Revisiting the Jihad of the companions after the demise of the Prophet (pbuh)
By: Farhad Shafti
Prologue
According to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, the guidance of the Almighty in the era of messengers works on the basis of the concept of Itmam al-Hujjah. Itmam al-Hujjah means completing the reasoning for the truth so that no excuses remain. When Itmam al-Hujjah is done on a group of people, they can no longer claim that they genuinely did not become convinced by the message of truth. After Itmam al-Hujjah the only reason that a person may reject the truth will be the person’s own arrogance. Itmam al-Hujjah is the basis of worldly reward and worldly punishment of the believers and rejecters who have been the direct addressees of a messenger of God. For these groups the worldly reward or punishment continues into the hereafter. According to Ghamidi, the attack of the companions to the neighbouring countries after the demise of the prophet (pbuh) was on the basis of the same concept, that is, Itmam al-Hujjah. These were the same countries that the prophet (pbuh) sent warning letters to their heads of states[1]. The mechanism of how Itmam al-Hujjah applies to these countries, as understood by Ghamidi, is a complex one. This article is the outcome of series of detailed discussions with Javed Ahmad Ghamidi and aims to reflect his views on this important subject.[2] The article ends with my reflections on the subject.
The article has been written for a reader who is already familiar with the concept of Itmam al-Hujjah and its consequences as explained by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. A brief reminder is given at the start of this article. [3] For the sake of brevity throughout the rest of this article I will use Ghamidi to refer to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi.
Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna
وَ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَسُولٌ فَإِذا جاءَ رَسُولُهُمْ قُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْقِسْطِ وَ هُمْ لا يُظْلَمُون
And for each community, there is a messenger. Then when their messenger comes, judgement will take place among them with justice and they are not wronged.(10:47)
The above verse is about one of the most important Sunan (ways) of the Almighty which in the words of Imam Hamid al-Din Farahi can be referred to as Daynuna. Daynuna (coming from Dayn in Arabic, meaning retribution) in its general meaning refers to the system of rewards and punishments of the Almighty that is fully manifested on the day of judgement. Daynuna in its specific meaning, as Ghamidi puts it, refers to the miniature day of judgement that takes place in this world for the direct addressees of a messenger of God. This specific Daynuna is the core component and in fact the driving force for Itmam al-Hujjah. Itmam al-Hujjah on the basis of Daynuna is the way that the Almighty provides divinely arranged guidance during the era of a messenger.
In the words of Ghamidi (translated):
“By this phase (i.e. Itmam al-Hujjah), the truth has become so evident to the addressees that they do not have any excuse except stubbornness to deny it. In religious parlance, this is called itmam-i h_ujjah. Obviously, in it besides the style adopted and the arguments presented, the very person of the rasul plays a role in achieving this end. The stage is reached that the matter becomes as evident as the sun shining in the open sky. Consequently, at this instance, a rasul to a great extent communicates the fate of the addressees to them, and his preaching takes the trenchant form of a final warning.”[4]
Once the Itmam al-Hujjah takes place, Daynuna of the addressees of the messenger starts. From the time of prophet Ibrahim (pbuh) onwards this Daynuna has had two dimensions:
1. Internal: This refers to the reward that the believers and the followers of the messenger receive in this world. This reward is mainly in the form of political strength and domination over other politically associated nations. This reward continues as long as they obey the religion of the Almighty. If they break the covenant that they have had with their Lord then their reward will cease and will be replaced with humiliation, hardship and subservience to other nations.
2. External: This refers to the punishment of the rejecters during the era of the messenger. Those rejecters that are polytheists will be executed or perished at the hands of the followers of the messenger or by natural calamities. Those rejecters that are originally monotheist will be subservient to the believers. Obviously the Internal dimension of Daynuna relates and contributes to the external dimension. This external dimension of Daynuna also applied to the nations before prophet Ibrahim (pbuh).
Ghamidi has described five phases for the process of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna in his book Mizan[5]. However in order to better understand the relationship between Daynuna and Itmam al-Hujjah, in this particular discussion, Ghamidi breaks the process of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna into three phases as follows:
- Phase one: General Dawah (preaching)
In this phase the messenger (pbuh) starts giving dawah (preaching) and inzar (warning) to mainly the leaders but also to the people of the nation that he is addressing. The inzar is to let the addressees know the consequences if they arrogantly reject the messenger and his message. One of the instrumental tools for warning the nations at this phase is to remind them of the destiny of those nations before them who had been warned by their messengers and had been punished and perished as a result of their arrogant rejection of the truth.
- Phase two: Implementation of Daynuna for the leaders
Following dawah and inzar, once the phase of Itmam al-Hujjah is concluded for the leaders of the nation, the punishment of these leaders starts. This is more specifically true when the divine punishment was carried out by the messenger and his immediate followers. In other cases, as described in the Qur’an, phase two and phase three were practically merged together as one phase and the divine punishment appeared in the form of a natural calamity.
- Phase three: Ultimatum to the common masses
This phase according to Ghamidi is the natural consequence of the previous two phases and happens inevitably after them. The punishment of the leaders of the nation contributes towards Itmam al-Hujjah for the common masses and therefore an ultimatum is given to them that unless they let go of their arrogance and submit to the truth, they too will face the same or a similar punishment as their leaders. Phase three ends with implementation of the ultimatum.
It is important to note that like a chain reaction, phase three is simply the consequence of phases one and two. In other words, just as the destiny of the nations who were punished in the past serves as a concrete evidence of the truth for the leaders of the addressed nation, the punishment of these leaders (along with the punishment of the past nations) serves as a strong evidence of the truth for the common masses of the addressed nation.
To be more specific about the era of the prophet (pbuh), the application of the above three phases to his time is as follows:
Phase one: The prophet (pbuh) started inzari ‘am (general warning and preaching) after a short period of private preaching to his friends and trusted ones. The chapter of Muddaththir can be seen as the beginning of this general warning and preaching for Quraysh. While this warning was towards all Quraysh (and in fact all who could hear and understand it at the time) it was specifically focusing on the leaders of Quraysh. Many of the chapters of the 29th and 30th sections (juzw) of the Qur’an (that is the seventh group of chapters of the Qur’an in thematic sense[6]) are specifically warning the leaders of Quraysh. One of the means of warning was to remind the Quraysh about the destiny of the nations before them who like them, were among the direct addressees of messengers and met their punishment or rewards in this world. The stories of these nations were considered as historical facts by the Quraysh or the people of the book in the Arabian Peninsula. In particular the Quraysh had a clear historical memory of what happened to the people of Thamud and ‘Ad.
Phase two: The punishment of the leaders of Quraysh started by their defeat in the battle of Badr and their subsequent defeats and retreats after that. During these battles a number of chief heads of Quraysh where either killed or humiliated.
Phase three: The defeat and humiliation of the leaders of Quraysh naturally and automatically served as further proof for the truth of the prophet’s (pbuh) message and therefore further contributed in warning the common masses of Quraysh. This warning reached its culmination at the time of the invasion of Mecca, as described in the chapter of Tau’bah. The defeat and humiliation of Quraysh itself served as a proof of the truth for the rest of the Arabs in the peninsula.
Elaboration on the mechanism of Itmam al-Hujjah
Before proceeding to the Itmam al-Hujjah after the demise of the prophet (pbuh), it is helpful to describe and illustrate some of the details of the above process as explained by Ghamidi:
Itmam al-Hujjah works in a chain reaction. In this chain reaction God provides the required means. One of the main means is the reward and the punishment of a previous group/nation. Witnessing or hearing the news of the past punishments or rewards serves as means for the next group/nation. A messenger of God (and if applies, his followers) will use this means for Itmam al-Hujjah. However, as for the followers, all they can do and all that they are responsible for is putting their efforts to strive for Itmam al-Hujjah. In the words of Ghamidi, this endeavour and effort can be translated as Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah in Arabic (literally meaning To Strive for Itmam Al-Hujjah). Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah by the believers may or may not result in the actual Itmam al-Hujjah and in the absence of any divine indications there will be no way to establish whether the actual Itmam al-Hujjah took place. However a messenger of God completes the actual Itmam al-Hujjah with the direct support of the Almighty. Once Itmam al-Hujjah happens for the new group/nation and the reward and punishment takes place for them, again this reward and punishment is used as means for Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah by the believers for the next group/nation, and as means for actual Itmam al-Hujjah where a messenger is also sent to that group/nation. This mechanism of the chain of Itmam al-Hujjah can be illustrated as follows:
Prologue
According to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, the guidance of the Almighty in the era of messengers works on the basis of the concept of Itmam al-Hujjah. Itmam al-Hujjah means completing the reasoning for the truth so that no excuses remain. When Itmam al-Hujjah is done on a group of people, they can no longer claim that they genuinely did not become convinced by the message of truth. After Itmam al-Hujjah the only reason that a person may reject the truth will be the person’s own arrogance. Itmam al-Hujjah is the basis of worldly reward and worldly punishment of the believers and rejecters who have been the direct addressees of a messenger of God. For these groups the worldly reward or punishment continues into the hereafter. According to Ghamidi, the attack of the companions to the neighbouring countries after the demise of the prophet (pbuh) was on the basis of the same concept, that is, Itmam al-Hujjah. These were the same countries that the prophet (pbuh) sent warning letters to their heads of states[1]. The mechanism of how Itmam al-Hujjah applies to these countries, as understood by Ghamidi, is a complex one. This article is the outcome of series of detailed discussions with Javed Ahmad Ghamidi and aims to reflect his views on this important subject.[2] The article ends with my reflections on the subject.
The article has been written for a reader who is already familiar with the concept of Itmam al-Hujjah and its consequences as explained by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. A brief reminder is given at the start of this article. [3] For the sake of brevity throughout the rest of this article I will use Ghamidi to refer to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi.
Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna
وَ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَسُولٌ فَإِذا جاءَ رَسُولُهُمْ قُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْقِسْطِ وَ هُمْ لا يُظْلَمُون
And for each community, there is a messenger. Then when their messenger comes, judgement will take place among them with justice and they are not wronged.(10:47)
The above verse is about one of the most important Sunan (ways) of the Almighty which in the words of Imam Hamid al-Din Farahi can be referred to as Daynuna. Daynuna (coming from Dayn in Arabic, meaning retribution) in its general meaning refers to the system of rewards and punishments of the Almighty that is fully manifested on the day of judgement. Daynuna in its specific meaning, as Ghamidi puts it, refers to the miniature day of judgement that takes place in this world for the direct addressees of a messenger of God. This specific Daynuna is the core component and in fact the driving force for Itmam al-Hujjah. Itmam al-Hujjah on the basis of Daynuna is the way that the Almighty provides divinely arranged guidance during the era of a messenger.
In the words of Ghamidi (translated):
“By this phase (i.e. Itmam al-Hujjah), the truth has become so evident to the addressees that they do not have any excuse except stubbornness to deny it. In religious parlance, this is called itmam-i h_ujjah. Obviously, in it besides the style adopted and the arguments presented, the very person of the rasul plays a role in achieving this end. The stage is reached that the matter becomes as evident as the sun shining in the open sky. Consequently, at this instance, a rasul to a great extent communicates the fate of the addressees to them, and his preaching takes the trenchant form of a final warning.”[4]
Once the Itmam al-Hujjah takes place, Daynuna of the addressees of the messenger starts. From the time of prophet Ibrahim (pbuh) onwards this Daynuna has had two dimensions:
1. Internal: This refers to the reward that the believers and the followers of the messenger receive in this world. This reward is mainly in the form of political strength and domination over other politically associated nations. This reward continues as long as they obey the religion of the Almighty. If they break the covenant that they have had with their Lord then their reward will cease and will be replaced with humiliation, hardship and subservience to other nations.
2. External: This refers to the punishment of the rejecters during the era of the messenger. Those rejecters that are polytheists will be executed or perished at the hands of the followers of the messenger or by natural calamities. Those rejecters that are originally monotheist will be subservient to the believers. Obviously the Internal dimension of Daynuna relates and contributes to the external dimension. This external dimension of Daynuna also applied to the nations before prophet Ibrahim (pbuh).
Ghamidi has described five phases for the process of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna in his book Mizan[5]. However in order to better understand the relationship between Daynuna and Itmam al-Hujjah, in this particular discussion, Ghamidi breaks the process of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna into three phases as follows:
- Phase one: General Dawah (preaching)
In this phase the messenger (pbuh) starts giving dawah (preaching) and inzar (warning) to mainly the leaders but also to the people of the nation that he is addressing. The inzar is to let the addressees know the consequences if they arrogantly reject the messenger and his message. One of the instrumental tools for warning the nations at this phase is to remind them of the destiny of those nations before them who had been warned by their messengers and had been punished and perished as a result of their arrogant rejection of the truth.
- Phase two: Implementation of Daynuna for the leaders
Following dawah and inzar, once the phase of Itmam al-Hujjah is concluded for the leaders of the nation, the punishment of these leaders starts. This is more specifically true when the divine punishment was carried out by the messenger and his immediate followers. In other cases, as described in the Qur’an, phase two and phase three were practically merged together as one phase and the divine punishment appeared in the form of a natural calamity.
- Phase three: Ultimatum to the common masses
This phase according to Ghamidi is the natural consequence of the previous two phases and happens inevitably after them. The punishment of the leaders of the nation contributes towards Itmam al-Hujjah for the common masses and therefore an ultimatum is given to them that unless they let go of their arrogance and submit to the truth, they too will face the same or a similar punishment as their leaders. Phase three ends with implementation of the ultimatum.
It is important to note that like a chain reaction, phase three is simply the consequence of phases one and two. In other words, just as the destiny of the nations who were punished in the past serves as a concrete evidence of the truth for the leaders of the addressed nation, the punishment of these leaders (along with the punishment of the past nations) serves as a strong evidence of the truth for the common masses of the addressed nation.
To be more specific about the era of the prophet (pbuh), the application of the above three phases to his time is as follows:
Phase one: The prophet (pbuh) started inzari ‘am (general warning and preaching) after a short period of private preaching to his friends and trusted ones. The chapter of Muddaththir can be seen as the beginning of this general warning and preaching for Quraysh. While this warning was towards all Quraysh (and in fact all who could hear and understand it at the time) it was specifically focusing on the leaders of Quraysh. Many of the chapters of the 29th and 30th sections (juzw) of the Qur’an (that is the seventh group of chapters of the Qur’an in thematic sense[6]) are specifically warning the leaders of Quraysh. One of the means of warning was to remind the Quraysh about the destiny of the nations before them who like them, were among the direct addressees of messengers and met their punishment or rewards in this world. The stories of these nations were considered as historical facts by the Quraysh or the people of the book in the Arabian Peninsula. In particular the Quraysh had a clear historical memory of what happened to the people of Thamud and ‘Ad.
Phase two: The punishment of the leaders of Quraysh started by their defeat in the battle of Badr and their subsequent defeats and retreats after that. During these battles a number of chief heads of Quraysh where either killed or humiliated.
Phase three: The defeat and humiliation of the leaders of Quraysh naturally and automatically served as further proof for the truth of the prophet’s (pbuh) message and therefore further contributed in warning the common masses of Quraysh. This warning reached its culmination at the time of the invasion of Mecca, as described in the chapter of Tau’bah. The defeat and humiliation of Quraysh itself served as a proof of the truth for the rest of the Arabs in the peninsula.
Elaboration on the mechanism of Itmam al-Hujjah
Before proceeding to the Itmam al-Hujjah after the demise of the prophet (pbuh), it is helpful to describe and illustrate some of the details of the above process as explained by Ghamidi:
Itmam al-Hujjah works in a chain reaction. In this chain reaction God provides the required means. One of the main means is the reward and the punishment of a previous group/nation. Witnessing or hearing the news of the past punishments or rewards serves as means for the next group/nation. A messenger of God (and if applies, his followers) will use this means for Itmam al-Hujjah. However, as for the followers, all they can do and all that they are responsible for is putting their efforts to strive for Itmam al-Hujjah. In the words of Ghamidi, this endeavour and effort can be translated as Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah in Arabic (literally meaning To Strive for Itmam Al-Hujjah). Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah by the believers may or may not result in the actual Itmam al-Hujjah and in the absence of any divine indications there will be no way to establish whether the actual Itmam al-Hujjah took place. However a messenger of God completes the actual Itmam al-Hujjah with the direct support of the Almighty. Once Itmam al-Hujjah happens for the new group/nation and the reward and punishment takes place for them, again this reward and punishment is used as means for Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah by the believers for the next group/nation, and as means for actual Itmam al-Hujjah where a messenger is also sent to that group/nation. This mechanism of the chain of Itmam al-Hujjah can be illustrated as follows:
As described earlier, in the above chain of events, where applicable, the Itmam al-Hujjah and punishment of the leaders of a nation precedes the Itmam al-Hujjah and punishment of the nation. One of the other important points that needs to be emphasised in the above figure is the division of responsibilities between a messenger, his companions (from among the chosen nation) and the rest of the chosen nation (i.e. from the generation of the companions). This is further clarified by the following table:
As it is clear from the above table, it is only the companions (immediate followers) of a messenger, that may be allowed to implement the punishment after the messenger has done Itmam al-Hujjah. The next generations of the believers do not have that permission and responsibility. The expression ‘where applies’ in Table 1 refers to the information given in the Qur’an about the ways of punishing the previous nations. Ghamidi explains in Mizan[7]:
“At times, this punishment is through earthquakes, cyclones and other calamities and disasters, while, at others, it emanates from the swords of the believers.”
According to Ghamidi, the position of a nation being appointed as witness (shahadah) to the truth, as mentioned in the Qur’an (2:143, 22:78), is in fact the authority of that nation to do Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah.
Application of the above after the demise of the prophet (pbuh)
Ghamidi explains that exactly the same process was adopted for the countries that were invaded by the companions after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). These are the same nations to which the prophet (pbuh) sent letters of warning. The companions, upon their ijtihad (deduction), considered it their responsibility to do their duty with this regard just as they performed their duty with regard to the direct addressees of the warnings of the Qur’an (i.e. Quraysh and the people of the book in the Arabian Peninsula).[8] This similar process of Itmam al-Hujjah after the demise of the prophet (pbuh) is explained in the following section. To illustrate this better, Persia is referred to as an example where the following had a full application according to Ghamidi:
Phase One: The victories of Muslims, along with the general knowledge of reward and punishment of nations which existed before, provided means for Itmam al-Hujjah by the prophet (pbuh). The prophet (pbuh) initiated Itmam al-Hujjah by sending letters to Khusru Parviz the then king of Persia. The letters warned the king to accept the message of Islam and informed him that his country will fall apart if he (the ruling body) does not accept the message of truth. Although the letters were literally addressing the king of Persia, they were in fact addressing the ruling body of Persia. As the king of a powerful country at the time, Khusru Parviz and his ruling body were aware of the developments in Arabia. They were later aware of the fact that the leaders of Quraysh were defeated and that the whole Arabia was dominated by Muslims. They were also aware of some of the stories of the nations before them who were punished due to rejecting the messengers of God. All this provided them with a clear opportunity to realise and appreciate the message of truth and as a consequence they were subjected to Itmam al-Hujjah. As the history reveals, the warning was not taken seriously by Khusru Parviz or the later kings of Persia and their ruling bodies.
Phase two: The companions were aware of the history of some of the nations who witnessed Itmam al-Hujjah before them. They had obviously heard the directives and warnings in the Qur’an related to the concept. They themselves were the direct addressees of some of these directives and they knew and had practically witnessed their own role with this regard. They were therefore fully aware of the concept of Itmam al-Hujjah and its implications. They then witnessed the sending of letters by the prophet (pbuh) and noticed the contents of the letters where (in case of Persia) the falling apart of the country was predicted. They therefore concluded through their ijtihad that the law of Itmam al-Hujjah is also applying to and is in fact in process for these nations, including Persia. They also had the means of Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah provided to them. Accordingly they first carried out their responsibility of punishing the ruling body of Persians. The Persian nation witnessed how against all odds, a powerful empire fell down apparently at the hands of much less powerful and less skilful army of Arab Muslims. What once was seen as one of the two super powers of the time was defeated by a nation that was not even considered as a serious rival in the region.
Phase three: The defeat of the then king of Persia and his ruling body provided further means for Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian nation. Ghamidi asserts that the Persian nation overall were aware of the letters of the prophet (pbuh) to their leadership and were also aware of the prophet’s (pbuh) prediction of Persia falling apart if they did not submit to truth. In this way, the letters of the prophet (pbuh) initiated a process that eventually reached Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian nation as well. As explained earlier, according to Ghamidi this third phase takes place naturally after the first two phases. It is therefore correct to say that the Itmam al-Hujjah for the entire Persia was the work of no one but the prophet (pbuh) himself (supported and blessed by the Almighty of course).
In the above mechanism of Itmam al-Hujjah for Persians, the letters of the prophet (pbuh) should be seen as an instrumental tool that served as a leading sign. While the ruling body of Persians and through them the Persian nation were warned by these letters, the companions considered them as indirect instructions to apply the punishment to Persia if they do not submit after Itmam al-Hujjah. Not only this, the companions also considered the contents of the letters to be a clear indication and a divine information that the process of Itmam al-Hujjah is taking place and will be competed for the Persian ruling body and the Persian nation. As explained above, this understanding was backed by their full awareness of the law of Itmam al-Hujjah for which they themselves played a key role in the Arabian Peninsula. As stated before, the letters contained predictions of Persia falling apart if they did not submit to the message of truth. The Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah by the Muslim army in Persia should be seen as the offshoot of the process of Itmam al-Hujjah that was started by the prophet (pbuh). Accordingly the Muslim army subjected Persian nation (on a gradual scheme) to the law of punishment of people of the book after Itmam al-Hujjah, that is, becoming subservient to the chosen nation by paying jaziya.
The above is illustrated in the following figure. Figure 2 is in fact application and elaboration of figure 1 for Persia after the demise of the prophet (pbuh):
“At times, this punishment is through earthquakes, cyclones and other calamities and disasters, while, at others, it emanates from the swords of the believers.”
According to Ghamidi, the position of a nation being appointed as witness (shahadah) to the truth, as mentioned in the Qur’an (2:143, 22:78), is in fact the authority of that nation to do Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah.
Application of the above after the demise of the prophet (pbuh)
Ghamidi explains that exactly the same process was adopted for the countries that were invaded by the companions after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). These are the same nations to which the prophet (pbuh) sent letters of warning. The companions, upon their ijtihad (deduction), considered it their responsibility to do their duty with this regard just as they performed their duty with regard to the direct addressees of the warnings of the Qur’an (i.e. Quraysh and the people of the book in the Arabian Peninsula).[8] This similar process of Itmam al-Hujjah after the demise of the prophet (pbuh) is explained in the following section. To illustrate this better, Persia is referred to as an example where the following had a full application according to Ghamidi:
Phase One: The victories of Muslims, along with the general knowledge of reward and punishment of nations which existed before, provided means for Itmam al-Hujjah by the prophet (pbuh). The prophet (pbuh) initiated Itmam al-Hujjah by sending letters to Khusru Parviz the then king of Persia. The letters warned the king to accept the message of Islam and informed him that his country will fall apart if he (the ruling body) does not accept the message of truth. Although the letters were literally addressing the king of Persia, they were in fact addressing the ruling body of Persia. As the king of a powerful country at the time, Khusru Parviz and his ruling body were aware of the developments in Arabia. They were later aware of the fact that the leaders of Quraysh were defeated and that the whole Arabia was dominated by Muslims. They were also aware of some of the stories of the nations before them who were punished due to rejecting the messengers of God. All this provided them with a clear opportunity to realise and appreciate the message of truth and as a consequence they were subjected to Itmam al-Hujjah. As the history reveals, the warning was not taken seriously by Khusru Parviz or the later kings of Persia and their ruling bodies.
Phase two: The companions were aware of the history of some of the nations who witnessed Itmam al-Hujjah before them. They had obviously heard the directives and warnings in the Qur’an related to the concept. They themselves were the direct addressees of some of these directives and they knew and had practically witnessed their own role with this regard. They were therefore fully aware of the concept of Itmam al-Hujjah and its implications. They then witnessed the sending of letters by the prophet (pbuh) and noticed the contents of the letters where (in case of Persia) the falling apart of the country was predicted. They therefore concluded through their ijtihad that the law of Itmam al-Hujjah is also applying to and is in fact in process for these nations, including Persia. They also had the means of Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah provided to them. Accordingly they first carried out their responsibility of punishing the ruling body of Persians. The Persian nation witnessed how against all odds, a powerful empire fell down apparently at the hands of much less powerful and less skilful army of Arab Muslims. What once was seen as one of the two super powers of the time was defeated by a nation that was not even considered as a serious rival in the region.
Phase three: The defeat of the then king of Persia and his ruling body provided further means for Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian nation. Ghamidi asserts that the Persian nation overall were aware of the letters of the prophet (pbuh) to their leadership and were also aware of the prophet’s (pbuh) prediction of Persia falling apart if they did not submit to truth. In this way, the letters of the prophet (pbuh) initiated a process that eventually reached Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian nation as well. As explained earlier, according to Ghamidi this third phase takes place naturally after the first two phases. It is therefore correct to say that the Itmam al-Hujjah for the entire Persia was the work of no one but the prophet (pbuh) himself (supported and blessed by the Almighty of course).
In the above mechanism of Itmam al-Hujjah for Persians, the letters of the prophet (pbuh) should be seen as an instrumental tool that served as a leading sign. While the ruling body of Persians and through them the Persian nation were warned by these letters, the companions considered them as indirect instructions to apply the punishment to Persia if they do not submit after Itmam al-Hujjah. Not only this, the companions also considered the contents of the letters to be a clear indication and a divine information that the process of Itmam al-Hujjah is taking place and will be competed for the Persian ruling body and the Persian nation. As explained above, this understanding was backed by their full awareness of the law of Itmam al-Hujjah for which they themselves played a key role in the Arabian Peninsula. As stated before, the letters contained predictions of Persia falling apart if they did not submit to the message of truth. The Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah by the Muslim army in Persia should be seen as the offshoot of the process of Itmam al-Hujjah that was started by the prophet (pbuh). Accordingly the Muslim army subjected Persian nation (on a gradual scheme) to the law of punishment of people of the book after Itmam al-Hujjah, that is, becoming subservient to the chosen nation by paying jaziya.
The above is illustrated in the following figure. Figure 2 is in fact application and elaboration of figure 1 for Persia after the demise of the prophet (pbuh):
Ghamidi explains that while the source of the events related to Itmam al-Hujjah for the Arab nation is the Qur’an, the source of the events related to Itmam al-Hujjah for Persians is history. He explains that the history of invasions of Muslims after the demise of the prophet (pbuh) has never been looked at from the Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna point of view. Ghamidi is of the view that if the history of these invasions were looked at from this standing point then many supporting evidences for the above explanation could have been derived. He has noted these supporting evidences himself and is keen for his students and other scholars to study and document them through research.
Summary of the main points
A few important points that can be derived from the above explanation are singled out and emphasized here. I intend to avoid the risk that the reader may not notice these very crucial points in the above rather long writing:
1. The attack of the companions to Persia and other countries were motivated by their ijtihad after observing the letters of the prophet (pbuh) to those countries. The companions on their own ijtihad concluded that they were responsible to implement the due punishment, after Itmam al-Hujjah on these countries had been done by the prophet’s (pbuh) initiative.
2. It was not the companions or the Muslim army that completed Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian rulers. It was in fact the prophet (pbuh) that did that.
3. Ghamidi is not claiming that the letters of the prophet (pbuh) were enough to do Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian rulers. The letters were in fact part of a system of means that are always available for messengers when they want to do Itmam al-Hujjah. This system included the news of the past punished and rewarded nations as well as those in the Arabian Peninsula at the time of the prophet (pbuh).
4. Following from the above point, in the words of Ghamidi, there is no difference between the prophet’s letters to the heads of the countries and his talks with the heads of Quraysh. Both these were supported by the evidences of punishment after Itmam al-Hujjah and it was together with these evidences that these letters or those talks contributed in Itmam al-Hujjah for the heads of the countries and the heads of Quraysh.
5. Similarly it was not the companions or the Muslim army who completed Itmam al-Hujjah on Persia or the other countries. Itmam al-Hujjah for these countries was a natural and ‘automatic’ consequence of observing the destiny of their ruling bodies.
6. The companions and the chosen nation of God were not responsible for Itmam al-Hujjah, they were not necessarily capable of Itmam al-Hujjah and did not even know on their own, whether Itmam al-Hujjah was done for a group or a nation. As the intermediate nation who had been given the position of shahadah (being witness of the truth for others) they were and they are only responsible to do Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah. From among the chosen nation, only the companions had the extra responsibility of implementing God’s punishment on nations for whom Itmam al-Hujjah had been done.
7. The companions knew that Itmam al-Hujjah was taking place for the Persian rulers and Persian people because the letters of the prophet (pbuh) had promised punishment of Persia in case they did not accept the prophet’s (pbuh) invitation to the message of Islam. Since the Persian rulers rejected the message of Islam the companions concluded that the perdition of the prophet (pbuh) would then materialise, which indicated to them that Itmam al-Hujjah was done for the rulers and was naturally going to be applied to the Persian people as well.
8. Ghamidi believes that the history shows that the punishment that was carried out by the companions in Persia (and other places) was implemented based on the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna. However, since the companions were not directly guided by the Almighty or His messenger (pbuh) in this endeavour, Ghamidi does not rule out the possibility that there could be mistakes and errors happening occasionally as well.
9. Although Ghamidi derives the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna and their implementation in the Arabian Peninsula from the Qur’an, he does not claim that the details of application of these principles in Persia and other countries are also in the Qur’an. He appreciates that the only source of reading about the application of these principles in these countries is history.
Author’s reflections and thoughts
I would like to end this article with some final personal reflections on the subject. My main problem with the idea of applying the principle of Itmam al-Hujjah on Persia and other countries was that at times I felt that in our keenness to uphold the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah, we sometimes seemed to unconsciously try to rewrite the history of these invasions in order to make them fitting with these principles. I could not help but to notice some not very impressive stories about some of the things that happened during these invasions. Although I had not studied the reliability of these reports, I found it not very academic and not quite objective to dismiss these reports only because they were not in line with the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah. All this however was based on indirect narratives of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi’s thought that I was exposed to and not based on direct discussion with him.
Throughout the long sessions of discussing this subject with Javed Ahmad Ghamidi I pleasantly found my mind in peace. The assertion of Ghamidi that the companions acted on their own ijtihad solved conflicting points in my mind. This simply means that from an academic point of view, we should not worry about reports of unjustified acts at the time of invasion of these countries. If we do find reliable reports of some acts that were not in line with the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah, then this does not question those principles. These reports of unjustified acts and practices, if proved reliable, are simply showing the fact that the army of Muslims, in the absence of direct leadership of the prophet (pbuh), was not benefitting from a direct divine supervision and was therefore prone to errors, mistakes and mishandling of affairs. In fact even when the prophet (pbuh) was supervising the battles at his time, some mistakes of the Muslim army that were out of his control and observation would take place. It is only natural that in his absence more mistakes and unacceptable deeds could take place during the extra ordinary war situation.
This notion of the invasions being on the basis of ijtihad, answers many questions, at least in my mind. Questions like how the companions knew how far to go and how they decided when punishment was applicable to a particular city or group of people, are all easily answerable by the concept of ijtihad, which denotes that the companions (and under their leadership, the Muslim army) did what to the best of their understanding was correct.
However, in my view, there are still a couple of inquiries that need further discussion and elaboration. One relates to the Qur’an and the other one is about the practicality of Itmam al-Hujjah for some of these neighbouring countries. I am not raising these points as criticisms. I refer to these points as questions that demand further research and clarification:
The silence of the Qur’an about the destiny of the neighbouring countries in my understanding is a challenging point. In the Qur’an, we do not see any directives or any news about these countries (in the era after the prophet - pbuh). The directives of the Qur’an to the prophet (pbuh) and its warnings all appear to be limited to the Arabian Peninsula. On the other hand I can also understand and consider the potential argument that the Qur’an does not need to include directives about the application of the rule of Itmam al-Hujjah on other nations, which is supposed to take place after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). It is worth listing all the verses that directly relate to Itmam al-Hujjah and to study which ones are specific to Arabian Peninsula and which ones are generalizable to other nations.
The second point is on the practical possibility of completing Itmam al-Hujjah for the neighbouring countries. This is a point that needs detailed historical research. The students of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (including myself) need to arrange for research projects to carefully review the history of the companions and the neighbouring countries after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). The aim of such research will be to establish a number of facts or nearly certain facts about the controversial era of history pertaining to the attacks of the Muslim army to these countries. A number of questions may be answered through these research projects, including, how did the companions begin to decide about attacking those countries; what does the history say about their motives and purpose for these attacks; how consistent was the attitude of the army of Muslims towards the people who they attacked; to what extent were the heads of the states of these countries as well as the general public aware of the developments in the Arabian Peninsula; given that some of these nations were not associated with Abrahamic religions to what extent were they aware of the concept of Daynuna; people in most of these countries could not understand Arabic, how was this obstacle overcome; what was the speed of spreading of news in the era where no modern media and technology were in place; to what extent were the general public in these countries aware of the letters of the prophet (pbuh) to their leaders, their contents and the response of their leaders to these letters; what versions of the narrated contents of the prophet’s (pbuh) letters are reliable and what do they say; are there any evidences that the perception of the Persians (for example) about the invasion of their country by Muslims was any different from their perception of the past invasions by other armies (like the Alexander’s army); when and how jaziya was applied to the residents of some of the invaded countries and to what extent they were encouraged to become Muslims rather than being punished by paying jaziya; how and through what processes the residents of these countries gradually became Muslims.
Javed Ahmad Ghamidi believes that when the history of these events is read from the standing point of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna then things start to make better sense and more evidences will emerge in support of these principles. It is interesting to see what parts of the history of that era may match these principles and what parts may not match them.
However, since the understanding is that these invasions were on the basis of ijtihad of the companions, no historical report will be able to question the very principles of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna. These principles and their applications up to the demise of the prophet (pbuh), as skilfully and comprehensively explained by Ghamidi, are clearly mentioned in the Qur’an. In fact ‘clearly mentioned’ is an understatement. The whole theme of the Qur’an and the whole thematic evolution of the Qur’an are on the basis of these principles. Whether the companions, in the absence of the prophet (pbuh), intended and managed to successfully adopt and apply all these principles in detail is only a historical inquiry that does not change our understanding of the principles themselves.
I personally believe that in this context it is also important to consider another aspect of the concept of Daynuna, that is the reward of the believers. I think (and I believe that this is what Ghamidi also agrees with) that the invasion of the other countries was not just about punishing those countries, but was also about rewarding the believers and the new believers that would emerge from those countries. In my personal opinion, even without Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna taking place, still those countries were supposed to become part of the Islamic territory at the time to fulfil the promise of rewarding the believers. In fact from purely political point of view this promise needed to be fulfilled anyway. History shows that when a nation starts to prosper in an extra ordinary way they will need more political dominance in the world. At our time this political dominance can easily take place by the use of media and online technology as well as modern cultural symbols and tools. However in the past much of this political dominance could only take place by physical, geographical dominance, i.e. invasion. In my understanding, the promise of reward for the believers matched very well with the political requirements of a fast growing nation of Islam at the time.
At the end, I would like to add that another thing I learned through my interviews with Javed Ahmad Ghamidi was that it was possible to be a very knowledgeable and formidable scholar and at the same time to remain open minded, research oriented and humble in discussing Islamic issues. His eyes were even shinier when I was bluntly and insistently questioning his whole reasoning. For me this point was even more educational than the whole discussion on Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna.
نه هر که چهره برافروخت دلبری داند نه هر که آینه سازد سکندری داند
غلام همت آن رند عافیت سوزم که در گدا صفتی کیمیاگری داند
هزار نکتۀ باریکتر ز مو اینجاست نه هر که سر بتراشد قلندری داند
Update Reflection (October 2016)
Due to my revised understanding of the mission of the prophet (pbuh), I no longer find it in accordance to the Qur'an that the prophet (pbuh) would want to invite any one other than the Arabs in Arabia at the time to convert to Islam. In fact, even the people of the book in Arabia were not expected to convert to Islam, let alone other nations and peoples of faith in the other countries.
I would like to be more explicit on what I discussed in the above reflections. The history as we know it, is not supporting the above theory of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi on itmam al-hujjah for the Persia and other neighbouring countries at the time. It is a wrong approach to make any comments about how history took place, based on a religious understanding. It is also a wrong approach to limit our studies to the reports in the books of non-professional Muslim historian to see what happened. The source of understanding history is the writing of historians and none of that, as far as I know, give us anything remotely close to the concept of itmam al-hujjah beyond Arabia, as illustrated above. Even the writings of Muslim historians does not support this.
The fact that the Qur'an is totally silent about this matter should be enough to raise suspicion about any divine instructions being behind the invasions after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). In fact even the so called letters of the prophet (pbuh) to the heads of the neighbouring states need verification, since the only sourse of this news are single narrated reports (akhbari ahad). What today is seen as remaining of those letters cannot be scientifically proven to be authentic and those who are familiar with the history know about the concept of back projecting an evidence to justify a historical incident. Even with the assumption that these letters are authentic, still there is the problem of establishing what exactly the letters were about, as some historians argue that they were more political in nature, rather than religious. In fact the teacher of teacher of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (Imam Farahi) believed that all that was demanded from other countries was to establish justice rather than converting to Islam (Tafsir Nidham al-Qur’an, 54-5).
In my understanding while religious motivations were certainly influential, the main motivation for the invasions after the demise of the prophet (pbuh) was of a political nature. This does not mean that I think the invasions were wrong. We are talking about the middle ages where any country would invade another one as a way to survive and to progress. In our modern time, this is done mostly through cultural invasion, in the middle ages, geographical invasion was the most common tool. It worked for the Muslims and eventually it also worked for most of the invaded countries, including Persia. One may argue that this was a blessing that God gave to Muslims to make them stronger. However to say this had to be done as the mission of the prophet (pbuh) and as the result of itmam al-hujjah, in my understanding is in contradiction with both the Qur'an and the history.
Glossary:
Itmam al-Hujjah: Refers to completing the reasoning for the truth, so that no excuse remains.
Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah: Refers to the efforts to strive for Itmam al-Hujjah
Daynuna: Is God’s reward and punishment that applies to the direct addressees of His messengers
Means of Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah and Itmam al-Hujjah: This refers to exposing the rewards and punishments of previous group/nations for a present group/nation.
Chain reaction of Itmam al-Hujjah: Refers to the fact that Itmam al-Hujjah for a group/nation and its consequent rewards and punishments serve as means to do Itmam al-Hujjah for another group/nation.
Shahadah (position of the messengers): Refers to their responsibility of doing Itmam al-Hujjah and consequently judging among their addressees.
Shahadah (position of the chosen nations): Refers to their responsibility of doing Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah
Footnotes:
[1] The countries are Abyssinia, Egypt, Persia, Rome, Bahrain, Yamamah, Damascus and Amman.
[2] I would like to express my gratitude to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi for his time and patience, also to Dr. Shehzad Saleem who facilitated this interview by acting as the interpreter and also contributing in the discussion.
[3] For more details refer to Mizan by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, or its translation by S. Saleem “Islam a Comprehensive Introduction”, pp. 119-122, 500-516, also look at S. Saleem, (2012), Playing God, Misreading a Divine Practice.
[4] Ghamidi, J. A., translation of Mizan, p. 505.
[5] Ibid. refer to The Shari’a of Preaching (the word Daynuna is not used but the concept is there).
[6] Ibid, p. 57 and A.A. Islahi, Tadabbur I Qur’an vol.4, pp.377-8.
[7] Translation of Mizan, p. 541
[8] In a letter attributed to Ali ibn Abi Talib addressing Umar ibn al-Khattab about attacking Persia it is written:
اِنَّ هذَا الاْمْرَ لَمْ يَكُنْ نَصْرُهُ وَلاَ خِذْلاَنُهُ بِكَثْرَة وَلاَ بِقِلَّة، وَهُوَ دِينُ اللهِ الَّذِي أَظْهَرَهُ، وَجُنْدُهُ الَّذِي أَعَدَّهُ وَأَمَدَّهُ، حَتَّى بَلَغَ مَا بَلَغَ، وَطَلَعَ حَيْثُ طَلَعَ، وَنَحْنُ عَلَى مَوْعُود مِنَ اللهِ، وَاللهُ مُنْجِزٌ وَعْدَهُ، وَنَاصِرٌ جُنْدَهُ.
In this matter, victory or defeat is not dependent on the diminutive or greatness of forces. It is God's religion which He has raised, and His army which He has mobilised and supported, till it has reached the point where it stands now, and has arrived at its present positions. We hold a promise from God, and He will fulfil His promise and help His army (Razi, Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 146)
Summary of the main points
A few important points that can be derived from the above explanation are singled out and emphasized here. I intend to avoid the risk that the reader may not notice these very crucial points in the above rather long writing:
1. The attack of the companions to Persia and other countries were motivated by their ijtihad after observing the letters of the prophet (pbuh) to those countries. The companions on their own ijtihad concluded that they were responsible to implement the due punishment, after Itmam al-Hujjah on these countries had been done by the prophet’s (pbuh) initiative.
2. It was not the companions or the Muslim army that completed Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian rulers. It was in fact the prophet (pbuh) that did that.
3. Ghamidi is not claiming that the letters of the prophet (pbuh) were enough to do Itmam al-Hujjah for the Persian rulers. The letters were in fact part of a system of means that are always available for messengers when they want to do Itmam al-Hujjah. This system included the news of the past punished and rewarded nations as well as those in the Arabian Peninsula at the time of the prophet (pbuh).
4. Following from the above point, in the words of Ghamidi, there is no difference between the prophet’s letters to the heads of the countries and his talks with the heads of Quraysh. Both these were supported by the evidences of punishment after Itmam al-Hujjah and it was together with these evidences that these letters or those talks contributed in Itmam al-Hujjah for the heads of the countries and the heads of Quraysh.
5. Similarly it was not the companions or the Muslim army who completed Itmam al-Hujjah on Persia or the other countries. Itmam al-Hujjah for these countries was a natural and ‘automatic’ consequence of observing the destiny of their ruling bodies.
6. The companions and the chosen nation of God were not responsible for Itmam al-Hujjah, they were not necessarily capable of Itmam al-Hujjah and did not even know on their own, whether Itmam al-Hujjah was done for a group or a nation. As the intermediate nation who had been given the position of shahadah (being witness of the truth for others) they were and they are only responsible to do Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah. From among the chosen nation, only the companions had the extra responsibility of implementing God’s punishment on nations for whom Itmam al-Hujjah had been done.
7. The companions knew that Itmam al-Hujjah was taking place for the Persian rulers and Persian people because the letters of the prophet (pbuh) had promised punishment of Persia in case they did not accept the prophet’s (pbuh) invitation to the message of Islam. Since the Persian rulers rejected the message of Islam the companions concluded that the perdition of the prophet (pbuh) would then materialise, which indicated to them that Itmam al-Hujjah was done for the rulers and was naturally going to be applied to the Persian people as well.
8. Ghamidi believes that the history shows that the punishment that was carried out by the companions in Persia (and other places) was implemented based on the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna. However, since the companions were not directly guided by the Almighty or His messenger (pbuh) in this endeavour, Ghamidi does not rule out the possibility that there could be mistakes and errors happening occasionally as well.
9. Although Ghamidi derives the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna and their implementation in the Arabian Peninsula from the Qur’an, he does not claim that the details of application of these principles in Persia and other countries are also in the Qur’an. He appreciates that the only source of reading about the application of these principles in these countries is history.
Author’s reflections and thoughts
I would like to end this article with some final personal reflections on the subject. My main problem with the idea of applying the principle of Itmam al-Hujjah on Persia and other countries was that at times I felt that in our keenness to uphold the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah, we sometimes seemed to unconsciously try to rewrite the history of these invasions in order to make them fitting with these principles. I could not help but to notice some not very impressive stories about some of the things that happened during these invasions. Although I had not studied the reliability of these reports, I found it not very academic and not quite objective to dismiss these reports only because they were not in line with the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah. All this however was based on indirect narratives of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi’s thought that I was exposed to and not based on direct discussion with him.
Throughout the long sessions of discussing this subject with Javed Ahmad Ghamidi I pleasantly found my mind in peace. The assertion of Ghamidi that the companions acted on their own ijtihad solved conflicting points in my mind. This simply means that from an academic point of view, we should not worry about reports of unjustified acts at the time of invasion of these countries. If we do find reliable reports of some acts that were not in line with the principles of Itmam al-Hujjah, then this does not question those principles. These reports of unjustified acts and practices, if proved reliable, are simply showing the fact that the army of Muslims, in the absence of direct leadership of the prophet (pbuh), was not benefitting from a direct divine supervision and was therefore prone to errors, mistakes and mishandling of affairs. In fact even when the prophet (pbuh) was supervising the battles at his time, some mistakes of the Muslim army that were out of his control and observation would take place. It is only natural that in his absence more mistakes and unacceptable deeds could take place during the extra ordinary war situation.
This notion of the invasions being on the basis of ijtihad, answers many questions, at least in my mind. Questions like how the companions knew how far to go and how they decided when punishment was applicable to a particular city or group of people, are all easily answerable by the concept of ijtihad, which denotes that the companions (and under their leadership, the Muslim army) did what to the best of their understanding was correct.
However, in my view, there are still a couple of inquiries that need further discussion and elaboration. One relates to the Qur’an and the other one is about the practicality of Itmam al-Hujjah for some of these neighbouring countries. I am not raising these points as criticisms. I refer to these points as questions that demand further research and clarification:
The silence of the Qur’an about the destiny of the neighbouring countries in my understanding is a challenging point. In the Qur’an, we do not see any directives or any news about these countries (in the era after the prophet - pbuh). The directives of the Qur’an to the prophet (pbuh) and its warnings all appear to be limited to the Arabian Peninsula. On the other hand I can also understand and consider the potential argument that the Qur’an does not need to include directives about the application of the rule of Itmam al-Hujjah on other nations, which is supposed to take place after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). It is worth listing all the verses that directly relate to Itmam al-Hujjah and to study which ones are specific to Arabian Peninsula and which ones are generalizable to other nations.
The second point is on the practical possibility of completing Itmam al-Hujjah for the neighbouring countries. This is a point that needs detailed historical research. The students of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (including myself) need to arrange for research projects to carefully review the history of the companions and the neighbouring countries after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). The aim of such research will be to establish a number of facts or nearly certain facts about the controversial era of history pertaining to the attacks of the Muslim army to these countries. A number of questions may be answered through these research projects, including, how did the companions begin to decide about attacking those countries; what does the history say about their motives and purpose for these attacks; how consistent was the attitude of the army of Muslims towards the people who they attacked; to what extent were the heads of the states of these countries as well as the general public aware of the developments in the Arabian Peninsula; given that some of these nations were not associated with Abrahamic religions to what extent were they aware of the concept of Daynuna; people in most of these countries could not understand Arabic, how was this obstacle overcome; what was the speed of spreading of news in the era where no modern media and technology were in place; to what extent were the general public in these countries aware of the letters of the prophet (pbuh) to their leaders, their contents and the response of their leaders to these letters; what versions of the narrated contents of the prophet’s (pbuh) letters are reliable and what do they say; are there any evidences that the perception of the Persians (for example) about the invasion of their country by Muslims was any different from their perception of the past invasions by other armies (like the Alexander’s army); when and how jaziya was applied to the residents of some of the invaded countries and to what extent they were encouraged to become Muslims rather than being punished by paying jaziya; how and through what processes the residents of these countries gradually became Muslims.
Javed Ahmad Ghamidi believes that when the history of these events is read from the standing point of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna then things start to make better sense and more evidences will emerge in support of these principles. It is interesting to see what parts of the history of that era may match these principles and what parts may not match them.
However, since the understanding is that these invasions were on the basis of ijtihad of the companions, no historical report will be able to question the very principles of Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna. These principles and their applications up to the demise of the prophet (pbuh), as skilfully and comprehensively explained by Ghamidi, are clearly mentioned in the Qur’an. In fact ‘clearly mentioned’ is an understatement. The whole theme of the Qur’an and the whole thematic evolution of the Qur’an are on the basis of these principles. Whether the companions, in the absence of the prophet (pbuh), intended and managed to successfully adopt and apply all these principles in detail is only a historical inquiry that does not change our understanding of the principles themselves.
I personally believe that in this context it is also important to consider another aspect of the concept of Daynuna, that is the reward of the believers. I think (and I believe that this is what Ghamidi also agrees with) that the invasion of the other countries was not just about punishing those countries, but was also about rewarding the believers and the new believers that would emerge from those countries. In my personal opinion, even without Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna taking place, still those countries were supposed to become part of the Islamic territory at the time to fulfil the promise of rewarding the believers. In fact from purely political point of view this promise needed to be fulfilled anyway. History shows that when a nation starts to prosper in an extra ordinary way they will need more political dominance in the world. At our time this political dominance can easily take place by the use of media and online technology as well as modern cultural symbols and tools. However in the past much of this political dominance could only take place by physical, geographical dominance, i.e. invasion. In my understanding, the promise of reward for the believers matched very well with the political requirements of a fast growing nation of Islam at the time.
At the end, I would like to add that another thing I learned through my interviews with Javed Ahmad Ghamidi was that it was possible to be a very knowledgeable and formidable scholar and at the same time to remain open minded, research oriented and humble in discussing Islamic issues. His eyes were even shinier when I was bluntly and insistently questioning his whole reasoning. For me this point was even more educational than the whole discussion on Itmam al-Hujjah and Daynuna.
نه هر که چهره برافروخت دلبری داند نه هر که آینه سازد سکندری داند
غلام همت آن رند عافیت سوزم که در گدا صفتی کیمیاگری داند
هزار نکتۀ باریکتر ز مو اینجاست نه هر که سر بتراشد قلندری داند
Update Reflection (October 2016)
Due to my revised understanding of the mission of the prophet (pbuh), I no longer find it in accordance to the Qur'an that the prophet (pbuh) would want to invite any one other than the Arabs in Arabia at the time to convert to Islam. In fact, even the people of the book in Arabia were not expected to convert to Islam, let alone other nations and peoples of faith in the other countries.
I would like to be more explicit on what I discussed in the above reflections. The history as we know it, is not supporting the above theory of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi on itmam al-hujjah for the Persia and other neighbouring countries at the time. It is a wrong approach to make any comments about how history took place, based on a religious understanding. It is also a wrong approach to limit our studies to the reports in the books of non-professional Muslim historian to see what happened. The source of understanding history is the writing of historians and none of that, as far as I know, give us anything remotely close to the concept of itmam al-hujjah beyond Arabia, as illustrated above. Even the writings of Muslim historians does not support this.
The fact that the Qur'an is totally silent about this matter should be enough to raise suspicion about any divine instructions being behind the invasions after the demise of the prophet (pbuh). In fact even the so called letters of the prophet (pbuh) to the heads of the neighbouring states need verification, since the only sourse of this news are single narrated reports (akhbari ahad). What today is seen as remaining of those letters cannot be scientifically proven to be authentic and those who are familiar with the history know about the concept of back projecting an evidence to justify a historical incident. Even with the assumption that these letters are authentic, still there is the problem of establishing what exactly the letters were about, as some historians argue that they were more political in nature, rather than religious. In fact the teacher of teacher of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (Imam Farahi) believed that all that was demanded from other countries was to establish justice rather than converting to Islam (Tafsir Nidham al-Qur’an, 54-5).
In my understanding while religious motivations were certainly influential, the main motivation for the invasions after the demise of the prophet (pbuh) was of a political nature. This does not mean that I think the invasions were wrong. We are talking about the middle ages where any country would invade another one as a way to survive and to progress. In our modern time, this is done mostly through cultural invasion, in the middle ages, geographical invasion was the most common tool. It worked for the Muslims and eventually it also worked for most of the invaded countries, including Persia. One may argue that this was a blessing that God gave to Muslims to make them stronger. However to say this had to be done as the mission of the prophet (pbuh) and as the result of itmam al-hujjah, in my understanding is in contradiction with both the Qur'an and the history.
Glossary:
Itmam al-Hujjah: Refers to completing the reasoning for the truth, so that no excuse remains.
Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah: Refers to the efforts to strive for Itmam al-Hujjah
Daynuna: Is God’s reward and punishment that applies to the direct addressees of His messengers
Means of Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah and Itmam al-Hujjah: This refers to exposing the rewards and punishments of previous group/nations for a present group/nation.
Chain reaction of Itmam al-Hujjah: Refers to the fact that Itmam al-Hujjah for a group/nation and its consequent rewards and punishments serve as means to do Itmam al-Hujjah for another group/nation.
Shahadah (position of the messengers): Refers to their responsibility of doing Itmam al-Hujjah and consequently judging among their addressees.
Shahadah (position of the chosen nations): Refers to their responsibility of doing Ihtimam bi Itmam al-Hujjah
Footnotes:
[1] The countries are Abyssinia, Egypt, Persia, Rome, Bahrain, Yamamah, Damascus and Amman.
[2] I would like to express my gratitude to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi for his time and patience, also to Dr. Shehzad Saleem who facilitated this interview by acting as the interpreter and also contributing in the discussion.
[3] For more details refer to Mizan by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, or its translation by S. Saleem “Islam a Comprehensive Introduction”, pp. 119-122, 500-516, also look at S. Saleem, (2012), Playing God, Misreading a Divine Practice.
[4] Ghamidi, J. A., translation of Mizan, p. 505.
[5] Ibid. refer to The Shari’a of Preaching (the word Daynuna is not used but the concept is there).
[6] Ibid, p. 57 and A.A. Islahi, Tadabbur I Qur’an vol.4, pp.377-8.
[7] Translation of Mizan, p. 541
[8] In a letter attributed to Ali ibn Abi Talib addressing Umar ibn al-Khattab about attacking Persia it is written:
اِنَّ هذَا الاْمْرَ لَمْ يَكُنْ نَصْرُهُ وَلاَ خِذْلاَنُهُ بِكَثْرَة وَلاَ بِقِلَّة، وَهُوَ دِينُ اللهِ الَّذِي أَظْهَرَهُ، وَجُنْدُهُ الَّذِي أَعَدَّهُ وَأَمَدَّهُ، حَتَّى بَلَغَ مَا بَلَغَ، وَطَلَعَ حَيْثُ طَلَعَ، وَنَحْنُ عَلَى مَوْعُود مِنَ اللهِ، وَاللهُ مُنْجِزٌ وَعْدَهُ، وَنَاصِرٌ جُنْدَهُ.
In this matter, victory or defeat is not dependent on the diminutive or greatness of forces. It is God's religion which He has raised, and His army which He has mobilised and supported, till it has reached the point where it stands now, and has arrived at its present positions. We hold a promise from God, and He will fulfil His promise and help His army (Razi, Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 146)
