Yeyote anayebeba Uislamu kwa uaminifu, na kufanya kazi kwa dhati kuurejesha Uislamu katika utawala na maisha, iwe ni kama mtu binafsi au kama kundi, hawezi kushiriki katika utawala wowote wa kikafiri, huku akidai kuwa anafanya kazi ya kuuangamiza. Hii ni kwa sababu kushiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri, ambao unatekeleza mifumo na sheria za ukafiri, ni kuimarisha mifumo ya ukafiri na si kuiangamiza. Ushahidi unaoweza kutolewa ili kuhalalisha ushiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri si chochote zaidi ya kujidanganya, kabla ya kuwadanganya Allah 􀀬 na Waumini. Hasa pale ushahidi huo unapopingana na dalili za Kishari'ah, ambazo ni thabiti kwa maana na usahihi.

The one who carries Islam truthfully, and works with sincerity to re-establish it in ruling and life, whether as an individual or group, is not able to participate in any kufr rule, while claiming that he is working to destroy it. This is because participating in a kufr rule, which applies the systems and laws of kufr, is consolidation of the systems of kufr and not destruction of them. The proof that may be brought, to justify participation in a kufr rule, is nothing but selfdeception, before deception to Allah 􀀬 and the believers. Especially when that proof is in conflict with the Shar’ee evidences, which are definite in meaning and authenticity.

Ni jaribu kubwa sana na dhambi kubwa kwa mlinganizi wa da'wah kuchukua maslahah (faida) ambayo akili yake inaitoa, lakini Shariy'ah haikuizingatia, kama ushahidi wa kuhalalisha kwa nafsi yake upinzani wake dhidi ya maandiko yaliyo wazi kwa maana na yaliyo sahihi kwa usahihi wake. Au kwa yeye kutegemea kitu ambacho hakifikii kiwango cha shubhat ad-daleel (dhana ya ushahidi), ili kuhalalisha ushiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri unaotawala kwa kinyume na alichokiteremsha Allah 􀀬. Ingawa ushiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri unapingana na dalili zilizo wazi kwa maana na sahihi kwa usahihi wake. Dalili hizo zinalazimu kutawala kwa yale aliyoyateremsha Allah 􀀬 na zinakataza kutawala kwa yasiyokuwa aliyoyateremsha Allah 􀀬.

It is indeed a severe test and a great sin, for the da’wah carrier to resort to taking a maslahah (interest), which his mind deduces, but the Shar’a did not consider, as an evidence to justify for himself his opposition to the text that is definite in meaning and authenticity. Or for him to resort to something not amounting to be a shubhat ad-daleel (semblance of an evidence), in order to justify participation in a kufr rule, which governs by other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed; even though participation in kufr rule contradicts the evidences that are definite in meaning and authenticity. These evidences oblige ruling by what Allah 􀀬 has revealed and prohibit ruling by other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed.

Wanachukua hadithi ya an-Najashi - ambaye kifo chake Mtume ﷺ aliwatangazia Masahaba siku alipofariki, kisha akamswalia Swalah ya Janaza - kama dalili ya kuhalalisha kushiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri unaotawala kwa kinyume na alichoteremsha Allah (SWT). Wanashikilia kwamba an-Najashi alisilimu wakati wa Mtume ﷺ na akaendelea kutawala kwa mfumo ule ule aliokuwa akitawala nao kabla ya kusilimu, ingawa ulikuwa ni mfumo usio wa Kiislamu. Ili kuthibitisha hilo, wanatoa hadithi sita, zilizopokewa na al-Bukhari, zinazohusu kifo cha Najashi na Swalah iliyoswaliwa kwa ajili yake. Tatu kati ya hizo zimepokewa na Jaabir bin ‘Abdullah al-Ansari na nyingine tatu na Abu Hurayra. Hata hivyo, dalili hizi sita haziwezi kusimama kama ushahidi wa kuhalalisha kushiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri unaotawala kwa mifumo na sheria za kikafiri.

They take the story of an-Najashi - whose death the Messenger 􀁕 announced to the Sahabah the day he died and then prayed Salatul Janazah for him - as an evidence to justify participation in a kufr rule that rules by other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed. They take the view that the Najashi had embraced Islam in the time of the Messenger 􀁕 and continued to rule by the system that he used to rule with before he had embraced Islam, even though it was a non-Islamic system. To prove this, they cite six ahadith, reported by al-Bukhari, relating to Najashi’s death and the prayer that was performed for him. Three of them have been narrated by Jaabir b. ‘Abdullah al-Ansari and the other three by Abu Hurayra. Even though these six evidences cannot stand up as an evidence to justify participation in a kufr rule that rules by kufr systems and laws.

Yafuatayo yataeleza jambo hili.

The following points will explain this matter.

1 - Bukhari alipozinukuu hadithi hizi, aliweka tano kati yake chini ya kichwa "Bab mawt an-najashi" (Mlango kuhusu kifo cha an-Najashi).

1 - When Bukhari reported these ahadith, he placed five of them under the heading ‘Bab mawt an-najashi’ (Chapter on the death of an-Najashi)

na alisimulia la sita katika ‘bab al-janaaiz’ (Mlango wa Sala ya Janaza).

and he reported the sixth in ‘bab al-janaaiz’ (Chapter of funeral prayers).

Hadithi zote sita zinahusu kifo cha an-Najashi, Mtume ﷺ kuwajulisha Masahaba kuhusu kifo chake, kwamba alikuwa mtu mcha Mungu, na kwamba alikuwa ndugu yao. Kisha aliamuru wamuombe msamaha kutoka kwa Allah (SWT), na kuswali pamoja naye sala ya jeneza kwa ajili ya an-Najashi. Haya yanaonyesha kwamba alikuwa Mwislamu.

All six ahadith are to do with the death of an-Najashi, the Messenger’s 􀁕 informing of the Sahabah about his death, that he was a pious man, and he was their brother, then he 􀁕 ordered them to ask Allah 􀀬 to forgive him, and to pray with him the funeral prayer for an-Najashi. These indicate that he was a Muslim.

2 - Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalaani, katika kitabu chake ‘Fathul Baari’ (sharhi ya Sahihi ya Bukhari), alitoa maoni juu ya riwaya ya Bukhari (kuhusu tukio hilo).

2 - Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalaani, in his book ‘Fathul Baari’ (commentary on the Sahih of Bukhari), commented on Bukhari’s report (on the incident)

chini ya kichwa "Kifo cha an-Najashi" badala ya taarifa yake kuhusu kusilimu kwake. Alisema: "Kuna mkanganyiko ambao al-Bukhari hakuripoti kuhusu kusilimu kwake (yaani an-Najashi), ambalo ndilo mahali pake halisi, bali aliripoti kifo chake. Hii ilitokana na kwamba simulizi inayohusu kukubali kwake Uislamu haikuthibitika kwake, ilhali imedhihirika katika kifo chake. Kwa hiyo aliripoti simulizi ya kifo chake ili kufahamisha kwamba (an-Najashi) alisilimu kutokana na sala ya janazah juu yake." 3 - Maneno ya hadithi zilizoripotiwa na al-Bukhari yanaonyesha kwamba Mtume ﷺ alijua kuhusu kifo cha Najashi na kusilimu kwake siku ya kifo chake kupitia wahyi. Pia yanaonyesha kwamba Maswahaba hawakujua kuhusu kusilimu kwake na kifo chake, isipokuwa pale Mtume ﷺ alipowajulisha. Hivyo, katika hadithi ya Jaabir, alisema: "Mtume ﷺ alisema alipofariki Najashi: 'Leo amefariki mtu mcha Mungu. Basi simameni mkamswalie ndugu yenu Ashimah.'" Katika hadithi ya Abu Hurayra, imetajwa kwamba: "Rasuli wa Allah ﷺ aliwajulisha kifo cha Najashi, mtawala wa Habasha, siku aliyofariki." Hili linaonyesha kwamba Mtume ﷺ alijua kuhusu kifo cha Najashi na kusilimu kwake kupitia wahyi siku aliyofariki. Kauli ya Mtume ﷺ kwa Maswahaba, kama ilivyopokelewa na Jaabir b. ‘Abdullah, kwamba, "Leo amefariki mtu mcha Mungu", na, "Basi simameni mkamswalie ndugu yenu Ashimah", inaonyesha kwamba hawakuwa wamejua kuhusu kusilimu kwake, kwa sababu kama wangekuwa wameshajua hapo awali, halingekuwa na haja kwa Mtume ﷺ kutumia maneno hayo ya 'mtu mcha Mungu', 'ndugu yenu'. Hii ni kwa sababu hakuwa akitumia maneno kama hayo alipokuwa akiwaita kwenye sala ya janazah pale mmoja wa Maswahaba alipofariki.

under the title ‘death of an-Najashi’ rather than his report on his conversion to Islam. He said; “There was confusion that al-Bukhari did not report about his (ie an-Najashi) conversion to Islam, which is its true place, and instead he reported his death. This was because the story related to his embrace of Islam was not proved to him, while it is explicit in his death. So he reported his death story to understand that he (an- Najashi) embraced Islam from the prayer of janazah on him.” 3 - The wording of the ahadith reported by al-Bukhari indicates that the Messenger 􀁕 knew of Najashi’s death and his embracing of Islam on the day of his death via revelation. It also indicates that the Sahabah did not know of his embracing of Islam and his death, except when the Messenger 􀁕 informed them of it. Thus, in the hadith of Jaabir, he said; “The Messenger 􀁕 said when the Najashi died: ‘Today a pious man has died. So stand and pray for your brother Ashimah.’” In the hadith of Abu Hurayra, it mentioned that; “The Rasool of Allah 􀁕 informed them of the death of Najashi, the ruler of Habasha, on the day that he died.” This indicates that the Messenger 􀁕 came to know of the Najashi’s death and embracing of Islam via revelation on the day that he died. The Messenger’s 􀁕 saying to to the Sahabah, as narrated by Jaabir b. ‘Abdullah, that, “Today a pious man has died”, and, “So stand and pray for your brother Ashimah”, indicates that they had not known of his embracing Islam, because if they had known that before, there would have been no need for the Messenger 􀁕 to use such expressions ‘a pious man’, ‘your brother’. This is because he 􀁕 did not use such expressions when he used to call them to the funeral prayer when one of the Sahabah died.

4 - Hadithi hizi zinaonyesha kwamba Najashi alisilimu muda mfupi kabla ya kufa kwake, lakini hazikueleza ni wakati gani alisilimu. Maneno yanaonyesha kwamba Mtume ﷺ alipata habari za kifo chake na kusilimu kwake kupitia wahyi siku ile aliyofariki, kama ilivyotajwa hapo awali. Hakuna riwaya yoyote sahihi inayotaja kwamba Mtume ﷺ alipewa habari za kusilimu kwake wakati mwingine wowote.

4 - These ahadith indicate that the Najashi had embraced Islam shortly before his death, but they did not explain when he embraced Islam. The wording indicates that the Messenger 􀁕 came to know of his death and embracing of Islam through revelation on the day he died, as mentioned before. There is not any authentic report that mentions that the Messenger 􀁕 was informed of his embracing of Islam at any other instance.

5 - Ahadith hizi sita hazina chochote kinachoonyesha kwamba Najashi ambaye kifo chake Mtume 􀁕 aliwajulisha Masahaba, alikuwa ndiye Najashi aliyekuwa mtawala wa Habasha (Ethiopia) wakati Waislamu walipohama kwenda huko. Vilevile, hakuna chochote kinachoonyesha kwamba yeye ndiye Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimtumia barua akimwalika kwenye Uislamu. Hii ni kwa sababu neno ‘Najashi’ si jina maalum la mtu fulani. Badala yake ni laqab (cheo) alichopewa kila mtawala aliyetawala Habasha, kama alivyosimulia an-Nawawi katika juzuu ya pili ya kitabu chake ‘Sharh Sahih Muslim’ na kama alivyosimulia Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalaani katika juzuu ya tatu ya kitabu chake ‘Al-Isaabah.’ 6- Katika juzuu ya kumi na mbili ya Sahih Muslim, An-Nawawi alitoa maoni kwamba Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimtumia barua akimwalika kwenye Uislamu mwishoni mwa mwaka wa sita wa Hijra, baada ya kurejea kutoka safari ya Hudaybiyyah, hakuwa Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ aliswalia janazah. Maandishi ya hadith ni kama ifuatavyo; “Imesimuliwa na Anas kwamba Mtume ﷺ aliandika barua kwa Kisra, Qaysar, Najashi na kila dhalimu, akiwalingania kwa Allah 􀀬. Lakini yeye hakuwa Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ aliswalia sala ya janazah.” Kutokana na hadith hii inadhihirika kwamba Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ aliswalia si Najashi ambaye Waislamu walihamia kwake ili waishi chini ya ulinzi wake, wala si Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimwandikia barua mwaka wa sita wa Hijra akimwalika kwenye Uislamu. Badala yake, ni Najashi aliyepata madaraka baada ya kifo cha Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimtumia barua pamoja na ‘Amr b. Umayyah ad-Damri akimwalika kwenye Uislamu. Hakujibu wala hakusilimu, kwa sababu kama angejibu na kusilimu, Mtume ﷺ angewajulisha Masahaba jambo hili na kumwombea, nao Ja’far b. Abi Taalib na Muhajirina wangelijua kuhusu uongofu wake. Walirejea kwa Mtume ﷺ katika mwaka wa saba, baada ya ushindi wa Makka, yaani baada ya Mtume ﷺ kuwa ameshatuma barua kwa Najashi. Lau angekuwa amesilimu, ingekuwa sababu ya furaha na sherehe kubwa miongoni mwa Waislamu, hasa baada ya ushindi wa Khaybar. Mtume ﷺ angewajulisha kuhusu uongofu wake, wala asingeishia tu kwenye kauli yake kuhusu kuwasili kwa Ja‘far: “Sijui kipi kinanifurahisha zaidi; ushindi wa Khaybar au kuwasili kwa Ja‘far.” [Sira ya Ibn Hisham]. Angepaswa pia kuongeza.

5 - These six ahadith contain nothing to indicate that the Najashi, whose death the Messenger 􀁕 informed the Sahabah of, was the same Najashi who was the ruler of Habasha (Ethiopia) when the Muslims migrated to it. As well, there is nothing to indicate that he is the same Najashi to whom the Messenger 􀁕 sent a letter in which he invited him to Islam. This is because the word ‘Najashi’ is not a proper noun for a specific person. Rather it is a laqab (title) given to every ruler who ruled Habashah, as reported by an-Nawawi in the second volume of his book ‘Sharh Sahih Muslim’ and as reported by Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalaani in the third volume of his book ‘Al-Isaabah.’ 6- In volume twelve of Sahih Muslim, An-Nawawi commented that the Najashi to whom the Messenger 􀁕 sent a letter inviting him to Islam at the end of the sixth year of the Hijrah, after his return from the expedition of Hudaybiyyah, was not the Najashi for whom the prophet 􀁕 prayed the Janazah. The text of the hadith is as follows; “Narrated by Anas that the Prophet 􀁕 wrote to the Kisra, Qaysar, Najashi and every tyrant, inviting them to Allah 􀀬. But he was not the Najashi for whom the Prophet 􀁕 made the (Janazah) prayer.” From this hadith it becomes clear that the Najashi for whom the Prophet 􀁕 prayed is not the Najashi to whom the Muslims migrated, in order to live under his protection, and he is not the Najashi to whom the Messenger 􀁕 wrote a letter in the sixth year of the Hijrah inviting him to Islam. Rather he is the Najashi who came to power after the death of the Najashi to whom the Prophet 􀁕 sent a letter with ‘Amr b. Umayyah ad- Damri inviting him to Islam. He did not respond and did not embrace Islam, because if he had responded and embraced Islam, the Messenger 􀁕 would have informed the Sahabah of this and prayed for him, and Ja’far b. Abi Taalib and the immigrants would have known about his conversion. They returned to the Messenger 􀁕 in the seventh year, after the conquest of Makkah ie after the Messenger 􀁕 had sent the letter to the Najashi. If he had embraced Islam, then it would have been a cause for reverbation and celebration amongst the Muslims, especially after the conquest of Khaybar. The Messenger 􀁕 would then have informed them of his conversion, and not restricted his saying regarding the coming of Ja’far; “I do not know what gives me more joy; the conquest of Khaybar or the arrival of Ja’far.” [Sira of Ibn Hisham]. He should have added:

Au kwa kusilimu kwa Najashi.' Lakini hakumtaja Najashi katika hadithi hii, ingawa hali ingehitaji hilo, kama angeitikia wito wake ﷺ wa da'wah na kusilimu.

‘Or by the conversion of Najashi.’ But he did not mention Najashi in this hadith, even though the situation would have necessitated it, if he had responded to his 􀁕 da’wah and embraced Islam.

7- Wale waliochukua maoni kwamba Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ aliswalia swala ya janaza ndiye Najashi yule yule ambaye Waislamu walihamia kwake na kuingia chini ya ulinzi wake, na ndiye yule yule ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimtumia barua ya kumwalika kwenye Uislamu mwishoni mwa mwaka wa sita wa Hijra; walikosea katika maoni haya, kwa sababu Najashi ambaye Waislamu walihamia kwake ni yule ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimsifu, alimtukuza na kumwelezea kwa wale waliotaka kuhama kwenda kwake, akisema:

7- Those who took the opinion that the Najashi for whom the Messenger 􀁕 prayed the Janazah prayer is the same Najashi to whom the Muslims migrated and entered into his protection, and the same Najashi to whom the Messenger 􀁕 sent the letter inviting him to Islam at the end of the sixth year of the Hijrah; they mistakenly took this view, because the Najashi to whom the Muslims made hijrah was the one whom the Messenger 􀁕 commended, praised and described to those who wished to emigrate to him by saying:

"Yeye ni Mfalme ambaye hakuna anayedhulumiwa chini yake, na ardhi yake ni ardhi ya haki." [Ibn Hisham]. Hii ni kwa sababu alitoa ulinzi bora zaidi kwa wale Waislamu waliohama kwenda kwake, na akawapa usalama, hivyo wakaweza kumwabudu Allah (SWT) bila kumwogopa mtu yeyote.

“He is a King, under whom no one is oppressed, and his land is a land of truth.” [Ibn Hisham]. This is because he gave the best protection for those who migrated to him from the Muslims, and gave them security, so they were able to worship Allah 􀀬 not fearing anyone.

Pia alikataa kuwakabidhi kwa wajumbe wawili wa Quraysh waliodai hivyo, kinyume na matakwa ya viongozi wake wa kikabila. Aliwazuia, akawalinda, na akawaambia wote wawili: "Mko salama katika nchi yangu, na yeyote aliyewadhulumu atatozwa faini (ataadhibiwa)." Pia ni kutokana na maoni yake juu ya jibu la Ja'far, alipomwuliza kuhusu kile ambacho Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ alichokileta; "Hakika jambo hili na kile ambacho 'Isa amekileta vinatoka katika taa moja", pamoja na maoni yake juu ya jibu la Ja'far siku ya pili, alipomwuliza kuhusu mtazamo wao juu ya 'Isa, ambapo alichukua fimbo kutoka ardhini na kusema; "Kwa Allah, Isa bin Maryam hakuzidi kile mlichosema kwa zaidi ya (upana wa) fimbo hii" [Sirah Ibn Hisham]. Kutokana na haya yote, walidhani kwamba alikuwa amesilimu ingawa Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ hakuwa ametangaza kusilimu kwake. Vivyo hivyo, Umm Salamah, mke wa Nabii ﷺ ambaye alikuwa miongoni mwa wahamiaji hadi Habasha, hakutaja kwamba alikuwa amesilimu, alipozungumza juu yake na juu ya yaliyowapata katika nchi ya Habasha, alipoeleza; "Tulipofika katika nchi ya Habasha, tulikuwa na jirani bora kabisa: Najashi. Tulijisikia salama kuhusu dini yetu, tukimwabudu Allah ﷻ bila kudhurika na hatukusikia chochote tunachoweza kukichukia..." Pia alisema; "Kwa Allah, tulikuwa katika hali hiyo, hadi mtu mmoja alipoibuka Habasha akipinga mamlaka yake." Alisema; "Hatukuwahi kujua huzuni kama ile iliyotupata wakati huo, tukiogopa kwamba mtu yule angemshinda Najashi, na hivyo mtu mwingine angekuja asiyetambua haki zetu, kama alivyofanya Najashi." Alisema; "Baada ya Allah kumpa Najashi ushindi dhidi ya adui yake, na kumtia nguvu katika nchi yake, kwa Allah, hatukuwahi kujua furaha kama tuliyoipata wakati huo." "Najashi alirudi (kutoka uwanja wa vita) Allah alipomwangamiza adui yake na kumtia nguvu katika nchi yake, na mambo ya Habasha yakawa yametengemaa vizuri. Kwa hiyo tulibaki katika jirani yake, katika makazi bora, hadi tulipofika kwa Rasuli wa Allah ﷺ alipokuwa Makkah." [Sira ya Ibn Hisham]. Hadithi hii ya Umm Salamah haionyeshi kwamba Najashi alisilimu.

He also refused to hand them over to the two delegates of the Quraysh who demanded this, against the wishes of his patriachs. He prevented them from this, protected them, and told them both; “You are safe in my land and whoever abused you will be fined (punished).” It is also because of his comment on Ja’far’s answer, when he asked him about what the Messenger 􀁕 had brought; “Indeed this matter and what ‘Isa has brought emanate from the one lamp”, beside his comment on Ja’far’s answer on the second day, when he asked him about their view of ‘Isa, where he took a stick from the ground and said; “By Allah, Isa bin Maryam did not exceed what you said more than (the width of) this stick” [Sirah Ibn Hisham]. From all this, they thought that he had embraced Islam even though the Messenger 􀁕 had not announced his embracing it. Similarly, Umm Salamah, the wife of the Prophet 􀁕 who was one of the immigrants to Habashah, did not mention that he had embraced Islam, when she talked about him and about what happened to them in the land of Habashah, when she said; “When we arrived in the land of Habashah, we had the best neighbour; The Najashi. We felt safe in regards of our deen, worshipped Allah 􀀬 without being harmed and did not hear anything we might hate…” She also said; “By Allah, we were in such a state, until a man emerged in the Habashah who challenged his authority.” She said; “We did not ever know a sadness such as happened to us at that time, fearing that man might defeat the Najashi, and hence another man might come who does not recognise of our right, as the Najashi did.” She said; “After Allah gave victory to the Najashi against his enemy, and strengthened him in his land, by Allah, we never knew a delight as we had then.” “The Najashi returned (from the battlefield) when Allah destroyed his enemy and strengthened him in his land, and the affair of al-Habashah put in good order. So we remained in his neighbourhood, in the best home until we arrived to the Rasool of Allah 􀁕 while he was in Makkah.” [Sirah Ibn Hisham]. This hadith of Umm Salamah does not indicate that the Najashi embraced Islam.

Kwa upande mmoja, ni kana kwamba wale wanaosema kwamba Najashi ambaye Mtume aliswalia ni yule yule Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimtuma Waislamu wahamiaji (Muhajireen) kwake, na yule Najashi ambaye barua ilitumwa kwake kumwalika kwenye Uislamu, ni kana kwamba hawajui hadithi ya Anas b. Malik, iliyopokewa na Muslim katika Sahih yake; "Kwamba Mtume ﷺ aliandika barua kwa Kisra, Qaysar, Najashi na kila dhalimu akiwaalika kwa Allah ﷻ. Lakini yeye hakuwa Najashi ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimswalia sala ya janazah." Kuhusu barua mbili zilizotajwa na Muhammad Hamidullah katika kitabu chake, 'Political documents of the Prophetic Era' (Nyaraka za Kisiasa za Zama za Utume), zinaeleza kwamba Najashi alimwandikia Mtume ﷺ barua ambamo anatangaza kusilimu kwake na utayari wake wa kuja kwa Mtume ﷺ endapo ataamriwa kufanya hivyo; na kwamba alimtuma mwanawe Arha b. al-Asham b.

This is from one angle. From another angle, it is as if those who say that the Najashi for whom the Messenger prayed is the same Najashi to whom the Messenger 􀁕 dispatched the Muhajireen, and the Najashi to whom a letter was sent inviting him to Islam; it is as if they are not familiar with the hadith of Anas b. Malik, which was reported by Muslim in his Sahih; “That the Prophet 􀁕 wrote to the Kisra, Qaysar, Najashi and every tyrant inviting them to Allah 􀀬. But he was not the Najashi for whom the Prophet 􀁕 made the (Janazah) prayer.” As for the two letters mentioned by Muhammad Hamidullah in his book, ‘Political documents of the Prophetic Era.’ They state that the Najashi wrote a letter to the Messenger 􀁕 in which he states his conversion to Islam and his readiness to come to the Messenger 􀁕 if he orders him to do so; and that he has sent his son Arha b. al-Asham b.

Abhar, na barua hiyo ilitumwa wakati Mtume ﷺ alipokuwa Makka. Kuhusu barua ya pili, imetajwa kwamba Najashi aliituma pamoja na Masahaba waliorejea kutoka Habashah, wakati yeye ﷺ alipokuwa Madina.

Abhar, and the letter was sent when the Messenger 􀁕 was in Makkah. As for the second letter, it was mentioned that the Najashi sent it with the Sahabah returning from Habashah whilst he 􀁕 was in Madinah.

Hakukuwa na kutajwa kwa barua hizi mbili katika vitabu sahihi vya hadith. Mwandishi wa kitabu 'Political documents of the Prophetic Era' amesema kwamba alizichukua hati hizi kutoka vitabu vya historia kama vile Tabari, Qalqashandi, Ibn Kathir na vingine. Hakusema kwamba alichukua yoyote kati ya hizo kutoka vitabu vya hadith. Vitabu vya historia si sahihi, kwa kuwa havishughulikii usimulizi wa taarifa kama vinavyofanya vitabu vya hadith. Vinakusanya taarifa zote kama yule anayekusanya kuni usiku; hajui kama mkono wake unaangukia tawi au nyoka. Kwa hiyo, barua hizi mbili hazina thamani yoyote, achilia mbali kwamba zinapingana na hadith ya Anas aliyoipokea Muslim, na simulizi ya Umm Salamah kuhusu Najashi, na Muhajirina waliohamia Habasha, ambao wa mwisho wao alikuwa Ja'far, ambaye hakutaja kwamba an-Najashi aliukubali Uislamu. Ja'far alirejea kwa Rasuli ﷺ mwaka wa saba, baada ya ushindi wa Khaybar, na baada ya Rasuli ﷺ kutuma barua kwa wafalme na watawala. Kwa hiyo, barua hizo mbili si sahihi, na kuzitolea hoja pia si sahihi, hivyo zinakataliwa. Kutokana na haya yote, ni wazi kwamba Najashi aliyeukubali Uislamu, na ambaye Rasuli ﷺ aliswalia sala ya jeneza, si Najashi yule ambaye Muhajirina walihamia kwake. Pia si yule ambaye Rasuli ﷺ alimtumia barua ya kumwalika kwenye Uislamu, kati ya mwisho wa mwaka wa sita wa Hijra na mwanzo wa mwaka wa saba, kwa mkono wa Amru b. Umayyah ad-Damri. Badala yake, ni Najashi aliyeshika madaraka huko Habasha baada ya kufa kwa Najashi ambaye Rasuli ﷺ alimtumia barua ya kumwalika kwenye Uislamu.

There had been no mention of these two letters in the sound books of hadith. The author of, ‘Political documents of the Prophetic Era’, mentioned that he took these documents from the history books like Tabari, Qalqashandi, Ibn Kathir and others. He did not mention that he took any of them from the books of hadith. The books of history are not authentic, because they are not concerned with the transmission of the reports like the hadith books. They gather all the reports like the one who gathers wood at night, he does not know whether his hand is falling upon a branch or a snake. Hence, these two letters are of no value, not to mention their contradiction with the hadith of Anas as reported by Muslim, and the narration of Umm Salamah in her talk about Najashi, and the Muhajireen in Habashah, of whom the last was Ja’far, who did not mention that an-Najashi embraced Islam, though Ja’far returned to the Rasool 􀁕 in the seventh year, after the conquest of Khaybar, and after the Rasool 􀁕 sent the letters to the Kings and princes. Therefore, those two letters are not correct, and deducing them is not correct as well, so they are rejected. From all of this, it is clear the Najashi who embraced Islam, and on whom the Rasool 􀁕 made funeral prayer is not the same Najashi to whom the Muhajireen emigrated. He is also not the same Najashi to whom the Rasool 􀁕 sent a letter to, inviting him to Islam, between the end of the sixth year of Hijrah and the beginning of the seventh year, with Amru b. Umayyah ad-Damri. He is rather the Najashi who assumed the power in Habashah after the death of the Najashi to whom the Rasool 􀁕 sent the letter inviting him to Islam.

Najashi aliyesilimu alikuwa ameshika madaraka katika mwaka wa saba.

The Najashi who embraced Islam had taken power in the seventh year.

Hii ni kwa sababu Mtume ﷺ alikuwa amewatuma wajumbe wake kwa wafalme na watawala, akiwemo Najashi, baada ya kurudi kutoka katika msafara wa Hudaybiyah. Hilo lilikuwa mwishoni mwa mwaka wa sita wa Hijra, katika mwezi wa Dhul Qa'dah. Najashi huyu alikuwa amefariki katika mwaka wa saba, ambapo Najashi aliyesilimu alichukua madaraka, na ndiye ambaye Mtume ﷺ alimswalia Swalatul Janaza, na kifo chake kilikuwa kabla ya ushindi wa Makka katika mwaka wa nane wa Hijra, kama alivyotaja al-Bayhaqi katika kitabu chake ‘Dalaa’il an-Nubuwwah’.

This is because the Messenger 􀁕 had sent his messengers to the kings and rulers, including the Najashi, after his return from the expedition of Hudaybiyah. This was at the end of the sixth year of the Hijrah, in the month of the Zhul Qa’dah. This Najashi would have died in the seventh year, in which the Najashi who had embraced Islam assumed power, and he was the one for whom the Messenger 􀁕 prayed the Salatul Janazah, and whose death was before the conquest of Makkah in the eighth year of the Hijrah, as mentioned by al-Bayhaqi in his ‘Dalaa’il an-Nubuwwah’.

Kwa hiyo kipindi kati ya kuingia kwake madarakani, na kusilimu kwake, na kifo chake kilikuwa kifupi. Alisilimu kwa siri na hakuna mtu aliyejua kuhusu kusilimu kwake, hata Mtume ﷺ. Mtume ﷺ alijulishwa kwa wahyi kuhusu kifo chake na kusilimu kwake, siku aliyofariki, kama inavyodhihirishwa na maneno ya hadithi sita za Bukhari, ambazo alizisimulia kuhusu kifo chake. Kipindi kifupi alichotumia kama Mwislamu kabla hajafariki hakikumwezesha kujua hukumu za Uislamu. Kutokujua kwa Mtume ﷺ kuhusu hili kulimaanisha kwamba hakumwandikia kuhusu kile alichopaswa kufanya.

Hence the period of time between his assuming power, and conversion, and his death was a short time. He secretly embcraced Islam and no one knew of his conversion, not even the Messenger 􀁕. The Messenger 􀁕 was informed by revelation about his death and conversion, on the day that he died, as indicated by the wording of the six ahadith in Bukhari, which he reported about his death. The short period of time that he spent as a Muslim before he died did not enable him to know the rules of Islam. The Prophet’s 􀁕 lack of knowledge of this meant that he did not write to him about what he should do.

Hii ndiyo sababu hili haliwezi kutumika kama ushahidi kwa wale wanaoruhusu kushiriki katika serikali ya kikafiri, inayotawala kwa kitu kisichokuwa kile ambacho Allah (SWT) ameteremsha. Hoja yao kwa hiyo inabatilika.

That is why this cannot be used as an evidence for those who permit participation in a kufr government, which rules by other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed. Their argument is therefore invalidated.