The Teachings of Ibn Tamiyyah

[Sampharo]

:sl:

according to the fataawah of ibn tamiyyah, not only was the killing of the tartars permissable and those who followed them in the army, govt etc but also the blood, family and wealth of the scholars who supported them was also halal to take.:sl:

Do you have proof for this or just plastering misquotations and twisted words? Just because your jamaa-breaking khawarej-supporting prayer leaders who misguide you into believing they are scholars who know what Ibn Taymeyya said and how to reapply it, does not mean that the rest of the World has to suffer continuously diplorable ignorant rants and illegal fatwas.

Ibn Taymeyya said no such things and it is the consensus of scholars all over the World today that Taliban actions in Pakistan are acts of mutiny and rebellion on Waleyy Al-Amr and their call is invalid, based on evidence and dictated authenticated hadith.

Additionally, Killing oneself in a premeditated trap in a civilian place to kill an unarmed "person" let say, does not have a single islamic bone in any of it, and whomever does such an act, again by consensus, as in one who killed himself delibarately along with an unarmed man and caused terror in a civilian nighborhood, cannot by any version be regarded as a martyr or a hero.

It is amazing that in one thread you post opinions by people that goes against direct dictations of Quran and Sunna and show us that you subscribe to them, yet in another you shoot yourself in the foot by declaring whomever does that to be a complete kafir and apostate.

[SayyedGilaniSha]

Was Ibn Tamiyyah a prophet or a messenger?
I am curious to know if I am obligated to follow him or
any "scholar who has read tons of books? Even if one
of the "edits", rulings or opinion seems outside Islam,
I would feel obligated to turn away from such a scholar.
In another thread, AD say that he will bring rulings etc
from scholars to prove his case in that particular thread.
the question is : whose scholars? it is like TTP scholars
saying suicide bombing etc is ok VS scholars in Pakistan
stating suicide bombing & collateral damage is haraam.

In the words of a "true believer" elsewhere Dr Naeemi
was a pagan & got what he deserved.

It seems TTP believes that if anyone does not accept
their version of religion , they are a legitimate target for
bombing. The best they have done now is to scare
even the observant muslims from the imposition of Islamic
laws.
Good job!

PS there are 2 outstanding ummah issues from 60 something
years ago; namely Palestine * kashmir issue. TTP should first
go & liberate those lands & then try to fight us bad muslims.

[SayyedGilaniSha]

Pls read AD as Du for Dawud_uk.
and edit as edict.

Can someone pls provide me link to Ibn Tammiyah's writings where he say killing of scholars , family members is ok? I the sunnah & history of islam( during the life of prophet, s.a.w) were non muslims , let alone innocent muslims harmed? Did he say it is ok to cause " collateral damage". If not, whatever these scholars are saying is bidah as there were plenty of wars during the Holy messenger's time and if he did not sanction a thing, we cannot invent one.

[Zafran]

:sl:

according to the fataawah of ibn tamiyyah, not only was the killing of the tartars permissable and those who followed them in the army, govt etc but also the blood, family and wealth of the scholars who supported them was also halal to take.

so lets examine the situation, are the pakistani murtadeen who make up the government like the tartars in claiming islam but ruling by another legal system? Yes, clearly.

if so then such fataawah apply here to the supporters of this government whether they be soldiers, police or scholars and this was the ruling of ibn taymiyyah.

:sl:

salaam

is that the only scholar you know? you keep quoting him while having zero idea about other scholars - how can you even use the Tarter example with people who blow themselves and kill indiscrimnitaly women, children and old poeple.

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

[The_Prince]

:sl:

according to the fataawah of ibn tamiyyah, not only was the killing of the tartars permissable and those who followed them in the army, govt etc but also the blood, family and wealth of the scholars who supported them was also halal to take.

so lets examine the situation, are the pakistani murtadeen who make up the government like the tartars in claiming islam but ruling by another legal system? Yes, clearly.

if so then such fataawah apply here to the supporters of this government whether they be soldiers, police or scholars and this was the ruling of ibn taymiyyah.

:sl:

:w:

people who were recently killed in this attack as the report shows was an Islamic scholar and some people who were with him, so this has nothing to do with fighting the goverment, if you want to fight the goverment, then why not fight the goverment? why go kill Muslims like the Pakistani taliban are doing?

as i said, whats the difference between the Pakistani goverment and the Pakistani taliban, both are two of the same on different sides of the coin, both are oppresive regimes in the business of killing Muslims who spreak or differ against them. we need a middle group to take both out.

also the taliban recently bombed a hotel, which mainly killed civillians etc, i mean if your fighting the goverment why bomb a hotel???? why not go attack an actual goverment building so no civillians are killed but the actual people you are fighting.

[Dawud_uk]

as a point of clarification, i didnt mean that ibn taymiyyah said the killing of the scholars and their families, but killing such scholars who support a taghoot and taking their families as slaves, just the same ruling as he applied to the soldiers and government supporters who supported the tartars.

one fights, one provides the justification for the fight that causes hundreds or thousands of others to go astray.

[Sampharo]

as a point of clarification, i didnt mean that ibn taymiyyah said the killing of the scholars and their families, but killing such scholars who support a taghoot and taking their families as slaves, just the same ruling as he applied to the soldiers and government supporters who supported the tartars.

one fights, one provides the justification for the fight that causes hundreds or thousands of others to go astray.

Ibn Taymeyya made no such fatwa. Bring your direct primary source evidence including page number and paragraph of a direct Ibn Taymeyya book, or confine your twisted incites of murder to your own misguided circles.

[Muezzin]

:sl:

This thread is to house discussion that existed originally in this World Affairs thread.

[alcurad]

easy now, this is for discussion, not insults and whatever else is happening,,
brother Dawud is trying his best, I don't agree with him at times, but he still Is our brother in faith, so again, cool it.

wasn't much reason for a thread either, but nevermind.

[جوري]

easy now, this is for discussion, not insults and whatever else is happening,,
brother Dawud is trying his best, I don't agree with him at times, but he still Is our brother in faith, so again, cool it.

wasn't much reason for a thread either, but nevermind.

I agree with that.. the whole point of this thread me thinkus is to purge from the leftover feelings of previous thread.. this too should be closed

:w:

[Tony]

peace brothers

[AntiKarateKid]

I agree.

Stop puffing out your chests in "indignation" and assaulting brother Dawud. You are talking to a brother in faith. Behave like it and may Allah forgive us.

[doorster]

when cornered and on verge of exposure, one of the best tricks used by deviants and their allies is to claim brotherhood of Islam.

what you people should be doing is, provide him with backing from Ibn Tamiyyah works instead of demanding thread closure for whatever motives (be it dislike of sampharo (I'm not very keen on him either but that's beside the point) in case of Sr. Manal, or spreading of misguidance in case of alucard)

wasalam alalmuslimeen!

PS. This thread was split at my request to stop davud uk starting afresh at another time after a clean-up, which is what he usually does after a gap of week or so.

PPS. I came back especially to respond to him by requesting to be unbanned temporarily.

[Sampharo]

Dawud UK has openly claimed without proper magistrate involvement the sporadic killing of scholars and enslaving their families is not only Islamic, but claimed that Ibn Taymeyya says so. This is not only in direct contradiction to his own post in "War in Somalia almost over", but also inciting open murder and speaking of it which is a punishable crime. The Islamic world has had enough without having outright criminals being defended here. There is nothing to discuss here with an ignorant twisted individual who commited incitement of murder, and with that coming directly from his mouth by islamic law removes his status of brother and requires taazir and at the very least what I would expect from this forum is to block such a deviant.

P.S. I just read doorster's note and I am glad that the forum already did the banning and that he is only temporarily allowed in order to expose his twisted statements.

[doorster]

D...

P.S. I just read doorster's note and I am glad that the forum already did the banning and that he is only temporarily allowed in order to expose his twisted statements.

are you saying that you are glad that I am/was/will be banned? that my posts are twisted? I am confused.

FYI I was not banned but I requested my account to be disabled so that I could not start a rampage of my own against a certain member or 2.

then some one sent me link to yours and dawud's "scholarly discussions" because "since I seem to have gotten a knack of indirectly getting threads closed", I came back, now I am retiring again of my own accord but am leaving the account enabled as per message I received from a sister

wasalam alalmuslimeen

[Sampharo]

are you saying that you are glad that I am/was/will be banned? that my posts are twisted? I am confused.

There is misunderstanding here. I understood when you said "I came back especially to respond to him by requesting to be unbanned temporarily." that you asked that HE gets unbanned temporarily. I am saying I was glad the forum banned him. I did not know that you disabled your account before.

If that is not the case and he wasn't banned I would like to know what then is a requirement to be blocked around here more than commiting a crime of inciting for murder especially when there is proof that it doesn't only goes against the very fabric of Islam but against his own beliefs as per his own messages?!