PDA

View Full Version : Voting



AbuSalahudeen
04-30-2008, 09:58 PM
Shaykh Muhammad Naasiruddeen al-Albaanee

Reference: Silsilatul Hudaa wan-Noor (Series of Guidance and Light), Tape #284 starting at approx 54mins. and continuing on tape #285

Questioner: Some students of knowledge issued a verdict permitting voting for the best of the available Christian candidates based on the premise that this is from choosing the lesser of two evils. Is this permissible?

In addition, isn’t this considered to be increasing their numbers which may in turn have a negative effect on the public's opinion of Muslims?

Shaykh: I have been asked this question on more than one occasion, and I believe that it is incomplete. So if you want to complete this unfinished question by bringing further clarity [then do so]...

Questioner: What is the permissibility of voting for the best available candidate, particularly if they are Christian?

Shaykh: This question is incomplete just as it was when presented by other than you. I will now say what I think is intended by the question.

In the event that there are a number of Christian candidates who are imposed upon the Muslims, meaning that one of them has to be elected whether the Muslims like it or not, the previously mentioned principal is applied: namely, choosing the lesser of two evils. For example, there are four Christian candidates in a certain country and it is inevitable that one of them will be the winner (elected).

Hypothetically speaking, if it were only the Muslims voting [for these candidates] and no one else - not even one other person is voting - such that if the Muslims refrained from voting they wouldn't be elected, then it is not permissible to vote for them.

Is it clear up to here?

Questioner: Yes

Shaykh: However, if the situation is contrary to this, and this is what I think the question is referring to, then one of them must be selected due to the electoral process established today. It is upon you to know that this system is not Islamic in any way whatsoever...[The Shaykh then begins to explain some of the ills of democracy and the harm of giving power to someone who requests it, in contrast to the beauty of the Islamic shooraa]

Discussing these issues is lengthy. However, the point is that it has been imposed upon the Muslims living in that particular country to choose a candidate just as it is imposed upon them that some of the elected politicians be Christian. Why? Because there are Christian citizens. The government takes into account the percentage of Christian citizens in the country and makes calculations. They compare, for example, the ratio of Muslims to Christians. Do they consider the Jewish citizens in this process? I'm not sure. Based on these calculations they conclude that the country should have, for instance, two Christian politicians.

If the Muslims do not choose between them, then their own people will choose. In either case, one of them is going to be elected. But as we said earlier there may be four or five candidates. The Muslims in that country must consider it like this: The first candidate is a Baathist and a non-Muslim, the second is a communist and a non-Muslim, the third is an atheist and a non-Muslim and so on. The last is a practicing Christian who does not harbor animosity towards the Muslims. If there is no way around the fact that one or two of them are going to be elected, then what should the Muslims do? Should they say, "We are not going to get involved? They are Christians. Let them fight each other." No, this is not the case, because two of these candidates will be elected regardless.

So O Muslims, O you who have sense, is this principle to be applied in this scenario or not? I say yes, because the Muslims in this case are between two evils. Similarly, this is the case if the candidates were Muslims, since amongst the Muslims are Communists, Baathists and so on. Okay, do we just sit back and watch or should we choose the one whose harm is less???

http://www.madeenah.com/article.cfm?id=1212
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
AbuSalahudeen
04-30-2008, 10:00 PM
Is it permissible for Muslim minorities to vote in the lands of non-Muslims?

Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-`Abbaad
Teacher in the Islamic University of Madinah and Teacher in the Prophets Masjid in Madinah.


Reference: Private sitting with the Shaykh on January 19th, 2007 (29 Dhul Hijjah 1427)


There is a question from America related to the ruling of Muslims living in non-Muslim countries who vote in local elections. Is it permissible for these Muslim minorities to vote in local elections if they believe that one of the candidates can benefit the Muslims by giving land, allowing them to give dawah, or other benefits?


Shaykh: There is no harm in voting for candidates who will be of more benefit to the Muslims than the others. In this instance, voting for them is an example of doing the lesser of two evils to avoid the greater evil. All of the candidates are disbelievers and, therefore, harmful. However, the candidate who is less harmful to the Muslims is better than the candidate whose harm is far greater.

Questioner: For the one who says that voting is from the innovated means, for example...?

Shaykh: In any event, this is something evil with which the people have been afflicted. If people have two choices, one being abhorrent and the other also detestable but of less harm, which should the people choose? The people should choose the lesser of the two evils, correct? Even though the Roman Christians and the Persians are all disbelievers, the people were happy when the Roman Christians were victorious over the Persians.

Questioner: Some people oppose this by mentioning that they are not forced to vote in the first place?

Shaykh: What I have mentioned is based on the premise that some benefit for the Muslims may be attained by voting. However, if there is no benefit then they should not participate.

http://www.madeenah.com/article.cfm?id=1208
Reply

barney
04-30-2008, 10:12 PM
Just out of curiosity, If there was a muslim candidate standing against a christian or agnostic one. Would a muslim be obliged to vote for the muslim even if they vehmently disagreed with her policies?
Reply

Umar001
05-01-2008, 12:12 PM
Salam Alaykum,

Brother AbuSalahudeen please provide reference to the first post.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
S_87
05-01-2008, 12:22 PM
Originally Posted by barney
Just out of curiosity, If there was a muslim candidate standing against a christian or agnostic one. Would a muslim be obliged to vote for the muslim even if they vehmently disagreed with her policies?
No :)
Reply

AbuSalahudeen
05-01-2008, 01:08 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
Salam Alaykum,

Brother AbuSalahudeen please provide reference to the first post.
Salam,

http://www.madeenah.com/article.cfm?id=1212
Reply

MinAhlilHadeeth
05-01-2008, 01:19 PM
Shaykh al-Albaanee on voting

Questioner:We have heard that you – O Shaykh – have said that it (participating in parliamentary elections) is permissible, but with conditions.

Al-Albaanee: No! It is not permissible! These conditions – if there are any – are theoretical and not based upon knowledge. So do you remember what are these conditions that reached you from me?

Questioner: The first condition is that the person safeguards himself.

Al-Albaanee: And is this possible?

Questioner: I have never attempted it.

Al-Albaanee: If Allaah wills you will never attempt it! It is not possible to fulfill these conditions and we have witnessed many of the people who we could see – at the very least during the first part of their lives – in their outward appearance, in their clothes and in their beards, but when they entered the majlis – that is the majlis of the parliament – then their outward appearance changed and their clothing transformed!! So is this a proof of corruption or rectification?!

Questioner: Shaykh, I mean the brothers in Algeria and this work of theirs and their entering into the political arena?

Al-Albaanee: We do not advise this! We do not advise political work during these days and any country from amongst the Muslim countries…

Silsilatul-Hudaa wan-Noor (1/352)

Also see here.

Sheikh Yahya Al Hajoree on voting and elections

No. 48. If someone asks you: What is the ruling on voting and elections?

Then say:

They are from the democratic laws that seek to destroy Allah's true legislation. They are also considered imitation of the disbelievers, and imitating them is not permissible. There is much harm present in them, and there is niether benefit nor gain for the Muslims (in them).

From their most significant harms are:

- (They promote) equality between truth and falsehood, and between the truthful people and those upon falsehood, according to and based on the majority (of votes)

- Elimination of (the foundations and beliefs of) loyalty and disloyalty

- Rupture the unity of the Muslims

They bring about:

- Hatred
- Enmity
- Factionism
- Fanaticism between the Muslims

They also cause:

- Deception
- Trickery
- Fraud
- Falsehood

They waste time, money, remove the modesty from the female, along with disrupting a Muslim's trust in Islamic knowledge and its people (the scholars)


Source: Al Mabadee Al Mufeedah fit Tawheed wal Fiqh wal Aqeedah - Basic Priniciples regarding Tawheed, Islamic Jurisprudence, and Belief- new Arabic print pg. 29 #48

Ash-Shaykh Al-Allaamah
'Ubayd Al-Jaabiree
(From The Major Scholars Of The Ummah :: Madeenah)
Democracy And Voting In The West


December 2004 A beautiful answer detailing the innovation of democracy and voting. The Shaykh is asked concerning voting and elections in the lands of the West. The Shaykh counters the argument of those who call to elections.

>>Click here for full reply in English and 'Arabic<<

Regarding Present day Elections
Shaykh Saalih ibn Fowzaan al-Fowzaan



All praise is due to Allaah, lord of the worlds, and may the Salaat and Salaam be upon our prophet Muhammad, his family and companions.

Amma Ba’d.

Indeed there have been a lot of inquires recently concerning elections and demonstrations on the basis that they are novel affairs and were acquired from non-Muslims, so I say, and Allaah is the granter of success:

The issue of elections needs some elaboration:

Firstly: It is permissible for Muslims to elect the grand Imaam (ruler of the Islaamic state) if they need to, but with the condition that Ahlul Hil wal ‘Aqd of the Ummah (the leaders of the Mulsim Ummah in knowledge and status) do so, and the rest of the Muslims are represented by them. Just as the Sahaabah did, may Allaah be pleased with them, when Ahlul Hil wal ‘Aqd amongst them elected Abu Bakr as Sideeq, may Allaah be pleased with him and pledged allegiance to him. Subsequently this pledge was binding upon the rest of the Muslims. This also took place when ‘Umar ibn al Khattaab appointed the remaining six of the ten companions who were given glad tidings that they would be in Jannah, to appoint a ruler after him. They chose Uthmaan ibn ‘Afaan, may Allaah be pleased with him. They pledged allegiance to him and therefore this pledge was binding upon all the Muslims.

Secondly: Concerning positions of leadership that are below the central leadership, appointing people for such positions is the authority/responsibility of the ruler. He is to choose those who are apt and trustworthy for such positions and appoint them. Allaah the Elevated said:

(Verily, Allaah commands that you render back the trusts to those whom they are due to, and that when you judge between people, you judge with justice.}

This verse is directed to the rulers, and the ‘trusts’ here, are the posts of authority in the country. Allaah has made them a trust over the ruler, and this trust is carried out by choosing apt and trustworthy people for such positions. Just as the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم), his companions and the Muslim rulers after them used to do, they chose people who were fit and suitable to assume such positions [of authority] and would carry out their duties in a legislative way.

As for the elections that are known to take place in different countries in present times, such elections are not from the Islaamic system. Disorder, personal agendas, greed and personal relationships get drawn into them. Tribulations and the spilling of blood are also caused due to them, and they do not attain the intended objective, rather they become an arena for bids, trade and false claims.

al-Jazeerah Newspaper: #11358




Shaykh Muhammad al-Imaam

Shaykh Muhammad al-Imaam in his book “Tanweerudh-Dhulamaat bi Kashf Mafaasid wa Shubahaat Al-Intikhabaat”, page 39-40, with introduction of Al-Imaamul-Muhaddith Muqbil bin Haadee al-Waadi’ee (rahimahullaah), stated:

“’Elections’ enter into association of partners with Allaah and that is Shirk of obedience, since Elections are from the Democratic system. And this system was established by the enemies of Islaam for the purpose of turning the Muslims away from their Religion. So whoever accepts it being pleased with it, propogating it believing it to be correct, surely he has obeyed the opponents of Islaam in opposition to the command of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. And this is the very essence of associating partners with Allaah with regard to obedience. Allaah has said:

"Or have they partners with Allâh (false gods), who have instituted for them a religion which Allâh has not allowed. And had it not been for a decisive Word (gone forth already), the matter would have been judged between them. And verily, for the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers), there is a painful torment. You will see (on the Day of Resurrection), the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.) fearful of that which they have earned, and it (Allâh's Torment) will surely befall them.." (Ash-Shura 42:21-22)

And there is a question here: "Are 'Elections' from the legislation of Allaah or are they from the legislation of man?"

So if they say: "They [elections] are from the legislation of Allaah." Then that is insolence and a lie upon Allaah, as will follow shortly, inshaa' Allaah, and the presence of secular constitutions found in the Muslim lands is the greatest witness that "Elections" are from the Democratic systems. And if they say: "They [i.e. elections] are from the legislation of mankind." Then the answer: "How have you accepted the legislation of mankind?!" And what is the ruling upon the one who accepts the legislation of mankind? Is the [above] verse not clear - indeed they have made the founders of "Democracy", those who have contrived "Elections" as partners with Allaah in legislating and laying down of procedures and methodologies for the creation.

And if the one who accepts the institution of "Elections" is not taking the creation as a legislator, then when [or in what case] would the creation [ever be] a legislator [if not in this case]?! And how are we to [therefore] understand the previous verse [above]?”
Reply

AbuSalahudeen
05-01-2008, 01:45 PM
Originally Posted by Faizah
Shaykh al-Albaanee on voting

Questioner:We have heard that you – O Shaykh – have said that it (participating in parliamentary elections) is permissible, but with conditions.

Al-Albaanee: No! It is not permissible! These conditions – if there are any – are theoretical and not based upon knowledge. So do you remember what are these conditions that reached you from me?

Questioner: The first condition is that the person safeguards himself.

Al-Albaanee: And is this possible?

Questioner: I have never attempted it.

Al-Albaanee: If Allaah wills you will never attempt it! It is not possible to fulfill these conditions and we have witnessed many of the people who we could see – at the very least during the first part of their lives – in their outward appearance, in their clothes and in their beards, but when they entered the majlis – that is the majlis of the parliament – then their outward appearance changed and their clothing transformed!! So is this a proof of corruption or rectification?!

Questioner: Shaykh, I mean the brothers in Algeria and this work of theirs and their entering into the political arena?

Al-Albaanee: We do not advise this! We do not advise political work during these days and any country from amongst the Muslim countries…

Silsilatul-Hudaa wan-Noor (1/352)

Also see here.

Sheikh Yahya Al Hajoree on voting and elections

No. 48. If someone asks you: What is the ruling on voting and elections?

Then say:

They are from the democratic laws that seek to destroy Allah's true legislation. They are also considered imitation of the disbelievers, and imitating them is not permissible. There is much harm present in them, and there is niether benefit nor gain for the Muslims (in them).

From their most significant harms are:

- (They promote) equality between truth and falsehood, and between the truthful people and those upon falsehood, according to and based on the majority (of votes)

- Elimination of (the foundations and beliefs of) loyalty and disloyalty

- Rupture the unity of the Muslims

They bring about:

- Hatred
- Enmity
- Factionism
- Fanaticism between the Muslims

They also cause:

- Deception
- Trickery
- Fraud
- Falsehood

They waste time, money, remove the modesty from the female, along with disrupting a Muslim's trust in Islamic knowledge and its people (the scholars)


Source: Al Mabadee Al Mufeedah fit Tawheed wal Fiqh wal Aqeedah - Basic Priniciples regarding Tawheed, Islamic Jurisprudence, and Belief- new Arabic print pg. 29 #48

Ash-Shaykh Al-Allaamah
'Ubayd Al-Jaabiree
(From The Major Scholars Of The Ummah :: Madeenah)
Democracy And Voting In The West


December 2004 A beautiful answer detailing the innovation of democracy and voting. The Shaykh is asked concerning voting and elections in the lands of the West. The Shaykh counters the argument of those who call to elections.

>>Click here for full reply in English and 'Arabic<<

Regarding Present day Elections
Shaykh Saalih ibn Fowzaan al-Fowzaan



All praise is due to Allaah, lord of the worlds, and may the Salaat and Salaam be upon our prophet Muhammad, his family and companions.

Amma Ba’d.

Indeed there have been a lot of inquires recently concerning elections and demonstrations on the basis that they are novel affairs and were acquired from non-Muslims, so I say, and Allaah is the granter of success:

The issue of elections needs some elaboration:

Firstly: It is permissible for Muslims to elect the grand Imaam (ruler of the Islaamic state) if they need to, but with the condition that Ahlul Hil wal ‘Aqd of the Ummah (the leaders of the Mulsim Ummah in knowledge and status) do so, and the rest of the Muslims are represented by them. Just as the Sahaabah did, may Allaah be pleased with them, when Ahlul Hil wal ‘Aqd amongst them elected Abu Bakr as Sideeq, may Allaah be pleased with him and pledged allegiance to him. Subsequently this pledge was binding upon the rest of the Muslims. This also took place when ‘Umar ibn al Khattaab appointed the remaining six of the ten companions who were given glad tidings that they would be in Jannah, to appoint a ruler after him. They chose Uthmaan ibn ‘Afaan, may Allaah be pleased with him. They pledged allegiance to him and therefore this pledge was binding upon all the Muslims.

Secondly: Concerning positions of leadership that are below the central leadership, appointing people for such positions is the authority/responsibility of the ruler. He is to choose those who are apt and trustworthy for such positions and appoint them. Allaah the Elevated said:

(Verily, Allaah commands that you render back the trusts to those whom they are due to, and that when you judge between people, you judge with justice.}

This verse is directed to the rulers, and the ‘trusts’ here, are the posts of authority in the country. Allaah has made them a trust over the ruler, and this trust is carried out by choosing apt and trustworthy people for such positions. Just as the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم), his companions and the Muslim rulers after them used to do, they chose people who were fit and suitable to assume such positions [of authority] and would carry out their duties in a legislative way.

As for the elections that are known to take place in different countries in present times, such elections are not from the Islaamic system. Disorder, personal agendas, greed and personal relationships get drawn into them. Tribulations and the spilling of blood are also caused due to them, and they do not attain the intended objective, rather they become an arena for bids, trade and false claims.

al-Jazeerah Newspaper: #11358




Shaykh Muhammad al-Imaam

Shaykh Muhammad al-Imaam in his book “Tanweerudh-Dhulamaat bi Kashf Mafaasid wa Shubahaat Al-Intikhabaat”, page 39-40, with introduction of Al-Imaamul-Muhaddith Muqbil bin Haadee al-Waadi’ee (rahimahullaah), stated:

“’Elections’ enter into association of partners with Allaah and that is Shirk of obedience, since Elections are from the Democratic system. And this system was established by the enemies of Islaam for the purpose of turning the Muslims away from their Religion. So whoever accepts it being pleased with it, propogating it believing it to be correct, surely he has obeyed the opponents of Islaam in opposition to the command of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. And this is the very essence of associating partners with Allaah with regard to obedience. Allaah has said:

"Or have they partners with Allâh (false gods), who have instituted for them a religion which Allâh has not allowed. And had it not been for a decisive Word (gone forth already), the matter would have been judged between them. And verily, for the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers), there is a painful torment. You will see (on the Day of Resurrection), the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.) fearful of that which they have earned, and it (Allâh's Torment) will surely befall them.." (Ash-Shura 42:21-22)

And there is a question here: "Are 'Elections' from the legislation of Allaah or are they from the legislation of man?"

So if they say: "They [elections] are from the legislation of Allaah." Then that is insolence and a lie upon Allaah, as will follow shortly, inshaa' Allaah, and the presence of secular constitutions found in the Muslim lands is the greatest witness that "Elections" are from the Democratic systems. And if they say: "They [i.e. elections] are from the legislation of mankind." Then the answer: "How have you accepted the legislation of mankind?!" And what is the ruling upon the one who accepts the legislation of mankind? Is the [above] verse not clear - indeed they have made the founders of "Democracy", those who have contrived "Elections" as partners with Allaah in legislating and laying down of procedures and methodologies for the creation.

And if the one who accepts the institution of "Elections" is not taking the creation as a legislator, then when [or in what case] would the creation [ever be] a legislator [if not in this case]?! And how are we to [therefore] understand the previous verse [above]?”
Salam,

At the end of the day there are ulamah who say yes and no, but no scholar is saying voting and democracy and they all say its evil and that is the truth. But many ullamah have said under certain times when there is a candidate who will cause harm to the muslim and theres one who would be less of a evil its better to do so. Thats why i believe that it is ok to vote under this conditions and thats why i decided to vote in these london mayor votes and it is well known Boris is againt islam and would cause harm to the muslims.

And sister if you read the fatwa carfully u will c there are about the situation i have mentionaed above. Also Shaykh Wassiullah Abbasi teachin in ummul qura and masjid haram has a view similar to Shaykh Abdul Muhsin Abbad.

w/s
Reply

MinAhlilHadeeth
05-01-2008, 03:02 PM
Originally Posted by AbuSalahudeen
Salam,

At the end of the day there are ulamah who say yes and no, but no scholar is saying voting and democracy and they all say its evil and that is the truth. But many ullamah have said under certain times when there is a candidate who will cause harm to the muslim and theres one who would be less of a evil its better to do so. Thats why i believe that it is ok to vote under this conditions and thats why i decided to vote in these london mayor votes and it is well known Boris is againt islam and would cause harm to the muslims.

And sister if you read the fatwa carfully u will c there are about the situation i have mentionaed above. Also Shaykh Wassiullah Abbasi teachin in ummul qura and masjid haram has a view similar to Shaykh Abdul Muhsin Abbad.

w/s
:wasalamex

And did you ask the 'Ulamaa about that particular situation? We shouldn't let ourselves follow ta'weelaat. It's important to refer back to the 'Ulamaa with specific situations, instead of looking to general fataawa and applying them ourselves.
Reply

AbuSalahudeen
05-01-2008, 03:14 PM
Originally Posted by Faizah
:wasalamex

And did you ask the 'Ulamaa about that particular situation? We shouldn't let ourselves follow ta'weelaat. It's important to refer back to the 'Ulamaa with specific situations, instead of looking to general fataawa and applying them ourselves.
Khair inshallah

:w:
Reply

Al-Zaara
05-01-2008, 03:24 PM
Haitham Al-Haddad on voting


As for sitting in London, and saying you are 'working towards establishing an Islamic state, this is folly. No Islamic state can exist without a state of Islam; otherwise, more harm is done than good.


Considering the issue of Al-Walaa’, it is evident that there’s nothing wrong Islamically in having some sort of cooperation between Muslims and non-Muslim as regards worldly affairs.


In the end there are differences of opinion
and Allahu Aleem.

Selam aleykum.
Reply

crayon
05-01-2008, 04:15 PM
I've heard both opinions, and I'm still not sure which is right, or if both are. Ultimately, though, I'll just stay on the safe side and not vote at all. There's a possibility for me to gain sins if I vote, but there isn't if I don't.
Reply

Pk_#2
05-01-2008, 04:33 PM
Originally Posted by crayon
I've heard both opinions, and I'm still not sure which is right, or if both are. Ultimately, though, I'll just stay on the safe side and not vote at all. There's a possibility for me to gain sins if I vote, but there isn't if I don't.
:blind: Huh.
Reply

Umar001
05-01-2008, 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by Happy
:blind: Huh.
One side says its ok one side says it is haram.

Thus if you do not do it then you are safe if you do do it then you may or may not be right.

I think thats what the sister is saying.
Reply

Samiu
05-28-2008, 04:06 PM
Originally Posted by crayon
I've heard both opinions, and I'm still not sure which is right, or if both are. Ultimately, though, I'll just stay on the safe side and not vote at all. There's a possibility for me to gain sins if I vote, but there isn't if I don't.
That's fine with me and others like me. However, what I dislike is when the party not voting accuse the party voting of following taghoot, committing shirk and/or kufr, etc. Verily these are very serious and vile accusations.

So whoever wishes to be on the safe side by not voting, then let it be so. And whoever wishes to vote in an effort to stop the greater evil come into authority, then so be it. To Allaah we shall return and will be judged. No need to curse so and so when the intentions are pure and there are ambiguities regarding the issue.
Reply

AbuSalahudeen
05-28-2008, 11:17 PM
Originally Posted by Samiu
That's fine with me and others like me. However, what I dislike is when the party not voting accuse the party voting of following taghoot, committing shirk and/or kufr, etc. Verily these are very serious and vile accusations.

So whoever wishes to be on the safe side by not voting, then let it be so. And whoever wishes to vote in an effort to stop the greater evil come into authority, then so be it. To Allaah we shall return and will be judged. No need to curse so and so when the intentions are pure and there are ambiguities regarding the issue.
Salam,

Mashallah akhi well said,

Abu Suhaib who is a active Da'ee in the UK and a student of Imam Albani and Shaykh Ali Hasan Al Halabi asked Imam Albani many questions on voting and the fatwas by Albani on the net are from his questions, and although the Shaykh told him one can vote under the conditions mentioned above Abu Suhaib agrees with the reasons but chooses not to for other reasons but does accuse the one who does with falling in 2 huge error etc. So this is a example we have to follow which shows manners from the sunnah.

w/s
Reply

Jeremy
05-29-2008, 09:10 AM
If yall are talking about the presidential race here in the States, the person I think most agreeable to our way of life is Barack Obama. Even thugh I dont care for most of his views, he does have a Muslim upbringing. If I remember correctly he went to elementary school in a muslim run school.
Reply

Umar001
05-29-2008, 09:14 AM
Originally Posted by AbuSalahudeen
Salam,

Mashallah akhi well said,

Abu Suhaib who is a active Da'ee in the UK and a student of Imam Albani and Shaykh Ali Hasan Al Halabi asked Imam Albani many questions on voting and the fatwas by Albani on the net are from his questions, and although the Shaykh told him one can vote under the conditions mentioned above Abu Suhaib agrees with the reasons but chooses not to for other reasons but does accuse the one who does with falling in 2 huge error etc. So this is a example we have to follow which shows manners from the sunnah.

w/s
Abu Suhaib who teaches Fiqh us Sunnah in Brixton?

Akhi I did not understand your post.
'Abu Suhaib agrees with the reasons but chooses not to for other reasons but does accuse the one who does with falling in 2 huge error etc.'

DOES ACCUSE or DOES NOT ACCUSE?
Reply

AbuSalahudeen
05-29-2008, 09:47 AM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
Abu Suhaib who teaches Fiqh us Sunnah in Brixton?

Akhi I did not understand your post.
'Abu Suhaib agrees with the reasons but chooses not to for other reasons but does accuse the one who does with falling in 2 huge error etc.'

DOES ACCUSE or DOES NOT ACCUSE?

Salam,

He believes the opinon has some weight but does not follow it him self due some other reasons but he doesnt accuse the one who does vote 4 the above reasons as being a Mub'tadi like so many of our salafi brothers do.
Reply

Umar001
05-29-2008, 09:59 AM
Originally Posted by AbuSalahudeen
Salam,

He believes the opinon has some weight but does not follow it him self due some other reasons but he doesnt accuse the one who does vote 4 the above reasons as being a Mub'tadi like so many of our salafi brothers do.
Missing the 'nt' in that word has drastic impact on the meaning
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-08-2013, 10:43 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-24-2011, 02:53 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-30-2010, 10:32 AM
  4. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-03-2006, 08:18 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!