Today TV’s program “Live With Ghamidi” In response to a question, Javed Ahmed Ghamidi’s discourse
What are the religious instructions regarding leading the Friday prayer, and to what extent do we adhere to them? To understand this issue, first recognize that the law governing obligatory prayers in Islam is divided into two parts: one part consists of the five daily prayers—Fajr, Dhuhr, Asr, Maghrib, and Isha—and the other part comprises the prayers of Jumu’ah (Friday prayer) and the two Eid prayers.
The five daily prayers can be performed individually or in congregation. To perform them in congregation, a mosque can be established at any appropriate location. It can be made in a corner of the house, in the neighborhood, or at the workplace. There is no restriction on a specific place for this purpose. There is also no condition for the imam in these prayers. Any Muslim can lead them.
The law for the prayers of Jumu’ah and the two Eid prayers is somewhat different from the five daily prayers. These prayers cannot be performed individually. As far as the Friday prayer is concerned, the directive has been given to the collective organization of Muslims, i.e., the government and state, that they should arrange a special prayer on the day of Friday each week. On that day, the Zuhr prayer is replaced by the Jumu’ah prayer. The directive regarding this prayer is that it should be performed not in ordinary mosques, but only in those mosques that are designated for this prayer. A fundamental condition of this prayer is that its arrangement is not done by ordinary Muslims, but by their rulers. They have the right to lead and deliver the sermon for this prayer, and the responsibility of it also rests upon them.
What is the wisdom behind the law of Friday prayer? From this perspective, it becomes clear that Islam, through this, simultaneously connects the rulers to the remembrance of God and accountability to the public. They come to the house of worship of Allah, prostrate before Him, recite His words. This act, evidently, serves as a reminder and recollection of their connection with their Lord. Alongside, they also have to face the general public directly and be accountable before them. This weekly accountability instills a sense of responsibility and answerability in them. They not only become aware of people’s issues but also go further to explain their actions. As a result of this process, the bonds of communication, harmony, and trust between the public and the rulers are strengthened.
In the time of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), there was no concept of individuals arranging the Friday prayer on their own in neighborhoods, localities, or villages. Designated central mosques were appointed for the Friday prayers. Initially, the Friday prayer was organized in the Prophet’s Mosque, where the Prophet (PBUH) personally led the prayer and delivered the sermon. Later, as the empire expanded, various officials appointed by him began organizing the Friday prayer at different places. This method continued during the period of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. Until the time of the Umayyads, the Friday pulpit remained in the hands of the rulers. After that, gradually, rulers began to feel intimidated by the people. That is, when they came to the mosque, they faced criticism and reactions from the people. Because of this fear, they abandoned the Friday pulpit. As soon as the rulers left the Friday pulpit, the scholars took it over. To this day, this pulpit remains with them.
I believe that the transfer of the pulpit of Friday from the rulers to the scholars has resulted in extremely adverse outcomes.
One outcome of this has been that a necessary opportunity for worship and connection with Allah’s religion has ended for the rulers. If the rulers attended the mosques for Friday prayers, they would spend some time in worship. For the Friday sermon, they would have to refer to religious teachings for advice and guidance. To lead the prayer, they would need to memorize portions of the Qur’an for recitation. They would need to adopt a demeanor appropriate for attending the mosque. All these things, evidently, would bring them closer to Allah and His religion.
The second consequence is that a very suitable form of communication between the rulers and the public has been abolished. The Friday congregation was a simple and easy way of doing this. Every person could have access to them and could inform them of their criticism and opinions. The current situation is such that not only is criticism of the rulers and holding them accountable out of reach, but the very idea of accessing them has become impossible for the common man.
The third outcome is that mosques have become centers of sectarianism. The situation is such that every mosque is associated with a particular sect. Consequently, here are mosques of the Ahl-e-Hadith, mosques of the Deobandis, and mosques of the Barelvis. All these sects have their mosques, but the concept of a mosque that transcends sectarian divisions, a mosque for Muslims or a house of Allah, has entirely vanished.
I believe that the only way to rectify this situation is to implement Islamic law regarding the organization of Friday prayers and its leadership, and to return the pulpit of Friday sermons from the scholars to the authorities. This is the correct path for eliminating sectarianism and reforming the rulers.
It should be noted that in our country, ninety to ninety-five percent of the people are Hanafi. In Hanafi jurisprudence, one of the conditions for Friday prayers is that the arrangement must be made by the Sultan, meaning the ruler is necessary, and it should be held in a Misr Jami, meaning a place where the ruler or his representative is present.