-
Killing Of Terrorist And State Army
Salam
Recently a video is circulating of pakistani major defending his comrade and attacking the other person ( officially called kharji or terrorist )
My question is both were Muslims both killed each other thinking they are fitna, both fought thinking there shadat will take them to jannat so who is right here?
And it follows with some other question .
If we say that Muslim don’t allow any group to order jihad or killing it’s only the state who can order this, with this argument one can say ok Pakistani army killing these groups are on the right side but then if American army starts killing people who fight them or rebel them? Will that be ok?
And on the other side for example one sincerely thinks that Balochistan or any territory is there area and some army is killing their people and opposing us and I have to retaliate then is he on the right path or wrong?
If I ask someone they say that only Allah will judge at qiyamat but for some reason this doesn’t satisfy me .
Can you guide me with some principle?
-
3 Replies
-
Killing Of Terrorist And State Army
updated 14 hours, 34 minutes ago
2 Members
·
3
Replies
-
Regarding your first point regarding who is right and who is wrong when both sides think they are on the right side. Please refer to the video shared below which enumerates the criteria to know this.
Please refer to the video below from 1:26:54 to 1:31:47 and from 1:32:37 to 1:34:17
-
Regarding your second point, please note that it is true that Islam only allows the state to initiate Jihad and no armed struggle can be initiated by any group other than the state. However, Islam only allows Jihad against oppression and persecution, and for no other reason. Therefore, a state which initiates Jihad for reason other than fighting oppression, injustice and persecution, then the people responsible for this wrong decision will be accountable on the day of judgement, whether it be United States Army or Pakistan’s Army.
As for the faction of society who thinks they are being wronged by an already established state, and they have to other option but to rebel against the state. If one genuinely considers the government of his time to be a tyrant or illegitimate, then there is always room open for peaceful resistance, this is where stating of Kalma-e-Haq in front of a tyrant applies; but without putting any other person’s life in danger. For open rebellion, which puts life, wealth and honour of other citizens in jeopardy, the conditions are very strict.
Please refer to the videos provided in the following thread to understand Ghamidi Sahab’s stance on rebellion against the state & the conditions for it:
-
Salam , jazakallah for reply. I understood to some extent but there is a follow up question I would like u to address.
As we all know the situation is very complex in Balochistan and kpk because of the historical context.
I have a beloved friend in army and he tells me that these groups are actually sponsored by the opposite country armed agency and they kill people of Pakistan and kill army person of Pakistan thats why we kill them.
This looks a justified argument
But when we see on the other side the people of groups say this army killed our father our Mother brothers and they are now killing us so we have to defend and kill them as revenge and also as self defence.
This argument is somewhat justifiable as well
The complexity comes from past that the same groups were actually arose by our state to fight some other country war and then the thought after we used them we can shut them off but it backfired so initially killing was started because they wanted them to call off but they don’t want to ( atleast thats what we know )
So now we have 2nd 3rd generation going on who kills because there beloved have been killed on both sides
It’s same as ( khandani dushmani through generations ) that 2nd 3rd are just killing because their beloved were killed
I am very well aware that only Allah can do justice but isn’t this situation both sides are somehow right and in parallel completely on wrong side.
Because state is killing because they wanted to call them off and they didn’t so they killed in return the other party killed and now this drama is going on for 25-30 years.
I am sorry its getting lengthy
Moreover, there is one aspect of self defence in these fights … Where you are in a convey or on your post and u r attacked by the other party I guess then purely for self defence u can kills them ( because in this case even if u were attacked by some other party or your own people u had this right ) and it goes same when our army initiate the attack then they have a justification to kill them in name of self defence!
So does killing because of self defence is justified? And if it is then initiating an attack to kill other person is the wrong act then.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
