The Ghazwa-e-Hind Claims Of Pakistani Jihadi Militants: Does Authentic Hadith Literature Enjoin Jihad Against India Just Before The Day Of Judgement - A Comprehensive Study (Concluding Part 2)
By
Grace Mubashir, New Age Islam
25 November
2022
The Islamic State Founded By Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)
Was Not An Absolute Islamic State, But The Totality Of The Islamic Community On
Earth At That Time To Be Emulated By All
-----
The Islamic
State founded by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was not an absolute Islamic State, but
the totality of the Islamic community on earth at that time to be emulated by
all. Because at the time of the death of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), the Islamic
community was not a global experience spread across all continents as it is
today, but a limited population living only within the boundaries of the
country that the late Prophet (PBUH) led. Islam is the vision presented by
Allah, the creator of the universe, for all mankind until the last day. The
Islamic society nurtured by the Prophet (PBUH) was responsible for transmitting
it across centuries and continents.
The secure
existence of the Prophet's disciples as a community depended mainly on the
security of the polity in which they lived. Because of this, the Muslim
community did after the death of the Prophet (PBUH) whatever was required to be
done for the security of a country according to the ethics of the world order
that existed at that time, following the progress of the Arabian political
system built by the Prophet (PBUH). Growing as an empire was the way of
political prosperity then. The then world political environment dominated by
the Roman Empire and the Persian Empire that tried to conquer each other and
conquered small countries for convenience. If the Islamic community had tried
to confine itself to being an Arabian phenomenon that could be swallowed up by
Rome or Persia whenever they saw it fit. This would have ended not just an
Islamic state, but Islam itself. It was the quest of history that the Islamic
state should be safe from the imperialist threats outside Arabia as well as
from the tribal threats inside Arabia. The accepted international policy of the
day was 'surrender or be conquered'. It was not the international community of
today, when the concept of nationalism, the League of Nations and the United
Nations came in and fixed boundaries for nations and declared interference
beyond the boundaries an international political crime. In that era, when there
were only two possibilities: grow yourself into an empire by expanding your
boundaries, or disappear in the expansionary process of some other empire. The
second possibility had to be avoided at all costs as far as the Islamic State
was concerned. The Prophet (PBUH) had not struggled to build an Islamic society
only so it faded into history within a few decades of his death!
Neither
Rome, nor Persia, nor the Arabs themselves felt that the political unification
achieved by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was strong enough to grow into an
empire. It is still one of the most mysterious miracles of history that before
Rome and Persia even had time to realize the power of Arabian innovation, the
Muslim armies entered the borders of these two empires and marked a new empire
on the map of the world. The Arabs, who had no experience of leading any world
wars until then, shook the forts of Persia and Rome during the time of Caliph
Umar and established a new great empire that included today's Iran, Iraq,
Syria, Jordan, Palestine, and Egypt in addition to the Arabian Peninsula. In
all these areas, Muslims began to live, Islamic instruction became active, and
the local people embraced Islam en masse. The caliph and his colleagues were
convinced that their military conquests were as much about Islam's mission to
become a world religion as it was about the preservation of an existing Islamic
society.
Due to
these religious dimensions, the Prophet (PBUH) had in many ways called it a
great virtue to continue military operations for the survival and progress of
the nation he founded. These motivations given by the Prophet (PBUH) were the
real driving force behind the establishment of the Islamic Empire. The need for
the Islamic army to focus outside of Arabia had been practically explained to
the Islamic community by leading the Tabuk campaign towards Rome in the ninth
year of Hijra. The Prophet (PBUH) left this world not only proclaiming the
virtue of military advances but also prophesying that the Muslims would have
victories that would amaze the world in the way of empire building. At a time
when Madina did not even have the manpower or weapons to overcome the
challenges raised by the polytheistic tribes within Arabia, the Prophet (PBUH)
made many prophecies about the future, based on divine instructions from Allah,
when the Islamic community would become the rulers of an empire. When the dawn
of those prophecies came during the time of the righteous Caliphs, the
truthfulness of the prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was also strongly
underlined. Those who understand the context of the said prophecies can easily
understand the vision of the 'India War' hadiths.
It is
well-known that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) told his companions that the glory days
of the emperors of Persia and Rome were coming to an end and that soon Muslims
would manage their treasuries. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was living in Madina
when Persia was at the height of its glory under King Khusro. When Khusro died
during the Prophet's lifetime and one of his daughters succeeded him as
empress, the Prophet (PBUH) said: "That nation - the Persians - who have
made a woman their leader is not going to win."
In the
fifth year of Hijra, the Prophet (PBUH) and his Companions laboriously dug a
large trench around the city limits to protect the city from a large coalition
army of various polytheistic Arab tribes that unexpectedly surrounded Madina.
While digging this trench, the Prophet (PBUH) used an axe to remove a huge
boulder that stood in the way and removed it with prayers. After cutting the
rock, the Prophet (PBUH) said that Allah was showing him the Persian and Roman
cities while he was cutting the rock. Then, upon the request of his companions,
the Prophet (PBUH) prayed to Allah that those lands should be conquered by the
Islamic army.
The Persia
of the hadiths is geographically the nations of today's Iran and Iraq. Rome is
Byzantine Rome; mainly the vast land which was called 'Sham' in Arabic at that
time - included the countries of today's Syria, Jordan, Palestine and Egypt.
How pitiful is the historical knowledge and world knowledge of someone who
presents prophetic statements about the impending collapse of Rome and Persia
or Arab Islamic military conquests there as 'evidence' to establish that
Muslims have religious enmity with Iran, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Palestine, and
Egypt, or that Muslims regard the destruction of said countries as virtuous!
None of these mentioned nations existed in the time of the Prophet (PBUH). The
Rome mentioned by the Prophet (PBUH) had no political entity like Persia exists
today. Not only Rome and Persia, but also the Islamic Empire that the Prophet
(PBUH) said would lead these wars no longer exists.
The age of
empires has faded into history and we have entered a new world order of nation
states. These hadiths from the Prophet (PBUH) are about a period that has
become history today. The Prophet (PBUH) predicted that the Islamic kingdom
founded by the Prophet (PBUH) in the Middle Ages, when the political grammar of
the world was imperialism, would grow into an empire according to the natural
state ethics of that time after his death, and overthrow the Roman and Persian
empires that were hostile to Islam and Muslims. All those prophecies were
fulfilled during the time of Caliph Umar (RA) with immense accuracy. That's
where the issue ends.
All the
provinces of these empires where the Prophet (PBUH) told the Muslims that they
would fight were enemy countries that did not have the presence of Muslim
communities at that time and were eager to destroy the Islamic Empire. With the
prophesied military advances of the Prophet (PBUH), they all entered a new
historical phase with the presence of large Islamic societies. If anyone
seriously thinks that the message of these hadiths is to fight the current
Iran, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Jordan and Egypt, then they have only misread
those hadiths. They have not mastered the narrative language of the time in
which they were spoken, they have not known that their prophecies have been
fulfilled in history, their enmities are irrelevant today, and they have not
noticed that the time to which their political logic applies is over.
A hadith
from Thawban (RA) shows that the Prophet (PBUH) mentioned India as a land that
touched the military expansion of the Islamic empire, like Rome and Persia.
India is translated from the Arabic word 'Al Hind'. Al Hind in Arabic at the
time of the Prophet (PBUH) is not India, which came into existence on August
15, 1947, which is our motherland. Sindhu and Hindu were mostly heard of by the
Arabs and as an abstract concept that extended to the eastern 'edge' of the
world, as they understood, encompassing parts of present-day Malaysia and
Indonesia in addition to the Indian subcontinent. In terms of present-day
nation-states, Al Hind in medieval Arabic is a signifier that includes
Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Indonesia. As soon as this becomes
clear, the call for Jihad in India would be no longer valid; but against the
teachings of Prophet himself. Because ‘India War’ Hadiths are about Sindh/Hind
War Hadiths. From them anti-Pakistan, anti-Bangladesh, anti-Malaysian and
anti-Indonesian wars can be determined by the same criteria as anti-India. In
the accounts of the global spread of Islam, Arabia was a little more distant
than Persia and Rome but inhabited by many warlike kings and uninitiated
peoples.
As in the
case of Persia and Rome, that phase has passed in medieval Islamic history. The
hadith sheds light on those occasions when early Islamic military advances
reached the 'Hind' provinces. It has nothing to do with the modern Indian
nation or the modern Muslims in India. In medieval Arabic, the expression 'Al
Hind' was sometimes extended to 'Sind wal Hind'. It was a term used to refer to
the vast tracts of land denoted by 'Al Hind' as Sind to the west of the Indus
and Hind to the east of the Indus. The Hadith has nothing to do with Hinduism
and never in literature Hinduism has been mentioned as enemies of Islam. The
Hind in Arabic literature is used to show the geographical extension.
To employ
the Hadith to present social and political condition is malicious and against
Islam itself. Based upon the Hadith, the call for Jihad is erroneous and to be
confronted both intellectually and physically. Likewise, Islamophobes fear
mongering using these Hadiths must be countered to facilitate mutual
cohabitation peacefully.
Eastward
military movements reached Sindh and then crossed the Indus to the other side
during the golden days when the capital of the Islamic Empire shifted from
Madina to Damascus and imperial growth accelerated brilliantly under the
Umayyad Caliphate based there. This was during the caliphate of Walid ibn Abdul
Malik ibn Marwan (reigned 705-715 CE). In Iraq, which had already become part
of the Islamic Empire, Walid's governor at that time was the famous Hajjaj Ibn
Yusuf. As the officer in charge of the eastern provinces of the empire, he
directed further eastward campaigns aimed at Hind. As far as the cradle of
Sindh province, during the first Umayyad caliph Muawiya (died AD 680) the
Islamic Empire had already expanded. The army commanded by Muawiya (RA) led by
Sinan Ibn Salama expanded the empire to the Makran province on the coast of the
Indian Ocean near Sindh. During Walid's reign, the famous Sindh and Hind
campaigns were accompanied by the expansion of the empire when the Islamic army
led by Qutaybat ibn Muslim made significant moves towards Central Asia near
China under the instructions of Hajjaj ibn Yusuf.
If Prophet
Muhammad (PBUH) had prophesied about a 'Ghazwatul Hindi' and its virtue, the
dawn of that prophecy would have occurred in parts of present-day Pakistan
within decades of the prophecies about Rome and Persia. As is well known Hazrat
Abu Huraira (603–681 CE) who had related this Hadith was hoping to participate
in Ghazwa-e-Hind during his lifetime and had talked about what would happen if
he comes back alive or is martyred in this battle.
The
hypocrisy, and indeed chutzpa, of
linking a story about an event some 1300 years ago when some of the soldiers of
the then Islamic nation fought against some kings and soldiers of a region now
part of Pakistan, with a completely new state called India and its Muslim
citizens that came into existence on August 15, 1947, would be obvious to
anyone with even a modicum of intellectual integrity. Those who understand that
the victories of Persia and Rome mentioned in the hadiths were achieved long
ago by the Islamic community and that its interest is not to win victory by
fighting with today's Iraq, Iran, Syria, Palestine or Egypt, all those who
understand that the battle of the hadith regarding the Indian war is no
different, if they read the history of Muhammad bin Qasim.
Just as the
Prophet (PBUH) spoke of Rome and Persia as completely non-Muslim countries, and
the military advances of the Prophet (PBUH) that fulfilled his prophecy changed
the course of those countries, it is also relevant that North India, which had
no Muslims when the Prophet (PBUH) spoke, became the centre of many medieval
Muslim regimes and millions of Muslims after Muhammad bin Qasim’s invasion.
After the decline of the power of the Abbasid Caliphate, it was the India of
the Delhi Sultans, Mughals and Nizams that remained the pre-eminent political
seat of the Islamic world. Even today, India remains the second largest Muslim
population in the world.
Like Rome
and Persia, India is one of the regions that were opened to Islam and Muslims
through the military advances of Muslim rulers and changed Islamic history in
the descriptions of all the early Islamic historians. The famous Tariq of Imam
Tabri (d. CE 923) mentions the victory of Islam in Al Hind. Yaqubi (d. CE
897/8) speaks specifically about the military campaign of Muhammad ibn Qasim.
Baladuri (d. CE 892), in Futuhul Buldan (Victory in the Lands), a work on the
conquests of Islam in various lands, Muhammad ibn Qasim gives a detailed
account of the conquests in India. Ibn al-Atheer (died c. AD 1160) quotes
Baladuri in detail to tell the story of India's arrival at the level of Muslim
settlement. In the provinces of the Indian subcontinent Muhammad bin Qasim
conquered, the families of many of the Arab Muslim soldiers who came with him
lived for generations. A book later compiled by some of them in Arabic, based
on the war memories of their forefathers, was translated into Persian in the
13th century as Chach Nama, which is extant still today. The Chach Nama has
special relevance as a text composed in India itself, reading India as an
important chapter in the early Islamic conquests.
Hafiz Ibn
Kathir's famous Al Bidayat is an example of this. Under the heading 'Al
Iqbaru an Ghazwatil Hind' (Chronicles of the Battle of the Hind), after
quoting hadiths relating to the Indian War, Ibn Kathir points to the fact that
Muslims had fought wars in India as an explanation for them. Clearly, if at all
the Prophet predicted a Ghazwa-eHind, it was fulfilled with Muhammad bin
Qasim’s invasion.
There are
some Muslim scholars and eschatologists who are of the opinion that the 'War
against India' mentioned by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is not a past event in
history but is to happen just before the Day of Judgment. The fact that Prophet
Muhammad (PBUH) mentioned the Muslims who will be in the army of Isa ibn Maryam
(Jesus Christ) along with Ghazwat al-Hind in the hadith and preached the same
reward to both groups may make some of them think so, if they consider those Ahadith
authentic. Both Muslim and Christian eschatologists believe that Prophet Jesus
(PBUH) will return to earth before the Day of Judgement. It has become a
popular Muslim and Christian belief too.
It is clear
from the hadiths that this is when the end of the world is approaching. But the
fact that two military movements are mentioned together in the same statement,
so as to say that the members of both have the same reward, does not prove that
both were to occur at the same time. If the Prophet (PBUH) had said that
"those who return after the war of India will meet Easa ibn Maryam and his
group", it would surely be certain that Ghazwatul Hind was to happen in
the future before the Doomsday. But we mentioned above that the narrations
which are seen to have been said by the Prophet (PBUH) are weak and
unacceptable as authentic. We know that there were hundreds of thousands of
concocted ahadith. As a result of this, the authenticity of every Hadith
becomes doubtful, no matter what the Muhaddithin may say. Therefore, the
contention that the text of the hadith indicates that the Ghazwatul Hind is
future event, unlike the Roman/Persian wars, does not seem to have any merit.
Another
thing that is pointed out is that some early Muslim scholarly accounts have
'Ghazwatul Hind' as a sign of the Last Day. There is an important fact to
consider here. We do not know how many centuries there are between Prophet Muhammad
(PBUH) and the end of the world, because Allah did not inform anyone. No Muslim
scholar naturally possesses this knowledge, which even the Prophet did not
have. The very appointment of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is counted as a sign of
the Last Day in Islamic tradition. The
Holy Prophet has mentioned that he and the Last Day are as close as the index
finger and the middle finger. To say that the prophethood has ended means that
the world is very close to its end. But nobody knows how much is meant by this
'more.
We are
living in a world where one and a half millennium has passed since the death of
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). The early Muslim scholars naturally did not know that
the world would go on without end for so long; It's like we don't know how much
longer the world will last. Since the end of the world can happen at any time,
scholars have understood that every prophecy after Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is a
sign of the end of the world, and a sign that we are getting closer to the end
of the world. The victories of the Muslims in Rome and Persia were, naturally,
signs of the last days. Similarly, Muhammad Bin Qasim's arrival in India can be
understood as an event related to the end of the world.
This is
only to point out here that the Hadith or the interpretations of the Hadith do
not prove that the 'War against India' is a future event for us, to happen in
the days immediately before the Last Day, as claimed by some sections. But it
is not that there is no possibility of such an opinion being correct. There are
scholars who are of the opinion that the war of the Muslims with the Romans,
apart from what happened during the time of the Companions, will happen again
very close to the Last Day, in connection with the return of Prophet Isa, and
this has been pointed out in some hadiths. The view that 'Ghazwatul Hind' is
one of a series of such wars near the end of the world is a scholarly opinion
that may be right or wrong, as with scholarly, eschatological opinion on all
subjects without clear evidence that can be accepted as authentic. But clearly
these Hadith are not in reference to present political social conditions in
Indian subcontinent.
Muslim
eschatologists believe that it is clear from the hadiths in (Kitab
Al-Fitan Wa Al-Malahim)
that the
present world or political situation will not exist at the time of doomsday
that the Muslim world would be plunged into civil wars and that eventually the
entire Muslim community would unite politically under one leader to end them
and his Islamic army, who would be known as the Imam Mahdi, would fight the
enemies of the Muslim world.
At a time
when the world rule of Imam Mahdi and Ibn Maryam comes into existence, what do
the radical elements think that the political conflicts that take place at a time
when today's maps are only historical pages have anything to do with the
current Indian situation? Even if the assumption of the scholars who believe
that 'Ghazwatul Hind' is a future event to take place during or just before the
return of Prophet Jesus (PBUH) is correct, such arguments have no place in
current realities of the nation. Muslims would do well to get out of fanciful
eschatological beliefs and start living in the contemporary 21st century world.
Part One
of the Article: The Ghazwa-e-Hind Claims Of Pakistani Jihadi Militants:
Does Authentic Hadith Literature Actually Enjoin Jihad Against India - A
Comprehensive Study (Part 1)
-----
A
regular columnist for NewAgeIslam.com, Mubashir V.P is a PhD scholar in Islamic
Studies at Jamia Millia Islamia and freelance journalist.
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic
Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism