Orya Maqbool Jan on Army of Khusran

[Zarvan]

Ghazwa e Hind and army of Khurasan., Exclusive Talk of Orya Maqbool Jan on Vimeo
@RazPaK @HRK @PWFI and others

 

[PWFI]

I appreciate a lot your work on PDF Zarvan, keep doing "dawa"----"merey jinay ka maksad terey deen ki sarfrazi, mein issi lyei muslamn mein issi lyei namazi.."

 

[MM_Haider]

The myth of Ghazwa-tul-Hind

religion has quite frequently been used as an excuse for military motives. Talking specifically about Islam, hadees has been used as a tool to invent excuses for political motivations and military interventions/attacks as and when required.

There has been enormous hue and cry over Ghazwa-tul-Hind for years. This was probably first used by self-styled ****** activists in Pakistan for getting public support in Pakistan and raising funds to be used in their attacks in Kashmir with the aim of conquering India and creating what they call dar-ul-Islam. It is very interesting to note that neither Arabs nor the Mujahideen of Afghanistan made use of these ahadees to wage a war against India. Pakistan army, ISI and the local Jihadis have a monopoly over Ghazwa-tul-Hind for now, although they don’t talk specifically about Green Pakistani Jihadis waging the war.

Are they authentic ?


Just a brief look at these will make it clear that none of these five ahadees are found in Sihah-e-Sitta. Two of these appear to be in the collections of ahadees by Imam Nisai but not in Sunan an-Nisai al Sughra, the book considered to be among the Sihah-e-Sitta, the six books considered most reliable by main-stream Muslims.

The others are not even found in the reliable collections of respected muhadiseen.

Note that Imam Nisai died in 915. The years of death of other respected muhadiseen to whom Sihah-e-Sitta are attributed to: Imam Bukhari in 870, Imam Muslim in 875, Abu Daud in 888, al-Tirmizi in 892, Imam Malik in 796, Ibn Maja in 886. All of them died before Imam Nisai. It does not make much sense that we have these ahadees being narrated through Imam Nisai but not through any of the other respected muhadiseen who lived before him.

They are narrated through a single chain. Reported only once through one companion of the Prophet.

Considering the reward for participating in this war and the importance of it, as these ahadees tell, they should have been narrated by more companions of the Prophet and should have been there in more books of ahadees.

It is very important to note that none of these are found in any of the collections of ahadees which the Shia Muslims consider authentic. This raises the question if they were invented by the Ummayads/Abbasids considering their expansionist designs? This is also to be noted that Ummayads did reach Sindh, a part of Hind back then.

One must also note the fact that we don’t have any history report telling us about the use of these ahadees in the past by Muslim rulers or conquerors, even those who did invade India or waged a war on it. If they were respected and authentic ahadees, we should have such history reports.

Fourthly, it must be remembered that it would have been very easy for Muslim conquerors of India in the past, men like Mahmud of Ghazni, Shihabuddin Ghori, Timur, Nadir Shah and so on, to present the hadith about the ghazwat ul-hind and wield it as a weapon to justify their attacks on the country. The corrupt ulema associated with their courts could well have suggested this to them had they wished. However, no such mention is made about this in history books. In the eighteenth century, the well-known Islamic scholar Shah Waliullah of Delhi invited the Afghan warlord Ahmad Shah Abdali to invade India and dispel the Marathas, which he accepted, but yet Shah Waliullah, too, did not use this hadith as a pretext for this.


What if they are authentic ?

It is also pertinent to examine how some well-known contemporary Indian ulema look at this hadith report.

Maulana Abdul Hamid Numani, a leading figure of the Jamiat ul-Ulema-i Hind, opines that this hadith was fulfilled at the time of the ‘Four Righteous Caliphs’ of the Sunnis, soon after the demise of the Prophet Muhammad, when several companions of the Prophet came to India, mainly in order to spread Islam.

Mufti Sajid Qasmi, who teaches at the Dar ul-Uloom in Deoband, is also of the same opinion, although he believes that it might also refer to the invasion of Sindh by the Arabs under Muhammad bin Qasim in the eighth century.

On the other hand, Maulana Mufti Mushtaq Tijarvi of the Jamaat-i Islami Hind believes that it is possible that this hadith report is not genuine at all and that it might have been fabricated at the time of Muhammad bin Qasim’s invasion of Sindh in order to justify it.

Scholars and historians argue that even if they are considered as authentic, it might be the case that they talk about an event which has already happened.

more at ....

http://blog.ale.com.pk/?p=1124

 

[Zarvan]

mm_haider most hadees related to ghzawa hind are authentic some and some Indian loyal simply can't accept the fact

MM_Haider read above

The myth of Ghazwa-tul-Hind

religion has quite frequently been used as an excuse for military motives. Talking specifically about Islam, hadees has been used as a tool to invent excuses for political motivations and military interventions/attacks as and when required.

There has been enormous hue and cry over Ghazwa-tul-Hind for years. This was probably first used by self-styled ****** activists in Pakistan for getting public support in Pakistan and raising funds to be used in their attacks in Kashmir with the aim of conquering India and creating what they call dar-ul-Islam. It is very interesting to note that neither Arabs nor the Mujahideen of Afghanistan made use of these ahadees to wage a war against India. Pakistan army, ISI and the local Jihadis have a monopoly over Ghazwa-tul-Hind for now, although they don’t talk specifically about Green Pakistani Jihadis waging the war.

Are they authentic ?


Just a brief look at these will make it clear that none of these five ahadees are found in Sihah-e-Sitta. Two of these appear to be in the collections of ahadees by Imam Nisai but not in Sunan an-Nisai al Sughra, the book considered to be among the Sihah-e-Sitta, the six books considered most reliable by main-stream Muslims.

The others are not even found in the reliable collections of respected muhadiseen.

Note that Imam Nisai died in 915. The years of death of other respected muhadiseen to whom Sihah-e-Sitta are attributed to: Imam Bukhari in 870, Imam Muslim in 875, Abu Daud in 888, al-Tirmizi in 892, Imam Malik in 796, Ibn Maja in 886. All of them died before Imam Nisai. It does not make much sense that we have these ahadees being narrated through Imam Nisai but not through any of the other respected muhadiseen who lived before him.

They are narrated through a single chain. Reported only once through one companion of the Prophet.

Considering the reward for participating in this war and the importance of it, as these ahadees tell, they should have been narrated by more companions of the Prophet and should have been there in more books of ahadees.

It is very important to note that none of these are found in any of the collections of ahadees which the Shia Muslims consider authentic. This raises the question if they were invented by the Ummayads/Abbasids considering their expansionist designs? This is also to be noted that Ummayads did reach Sindh, a part of Hind back then.

One must also note the fact that we don’t have any history report telling us about the use of these ahadees in the past by Muslim rulers or conquerors, even those who did invade India or waged a war on it. If they were respected and authentic ahadees, we should have such history reports.

Fourthly, it must be remembered that it would have been very easy for Muslim conquerors of India in the past, men like Mahmud of Ghazni, Shihabuddin Ghori, Timur, Nadir Shah and so on, to present the hadith about the ghazwat ul-hind and wield it as a weapon to justify their attacks on the country. The corrupt ulema associated with their courts could well have suggested this to them had they wished. However, no such mention is made about this in history books. In the eighteenth century, the well-known Islamic scholar Shah Waliullah of Delhi invited the Afghan warlord Ahmad Shah Abdali to invade India and dispel the Marathas, which he accepted, but yet Shah Waliullah, too, did not use this hadith as a pretext for this.


What if they are authentic ?

It is also pertinent to examine how some well-known contemporary Indian ulema look at this hadith report.

Maulana Abdul Hamid Numani, a leading figure of the Jamiat ul-Ulema-i Hind, opines that this hadith was fulfilled at the time of the ‘Four Righteous Caliphs’ of the Sunnis, soon after the demise of the Prophet Muhammad, when several companions of the Prophet came to India, mainly in order to spread Islam.

Mufti Sajid Qasmi, who teaches at the Dar ul-Uloom in Deoband, is also of the same opinion, although he believes that it might also refer to the invasion of Sindh by the Arabs under Muhammad bin Qasim in the eighth century.

On the other hand, Maulana Mufti Mushtaq Tijarvi of the Jamaat-i Islami Hind believes that it is possible that this hadith report is not genuine at all and that it might have been fabricated at the time of Muhammad bin Qasim’s invasion of Sindh in order to justify it.

Scholars and historians argue that even if they are considered as authentic, it might be the case that they talk about an event which has already happened.

more at ....

http://blog.ale.com.pk/?p=1124

Mr all hadees related to ghzawa e hind and off you study all you will this has to happen and not what qasim did

 

[Bratva]

mm_haider most hadees related to ghzawa hind are authentic some and some Indian loyal simply can't accept the fact

MM_Haider read above


Mr all hadees related to ghzawa e hind and off you study all you will this has to happen and not what qasim did

If hadith is not in Sahaa sitta, it is considered weak and should be discarded. Your weird insistence they are correct, are on what basis?

If they authentic,,, why Saha sitta didn't reported any hadith then? Your statement Mr they are correct is the most arrogant statement in this intellectual debate. Things doesn't work that way in Religious matters

 

[Zarvan]

If hadith is not in Sahaa sitta, it is considered weak and should be discarded. Your weird insistence they are correct, are on what basis?

If they authentic,,, why Saha sitta didn't reported any hadith then? Your statement Mr they are correct is the most arrogant statement in this intellectual debate. Things doesn't work that way in Religious matters

Mr first of all these Hadees are in Masnad e Ahmad Bin Hanbal Mr and that contains 30000 hadees Mr all sahih sitta hadee come from that Mr and Mutta Imam Malik is conisdered more authentic than some books in Sahih Sitta Mr their are other books than Sahih Sitta Mr read complete concept of Hadees and books of Hadees Mr

 

[Zarvan]

 

[Imran Khan]

can't secure own land but can wage a war on others this guy is more stupid then ZH

 

[Zarvan]

can't secure own land but can wage a war on others this guy is more stupid then ZH

Yes this same kind off logic used to be given by traitor abdullah bin Ubai and his followers that Muslims are week please don't go for war this will happen that will happen blah blah blah but their thoughts were rejected and Muslims went ahead and most off the time with half the army off the enemy

 

[aakalim]

Yes this same kind off logic used to be given by traitor abdullah bin Ubai and his followers that Muslims are week please don't go for war this will happen that will happen blah blah blah but their thoughts were rejected and Muslims went ahead and most off the time with half the army off the enemy

So when are you going to Waziristan to get training for the war, and then onto India to kick some a**.? Its your religious duty, isn't it. Why still in Lahore, posting on the internet, which by the way is the invention of the evil kaffirs. Imitating kafirs is a sin too, isn't it.?

 

[Imran Khan]

So when are you going to Waziristan to get training for the war, and then onto India to kick some a**.? Its your religious duty, isn't it. Why still in Lahore, posting on the internet, which by the way is the invention of the evil kaffirs. Imitating kafirs is a sin too, isn't it.?

 

[root]

OH MAN I JUST SPIT MY COFFEE...Imran Bahi you are great !!!

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

I saw the first 5 mins. Yaar ye mudde ki baat pe kab aayega ? Tab se Shohar aur Begum ki baatein kiye ja raha hai.

 

[Armstrong]

@Zarvan - Oh Bhai Khurasan kiii Fauj ko Khusran ki Fauj banaaa diyaaa !

 

[MM_Haider]

Mr first of all these Hadees are in Masnad e Ahmad Bin Hanbal Mr and that contains 30000 hadees Mr all sahih sitta hadee come from that Mr and Mutta Imam Malik is conisdered more authentic than some books in Sahih Sitta Mr their are other books than Sahih Sitta Mr read complete concept of Hadees and books of Hadees Mr

why don'y you take your medicine in time? 6 books are the most authentic and secondly the true hadith has to be mutwatir not to be reported by single source only... as far as these ahadiths are concerned .. are not Mutwatir... there is also a chance that Banu Ummaya fabricated these ahadiths to attack India..