-
Following The Rule Of The Land & Rebellion Against The State
(Sorry if i have posted this multiple times, i cant tell if it was posted before)
This is with regard to the recent debate on whether its ok to rebel against the state, or in our case the “establishment”.
A closely related topic is Ghamdi sahab’s views on accepting the reality of israel against Palestinians.
As i understand his views, its basically that “accept the reality”, and don’t rebel. And that Allah’s help is with those who remain unarmed and pacifists.
My question is, that if people were to follow the exact teachings of what Ghamdi sahab is suggesting, would it not be a recipe for permanent slavery?
States do many things to maintain control, including keeping population disenfranchised. In Pakistan it’s more obscure, but in many cases its very apparent. In such cases, if the advice is to “remain and abide by law” and accepting the reality as it is, then that basically seems like accepting permanent subjugation.
Is fighting and dying for freedom and “haq”, even if you know it might not be successful still wrong?
I imagine that if i was a Palestinian, i would have killed a few of the evil occupying people, before being killed myself. (I would at least hope Allah would give me that strength). Would that be wrong too?
Is then the idea of “1 day of lion, vs 100 days of jackal” a wrong philosophy?
Don’t you think that If there is no threat of rebellion, the tyrants would continue extreme injustice?
-
1 Reply
-
Following The Rule Of The Land & Rebellion Against The State
updated 2 weeks, 1 day ago
2 Members
·
1
Reply
-
This is not the complete view of Ghamidi Sahab as presented in the question: “As i understand his views, its basically that “accept the reality”, and don’t rebel. And that Allah’s help is with those who remain unarmed and pacifists.”
When facing extreme oppression in the context of Palestine Israel conflict, it is advice of Ghamidi Sahab to accept the reality and buy time for your nation from the oppressor so that you can build them and educate them. Also, don’t violate any ethical boundaries in accordance with Quran.
Islam does not support vigilante justice, rather there are very strict conditons when it comes to the obligation of Jihad and in the absence of those conditions, Jihad does not become obligatory. In such conditions, it is better to buy time for the nation than to sacrifice future generations based on reckless decisions of today.
However, already living within a state is a different scenario than the one discussed above. 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 following thread to understand Ghamidi Sahab’s stance on rebellion against the state:
ask.ghamidi.org
Rebelling Against State - Ask Ghamidi
When it's become compulsory to act against majority elected Leader?(not fully sure where) also I heard that there is a saying: until Muslim leader perform
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
