-
Reason Suleman AS Asked Queen Of Saba To Surrender
Hello,
As per Surah Naml 27: Ayat 22 – 37. which talks about how Suleman AS got to know about People of Saba and how they are involved in Polytheism. He sent out letter in the name of Allah to surrender.
Since we know Suleman AS was a nabi and not one of the Rasool. On what islamic principles did he warned them to such extend that if they would not have surrendered it looks like the left out choice was war.
Does this mean that any Islamic power can send out such warnings to the state which are involved in Polytheism without giving any teachings about islam.
Please clarify this question to me somehow I am not able to understand this.
Thanks
Faraz
-
11 Replies
-
Reason Suleman AS Asked Queen Of Saba To Surrender
updated 2 years, 10 months ago
5 Members
·
11
Replies
-
Ghamidi sahab explained this as the dainuunat of zurriyat e ibrahimi. Aside from rasuls Allah made and chose qoums to do the ittemam e hujjat task. First Allah chose bani israel to be the shahid. And the promise was when they will stand upright ikhlaq o ilm and amal wise Allah will be with them. In case of hazrat suleman as it was the time when Allah did reward them and was with them. As a result of this the shahid qoum when Allah is with them has the right to punish others doing shirk. i.e the law explained in surah taubah of dainuunat to kill mushrikeen and jizya for ehle kitab.
-
Thanks for responding back!
Does this rule also apply to bani ismaael(Arabs) of today’s time. If they stand upright in terms of akhlaaq, ilm and amal will they be given same rights as given to bani Israel as a qaum and did Allah promised help to them as well if they try to punish people of shirk?
-
Well i think you should listen to this for the details of this qanuun.
-
For a detailed understanding of the subject-matter, including current responsibility of Bani-Ismael, please refer to the following threads:
-
For summarized comments, please refer to the following video from 17:35 to 18:59
-
Please also refer to the following link from 17:09 to 25:37
-
Hi..
Thank you for sharing this much of content. Will go through them and get back if I still remain with question.
Jazakallah.
Regards
Faraz
-
There are few things I want to clarify: (Please bear in case I am going too much elaborative)
1) I understood that Bani israel as a qaum was chosen for the similar role as a whole, what a rasool gets. This trend was started after Ibrahim AS. Allah Ta’ala decided to choose from the progeny of Ibrahim AS to be responsible for being center of Tauheed. Now few questions related to this if this whole set of people were chosen then what was the reason to send a individual Rasool again in form of Isa AS. Was it only to do final itmam-e-hujjat on the derailed Bani Israel as a qaum?
2) When Bani Israel was on their Urooj(Peak) in the time of Dawood AS and Suleman AS. I feel that since their responsibility was towards other nations to spread deen of Allah that is the reason Suleman AS sent out letter.
But still if there would have been denial from people of Saba, then outcome would have been the war as it looks from Ayat in Quran. So Does this war would have been fought as a result of Itmam-e-hujjat been completed? Could the extraordinary powers given to Suleman AS which queen of Saba saw when she came to meet Suleman AS be treated as Itmam-e-Hujjat in such case?
Or Does a Nabi like Suleman AS is eligible in his responsibility to do itmam-e-hujjat of similar kind which Rasools like Hud AS/Loot AS/Saleh AS did? Because what I understood from Ghamidi Sahab is that nabi is not responsible for doing itmam-e- hujjat.
I want to understand the basic law because of which this war would have been fought in case of denial. Was it because of law of itmam-e-hujjat or simply because a muslim state was in power? Even if as a collective responsibility of Bani Israel at that time, can war be the right step directly without properly giving dawah of the deen to people of Saba.
3) I always hear from Ghamidi Sahib mention of term ‘Bani Ismael’, but this term in whole Quran is never used anywhere . I want to know from where we can infer that people of Arabs at that time were pure Bani Ismael? And does similar law also applicable to Bani Ismael as Bani Israel got as a qaum.
Instead everywhere People of Arab whom our Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was addressing were called by O People/Momin/Mushriqeen/Munafiqeen/Muslim/ummat . But never Allah used term Bani Ismael(what is the reason?).
Why we can’t infer that when Allah Ta’ala is addressing Muslim as a ummat its not only been addressed to the people of Arab of that time but also those who in future are going to become Muslims from other part of the world.
Because there are ayats like this ummat is the best one chosen for Mankind, or this Ummat’s resposiblity is towards rest of the World as Shohada. If we consider Shohada to be only those who were the Momins of that time, then now no muslim in rest of the world will be responsible for such kind of role?
Interestingly when Allah Ta’ala addresses O’ Bani Israel remember I did this and that in Surah Baqarah as reminder to the Jewish people of Arab, they were also not the same set of People whom Allah Ta’ala took Shahaadat because those Jewish people were settled in Arab for long time without any nabi or rasool after Isa AS (I think for around 500 years). Still Allah Ta’ala is expecting from them with same responsibility as Bani Israel . Following same principle why can’t muslim people settled in other non arabic countries in current time will be also expected to have same responsibility as those from whom Allah took Shahaadat as Ummat.
4) Can you please differentiate between the terms in context of Quran, UMMAT, QAUM, ZURRIYAT and MILLAT. This is very important for me to understand the law of preaching which Ghamidi Sahib has classified. Where he mentions that Bani Ismael are the people whose responsibility will be to spread religion in rest of the world. If they are not doing the job properly why all humiliation are coming to Muslims mostly in Non Arabic world like India,Pakistan etc
I know I am being little critical but I feel these points are valid to be pondered upon. Maybe I may not have depth of the knowledge. But I request you in most polite way please answer your thought also as summary with reference of any Ghamidi sahab lecture. Because just pointing so many lectures will not give exact answer to my question. It does clarify some of the related points but not complete.
I heard these lectures and most of them are talking about Bani Israel’s responsibilities after which I am still not being convinced why Allah Ta’ala left the responsibility to only Bani Ismael alone to be responsible as shohada till end of the times for all people. My thought process says when population was less Allah Tala was sending one Rasool to all different set of qaums. But when it increased Allah Taala chosen set of people for the same responsiblity like Bani Israel.
But After our beloved Protophet Muhammad (SAW) till end of times population throughout the world has increased a lot then logic says the responsible people should not be a limited set of Bani Ismael but the whole set of Muslim Community or Ummat to play the role of shohada. Please comment.
In last want to say Thanks for your all effort in explaining my queries. Please do not feel otherwise. I really have huge respect for Ghamidi Sahab and from last 2 years following his perspective of Deen from his books and lectures. And it really helped me a lot in many other matters. I feel this school of thought has best answers for people of this time.
Regards
Faraz
-
Please split your post and create multiple discussions with one question per discussion.
-
-
Ok … I am splitting as requested. I will keep this post only for the question below: (Rest will be created separately)
When Bani Israel was on their Urooj(Peak) in the time of Dawood AS and Suleman AS. I feel that since their responsibility was towards other nations to spread deen of Allah that is the reason Suleman AS sent out letter.
But still if there would have been denial from people of Saba, then outcome would have been the war as it looks from Ayat in Quran. So Does this war would have been fought as a result of Itmam-e-hujjat been completed? Could the extraordinary powers given to Suleman AS which queen of Saba saw when she came to meet Suleman AS be treated as Itmam-e-Hujjat in such case?
Or Does a Nabi like Suleman AS is eligible in his responsibility to do itmam-e-hujjat of similar kind which Rasools like Hud AS/Loot AS/Saleh AS did? Because what I understood from Ghamidi Sahab is that nabi is not responsible for doing itmam-e- hujjat.
I want to understand the basic law because of which this war would have been fought in case of denial. Was it because of law of itmam-e-hujjat or simply because a muslim state was in power? Even if as a collective responsibility of Bani Israel at that time, can war be the right step directly without properly giving dawah of the deen to people of Saba.
Thanks
-
I had the same question when reading Quran 27:31. The following video (10:32 to 15:15) does not directly address your question, but is generally helpful to understand the historic context:
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
