The Quranic and Shari’ah Prescription of a Muslim Brotherhood
Is this a Social Ideal for the Ummah?
Or
A Political Ruling and Injunction?
ABSTRACT
“All believers are but brethren. Hence, [whenever they are at odds,] make peace between your two brethren, and remain conscious of God, so that you might be graced with His mercy”.
I have chosen this ayah because its message is very close and dearest to the hearts of all us, Muslims. The concept of the Muslim Brotherhood is the main social ideal of Islam. It appears as if Islam cannot be completely realized until this model of perfection and excellence is achieved. This is among the most important verses in the Quran for understanding the structure of the Muslim community (ummah). No wonder this was the main theme of the Holy Prophet’s Sermon at his last pilgrimage. The article includes many ahaadith to support this view.
Herein the basic principles for dealing with disputes between Muslims are explained. The Prophet enjoined his followers, “Help your brother whether he oppresses or is oppressed.” When asked what it means to help the oppressor, he replied, “You help him by preventing him from oppressing”
As I was working on this ayah, I soon realized that the preceding ayah in the Quran is an integral part of the message of this ayah:
“If two parties of the believers happen to fight, make peace between them. But then, if one of them transgresses against the other, fight the one that transgresses until it reverts to Allah's command. And if it does revert, make peace between them with justice, and be equitable for Allah loves the equitable.”
This ayah is addressing Muslims, particularly those who are in authority and who are not a party in the strife but are in a position to offer and enforce, if need be their good services. If there is no leader to guide a joint action, the Muslims should stay away from the arena. It is clear from this ayah, if two groups of Muslims are at loggerheads the rest cannot just look the other way as if this not their concern. The others have to get involved, find the relevant issues and try their best to bring about peace and reconciliation between the parties. Not only this, if it is revealed that one party is unfair and aggressive, the rest are required, if possible to join in to combat the aggression. However the aim is not to punish or defeat the aggressive party but to aim at concluding a truce between them with justice and equity as required by the command of Allah in this ayah; you are not supposed to stand on judgement. The research scholar and mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamdi stresses that obviously these rules will be operative only if there is a State or Government of Muslims which is capable of conducting a war against the dissidents. In the absence of such a State, he quotes that in reply to a question from Sayyidna Khudaifa, the Holy Prophet directed that every Muslim “should completely stay away from this fitna - mischief and civil strife”. (Bukhari No. 7084). He further clarifies that once the parties are on the table for reconciliation, Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo does not want any favoritism or pressure but a settlement with justice and equity; a party should be compensated for its loss, if any.
These are the precepts and principles to guide us in the event of a dispute and hostility between two group of Muslims. What about the law and jurisprudence in this matter? Here, we do not have any reference from the Holy Prophet. To gain your confidence, I will allow Maulana Maudoodi to speak to you directly on this issue “For, in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), no war took place between the Muslims; hence nothing is found in his practice and sayings that could throw light on the commandments concerning it”.
Fast forward only twenty four years, and lo! The Muslim community was faced with powerful and painful jolts and shocks. When I first read about the Battle of Camels as a young man I was dazed and dumbfounded. How can this be true? I exclaimed to myself. Two most venerated and loved personalities of the elite group of Sahaabah grappling each other on the battle field!!! And that too, so soon after the demise of our loving Holy Prophet. A carnage, responsible for the death of ten thousand noble companions in the process. I had found it utterly unbelievable. Very damaging to the tall and deserving image of our early sahaabah. We have just read that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “To abuse a Muslim is sinful and to fight him is a disbelief”. I decided I will simply note it and rest there. Do not try to analyse it, I told to myself; I did not feel qualified to do it, emotionally or intellectually. It was probably easier for the general Ummah to accept it or rationalize this massacre, going on the formula of Pharaoh. He had seen a conspiracy between his sorcerers and Prophet Moses for the victory of the latter. Our Ummah has a ready and ever handy evil Jewish conspiracies for all our ailments. The other day I was listening to Maulana Makki on TV. He very confidently asserted (supported by Dr. Israr Ahmed and most Muslims) that it was the plot and scheme of the Jew Abdullah ibn Saba responsible for the encounter between these two towering personalities of Islam. Jewish conspiracy is blamed for the assassination of Sayyidna Usman and for the formation of all the various sects in Islam. Maulana Makki quotes further “hundreds” other such Jewish intrigues. This has become our standard shelter and refuge to disown all our shortcomings and failures. No wonder we are sinking deeper in the quagmire we are in. Internecine hostilities and battle are criminal. But this becomes a worst and shameful crime if it is done at the behest and conspiracy of our perceived enemy, the Jews. It beats me how do my fellow Muslims absolve themselves of any outrage or disgrace by calling it a “Jewish conspiracy”.
Our Fuqahaa and legal experts proved to be more pragmatic on this issue. They were able to rise above the great sentimental trauma of the two internecine battles and were able to focus on the legal parameters of this Ayah. A large number of the companions were still living at that time. Taking advantage of their example and statements, they tried to work out a detailed code of law for the practices prescribed in this ayah. Sayyidna Ali’s sayings and practices served as the real source for most jurists in the compilation of this law.
Some well known Islamic scholars have given a political color and interpretation (without much basis in my view ) to this Social Ideal of Muslim Brotherhood conveyed in these ayahs. In the process they have caused many hurdles and problems for the Ummah specially in our age of popular pluralism. The eminent scholar Sayyed Qutb in his monumental tafseer “Fee Zilalil Quran” declares in the elaboration of this ayah “In the right order of things, all Muslims of the world should have one leader” and if another claimant appears “he should be killed”. He takes for support of this statement the battles of Camel and Siffin fought by Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib and goes on to build up his case to “have only one ruler” even to the point of risking a civil war among Muslims. As Aristotle has said “great men make great mistakes”.
Read ONLY, IF AND WHEN you have time and mood for:
“An Ayah of the Quran for 30 Days” -- December 28, 2019
Choose the section you have time in the next 30 days to read this ayah:-
Prelude: Recurrent Primary Message 1st. Page
Starting Dua, a note & The Ayah 2nd. Page
A Short Version: For the Busy Bee Two minus Pages
The Main Story: Recommended Three Pages
Footnotes: For the Perfectionist Two Plus Pages
PRELUDE
From the Pen and Perspective of a self-styled PPK Muslim (Proud, Practicing, Knowledgeable) with a humble submission that Islam totally rejects Blind Following BUT vigorously focusses on the Limitations of Pure Human Reasoning..............and clearly and comprehensively AlLAH knows best.
In the beginning of the seventh century C.E., the folks of Mecca and Medina had a fascinatingly unique window: they had direct access to the Heavens through one of their own; as if Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo was with them on the grounds. They were blessed with a regular stream of Divine counseling and guidelines. Question and answer sessions were part of the program. Even individual questioner was graced by an answer. In the short Introduction to this scheme they were assured that at the end of this twenty-two year project, Divine Directions and Admonitions will continue through the agency of the PEN. The whole discourse has been preserved and archived till eternity under the guarantee of our Lord and Creator. This record in known as the Quran.
It should sound unbelievable but factually appears to be true: Many of our prevalent, widespread and important concepts and opinions about religious matters do not have a basis in the Quran and sometimes even appear to be in obvious conflict with the teachings of the Quran. It would be very educative and helpful to discuss an Ayah of the Quran once a month to see if it supports or rejects our views and actions in our daily life. I wish and hope this generates some soul searching and fruitful interactive discussion.
DUAA’
بِسمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحمٰنِ الرَّحيمِ
In the name of Allah, we praise HIM, seek HIS help and ask for HIS forgiveness. Whosoever Allah guideth none can misguide; whosoever HE allows to fall astray, none can guide him right. We bear witness that there is none worthy of worship but Allah alone and we bear witness that Mohammed, SAW is HIS slave-servant and the Seal of HIS Messengers.
Further, we recall that Allah Ta’aala has declared in HIS Book1
“He granteth wisdom to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom wisdom is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message (or remember or receive admonition) but men of understanding (or intellect)”
and we also recollect that he has warned us about the day of judgement2
“Then on that day you shall most certainly be questioned about the boons (joy, pleasure).”
As there cannot be a greater boon or blessing or benefit than wisdom, we wonder if this should be a timely reminder to very many of us sincere and practicing Muslims who use our critical thinking to enhance the mundane for ourselves and our families but in matters religion we choose to resort to blind following -- taqleed, doctrine of classical Sunni Islamic Fiqh.
(NOTE: I have filtered out the proofs and details into the Footnotes for those who have the time and interest for them. The main text will then be of reasonable length, hopefully for the busy majority. What follows is not a sermon; I do not feel qualified to give one, anyhow. I wish, it may provide a food for thought. A caveat seems in order: If the ayah selected pertains to issues we face in our daily life with our family, friends, neighbours or peers it may affect us personally and lead to some self analysis and soul searching which in turn could be divisive and distressing. If taken in the right spirit, it can be a humble attempt towards finding the “straight path”.)
THE AYAH
Surah Al-Hujurat No. 49 Ayah 10
إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ فَأَصْلِحُوا بَيْنَ أَخَوَيْكُمْ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ
“All believers are but brethren.1 Hence, [whenever they are at odds,] make peace between your two brethren, and remain conscious of God, so that you might be graced with His mercy”.
A SHORT VERSION
“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” — Imam Shafa’i
I have chosen this ayah because its message is very close and dearest to the hearts of all us, Muslims. The concept of the Muslim Brotherhood is the main social ideal of Islam. It appears as if Islam cannot be completely realized until this model of perfection and excellence is achieved. This is among the most important verses in the Quran for understanding the structure of the Muslim community (ummah). No wonder this was the main theme of the Holy Prophet’s Sermon at his last pilgrimage. “This verse establishes a universal brotherhood of all the Muslims of the world, and it is by virtue of this that the sort of fraternity that exists among the Muslims exists among the followers of no other religion and creed” adds the great scholar Maulana Maudoodi in his classical tafseer “Tafheem-ul-Quran”.
“The Study Quran” a modern tafseer by Nasr Sayyed Hossain et al has mentioned some beautiful ahaadith of the Holy Prophet regarding the Unity of Ummah. ………..(Please see the Main Story)
Herein the basic principles for dealing with disputes between Muslims are explained. The Prophet enjoined his followers, “Help your brother whether he oppresses or is oppressed.” When asked what it means to help the oppressor, he replied, “You help him by preventing him from oppressing”
This verse was reportedly revealed regarding ……..(Please see the Main Story)
There are many ahaadith wherein the Holy Prophet ex plains the full significance and meaning of this ayah: ……………….(Please see the Main Story)
As I was working on this ayah, I soon realized that the preceding ayah in the Quran is an integral part of the message of this ayah:
“If two parties of the believers happen to fight, make peace between them. But then, if one of them transgresses against the other, fight the one that transgresses until it reverts to Allah's command. And if it does revert, make peace between them with justice, and be equitable for Allah loves the equitable.”
This ayah is addressing Muslims, particularly those who are in authority and who are not a party in the strife but are in a position to offer and enforce, if need be their good services. However, indirectly all Muslims are called upon to assist those in authority as per Mufti Mohammed Shafi. If there is no leader to guide a joint action, the Muslims should stay away from the arena. It is clear from this ayah, if two groups of Muslims are at loggerheads the rest cannot just look the other way as if this not their concern. The others have to get involved, find the relevant issues and try their best to bring about peace and reconciliation between the parties. Not only this, if it is revealed that one party is unfair and aggressive, the rest are required, if possible to join in to combat the aggression. “As this fighting has been enjoined by Allah, it is obligatory and comes under jihad” says Maulana Maudoodi. He further adds “All the jurists agree on its being an obligation. And there was no difference of opinion among the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) companions about its being obligatory. (AIJassas, Ahkamal-Quran)”. However the aim is not to punish or defeat the aggressive party but to aim at concluding a truce between them with justice and equity as required by the command of Allah in this ayah; you are not supposed to stand on judgement.
The research scholar and mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamdi cautions that this intervention is feasible only if Muslims have a state and government who is entitled to wage a war. If not then, he reminds us of the Holy Prophet’s answer to the question of Sayyidna Huzaifa that in such a situation every Muslim “should remain aloof fr0m such a fitna—conflict and civil war”. (Bukhari 7084)
Mufti Mohammed Shafi has given a Ruling for a situation when a very powerful group of Muslims revolts against the Muslim ruler. (See Footnotes)
These are the precepts and principles to guide us in the event of a dispute and hostility between two group of Muslims. What about the law and jurisprudence in this matter? Here, we do not have any reference from the Holy Prophet. To gain your confidence, I will allow Maulana Maudoodi to speak to you directly on this issue “For, in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), no war took place between the Muslims; hence nothing is found in his practice and sayings that could throw light on the commandments concerning it”.
Fast forward only twenty four years, and lo! The Muslim community was faced with powerful and painful jolts and shocks. When I first read about the Battle of Camels as a young man I was dazed and dumbfounded. How can this be true? I exclaimed to myself. Two most venerated and loved personalities of the elite group of Sahaabah grappling each other on the battle field!!! And that too, so soon after the demise of our loving Holy Prophet. A carnage, responsible for the death of ten thousand noble companions in the process. I had found it utterly unbelievable. Very damaging to the tall and deserving image of our early sahaabah. We have just read that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “To abuse a Muslim is sinful and to fight him is a disbelief”. I decided I will simply note it and rest there. Do not try to analyse it, I told to myself; I did not feel qualified to do it, emotionally or intellectually. It was probably easier for the general Ummah to accept it or rationalize this massacre, going on the formula of Pharaoh. He had seen a conspiracy between his sorcerers and Prophet Moses for the victory of the latter. Our Ummah has a ready and ever handy evil Jewish conspiracies for all our ailments. The other day I was listening to Maulana Makki on TV. He very confidently asserted (supported by Dr. Israr Ahmed and most Muslims) that it was the plot and scheme of a Jew Abdullah ibn Saba responsible for the encounter between these two towering personalities of Islam. Jewish conspiracy is blamed for the assassination of Sayyidna Usman and for the formation of all the various sects in Islam. Maulana Makki quotes further “hundreds” other such Jewish intrigues. This has become our standard shelter and refuge to disown all our shortcomings and failures. No wonder we are sinking deeper in the quagmire we are in. Internecine hostilities and battle are criminal. But this becomes a worst and shameful crime if it is done at the behest and conspiracy of our perceived enemy, the Jews. It beats me how do my fellow Muslims absolve themselves of any outrage or disgrace by calling it a “Jewish conspiracy”.
Our Fuqahaa and legal experts proved to be more pragmatic on this issue. They were able to rise above the great sentimental trauma of the two internecine battles and were able to focus on the legal parameters of this Ayah. A large number of the companions were still living at that time. Taking advantage of their example and statements, they tried to work out a detailed code of law for the practices prescribed in this ayah. Sayyidna Ali’s sayings and practices served as the real source for most jurists in the compilation of this law. They highlighted the difference between the law of fighting against the infidels and the infighting among Muslims. Even a “brief” resume of this code in the Tafheemul Quran is too long for our present discourse.
Imam Aba Bakr Ibn-ul-'Arabi says that …….(Please see the Main Story)
The research scholar and Mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamdi stresses that obviously these rules will be operative only if there is a State or Government of Muslims which is capable of conducting a war against the dissidents. In the absence of such a State, he quotes that in reply to a question from Sayyidna Khudaifa, the Holy Prophet directed that every Muslim “should completely stay away from this fitna - mischief and civil strife”. (Bukhari No. 7084). He further clarifies that once the parties are on the table for reconciliation, Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo does not want any favoritism or pressure but a settlement with justice and equity; a party should be compensated for its loss, if any.
Some well known Islamic scholars have given a political color and interpretation (without much basis in my view ) to this Social Ideal of Muslim Brotherhood conveyed in these ayahs. In the process they have caused many hurdles and problems for the Ummah specially in our age of popular pluralism. The eminent scholar Sayyed Qutb in his monumental tafseer “Fee Zilalil Quran” declares in the elaboration of this ayah “In the right order of things, all Muslims of the world should have one leader” and if another claimant appears “he should be killed”. He takes for support of this statement the battles of Camel and Siffin fought by Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib and goes on to build up his case to “have only one ruler” even to the point of risking a civil war among Muslims. As Aristotle has said “great men make great mistakes”. To those interested, I have reproduced here part of Sayyed Qutb’s observations. (See Footnotes)
........and Allah knows best.
May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.
THE MAIN STORY
“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” — Imam Shafa’i
I have chosen this ayah because its message is very close and dearest to the hearts of all us, Muslims. The concept of the Muslim Brotherhood is the main social ideal of Islam. It appears as if Islam cannot be completely realized until this model of perfection and excellence is achieved. This is among the most important verses in the Quran for understanding the structure of the Muslim community (ummah). No wonder this was the main theme of the Holy Prophet’s Sermon at his last pilgrimage. “This verse establishes a universal brotherhood of all the Muslims of the world, and it is by virtue of this that the sort of fraternity that exists among the Muslims exists among the followers of no other religion and creed” adds the great scholar Maulana Maudoodi in his classical tafseer “Tafheem-ul-Quran”.
“The Study Quran” a modern tafseer by Nasr Sayyed Hossain et al has mentioned some beautiful ahaadith of the Holy Prophet regarding the Unity of Ummah. Basically these ahaadith highlight a bond of faith beyond those of family ties and relationship and rejects union and association based merely upon tribal bonds. Unfortunately the Muslims today are mostly motivated by this tribal feelings specially in the political arena at the cost of the golden principles of Islam:
“The believers are like a single structure, each part supporting the other.”
“None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.”
“God helps His servant as long as the servant helps his brother.
“Among the seven types of people whom the Prophet said will be granted Paradise, he lists “two men who love each other for the sake of God, meeting for that reason, and parting with this love.”
A famous ḥadīth qudsī states, “God will ask on the Day of Judgment, ‘Where are those who loved each other for the sake of My Glory? Today, on a day wherein there is no shade but Mine, I shall shade them with My shade.’”
“Cursing a Muslim is a sin, and fighting him is disbelief”.
Herein the basic principles for dealing with disputes between Muslims are explained. The Prophet enjoined his followers, “Help your brother whether he oppresses or is oppressed.” When asked what it means to help the oppressor, he replied, “You help him by preventing him from oppressing”
This verse was reportedly revealed regarding an incident in which the Prophet went to call upon ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ubayy, the leader of the hypocrites in Madinah. When the Prophet reached him, ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ubayy said, “Keep away from me. The stench of your donkey is offending me.” A man from the Helpers said to him, “By God, the donkey of the Messenger of God smells better than you.” One of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ubayy’s tribesmen became angry. The parties exchanged blows; then this verse was revealed..
Mufti Mohammed Shafi finds real strength in this set of verses (the second will follow shortly) which “establishes the manners, mores, injunctions, and mutual rights and obligations to be observed in individual and social life. The common value of all these rules is to avoid causing any inconvenience to the members of the society”.
To encourage our sisters, I must quote Dr. Mohammed Asad on this ayah from his well known tafseer “The Message of Quran” that “The plural noun إِخْوَةٌ ikhwah ("brethren" or "brotherhood") has here, of course, a purely ideological connotation, comprising men and women alike; the same applies to the subsequent mention of أَخَوَيْكُمْ "your two brethren”.
There are many ahaadith wherein the Holy Prophet ex plains the full significance and meaning of this ayah:
According to Abdullah bin Masud, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: To abuse a Muslim is sinful and to fight him a disbelief.
Abu Hurairah relates that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: The life, property and honor of every Muslim is forbidden to every other Muslim. (Muslim: Kitab-al-Birr was Silah; Tirmidhi: Abwab-al-Birr was-Silah).
Abu Saeed Khudri and Abu Hurairah say that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A Muslim is a brother to the other Muslim: he does not treat him unjustly, he does not leave him alone and he does not dishonor him. There is no greater evil than that one should hold a Muslim in contempt. (Musnad Ahmad).
In another Hadith the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: The believers’ example in the matter of their mutual love, relationship and compassion with one another is of the state of the body that when a part of it is afflicted, the whole of it is afflicted with fever and restlessness. (Bukhari, Muslim).
As I was working on this ayah, I soon realized that the preceding ayah in the Qurah is an integral part of the message of this ayah:3
“If two parties of the believers happen to fight, make peace between them. But then, if one of them transgresses against the other, fight the one that transgresses until it reverts to Allah's command. And if it does revert, make peace between them with justice, and be equitable for Allah loves the equitable.”
This ayah is addressing Muslims, particularly those who are in authority and who are not a party in the strife but are in a position to offer and enforce, if need be their good services. However, indirectly all Muslims are called upon to assist those in authority as per Mufti Mohammed Shafi. If there is no leader to guide a joint action, the Muslims should stay away from the arena. It is clear from this ayah, if two groups of Muslims are at loggerheads the rest cannot just look the other way as if this not their concern. The others have to get involved, find the relevant issues and try their best to bring about peace and reconciliation between the parties. Not only this, if it is revealed that one party is unfair and aggressive, the rest are required, if possible to join in to combat the aggression. “As this fighting has been enjoined by Allah, it is obligatory and comes under jihad” says Maulana Maudoodi. He further adds “All the jurists agree on its being an obligation. And there was no difference of opinion among the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) companions about its being obligatory. (AIJassas, Ahkamal-Quran)”. However the aim is not to punish or defeat the aggressive party but to aim at concluding a truce between them with justice and equity as required by the command of Allah in this ayah; you are not supposed to stand on judgement.
The research scholar and mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamdi cautions that this intervention is feasible only if Muslims have a state and government who is entitled to wage a war. If not then, he reminds us of the Holy Prophet’s answer to the question of Sayyidna Huzaifa that in such a situation every Muslim “should remain aloof fr0m such a fitna—conflict and civil war”. (Bukhari 7084)
Mufti Mohammed Shafi has given a Ruling for a situation when a very powerful group of Muslims revolts against the Muslim ruler.4
These are the precepts and principles to guide us in the event of a dispute and hostility between two group of Muslims. What about the law and jurisprudence in this matter? Here, we do not have any reference from the Holy Prophet. To gain your confidence, I will allow Maulana Maudoodi to speak to you directly on this issue “For, in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), no war took place between the Muslims; hence nothing is found in his practice and sayings that could throw light on the commandments concerning it”.
Fast forward only twenty four years, and lo! The Muslim community was faced with powerful and painful jolts and shocks. When I first read about the Battle of Camels as a young man I was dazed and dumbfounded. How can this be true? I exclaimed to myself. Two most venerated and loved personalities of the elite group of Sahaabah grappling each other on the battle field!!! And that too, so soon after the demise of our loving Holy Prophet. A carnage, responsible for the death of ten thousand noble companions in the process. I had found it utterly unbelievable. Very damaging to the tall and deserving image of our early sahaabah. We have just read that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “To abuse a Muslim is sinful and to fight him is a disbelief”. I decided I will simply note it and rest there. Do not try to analyse it, I told to myself; I did not feel qualified to do it, emotionally or intellectually. It was probably easier for the general Ummah to accept it or rationalize this massacre, going on the formula of Pharaoh. He had seen a conspiracy between his sorcerers and Prophet Moses for the victory of the latter. Our Ummah has a ready and ever handy evil Jewish conspiracies for all our ailments. The other day I was listening to Maulana Makki on TV. He very confidently asserted (supported by Dr. Israr Ahmed and most Muslims) that it was the plot and scheme of a Jew Abdullah ibn Saba responsible for the encounter between these two towering personalities of Islam. Jewish conspiracy is blamed for the assassination of Sayyidna Usman and for the formation of all the various sects in Islam. Maulana Makki quotes further “hundreds” other such Jewish intrigues. This has become our standard shelter and refuge to disown all our shortcomings and failures. No wonder we are sinking deeper in the quagmire we are in. Internecine hostilities and battle are criminal. But this becomes a worst and shameful crime if it is done at the behest and conspiracy of our perceived enemy, the Jews. It beats me how do my fellow Muslims absolve themselves of any outrage or disgrace by calling it a “Jewish conspiracy”.
Our fuqaha and legal experts proved to be more pragmatic on this issue. They were able to rise above the great sentimental trauma of the two internecine battles and were able to focus on the legal parameters of this Ayah. A large number of the companions were still living at that time. Taking advantage of their example and statements, they tried to work out a detailed code of law for the practices prescribed in this ayah. Sayyidna Ali’s sayings and practices served as the real source for most jurists in the compilation of this law. They highlighted the difference between the law of fighting against the infidels and the infighting among Muslims. Even a “brief” resume of this code in the Tafheemul Quran is too long for our present discourse.
Imam Aba Bakr Ibn-ul-'Arabi says that this verse of battle between Muslims covers all cases. It includes the case where both parties prepare for war on grounds of a principle of Shari'ah. Civil wars of the noble
Companions were of this nature. Qurtubi, quoting this view of Ibn-ul-'Arabi, explains the actual situation of the Battle of Camel and the Battle of Siffin and gives guidelines for later generations of Muslims to
follow in the light of the battles of the blessed Companions. As I pointed out earlier, legal mind is sharply focussed on validity, legitimacy and mechanization of this infighting of the Muslims. The utter distress and pain as also guilt and shame in this situation does not bother them.
Mufti Mohammed Shafi has dealt at length with this subject in “Ahkam-ul-Qur'an" in Arabic and his Urdu book “Maqame-Sahabah. Basicaly, it appears he has followed the same strategy as I have: the characters involved are too respectable and sacrosanct for us to analyse or criticize. Those interested can read the summary of the discussion given in that book with reference to Qurtubi.5
The research scholar and Mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamdi stresses that obviously these rules will be operative only if there is a State or Government of Muslims which is capable of conducting a war against the dissidents. In the absence of such a State, he quotes that in reply to a question from Sayyidna Khudaifa, the Holy Prophet directed that every Muslim “should completely stay away from this fitna - mischief and civil strife”. (Bukhari No. 7084). He further clarifies that once the parties are on the table for reconciliation, Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo does not want any favoritism or pressure but a settlement with justice and equity; a party should be compensated for its loss, if any.
Some well known Islamic scholars have given a political color and interpretation (without much basis in my view ) to this Social Ideal of Muslim Brotherhood conveyed in these ayahs. In the process they have caused many hurdles and problems for the Ummah specially in our age of popular pluralism. The eminent scholar Sayyed Qutb in his monumental tafseer “Fee Zilalil Quran” declares in the elaboration of this ayah “In the right order of things, all Muslims of the world should have one leader” and if another claimant appears “he should be killed”. He takes for support of this statement the battles of Camel and Siffin fought by Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib and goes on to build up his case to “have only one ruler” even to the point of risking a civil war among Muslims. As Aristotle has said “great men make great mistakes”. To those interested, I have reproduced here part of Sayyed Qutb’s observations.6
........and Allah knows best.
May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.
Dr. Khalid Mitha
FOOTNOTES
(1) Surah 2/269
يُؤتِي الحِكمَةَ مَن يَشاءُ ۚ وَمَن يُؤتَ الحِكمَةَ فَقَد أوتِيَ خَيرًا كَثيرًا ۗ وَما يَذَّكَّرُ إِلّا أُولُو الأَلبابِ
(2) Surah 102/8
ثُمَّ لَتُسأَلُنَّ يَومَئِذٍ عَنِ النَّعيمِ
(3) Surah 49/9
وَاِنۡ طَآئِفَتٰنِ مِنَ الۡمُؤۡمِنِيۡنَ اقۡتَتَلُوۡا فَاَصۡلِحُوۡا بَيۡنَهُمَا ۚ فَاِنۡۢ بَغَتۡ اِحۡدٰٮهُمَا عَلَى الۡاُخۡرٰى فَقَاتِلُوا الَّتِىۡ تَبۡغِىۡ حَتّٰى تَفِىۡٓءَ اِلٰٓى اَمۡرِ اللّٰهِ ۚ فَاِنۡ فَآءَتۡ فَاَصۡلِحُوۡا بَيۡنَهُمَا بِالۡعَدۡلِ وَاَقۡسِطُوۡا ؕ اِنَّ اللّٰهَ يُحِبُّ الۡمُقۡسِطِيۡنَ
(4) Ruling of Mufti Mohammed Shafi
If a very powerful group of Muslims revolts against the Muslim ruler, then it is necessary for the ruler to first hear out their complaint or cause of their dissatisfaction. If a doubt or a misunderstanding has arisen in their mind about some matter, it should be removed. If they show such cause on the basis of which it is permissible in Shari'ah to oppose a Muslim leader or ruler, like unjust behavior on the part of the government, it is essential for the general body of Muslims to assist the group, so that the leader or ruler may refrain from his tyranny, provided that his tyranny is proved beyond any shadow of doubt (Ibn-ul-Humam; Mazhari).If they cannot show any clearly legitimate reason for their dissatisfaction, revolt, disobedience, and waging war against the Muslim ruler, it is permitted for Muslims to wage war against the rebels. Imam Shafi’ held that Muslims should not initiate the fight against the rebels unless they first start the fight [Mazharil.This law applies when it is positively and unquestionably clear that the group is rebellious. However, if it is difficult to determine which group is rebellious and which is just, because each party has a valid Shari’ah argument to justify its course of action, then the pros and cons of both parties may be weighed to determine the party that is "just" on the principle of probability. If the juristic argument of one party seems to someone more convincing, it is permitted for him to assist such a group. If someone cannot prefer the standpoint of any one of them, he should remain neutral, as it happened in the civil wars of the Battle of Camel and the Battle of Siffin when many noble Companions remained aloof.
(5) The summary of the discussion given in “Maqame-Sahabah by Mufti Mohammed Shafi with reference to Qurtubi is as follows:
It is not permitted to attribute categorically, and with certainty to any of the Companions that he was absolutely wrong in his action, because each of them acted according to his own Ijtihad. Their objective was to seek the pleasure of Allah. The Companions are all our leaders, and it is enjoined upon us that we should hold back our tongue from talking about their mutual differences, and always speak the best things about them. Prophet's companionship is a highly honorable position which should not be violated. The Holy Prophet $$has prohibited to revile them or talk bad about them, and informed us that they have been forgiven and that Allah is pleased with them. Besides, there is the Hadith regarding Sayyidna Talhah reaching us through several transmitting authorities that: "Talhah is a martyr walking on the face of the earth."
If Sayyidna Talhah was committing a clear sin by going out to wage war against Sayyidna Ali, he could not attain the high status of a martyr. In the same way, if his act might be regarded as a failure to perform his duty on the basis of a clearly wrong interpretation, he would still not attain the status of martyrdom. Martyrdom is attained only when a person is killed in obedience of Allah. Therefore, it is necessary to construe the matter of the Companions in terms of the principle mentioned above.
Another proof of this is available in authentic and well-established Ahadith which are reported by Sayyidna Ali himself where the Holy Prophet said: "The killer of Zubair is in Hell." Furthermore, Sayyidna Ali reports that the Prophet said: "Give news to the killer of Sayyidah Safiyyah's son that he will be in Hell." In the light of this we need to believe that Sayyidna Zubair and Sayyidna Talhah were not sinners or disobedient to Allah in the position taken by them in the battle. Otherwise the Holy Prophet would not have referred to Sayyidna Talha as a martyr, nor would he predict about the killer of Zubair that he would be in Hell. Also, he is counted among the ten who were given the glad tidings of attaining Paradise. Traditions relating to this subject have almost reached the grade of continuity [tawaturl and the Traditions are referred to as hadlth mutawatir.
Likewise the noble Companions, who did not participate in the battles on either side, cannot be regarded as defaulters because their behaviour, conduct and attitude in this matter was also based on their ijtihad, and Allah maintained them thus. Therefore, it is not proper in any sense of the word to curse them, to taunt them, to hold them as sinners, and to neglect their virtues, their struggles and their great religious stations, Some of the scholars were posed the question: what is your view regarding the blood that was shed in the battles that took place among the blessed Companions? They simply recited the following verse of the Quran:
'Those are a people who have passed away. For them what they earned, and for you what you earned. And you shall not be questioned as to what they have been doing”. (Surah 2:134)
The same question was posed to another scholar. He replied: "Allah saved my hands from being soiled with that blood. Now I will not soil my tongue with it." He meant that he does not wish to make the mistake of categorically adjudging any one of the groups as the defaulter.
Allamah Ibn-Fuwarrak says: "Some of our colleagues feel that the example of the conflicts that took place between the noble Companions is like that of the episodes of conflict that occurred between Sayyidna Yusuf and his brothers. They, despite their mutual differences, did not lose their status of wilayah and nubuwwah. The same principle applies to the matter of conflicts that occurred between the Companions."
Sayyidna Muhasibi says: "As far as this blood-shed is concerned, it is difficult for us to say anything because there was a difference of opinion in this regard among the noble Companions themselves.
When Hasan Al-Basri was asked the question concerning the wars between the noble Companions, he replied: "Those were fights in which the Companions were present and we were not. They knew all the circumstances and we do not know them. The matter in which the Companions are unanimous, we follow; and the matter in which there is difference of opinion, we observe silence."
Sayyidna Muhasibi says: “We concur with Hasan Al-Basri; we know that when the noble Companions meddled in any matter, they knew fully well why they were doing it. Our task is merely to follow them where they are unanimous, and where they differ we observe silence. We should not on our own, introduce new ideas, We are assured that they must have exercised ijtihad and sought the pleasure of Allah. Therefore, in matters of religion they are all beyond doubt."
(6) Sayyid Qutb
In the right order of things, all Muslims of the world should have one leader. Once a pledge of loyalty is given to a leader to rule over the Muslim community as a whole, and another person claims such leadership for himself, this claimant should be killed.He and his supporters are regarded as rebels whom believers should fight alongside their leader. It was on this basis the Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib fought those who rebelled in the battles of Camel and Siffin. Many of the Prophet’s distinguished companions fought alongside him. However a small number including Sa’ad Ibn Abi Waqas, Mohammed Ibn Msslamah, Usamah Ibn Zaid and Abdullah Ibn Umer chose not to engage in the battle ……
This proper state of affairs, whereby the Muslims have only one ruler, should be the norm in all situations, including those exceptional situations when two or more political rulers are in power in different and separate Muslim areas. It is the duty of the Muslims to fight on the side of the single ruler against the group acting wrongfully, if they rebelled against its authority, or if one group acts wrongfully towards another group without rebelling against the Muslim ruler per se. It is also the duty of Muslims to fight such rebels if they affiliate themselves to a political ruler in a situation where more than one Muslim ruler is in power. All Muslims must close rank and stand against those acting wrongfully until they revert to God’s commandments. In this way, this text remains operational in all situations.
It is clear that this system, on arbitration and fighting the group in the wrong until they revert to God’s commandments, precedes all human attempts in this regard. Moreover, it is free of all the flaws and shortcomings inherent in defective human endeavors. Moreover, it incorporates qualities of purity, honesty and absolute justice. The arbitration that it calls for is based on is based on operating God’s orders, which are equitable, free of any prejudice and defect. Alas for mankind! They look on, but go away limping and stumbling when the clear, paved and straight way beckons to them.
