Hareem that is a totally incorrect translation... Kill the wrongdoers among you would have been just that... wrongdoers have been added in the translation in (BRACKETS) based on the a hadithist interpretation... SORRY sister. Unacceptable!
You can argue on if the Apostates from Bani Israeel committed suicide or they were killed by the Believers but one thing is confirmed that those Apostates were killed according to Quran. Now if you want to be a Munkir-e-Quran (Quran Rejector) like Javed Ghamidi then that's your choice.
I don't mind if Apostates of Today kill themselves to obey Allah's command in Quran, lol. And if they don't themselves then it is the duty of Believers to kill them along with those who reject this command of Allah i.e the likes of Ghamidi.
And if they don't themselves then it is the duty of Believers to kill them along with those who reject this command of Allah i.e the likes of Ghamidi.
Dear brother, this story of Moses having apostates killed is a biblical story from the OLD TESTAMENT (copied into hadith of course and forced into the Quran through man-made tafseer).
Secondly, the words in RED cannot be those of a muslim. I am really sorry for you... First, you are misinterpreting 2:54
وإن نكثوا أيمنهم من بعد عهدهم وطعنوا في دينكم فقتلوا أئمة الكفر إنهم لا أيمن لهم لعلهم ينتهون
And if they break their oaths after making them, and they denounce the authority of your system; then you may kill the chiefs of rejection. Their oaths are nothing to them, perhaps they will then cease (how are they supposed to cease if they are all dead????).
And second, you are DENYING 2:256
لا إكراه في الدين
There is no compulsion in the system/religion/way-of-life
By your standards, you should go and jump off a building now... or do what suits your fancy.
We are only allowed to fight (and if left with no choice, kill) in self defence. The death penalty comes ONLY from the islamic state for the LEADERS of those who try to topple/denounce/undermine the state, or those murdering people or raping women...
The attitude of some of the members of this forum is hopeless! No wonder we have been pushed back and are now trailing in humanity! We, once upon a time, a great nation... We ARE our own undoing!!!
I am leaving this forum! fii amaan Allah ... you'll need it.
In short, you are confusing Ijma of scholars with Ijma of Ummah as ijma of Ummah is only on Qur’an and those Sunnah practices on which no sect of Muslims disagree. Secondly, perpetual adherence of a practice from Prophet’s time is a more stronger proof of a Sunnah than Ijma of Ummah, as today Ummah can have a ijma of Eid Milad-un-Nabi, but actually it is not Sunnah at all because it cannot be proved through perpetual adherence from Prophet.
I’ve written so many times and have given so many examples that Ghamidi doesn’t reject hadith unless it really goes against Qur’an. He also never rejected the hadith of apostasy. One should read the article of Ghamidi here. He believes that when Prophet Muhammad’s addressees were punished, as addressees of all Messengers are punished, they were given a chance to convert to Islam or face death. At that point, Prophet gave this directive. After the prophet and his companions, no one can exercise this command. And Qur’an states very clearly that Sahaba were standing at the status of Shahadah, hence they fought just like God chose prophets in history to fight in the way of God to spread religion.
My only request is that please read Ghamidi’s articles first before criticizing. This is also why I say that there hasn’t been a scholarly criticisizm on Ghamidi.
MKF, asking like this may not get you anywhere. In all honesty, I have mostly heard of him through works of others. From what I have read about him, I do not agree with him on some of his stances, but I cannot say that he is totally wrong and I can definitely not claim that “he is out of the fold of islam”. If he denies some ahaadith, he must have some understanding of them. Obviously I do not have that much knowledge but I can tell that certain ahaadith actually seem fabrications. You’ve said this yourself too so there is some part of you that feels it as well.
I will spend some time and read his books, Miizaan and Burhaan to form an appropriate opinion. You should do the same rather than asking others… as you have clearly seen, most people here have not even read his works and are forming an opinion based on their pre-conceived notions.
Brother, Ghamidi’s word is not like the fruit of evil that Eve was told to stay away from… his word is his opinion. We all differ from each other and cannot say for sure that we are right. Why is it that God says fa aHkum-u bainakum fii maa kuntum fiihi takhtalifoon? Is the decision in our hands? Clearly NOT!!
Dear sister, I was too upset last night by binAdam’s post. How can one expect to have a conversation with a person who says, in essence: Kill anyone who disagrees… what kind of Islam is this??? Is this how Ara’ait an-Naas yad khloon-a fii diin Illah-i afwaajaa?
Dear brother, this story of Moses having apostates killed is a biblical story from the OLD TESTAMENT (copied into hadith of course and forced into the Quran through man-made tafseer).
I think you have lost your senses, the apostates being killed is in the verse which I mentioned above. I nowhere quoted any Tafsir or Hadith. The verse number is 02:54, read it again and take your words back please.
[quote]
Secondly, the words in RED cannot be those of a muslim. I am really sorry for you... First, you are misinterpreting 2:54
وإن نكثوا أيمنهم من بعد عهدهم وطعنوا في دينكم فقتلوا أئمة الكفر إنهم لا أيمن لهم لعلهم ينتهون
And if they break their oaths after making them, and they denounce the authority of your system; then you may kill the chiefs of rejection. Their oaths are nothing to them, perhaps they will then cease (how are they supposed to cease if they are all dead????).
[/quote]
I think you were sleeping when you typed this post, wake up bro.
The verse 02:54 is this:
002.054 And remember Moses said to his people: "O my people! Ye have indeed wronged yourselves by your worship of the calf: So turn (in repentance) to your Maker, and slay yourselves (the wrong-doers); that will be better for you in the sight of your Maker." Then He turned towards you (in forgiveness): For He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.
[quote]
And second, you are DENYING 2:256
لا إكراه في الدين
There is no compulsion in the system/religion/way-of-life
[/quote]
There wouldn't be any harm if you quoted the full aayah:
002.256 Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
The above verse is about Disbelievers and not Believers (Muslims), there is no Ikraah for Kuffar in Deen, we are not going to force them to embrace Islam, but those who have signed the agreement of being Muslims, they have to obey Allah and His Messenger, or they will be forced for that.
[quote]
We are only allowed to fight (and if left with no choice, kill) in self defence.
[/quote]
Speak of yourself only!
Read Quran and stop doing blind taqleed of Jahils like Ghamidi.
[quote]
The death penalty comes ONLY from the islamic state for the LEADERS of those who try to topple/denounce/undermine the state, or those murdering people or raping women...
[/quote]
And if people stop you from establishing an Islamic State, e.g today the present Regime and those of the past is/were an obstacle to Islamic State, and Agha Ghamidi should lead a Jihad against Agha Parvez's Kafir Regime so that an Islamic State be formed in this country. What is your say on this?
[quote]
The attitude of some of the members of this forum is hopeless! No wonder we have been pushed back and are now trailing in humanity! We, once upon a time, a great nation... We ARE our own undoing!!!
I am leaving this forum! fii amaan Allah ... you'll need it.
[/quote]
Let's go to attend a lecture from Agha Ghamidi to learn MORE Islam..
of the little i know this man, he contradicts himself in what he says on tv and what he writes in his books....
i had a brief overview of his books (esp. meezan) and he doesnt seem to be much unorthodox there....
Well, the Ijma’ of Ummah upon the Khilafat of Abu Bakr, 'Umar, ‘Uthman radhiyAllahu ‘anhum etc,
the Ijma’ of Ummah regarding Qitaal of rejectors of Zakaat etc in the Khilafat of Abu Bakr r.a
are also not mentioned in Quran and Sunnah.
There is an Ijma’ of Ummah with continuity concerning killing of Apostates, only Kafirs in the guise of Islam deny that.
By the way this is in Sunnah too.
It shows your lack of knowledge and information, as there is no Ijma’ of Ummah on the so called Eid Miladun Nabi.
Here is a contradiction in your position:
First you say only Prophet Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam could do Qitaal of Apostates and then you said Sahabah also had the right to do so. Well show me the verse which supports your opinion.
Secondly the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w is a witness upon us and we are the witness upon the rest of Humans till the day of judgment. Someone’s rejecting Prophethood of Muhammad s.a.w is not something as his personal issue, instead that is a general issue of rejecting Allah because it is the Messenger who conveys His Message to the humans. Therefore after the Prophet Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, if someone turns to an Apostate he will be rejecting the Prophethood of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam and his crime will be the same as would be in the life of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, the crime of Zina in the life of Muhammad s.a.w is the same today with same punishment likewise, and so an Apostate will be killed for the same reason.
If something is against your Agha Ghamidi then it is not scholarly, that’s obvious, I have Alhamdu Lillah started reading his views from today so you should now be cheer up.
of the little i know this man, he contradicts himself in what he says on tv and what he writes in his books....
i had a brief overview of his books (esp. meezan) and he doesnt seem to be much unorthodox there....
I have an idea about such people, bro. They themselves know that they are wrong and are representing anti-Islam-Lobby or the Christian-Missionaries that is why they change their stance according to the situation. I have seen him on tv, when he is with traditional scholars (e.g Deobandis), he tries to be a good boy and doesn't speak much like a parrot.
If he denies some ahaadith, he must have some understanding of them.
Must you do his blind taqleed, man?
Is he very pretty or looks like a princess that you prefer him over the whole world?
[quote]
Obviously I do not have that much knowledge but I can tell that certain ahaadith actually seem fabrications. You've said this yourself too so there is some part of you that feels it as well.
[/quote]
SubhaanAllah! You don't have knowledge still you know some hadiths are forged. It's a miracle. Isn't it?
Well, if you feel bad about some hadiths then that might be because you don't have sufficient knowledge or you follow your desires. Isn't it the best way to gain knowledge yourself and stop doing blind taqleed of those who belong to an Isolated Block.
[quote]
I will spend some time and read his books, Miizaan and Burhaan to form an appropriate opinion.
[/quote]
Come on! You shouldn't read his books, first read Quran and Hadith then read books of Ghamidi or Hamidi, then only you will know who is who and shoe is shoe.
[quote]
You should do the same rather than asking others... as you have clearly seen, most people here have not even read his works and are forming an opinion based on their pre-conceived notions.
[/quote]
Well, personally, I haven't read any books AGAINST Ghamidi, my views about him are because I have myself seen him on tv many times, he behaves like a Jahil to keep talking like a parrot. Once Dr Shahid Masood from ARY channel (in the past) asked him about Jihad that if it can be started without the permission of Goerge Wa*ker Mush or Agha Hamid Kargai, you know what Chacha Ghamidi said?
He said Jihad cannot be started without the permission of the Head of the State, and Shahid Masood asked even if a foreign force attacks you will wait for the permission of the head of state against the foreign forces, and he didn't reply to the point and said
Only the head of state can announce Jihad.
which means if Hamid Karzai (the American Puppet) doesn't announce Jihad against Americans, all those who are fighting Americans in Afghanistan are not doing Jihad, but they are terrorists.
This is why I hate your Chacha Ghamidi and I will be quite happy if such a Munafiq dies of a Rabies.
[quote]
Dear sister, I was too upset last night by binAdam's post. How can one expect to have a conversation with a person who says, in essence: Kill anyone who disagrees... what kind of Islam is this??? Is this how Ara'ait an-Naas yad khloon-a fii diin Illah-i afwaajaa?
[/quote]
I didn't say kill anyone who disagrees, I said Kill the Apostate (of course through an Islamic State) and if Ghamidi denies this punishment of Apostacy, he becomes an Apostate also.
binAdam, I wanted to write a lengthy post... but I think I give up. Many thanks for not even understanding what I wrote. Indeed, Khatam Allah-u 'alaa Qalbika Ghishaawah...
Well, the Ijma' of Ummah upon the Khilafat of Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman radhiyAllahu 'anhum etc,
the Ijma' of Ummah regarding Qitaal of rejectors of Zakaat etc in the Khilafat of Abu Bakr r.a
are also not mentioned in Quran and Sunnah.
There is an Ijma' of Ummah with continuity concerning killing of Apostates, only Kafirs in the guise of Islam deny that.
By the way this is in Sunnah too.
As according to the Qur'an, a person can only claim his citizenship as Muslim if he prays and gives Zakah. As Qur'an says: So if they repent and are diligent in the prayer and pay the zakah, they shall become your brothers in religion. (9:11)
When Abu Bakr (ra) started Jihad against rejectors of Zakat, he was actually doing Jihad against deniers of the truth after Itmam al-hujjah. And the Qur'an gave clear directions to fight against them e.g. 9:5 and 9:29.
It shows your lack of knowledge and information, as there is no Ijma' of Ummah on the so called Eid Miladun Nabi.
I just wrote it as an example, not as a fact.
Here is a contradiction in your position:
First you say only Prophet Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam could do Qitaal of Apostates and then you said Sahabah also had the right to do so. Well show me the verse which supports your opinion.
A huge part of the Qur'an gives examples from previous nations that how God destroyed previous nations when He sent messengers to them. This was to tell that addressees of Prophet are going to face the same punishment. How can we, who will not receive anymore messengers, give the same punishment according to the Qur'an. (kindly read my complete response before answering)
Secondly the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w is a witness upon us and we are the witness upon the rest of Humans till the day of judgment. Someone's rejecting Prophethood of Muhammad s.a.w is not something as his personal issue, instead that is a general issue of rejecting Allah because it is the Messenger who conveys His Message to the humans.
The verse you mentioned is addressing to Sahaba. They were witnessess to the whole world just like Prophet was witness infront of them. As Qur'an says:
And similarly, [O Companions of the Prophet!] We have made you an intermediate group so that you be witnesses [to this religion] before the nations, and the Rasulbe such a witness before you. (2:143)
This is exaplained in another verse as well where it is said that Sahaba were chosen people just like God chooses prophets from the whole humanity. As Qur'an says:
He has chosen you, and has imposed no difficulties on you in religion; it is the religion of your father Abraham. It is He Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this [Qur’an]: [He chose you so that] the Messenger may be a witness [of this religion] to you, and you be witnesses of this religion to non-Muslims [of your times]. (22:78)
If you take the meaning of above verse in order to apply on all Muslims, you would imply that every Muslim in Muslim nation is a chosen person, which is wrong as well otherwise we won't be suffering today because of our own deeds.
Therefore after the Prophet Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, if someone turns to an Apostate he will be rejecting the Prophethood of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam and his crime will be the same as would be in the life of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, the crime of Zina in the life of Muhammad s.a.w is the same today with same punishment likewise, and so an Apostate will be killed for the same reason.
As I mentioned earlier, punishments given to rejectors of Messengers can only be given to rejectors of Messengers, not after him as no one can do Itmam-al hujjah anymore. But punishment of adultery will always remain as this is a universal crime and will always be a crime. I hope that this will clear the misconception. Cheers!
Thank you Laeeq for giving this link. It will be interesting to read this. Cheers!
I just read the preface of the article. It states, “if Allama Javed Ahmad Ghamidi doesn’t believe in the principles on which Ahl-e-Sunnah believes in then it is true that there hasn’t been any criticism on him”.
It shows clearly that people when criticize Javed Ghamidi, they look at him from their own understanding of religion and when proofs are provided from the Qur’an and Sunnah, they don’t accept it. Hence, we need to differentiate where the God’s book and Sunnah finish and from where our opinions start.
As according to the Qur'an, a person can only claim his citizenship as Muslim if he prays and gives Zakah. As Qur'an says:
So if they repent and are diligent in the prayer and pay the zakah, they shall become your brothers in religion. (9:11)
When Abu Bakr (ra) started Jihad against rejectors of Zakat, he was actually doing Jihad against deniers of the truth after Itmam al-hujjah. And the Qur'an
gave clear directions to fight against them e.g. 9:5 and 9:29.
009.005 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Mushrikeen wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
I just wrote it as an example, not as a fact.
Those whom Saiyidina Abu Bakr radhiyAllahu 'anhu fought were not Mushrikeen but they had embraced Islam before, Abu Bakr did their Qitaal because they rejected Zakaat, a pillar of faith, and so they became Apostates, there were other Apostates too whom Saiyidina Abu Bakr fought.
The verse 09:11 is again about Mushrikeen / Pagans, that if they repent and embrace Islam (and establish salaah and pay zakaah), they are our brothers, no?
009.029 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
So again this verse doesn't address those whom Saiyidina Abu Bakr fought. Isn't it?
Since you yourself have accepted that Abu Bakr radhiyAllahu 'anhu fought those who rejected Zakaah, means Apostates need to be killed by Believers and Ghamidi and his followers who don't believe in it are outside the fold of Islam. They can be our brothers once again if they repent and enter Islam fully.
Well, we can give them (the Rejectors of Deen) those punishments which are prescribed by Quran or which Allah demands us to give to Disbelievers e.g the one I referred to above:
009.029 Fight (Slay) those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Your problem is you Reject Quran and follow your desires and whims; you have a blind faith in a Kafir like Ghamidi but not in the words of Allah (Quran).
Because of Rejecting Quran, Ghamidi and his followers make an Ass of themselves, I have seen this a lot of times that those who Reject clear signs of Allah for the sake of money or fitnah, they talk nonsense, they want Jews and Christians their friends, because if they talk about Qitaal and killing the Apostates they will be opposing Christian and Jewish missionaries.
002.143 Thus, have We made of you an Ummat justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Apostle a witness over yourselves; and We appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Apostle from those who would turn on their heels (From the Faith). Indeed it was (A change) momentous, except to those guided by Allah. And never would Allah Make your faith of no effect. For Allah is to all people Most surely full of kindness, Most Merciful.
There is no traces of Sahabah in the above verse exclusively but it is generally addressing all Believers, even if we suppose the above verse is addressing Companions of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w only then it will prove following points:
Quran and its ahkaam were descent for Sahabah only or mostly so we need another Divine Book and another Messenger for the present time; why should we depend on Ijtihaad while there are a 100 schools of Ijtihaad today including one of Ghamidi. A Messenger unites people on one faith but these schools are dividing people into a number of factions or sects.
If only Sahabah were the witness because the verse is addressing the change of Qibla then Sahabah are not living today, so who is going to be a Witness over today’s Mushrikeen and Kuffar and all the nations?
022.077 O ye who believe! bow down, prostrate yourselves, and adore your Lord; and do good; that ye may prosper.
So 022:77 is addresseing the People of Faith, right? And not only Sahabah are the people of Faith.
Now read 022:78 which is the continuation of 022:77:
[RIGHT]وَجَاهِدُوا فِي اللَّهِ حَقَّ جِهَادِهِ هُوَ اجْتَبَاكُمْ وَمَا جَعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ مِنْ حَرَجٍ مِّلَّةَ أَبِيكُمْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ هُوَ سَمَّاكُمُ الْمُسْلِمينَ مِن قَبْلُ وَفِي هَذَا لِيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ شَهِيدًا عَلَيْكُمْ وَتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاء عَلَى النَّاسِ فَأَقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَآتُوا الزَّكَاةَ وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِاللَّهِ هُوَ مَوْلَاكُمْ فَنِعْمَ الْمَوْلَى وَنِعْمَ النَّصِيرُ
[/RIGHT]
022.078 And strive in His cause as ye ought to strive, (with sincerity and under discipline). He has chosen you, and has imposed no difficulties on you in religion; it is the cult of your father Abraham. It is He Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation); that the Apostle may be a witness for you, and ye be witnesses for mankind! So establish regular Prayer, give regular Charity, and hold fast to Allah! He is your Protector - the Best to protect and the Best to help!
Well, the verse is talking about Believers, and there are only a few Believers in this world today, most of the so called Muslims today are Munafiqeen, including Kafirs like Ghamidi.
And what about Quran. Is it a toy in your hands to play with? All ahkaam in Quran are only for you to mock at?
SubhaanAllah!
Adultery is a crime and Rejection of the Prophethood of Muhammad is not.
Do I take from this statement of yours that a Muslim Adulterer will always burn in the Hell while a Righteous Mushrik who rejects the Prophethood of Muhammad s.a.w will go to Jannah ultimately?
I’ve told you earlier that there was special punishment for deniers of Prophet Muhammad, just like God has punished all previous nations of Messengers. Hence, Abu Bakr fought against those, who lost their rights as Muslims when they didn’t pay Zakah. But now, we can declare someone non-Muslim on the basis, if he/she doesn’t pray or doesn’t pay Zakah. But after Sahaba, this kind of Qatal cannot be done, as I gave example from Qur’an.
There are two kinds of punishment. Either the punishment comes from sky as in case 'Aad and Thamud or it can come through hands of believers as in case of Moses (as) and Muhammad (sws). Adversaries of both Messengers were punished by their companions. In case of Moses, when people worshiped Golden calf, they were persecuted and Similarly, polytheists of Arabia were asked to convert to Islam or face consequences and others were subjugated as they were atleast claimants of Monotheism. Hence, you completely ignored my point, as punishement can also come through companions of the Prophet. As Qur’an says:
Fight them and God will punish them with your hands. (9:14)
Firstly, you are taking the verse out of context. Because the Qur’an is talking about a specific situation in Prophet’s life and the addressees of this verse can only be Sahaba. Secondly, I knew that Prophet was witness infront of Sahaba, but how he (sws) is witness infront of us? this is out of my comprehension. As the Qur’an say:
*And similarly, [O Companions of the Prophet!] We have made you an intermediate group so that you be witnesses [to this religion] before the nations, and the Rasul be such a witness before you. (2:143) *
You missed the point which I raised and now I am glad to know that atleast you are a true believer and Ummah is actually consisted of a very few true believers like you and rest of them are Kafir and Munafiqin and also thanks for giving Ghamidi a certificate for hell.
Those who will and who have denied the Prophet Muhammad with their best knowledge will definitely go to hell. But when we talk about punishment of addressees of Prophet Muhammad in this world, the Qur’an says about “People of book” that how they knew Muhammad (sws):
The people of the Book know this as they know their own sons. 2:146
The punishment was given to direct addressees of Prophet Muhammad as truth was made clear from every possible angle. As at another place Qur’an makes it clear that person’s religion will not save him/her rather there is a merit that will save on Judgement day.
Those who believe (i.e. Muslims), and those who are Jews, and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. 2:62
Those who denied Prophet Muhammad with their best knowledge were punished by Sahaba, but after Sahaba no one can do Itmam al-hujjah hence no one can punish someone for his/her religion and everyone will be judged on the Judgement day according to their knowledge. And God knows best!
Were the deniers of Prophethood of Muhammad sallAllahu ‘alayhe wasallam punished like nations of ‘Aad and Thamood were punished?
Were Pagans of Makkah who didn’t embrace Islam turned to monkeys as Allah punished previous nations?
If not so, then what was the special punishment which were given to the Rejectors of Muhammad’s Nubuwwat?
Please quote from Quran not from Hadith of Agha Ghamidi or your own (no more explanation from your own conjectures).
Did any group of people deny paying Zakaah during the life of Muhammad sallAllahu ‘alayhe wasallam?
What is the special verse in Quran that gives Sahabah a special right to punish those who reject Zakaat and that no one after Sahabah can use to do Qitaal of Munkireen of Zakaat?
[quote] There are two kinds of punishment. Either the punishment comes from sky as in case 'Aad and Thamud or it can come through hands of believers as in case of Moses (as) and Muhammad (sws).
Was ThilQarnain a Companion of Musa ‘alayhis salam?
If not so then why he punished Disbelievers through Qitaal?
Rest of the hundreds of verses in Quran about Qitaal are all addressing Sahabah?
If not so then what Qitaal means? Celebrating Christmas or holey (ma’athAllah)?
Isn’t Qitaal the punishment to Disbelievers?
Now using your argument I can say, since the above verse addresses Sahabah only and according to the above verse and all the verses in its context, the Audience is Sahabah, so we as later generations don’t bother to take Masjid al Haraam as our Qiblah, we can turn to Masjid al Aqsa as our Qiblah too in order to show solidarity with our Jewish brothers. Isn’t it a good idea for Agha Ghamdi?
This is because as the above verse says:
And We appointed the qiblah which ye formerly observed only that We might know him who followeth the messenger
The purpose of appointment of Kaabah as Qiblah was only to see who follows the Messenger s.a.w and this verse is talking to Sahabah only, and we the Muslims of the later generations are already following the Messenger, this verse doesn’t address us, right?
And even this verse is addressing Sahabah:
002.144:We have seen the turning of thy face to heaven (for guidance, O Muhammad). And now verily We shall make thee turn (in prayer) toward a qiblah which is dear to thee. So turn thy face toward the Inviolable Place of Worship, and ye (O Muslims), wheresoever ye may be, turn your faces (when ye pray) toward it. Lo! Those who have received the Scripture know that (this revelation) is the Truth from their Lord. And Allah is not unaware of what they do.
This is addressing the Messenger and Sahabah, not us, no?
02:146:The people of the Book know this as they know their own sons; but some of them conceal the truth which they themselves know.
So in the above verse, by people of the Book, only those Jews and Christians are meant who existed at the time of Prophet Muhammad sallAllahu ‘alayhe wasallam (or Sahabah)?
And today people of the Book don’t know what they knew those days?
Do you have any evidence that they have forgotten now what they remembered during the life of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w?
Where is the verse of Quran which says that only Sahabah could do Qitaal or punish the Disbelievers?
And where is the verse of Quran which says that only Sahabah could do Itmamul Hujjah and people after them can’t do anything?
I prefer Quran over Hadiths of Ghamidi (his explanations and conjectures).
Ofcourse! I think you tried to answer the questions before reading my complete response.
The Qur’an says that this punishment came through hands of Sahaba in case of Prophet Muhammad.
Fight them and God will punish them with your hands. (9:14)
If any group would deny Zakat in Prophet’s time, he would be handled the same way Abu Bakr (ra) handled rejectors of Zakat. According to Ghamidi, an Islamic government **can ** force its Muslim citizens to pray and pay Zakah. But in case of Abu Bakr (ra), anyone denying Zakat would lose his basic rights as Muslim and would be punishable as other Non-Muslims were liable to be punished.
I don’t know how you are combining Zulqarnain (as) with Jihad of Musa (as).
This is the most weakest argument, I’ve read so far. These were Sahaba who were actually asked to change the Qibla. We are not being asked to change Qibla. Maybe if you want to change Qibla one more time, it is upto you.
I don’t know if you are joking, or you’ve really haven’t understood it. Qur’an is telling that these People of the Book know the truth (about Islam and Prophet Muhammad) just like they know their sons. How can it be applied to modern people. I know first handedly that there are many Christians in western world who donot even know that Muslims consider Muhammad (sws) as prophet or God. I admire at your daring claims.
Words of the following verse shows clearly that this is a general comment.
Those who believe (i.e. Muslims), and those who are Jews, and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. 2:62
Mr! You have ignored all of my comments in my previous reply and you are also thinking that a large part of Qur’an which deals with punishments of previous nations was futile.
And I think there is no point in exchanging more fire. We can have different opinions and I think we should try to live with that.
