-
Change In Ghamidi Sahab's Stance On Hadood Punishments On Non-Muslims
Ghamidi Sb. in recent years appears to be saying that Hudud punishments of theft and fornication are religious punishments(Azaab) for breaking the covenant with Allah by committing the crime as a believer. You can look at the following two videos for reference
https://youtu.be/TWNWhB2RoVw?t=64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Axsj3eEUBd0&t=2s&ab_channel=AlMawridHindHowever, in earlier videos, he has said the opposite, and in fact, argued that it would be unfair and absurd to apply different punishments to Muslims and non-Muslims and that this is Islam’s public law applicable to all citizens of the state. For reference check out this video
https://youtu.be/loHO95GHm58?t=1246My question is, is there some way these positions can be reconciled, or Ghamidi Sb. has indeed changed his mind on this question. And if it’s the latter, could you tell me what was the mistake in his older interpretation? He argues for both positions with equal certainty and makes it seem like it’s an extremely obvious point, so when he changes his position, it is quite confusing.
I’ll be very grateful if you can provide an answer here, but I also think it would be helpful if this can be covered in the 23-question series, especially if it’s the case that Ghamidi Sb.’s position has changed.
-
5 Replies
-
Change In Ghamidi Sahab's Stance On Hadood Punishments On Non-Muslims
updated 2 years, 5 months ago
3 Members
·
5
Replies
-
You are correct that initially Ghamidi sahab held the position that the hudud punishments were applicable to every citizen of a state regardless of their belief system. This is the traditional view also held by all of our revered fuqha (jurists). However, with time and further research Ghamidi sahab now holds the view that these punishments are in fact divine azab for those who despite having a covenant with God ended up breaking it by committing these crimes.
I don’t think that it should be a cause for an alarm. It only goes to show that a credible scholar is just a human being and whatever understanding he presents, regardless of the level of conviction, is always subject to change with further research and contemplation. What one should always pay attention to is the strength of the basis of any given argument. If a new argument provides a stronger basis then insisting upon conclusions derived from a previous argument is in fact dishonesty.
-
Thank you for your response. Could you also explain the reasons that led Ghamidi Sb. to change his conclusion? I understand that scholars continually revisit and revise their opinions and that’s great, but I am just trying to understand the specific reasoning in this case.
In particular, Ghamidi Sb. cites the use of the word Azab in Quran 24:2 which to him suggests it is divine punishment. Since Ghamidi Sb. held a different view previously, it seems that he didn’t think that Azab meant divine punishment in this case. What was his previous understanding regarding this word, and what led him to change his translation/interpretation?
-
Unfortunately there’s no further analysis possible as this is a classic example of errors we make when approaching the Quran with preconceived notions. All of us begin our journey of knowledge with the commonly accepted understanding of any concept. Critically analyzing those concepts takes place gradually rather than all at once.
-
Thank you for your response. Jazakallah Khair
-
-
Revised Lectures of Ghamidi Sahab on Penal Sharia can be found in the following thread:
____
Relevant portion from revised Lectures on Meezan on the above matter:
Please refer to the video below from 7:25 to 35:03
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
