Dispelling Myths

A Mission to Conquer India? Demystifying Ghazwa-e-Hind

Loyalty to nation is an integral part of faith in Islam. But opponents try to call this fact into question by misrepresenting one of the prophecies of the Holy Prophet(sa).

Dispelling Myths

A Mission to Conquer India? Demystifying Ghazwa-e-Hind

Loyalty to nation is an integral part of faith in Islam. But opponents try to call this fact into question by misrepresenting one of the prophecies of the Holy Prophet(sa).

AMIR AZIZ AHMEDI, KOLKATA

February 28, 2021

Among all the misunderstood terms in Islamic terminology, the word ‘Jihad’ is the most misinterpreted and misused. Based on this erroneous understanding of Jihad, many ideologies and concepts in Islam have been largely distorted, Ghazwa-e-Hind being one of them.

Ghazwa-e-Hind has been misconstrued by various extremist organisations to perpetrate acts of aggression and furnish selfish ambitions blinded by geopolitical gains. It has also been repeatedly quoted by the enemies of Islam as a tool to question and put under suspicion a Muslim’s loyalty to his country.

The concept of Ghazwa-e-Hind is generally understood—both by some extremist Muslims as well as the proponents of Islamophobia—as a military raid foretold by the Holy Prophet^sa, in which India will be conquered by Muslims through warfare.

However, a factual analysis and an unbiased study of Islamic texts will convincingly prove that attributing such a violent notion to Islam is false and baseless.

Authenticity of the narrations

Of the six most authentic collections of Hadith known as Sihah Sittah, only Sunan an-Nasai records the narrations of Ghazwa-e-Hind. Nasai has included three narrations regarding this, the first two of which are similar in text and report Hazrat Abu Huraira^ra as saying:

“The Messenger^sa of Allah promised us an expedition in India. If I live to see that, I will expend myself and my wealth in it. If I am killed, I will be one of the best of the martyrs, and if I come back, I will be Abu Hurairah, the freed one [from the hellfire].”^[1]

This narration has been ruled as inauthentic by Hadith scholars. For instance, the famous scholar Al-Dhahabi writes:

“Jabr ibn Abidah narrated a rejected report from Abu Huraira. His tradition is: ‘We have been promised the invasion of India.’”^[2]

Likewise, Sheikh al-Arnaut says:

“There are traditions narrated on this topic from Abu Huraira^ra that have two weak chains.”^[3]

Hence, both these narrations are considered weak and untrustworthy by Hadith scholars. The third narration in Sunan al-Nasai reports the Holy Prophet^sa as saying:

“There are two groups of my Ummah whom Allah will free from hellfire: The group that undertakes an expedition in India and the group that will be with Isa ibn Maryam^as.”^[4]

Although this narration has some degree of authenticity as compared to the other two and is considered by many scholars to be trustworthy, it is not entirely free from criticism. Ibn Adi has included this tradition in his collection of weak narrations^[5]. Similarly, Sheikh al-Arnaut comments:

“It is a fair tradition, but this chain is weak due to Baqiyyah, son of Al-Walid, although some follow him. The remaining narrators are reliable except for Abu Bakr ibn al-Walid az-Zubaydi, whose status is unknown.”^[6]

In short, this narration is considered by many to be ‘hasan’ (fair) but not authentic enough to be classified as ‘sahih’ (sound), as there are at least two narrators whose status is doubtful.

However, even if this narration is considered true, it may be noted that, unlike the other two reports, it does not mention fighting and getting killed. Instead, it only speaks of a group undertaking a mission in India who will be granted refuge from hellfire. Thus, this narration does not lend support to the generally understood violent notion of Ghazwa-e-Hind.

‘Ghazwa’ does not necessarily denote war

The word ‘ghazwa’ is derived from the root word ‘ghaza’, which means ‘to intend to attain something’ or ‘to undertake a mission’. In Islamic terminology, the wars fought in the time of the Holy Prophet^sa are usually referred to as ghazwa and sariyya. ‘Ghazwa’ denotes wars in which the Holy Prophet^sa himself participated, while ‘sariyya’ refers to expeditions sent by the Holy Prophet^sa in which he did not personally take part.

However, these words do not always signify military expeditions. Instead, peaceful campaigns with no intention of war are also referred to using the same terms in Islamic history. Hence, many campaigns where the Holy Prophet^sa sent delegations to spread Islam have also been described by historians as sariyya in Islamic history.

Occasionally, such groups were attacked by refractory infidel tribes, resulting in the killing of peaceful Muslims. Sariyya al-Raji and Sariyya Bir Mauna are examples of such expeditions.

In short, the word ‘ghazwa’ can denote two scenarios: a battle to counter an act of aggression or a campaign to invite people to faith through peaceful means, without resorting to violence.

The Holy Quran rejects the notion of violence

The Holy Quran is unambiguous in strictly prohibiting aggression in the name of religion. There is absolutely no permission to attack anyone either for propagating Islam or overtly or covertly harming those who do not follow Islam.

So, if some extremist organisations interpret Ghazwa-e-Hind as a military conquest, they do so with geopolitical intentions. If they give it a religious angle and incite people to attack others, they are no different from the political powers who perpetually plunge nations into conflict under the guise of protecting democracy and ensuring peace.

In the judgement of God, as stated in the Holy Quran, killing a single innocent human being carries the curse equivalent to murdering the entire humanity.^[7] Islam does not sanctify the destruction of temples, the killing of non-Muslims, or any actions that harm others. Such acts of aggression contradict the very essence of Islam, which stands for selflessness, sacrifice, tolerance, peace, and brotherhood. Under no circumstances does any form of war or invasion—except in self-defence—carry any divine sanction.

True intent of the prophecy

The only possibility as to what the narration of Ghazwa-e-Hind actually denotes is that it is a spiritual mission to propagate the peaceful teachings of Islam in the Indian subcontinent. Holy figures like Mueenuddin Chishti^rh, Fariduddin Ganjshakar^rh, Nizamuddin Auliya^rh and others exemplified this form of Jihad in India. Their Jihad was not a Jihad of violence, as is often misconceived today. Instead, their Jihad was the Jihad performed by the Holy Prophet^sa, which was to propagate the teachings of Islam and promote the values of pluralism and tolerance. This is likely the group that has been mentioned in the narration as undertaking a mission in India.

The next part of the narration further substantiates this view. The second group regarding whom the Holy Prophet^sa said would be granted refuge from hellfire is the one who would be with Isa ibn Maryam^as or the Promised Messiah, who was to appear in the latter days. Many prophecies of the Holy Prophet^sa about the Promised Messiah point to his birth in India^[8]. Hence, the narration indicates the spiritual conquest that was to happen through him and his companions.

Since the Promised Messiah was supposed to end wars and establish a new world order through rationality and truth, it is bizarre to expect any battle during his times. The truth is that all prophecies pertaining to struggle during the latter days through him and his followers indicate intellectual struggle through literary means.

The Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, claimed to be the Promised Messiah and carried out that peaceful mission through the propagation of Islam till his demise in 1908. The noble task of winning the hearts of diverse mankind continues to this day under the guidance of his spiritual successors.

A spiritual struggle to establish peace

Since a clear perspective about Islamic injunctions exists, it would be a fatal blunder to attribute a concocted notion of aggression against a peaceful country.

The conditions during the early days of Islam, when all efforts were made to eradicate the faith, were completely different. Permission to fight against oppression was granted only when all options of peace were exhausted, and when oppressors had maliciously sought to eliminate Islam and its followers through warfare.

Therefore, interpreting Ghazwa-e-Hind as a violent mission goes against the fundamental principles of Islam and the spirit of the Holy Quran, which upholds absolute freedom in matters of belief. The only acceptable conclusion proven by research is that Ghazwa-e-Hind represents a spiritual struggle undertaken in India by various saints, followed by the intellectual revolution led by the Promised Messiah.

Amir Aziz holds a Master’s degree in English and is also a Management Post Graduate. Currently, he serves as the head of the Ahmadi Muslim Young Men’s Auxiliary (Majlis Khuddamul Ahmadiyya) in Kolkata.

END NOTES

[1] Sunan an-Nasai, Kitab al-Jihad (The Book on Jihad)

[2] Mizan al-I’tidal 1/388

[3] Takhrij Musnad Ahmad 37/42

[4] Sunan an-Nasai, Kitab al-Jihad (The Book on Jihad)

[5] Al Kamil fi Du’afa al-Rijal

[6] Takhrij Musnad Ahmad 12/30

[7] Holy Quran 5: 33

[8] It is evident from many traditions of the Holy Prophet^sa that the Promised Messiah and Imam Mahdi are not two different persons, but are different titles given to the same person. For instance, Ibn Maja records a narration of the Prophet saying that the Mahdi will be no other than the Messiah. Similarly, Musnad Ahmad records a tradition of the Prophet saying that in the latter days, people will find Isa ibn Maryam as the Imam Mahdi.

There are many narrations indicating the Mahdi to appear in India. Imam Bukhari records a tradition in his Tarikh al-Kabir in which the Holy Prophet^sa informed of a group undertaking a mission in India under the leadership of Imam Mahdi. Similarly, Jawahir al-Asrar records a narration which mentions Imam Mahdi to appear from a city called Kad’ah which can be understood as an Arabic variant of the Indian town, Qadian, the birthplace of the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.