I have read your book "The Islamic Sharī'ah of Jihad" by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, which arose a few questions in my mind. Please answer my following questions:
a.In which conditions Jihad against the ruler of one's own Islamic state can be undertaken?
b.When and how can we declare a ruler of our Islamic state a non-Muslim urge people to defy his orders?
c.In battle of Siffīn Hazrat Mu'āviah revolted against Hazrat Ali so who was at truth, and whose battle can be taken as jihad?
d. Was the battle of Karbala a revolt against the ruler Yazīd? Give your reasons.
Since your answer is on the basis of the "The Islamic Shari'ah of Jihad" by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, I will answer your first two questions on the basis of the same book and the same premises:
- Which are the occasions when Jihad against own ruler of Islamic state can be undertaken?
According to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, revolt against own ruler can be taken under the following conditions:
- The government should be guilty of openly denying the shari'ah in any way.
- The government should be a despotic one. It has neither come into existence through the opinion of the people nor can it be changed through their opinion.
- The person who leads this uprising should have a clear cut majority of the nation at his back and they are willing to accept him as their future ruler in favor of the existing one.
- According to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, it is as stated above, that is:
"The government should be guilty of openly denying the shari'ah in any way." When it says "openly denying" that means no doubts will remain and no judgments are needed.
- In the context of this writing we consider revolt to be rising against the ruler in order to bring him down. To my best understanding based on the historical reports that have been available to me and I am relying on, Mu'āwiah was not in the stage of revolt at the beginning. He only disobeyed Ali (ra) and criticized him and demanded the assassins of Uthman (ra). This however later reached to the stage that materialized itself as a full revolt against the ruler i.e. Ali (ra). Based on my understanding, Mu'āwiah had no right to disobey and fight against Ali (ra).
Having said that, neither of the two sides, in my current view, were doing Jihad. Not every battle in which a group of Muslims are involved is supposed to be Jihad. This was simply a battle between two groups of Muslims, where one group was wrong. The best description of such battle is given in the Qur'an, that is, verse 49:9.
- To my understanding and based on the historical reports that have been available to me and I am relying on, the battle of Karbala itself was not a revolt. It was in fact self-defense. Ibn Ziyād had demanded Hussain (ra) to submit himself to him and Hussain (ra) did not consider this fair and legal and considered it a humiliating act. The army of Ibn Ziyād did not allow Hussain (ra) and his caravan to leave and practically forced them to fight and defend themselves. Having said that, to my understanding, the move of Hussain (ra) from Madina and then Mecca towards Kufa was a move towards revolt. It appears that Hussain (ra) was trying to fulfill the conditions of a religiously legitimate revolt. His journey to Kufa was in fact his attempt to find a base and to start to get more and more supporters. When he realized that the situation in Kufa was not what he expected it to be, it was already too late and resulted in the occurrence of the sad events that happened.