب یہی امر بالفعل کسی سبب کی وجہ سے واجب ہو تو اس سبب کے تکرار کی وجہ سے فعل کی بھی تکرار ہوگی ، جیساکہ ہم نے اوپر نماز والی مثال میں سمجھ لیا ۔

    بتوفیق اللہ وللہ الحمد  


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/7/2019 4:13:46 AM



  • @KF and Satish, you too should know that, one of the Hanafi Principles of Jurisprudence is that Amr bil Feil (commanding any specific work) does not require repetition of the same work by the person who has been commanded to so. This means that, after fulfilling the work only once, the worker actually fulfills the requisite of the command. Thereafter he does not need to reperform the same command through his action (amal). You should also know that this principle is specific only for the condition of Amr’s (command’s) being mutlaq (absolute), that is, when someone says any sentence using such a ‘command verb’ which is free from any qareena consisting of luzum or adam-e-luzum, or wujub or adma-e-wujub (such as, istihbab, mubah, etc).


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/7/2019 12:42:44 AM



  • bahut khubsurat aur INTERESTING science hai ye, suna hai is science ko hum sahih se padhenge to albert anstien ki theory ya mathmatician ke formule ka taste aur zaayqa bhul jaanege. 
    By Talha - 12/7/2019 12:14:01 AM



  • حنفی فقہ کا ایک اصول ہے کہ امر بالفعل یعنی کسی کام کا امر (حکم) تکرارکا تقاضہ نہیں کرتا ۔یعنی کسی شخص نے آپ کو کوئی کام کرنے کا حکم دیا  پھر آپ نے اس کام کو ایک مرتبہ انجام دے دیا تو اب آپ پر یہ لازم نہیں آئے گا آپ اسی کام کو دوبارہ انجام دیں ، کیونکہ دوبارہ انجام دینے کی صورت میں امر بجالانے کی تکرار ہوگی اور قاعدہ ہے کہ امر بالفعل تکرار کا تقاضہ نہیں کرتا ۔ اسی وجہ سے آپ پر یہ لازم نہیں کہ آپ اسی کام کو دوبارہ انجام دیں  یعنی اس کام کی تکرار کریں ۔خیال رہے کہ یہ قاعدہ (یعنی امر بالفعل تکرار کا تقاضہ نہیں کرتا) صرف وہیں نافذ ہوتا ہے جہاں مطلق امر ہو  یعنی کسی نے آپ کو کوئی کام کرنے کا حکم دیا مگر اس  جملہ میں کوئی قرینہ ، شرط یا کوئی ایسا وصف نہیں جس سے آپ یہ جان سکیں کہ آپ کو یہ کام کرنا ہی پڑے گا کیونکہ نہیں کرنے کی صورت میں  کسی طرح کی چھوٹی بڑی سزا ہوگی یا اسی طرح کوئی  دوسرا قرینہ کہ  اگر یہ کام کریں گے تو ثواب نہیں تو کوئی گناہ نہیں ، البتہ اگر کوئی قرینہ موجود نہ ہو تو وہ امر مطلق ہوگا ، اور اسی مفہوم کو ائمہ نے عالمانہ انداز میں بیان کیا کہ اگر کوئی امر لزوم یا عدم لزوم کے قرینہ سے خالی ہو تو وہ مطلق امر کہلائے گا ۔تو اسے جان لینے بعد یہ جاننا اور سمجھنا ضروری ہے کہ  جب کسی امر بالفعل یعنی کسی کام کا حکم یا امر کوئی آپ کو دے تو وہ اگر مطلق امر ہے یعنی لزوم یا عدم لزوم سے قرینہ سے خالی ہے تو اس صورت میں آپ کو اوپر صرف اس مامور بہ (یعنی جس کام کے کرنے کا حکم دیا گیا ہے )کو صرف ایک مرتبہ اداکرنا واجب ہوگا  اس کام کا تکرار نہیں ہوگا ۔

    یہاں مامور بہ  کے مطلق عن الوقت، مقید بالوقت ہونے ، پھر مامور بہ کے حسن ہونے کے اعتبار سے حسن بنفسہ اور حسن لغیرہ  ہونے ، پھر م ادائیگی کے اعتبار سے مامور بہ کے اداء یا قضاء ہونے  پھر ادائے کامل یا  ادائے قاصراور قضائے کامل یا قضائے قاصر ہونے کے اعتبار سے ، پھر متعلقہ شرائط، اسباب وعلل پر نظر کرتے ہوئے قرآن وسنت سے جمع کردہ تمام متعلقہ دلائل پر نظر کی جائے گی اور جو حکم نکلتا ہو اسی کا حکم لگایا جائے گا ۔ یہ اصول کا وہ حصہ ہے جس سے قرآن وسنت میں مذکورہ اوامر  کے صیغوں کے مرادی معانی پر وجوب یا عدم وجوب مثلا استحباب ، اباحۃ وغیرہ، یا اسباب وعلل کے مفقود ہونے کی صورت میں ترک وجوب کی گنجائش بنتی ہو ، لہذا ان اعتبارات کے مطابق کی حکم لگایا جائے گا۔

    اب چونکہ شرعی اوامر میں عوام ان چیزوں کو سمجھنے سے قاصر ہے لہذا ان کی اس کمزوری کی رعایت کرتے ہوئے  عام فہم انداز میں صرف حکم بتایا جائے گا۔


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/6/2019 10:45:34 PM



  • Amir bittakraar ki bahas mujhe samjha den. mujhe aaj tak ye bahas samjh me nahi aayi. mujhe bahut confusion hai is issue par. 
    mufti sahab padhate waqt achche se samjhaye the magar ye masla main hi nahi samajh paayi bahut confusion thi, aur abhi tak clear samajh me nahi

    By KF - 12/6/2019 10:06:49 PM



  • If we should think of what our divine commands guide us to, we should think of it with genuine heart, indepth feeling, with centered focus on it, as we must be doing in most modes of Yoga, in order to take the message to our mind, soul and heart. We shold then realize as to how disloyal actually we are, thinking that the One Who created us, The One Who gives us breaths to breathe and be alive, the One who will cause death to us one day, the One Who will ask us abour our actions, and the days of thousand years which we will have to live, with all our rewards on account of our actions, good reward for good acts, bad reward for bad acts. Such are the matters of introspection and deep meditation after or before performing obligatory acts of worship or otherwise. If we actually realize the truth, we achieve peace in our mind and soul. Finally if we are at peace, we would definitely like to establish this peace around the globe, thinking of goodness for all other people around the world, so we remain alive with the purpose of promoting peace, and this purpose gives us peace, and thus we see the world with the mind of peace, with the sight of peace, with the heart of peace, and when we are thus befriended with peace, we succeed to put love at its rightful place because love does not exist outside the border of peace. Whether there is no peace, there is only hate and where there is hate there is no peace.

    We talk about other’s peace, but we are not at peace. This will never make us succeed in establishing peace. To establish peace, we need to be at peace. 
    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/5/2019 12:56:34 AM



  • @KF & Satish, please take the following passage to the depth of your consciousness, only to understand it properly, but do it only if you are truly interested in learning some details of Amr commands as per Islamic Jurisprudence.

    The divine commands (amr plu. Awamir of Allah) related to Furuyiaat are compulsory (waajib), after which Mukallaf Muslim does not have such a choice as between avoiding and acting when facing Mubah or Mustahab issues. The Jurisprudnetial issues of Islam hold varying ranks as compared to one another. Some issues own the rank of wujub, some of mustahab, and some others of mubah. These can be shortly defined here that when the acts based on the rank of wujub are violated or neglected by any Mukallaf Muslim, he will be sinner and liable to punishment, unless its qaza (missed) acts are not performed, for example, Namaz, Roza, etc.

    There are some other actions which hold either the rank of ibahat or istihbab. The acts based on Ibahat are known as Mustahab acts and those based on Istihab are known as Mubah acts. The reward associated with such acts is that when Muslims perform Mustahab and Mubah acts, they will earn virtue (thawab) and in the opposite case, that is, when they miss or neglect such acts, they will not be called sinners. Such are the acts which give Muslims a choice between avoiding and acting.

    If Muslims do not practice waajib actions, they will be sinners because here they do not have any choice in times of Ibahat and Istihbab.

    Such are waajib acts whose violation has been disliked by our God Almighty, as in the verse which reads,

    وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ وَلَا مُؤْمِنَةٍ إِذَا قَضَى اللَّـهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَمْرًا أَن يَكُونَ لَهُمُ الْخِيَرَةُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِمْ ۗ وَمَن يَعْصِ اللَّـهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلَالًا مُّبِينًا   

    “And no Muslim man or woman has any right in the affair, when Allah and His Noble Messenger have decreed a command regarding it; and whoever does not obey the command of Allah and His Noble Messenger, has indeed clearly gone very astray.” (33:36)

    Another verse in this vein reads,

    ‘‘قَالَ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَلَّا تَسْجُدَ إِذْ أَمَرْتُكَ ۖ قَالَ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِّنْهُ خَلَقْتَنِي مِن نَّارٍ وَخَلَقْتَهُ مِن طِينٍ’’

     “(Allah) said, “What prevented you, that you did not prostrate when I commanded you?” Answered Iblis, “I am better than him; You created me from fire whereas You created him from clay.”

    The phrase, “What prevented you, that you did not prostrate when I commanded you” refers to the significance of the divine command, which should be sensed by Muslims by heart of faith and actions with purified intentions. ‘What prevented you’ denotes that ‘what was there that prevented you from …..’ to actually mean to Iblis that you have only one God, He is your Real Lord, He created you and He will cause death for you, He will forgive you, it is He Who can love you for your nothingness, It is He who gives you happy, peace and contentment, so you should act upon the command of Allah, do not think that you are going to bow down to Aaadam but instead you should think that you are going to obey the command of your own God, because you did not prostrate and on the contrary you adopted the path of arrogance in front of your own God and you did not even think that you were showing your arrogance in front of your own God by saying that you were created by fire and Adam was created from clay. So you loved your act of arrogance and showed it to express your Iblisi nature.

    Though connected with the context of the subject taking place among Allah Almighty, Adam (peace be upon him) and Iblis before hazrat Adam and Iblis were sent down to the world, this subject makes us understand the likes and dislikes of our God Almighty. Associated with that, it can be shortly said here that those acts which have been compulsory (waajib) are really compulsory, the violation of which makes the Mukallaf sinner.


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 12/4/2019 11:58:29 PM



  • The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: الرَّاحِمُونَ يَرْحَمُهُمْ الرَّحْمَنُ ارْحَمُوا مَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ يَرْحَمْكُمْ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاء

    “The merciful will be shown mercy by the Most Merciful. Be merciful to those on the earth and the One in the heavens will have mercy upon you.” (Sunan al-Tirmidhi)

    The Prophet (peace be upon him) is a mercy to all worlds. In this hadith he is commanding to have mercy towards all people on the earth.

    The word ‘irhamu’ is Amr (command) verb. This is Mutlaq Amr that is free from any qareena (reasonable ground of presumption) of luzum or adme luzum, which signifies that the ruling of having mercy to all mankind on the earth, as deduced from the Amr verb mentioned in the hadith, is compulsory (Wajib). So it is compulsory to be merciful to the people living on the earth and hence those who do not show mercy towards the people who need it, is a sinner.

    Acting upon the Wajib command is referred to as Taa’at (obedience) while avoiding it is Ma’asiyat (disobedience) in both Islamic Sharia and Custom (urf).


    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 11/30/2019 3:25:24 AM



Compose Your Comments here:
Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

Content